(How would someone be able to evaluate a canon 85mm F1.2 if it's been processed in this way?) I understand the merits of having "real" bokeh in a pool like this - for learning purposes. I wouldn't think of posting something like this to the pool. I think this practice is pretty ridiculous. I also prefer to purchase good lenses than to spend tyme covering up for having bought mediocre lenses on the computer. I prefer to spend tyme with subjects, not my computer. I'd suggest posting your revision in his comments with a link to this thread so he can weigh in, or request you remove it, given its now being publically discussed. In this case the original photo's description iself critiques the image regarding the bokeh, so its probably a good candidate for such examination. Now an aside: Using someone else’s photo as an example of an inferior shot in a discussion thread is typically bad form unless you have the permission of the original photographer. I think such is a minor edit and simply part of digital workflow and not necessarily "faking" it. I too have "faked" it on occasion but I don't post those here given the original rules of the group.Ģ) I'll often use noise reduction software which has the result of smoothing out the bokeh along with the whole image (by eliminating noise). This could be a good option for those who can't afford the best quality lensesġ) Fake photoshopped bokeh (selecting background, using lensblur, filters, Gaussian blur and the like) is not permitted in this group pool even though on rare occasion it can be done in a manner that adds to the image in my opinion as the example above demonstrates well. To my eye that looks like the type of bokeh you'd get from a 85mm F1.4 - and it literally took 4-5 minutes and a few clicks.Ĭonclusion: as long as you start with an image that has "decent" bokeh, you can fairly easily up it to "high quality bokeh" through post processing. I used "quick select" to avoid blurring the guy. I applied the lens blur filter then used a layermask to selective apply the blur. I went ahead and tried to correct it in photoshop. He describes the photo as having "bad bokeh." I agree that its not good - but its a decent start He managed to get shallow depth of field but the bokeh renders extremely harsh + displeasing to the eye. Okay to test my hypothesis, I did a flickr search for the term "bad bokeh" and found a good example of what I'm talking about. Unfortunately, only very expensive lenses do this well (Nikon 85mm F1.4, 135mm F2DC, etc.) The Nikon 50mm F1.4D creates harsh bokeh for example good bokeh = creamy smooth out of focus regions. Getting "good bokeh" is a function of the OPTICAL design. You are referring to shallow "Depth of field" Nick Arora Photo Jonathan - getting "good bokeh" in camera is only marginally related to aperture and distance. This way you have great control over how much blur you have at different distances. Brush over the parts closer to the focus point more times, have a 100% mask over the focus point itself. Just make a duplicate background layer in PS and apply a heavy Gaussian blur, then use a low opacity, soft brush to build on a mask. That being said, I disagree with using negative clarity, that ruins the picture by eliminating the contrast points, and its a full picture edit, you definitely want to spot edit. Getting good bokeh in camera is never difficult, just shoot with the aperature wide and as close as you can get. If I get a chance later today, I'll experiment and post my own results I have a strong feeling that subtle post-processing adjustments to lenses with "okay" bokeh could create some dramatic results Nick Arora Photo DavieT, got any examples where you've pulled this off successfully? Some people oversharpen their photos and that makes bokeh much more busy. Negative on the Clarity slider in Adobe Camera RAW and Lightroom (around -10). Either it's there and looks good, or it's not. Nick Arora Photo edited this topic ages ago. Originally posted at 10:39AM, 16 September 2010 PDT The transitions from focus to out of focus are usually off.ĭoes anyone shoot with lenses that provide "decent" but not "spectacular" out of focus areas (example: nikon 85mm F1.8 or nikon 50mm F1.4G) and then use photoshop to subtly improve the quality of the out of focus areas?Īlso, what steps do you take to accomplish this effect? Generally speaking, when people try to fake non-existant bokeh into a photo it looks really really fake. I'm sure "faking" bokeh in photoshop where none previously existed has been discussed here before - but that is not what I'm talking about.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |