What the deuce is bokeh?

Adam J McKay

Adam J McKay

Veteran
Bokeh? What is it?

Is it the ground glass? Is it the magic Elves that live deep within 35mm adapters that spin/shake the GG. Is it a softness?

From what I can deduce it seems that Bokeh is a fancy term for film look, if so why dont pople say film look instead of confusing people with all this bokeh?
So before I even finished writing this I googled bokeh and found this.

"Bokeh (from the Japanese boke ぼけ, "blur") is a photographic term referring to the appearance of out-of-focus areas in an image produced by a camera lens.[1] Different lens bokeh produces different aesthetic qualities in out-of-focus backgrounds, which are often used to reduce distractions and emphasize the primary subject."

Now this particular definition indicates that Bokeh is a product of any given lens. So wouldn't this mean that all 35mm adapters are equal when it comes to "bokeh" and that it is in fact the glass that makes the diferrence?
 
No. Bokeh properties are affected by the ground glass on a 35mm adapter as well.

Quick and dirty.... A GG that loses less light, typically has a "less filmic" bokeh representation. One that loses more light will have a "more filmic" bokeh. So, the manufacturers try to find the happy balance between the two without trading off one or the other too much.

Or, some go balls to the wall in one direction or the other. Others, offer interchangeable glass, so the consumer can pick based on their shooting needs from project to project what they wish to have... Maximum light efficiency or most film like bokeh...

And, then the lens also will play a role in how the bokeh looks.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/bokeh.htm
 
Jason described it very well.

I think the term 'bokeh' is misused in 35mm adapter terms. Bokeh is ofcourse the byproduct of the 35mm lens. When attached to a 35mm adapter, the GG element 'renders' the bokeh differently depending on its diffusive properties. This is the reason why I came up with the term 'bokeh rendition' a while back, as not to confuse the two.

So bokeh is fixed by the 35mm lens attached, but the GG/focusing screen in the adapter influences the final look and appearance
 
I see,

Is this why I might enjoy the SGpro look more then the Letus Extreme? Because I find the Sg has the certain something that the Letus doesn't. Don't get me wrong I think the LEX looks amazing, but I really enjoy the look that the SG produces. With that said, I find the SG has more vigenetting then other adapters and is generally soft to the point of being out of focus. Is this due to user inexperience or are there slight disadvanteges when it comes to softness and vignetting.

Wayne?
 
The SGpro is known for it's great looking bokeh. However it's also known for being pretty sharp. The LEX is supposed to be sharper than the SGpro, but the SG's sharpness isn't anything to sneeze at. Do a search for SGPro and I'm sure you'll find some footage that will impress you.

There was a reggae music video on here somewhere that was very impressive. Can't remember the Artist/ Song title/ DP, if I find it I'll post a link for you.
 
zergtherobot said:
I find the SG has more vigenetting then other adapters ...

Wayne?
Click to expand...

Heh?

Is that true? I never heard that, and even it is contradict; vignetting is side product of not enought diffusive material.. so, lex should even vignette more..

Or, am I wrong?
 
zergtherobot said:
Bokeh? What is it?
Click to expand...

Bokeh - noun - the out of focus area of the frame that 35mm/DOF adapter users obsess about even though no casual viewer cares one lick.


In one week you'll find more discussion about bokeh on forums like this than I've heard in almost 20 years of working in the film industry. Yes, part of that is because "film like bokeh" is inherently present when you're shooting film and therefore, some will argue, that of course there's no reason to discuss it in that setting. But bokeh is not something unique to the 35mm/DOF adapter scene, it's just unbelievably overblown, overanalyzed and overdebated by people who use 35mm/DOF adapters. I've been getting paid to shoot film since 1990. Nobody on any set, preproduction meeting, budgeting meeting or dailies screening I've ever been present at has EVER used the word bokeh. EVER.

Seriously, it's really almost completely irrelevant to the viewer.
 
The casual viewer doesn't really know about 24p either.... But, they do recognize the difference. If you give them a "movie" that is 60i, they won't know why or what, but it won't look like a "movie" to them. I've done the inverse in trying to bring "24p" into the Indonesian wedding market... People see the footage and they're like... wow, that looks like a movie... how come the other guys don't look like that.... Try to explain it and you lose them....

POint is though, some of these aesthetics are ingrained in the casual movie goers subconscious or whatever, and whether they know what it is or not, they recognize a difference and it makes something "feel" or not feel like a movie. THey don't know 24p, and they don't know bokeh.... But, I guarantee that if you give them a DVD of your film shot on 60i with a bare 1/3" camera, it will either feel somewhat amateurish/low quality in most cases, or it will seem like a sitcom, or made for tv. Exempting cases where a particular movie would be appropriate for that kind of aesthetic.

Until someone invents a new mold, there is an aesthetic that we have to try to approximate in most circumstances if we don't want to lose even the casual viewer in the first ten minutes.

It ain't a rule, and I'm not saying one can't make a kick ass 1/3" bare camera 60i film.... But, I am saying, that the uneducated, casual viewer has their whole lifetime of a certain aesthetic showing up on t.v., in the theatre's, etc...

Later,
Jason
 
The bigger question is how the hell do you pronounce it? I have heard it all different ways but everyone says it 2 different ways when talking about it in case they are saying it wrong.
 
I've always heard it pronounced "boh-kay" by most photographers I worked with, so I personally pronounce it that way. I don't know if it's supposed to be pronounced differently in english (I'm french canadian), but I'm pretty positive it should be pronounced that way since japanese words ending in "e" are pronounced "hey".

I might be wrong though, feel free to correct me!
 
Jason Ramsey said:
The casual viewer doesn't really know about 24p either.... But, they do recognize the difference. If you give them a "movie" that is 60i, they won't know why or what, but it won't look like a "movie" to them.
Click to expand...

If you cut 60i scenes into a 24p project, people notice that something happened whether they know what 24p is or not. If you cut SGPro scenes into a Redrock M2 project, nobody is going to say "whoa!! Did you see how the out of focus areas of the frame look different than the last scene???" They may notice sharpness differences, they may notice other things, but they're not going to notice the bokeh. No audience member cares at all. It's nothing at all like intercutting 24p with 60i.

The difference in lens sharpness or coloration as you go from one lens to another is a much more obvious shift than bokeh, but nobody in the 35mm adapter world seems worried about buying matched sets of primes. Yet something as esoteric as the 'quality' of the out of focus stuff is front and center in any conversation about adapters. Makes no sense to me at all. The audience really doesn't know the difference and really doesn't care. None of them would ever notice that the bokeh changed between a scene shot on an SGPro and one shot with an M2.

I'm sure the bokeh worship will continue, as will the search for the ultimate 'film like bokeh', whatever the hell that even means, I'll just continue to stand on the sidelines and wonder what the point of it is.

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top