That is why I could see bad bokeh since many probably third factors affected the final result which was not bad. Maybe in other circumstances I would see it. I just must try again. Alek Użytkownik Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >Dan Scott wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 10:46 AM, Fred wrote: >> >> >> What is judged good or bad bokeh depends only on the lens, not the >> >> subject's surroundings. What surrounds the subject may be judged >> >> to be a good or bad choice of _background_, but whether the image >> >> exhibits acceptable _bokeh_ depends ONLY on the lens. In my >> >> opinion of what I understand. >> > >> > I would say that you are correct, Keith. Nonetheless, the choice of >> > background (and sometimes foreground) when shooting, when making >> > such a choice is possible, can make lenses with bad bokeh (even >> > mirror lenses, for example, which are my own worst lenses for bokeh) >> > "look pretty good" (for bokeh) - <g>. >> > >> > Fred >> > >> >> Fred's right. Bokeh won't be a problem if you don't have any objects of >> the right sort in the right spot, foreground or background. The optical >> characteristics of the lens are in the lens, but you need the right >> combination of elements in the scene being photographed for "bad" bokeh >> to end up on the film. Plus, the third factor affecting valuation of >> bokeh is the viewer. If you like the bokeh in evidence on the print or >> transparency, it's "good" bokeh if you don't, it's "bad". > >Quite clearly, that's abundantly true! <grin> > >Thanks for the clarification! > >keith > >> Dan Scott > --------------r-e-k-l-a-m-a-----------------
Masz dość płacenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - załóż konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
