Bokeh and Leaves

[xysmas]

I haven't posted here in a while - been out on a great vacation road tripping through southern utah. This was taken before that trip not long after a rainstorm with a rather brilliant sunset. The light was radiating in little slits to these leaves and lit them up rather wonderfully.

[sunsetter]

Nice shot, good light. Did you crop the bottom cut off of leaf or is that the bottom of the original.

[windrider86]

I think this is a really nice shot but my eyes seem to wander to the bright light (sun) in the background instead of the leaves

[xysmas]

Originally Posted by windrider86

I think this is a really nice shot but my eyes seem to wander to the bright light (sun) in the background instead of the leaves

That is partially what i was going for - the bokeh (out of focus areas) in the shot are almost more interesting to me than the leaves - which is why it was cropped the way it is. I'm glad your eyes wandered, as the effect was intentional.

@ sunsetter -

this was cropped a tad as there were some more distracting elements ( tip of a fence and other such noisome things) in the shot. The other two similar shots here didn't have the same quality to them but were a little better composed... annoying, eh?

[jiminyClickit]

xysmas,

Bokeh is intended to present a pleasant setting for a subject in such a way that it does not distract the viewer from that subject. Distractions, besides being annoying, defeat the purpose of a photograph: to communicate an image. So you believe that the half of of your photo containing little undiscernible blobs of color is "almost more interesting" than the leaves?

[ELAY]

I wonder if cropping over from the left to take out the blown out parts of your lovely bokeh addresses JC's rhetorical question.

When I use the manual cropping tool (right hand with index finger extended) I get less wander.

I'm a sucker for good bokeh myself. Nice shot.

EL

[xysmas]

Originally Posted by jiminyClickit

xysmas,

Bokeh is intended to present a pleasant setting for a subject in such a way that it does not distract the viewer from that subject. Distractions, besides being annoying, defeat the purpose of a photograph: to communicate an image. So you believe that the half of of your photo containing little undiscernible blobs of color is "almost more interesting" than the leaves?

I understand and appreciate your criticism and what you are saying here, and yes i agree that bokeh usually is used to put more weight on the subject of a photo. I could not resist responding however, as your language seemed a bit strong here.

The communication of the image here was to see the contrast between the crisp leaves and the blurry, scattered highlights that are responsible for passing the sunlight to the leaves. I don't think my image got that across as well as i might have hoped, but bokeh has no steadfast rule on how to use it and is not always meant to present a pleasant setting for a subject at hand. That was my only contention to what you had said, really, and please do not take my tone as too defensive or anything. It is helpful to hear good constructive criticism, which you provide on a consistent basis.

[jiminyClickit]

xysmas,

I asked the question because it (Post #4) just sounded like something you made up on the spur of the moment because windrider86's eyes were distracted. There are times when the "guidelines" may be crossed, but that comes from being very well experienced in the basics. Good constructive criticism has to be based on something, otherwise this category would be called "Like/Don't Like" with little boxes in which to put a checkmark.

Since I find emoticons a poor substitute for language, I used a commonly-held view plus a quote from your post to ask a question. It was a legitimate question, not rhetorical, the answer to which I hoped would reveal something more about the "intention."

When in doubt, I forget everything written about a photograph, and just look at it again. The overly bright stuff on extreme right is distracting, and is not clearly a "rather brilliant sunset." If you had been behind the leaves "lit...up rather wonderfully," and the blobs of color were a part of the spaces between those leaves, the photo could have been a striking combination of your title.

[wulf]

I think the weak aspect of this shot is, as Jiminy suggested, that the background distracts from the apparent subject. I think this would be less of a problem if (a) the overexposed part of the background was cropped, probably reducing the height as well (as per Elay's suggestion - this would also make the leaves relativly larger) and (b) the background provided more colour contrast with the foreground while remaining darker and more subdued (at present they are tonally quite similar).

Finally, since it seems to be "picky season" ( ), I think the cluster of leaves would be better without the blurred one in the foreground.

Here is an example of one of my pictures that has a clear foreground, lots of blurred background and strong colour contrast (although not the beautiful autumn leaves!):



Wulf

[ELAY]

I have noticed that people use bokeh in two ways.

One, to mean just out of focus background stuff generally, nicely rendered.

Two, to mean the rendering of relatively brighter spots as geometrical shapes in the background (Christmas lights is a classic).

I do agree that the splash of overexposure is something that could be improved on, but otherwise I think the bokeh enhances and adds to the main subject. I am not sure I agree with Wulf on the monochrome; it seems to me that a contrasting colour on the right would have been more distracting.

EL