Blurry Bokeh Balls As Abstract Art

Bokeh Abstract – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-E4 – “Retro Gold” recipe

Bokeh is an often discussed aspect of picture quality. A lot of people use the term, but I don’t know how commonly it is understood. Bokeh is a misspelled Japanese word that means fuzziness. In photography, it is used to describe the out-of-focus portion of a photograph. Good bokeh simply means that the quality of the blurry part of an image is pleasant. Obviously what is “good” is subjective, as different people have different tastes. When there are bright points (such as lights) that are out-of-focus in a picture, the camera will render them as blurry orbs, which are sometimes called “bokeh orbs” or “bokeh balls” or “bokeh circles” (depending on who you ask). Sometimes when people discuss “bokeh” they’re specifically talking about these orbs and not the rest of the blurry part of the picture, even though technically all of it is bokeh, and not just the bokeh balls.

In this article we’re going to purposefully create blurry bokeh balls as abstract art. We’re going to do some things in the name of creativity that might seem photographically unusual or even outlandish.

Hold on tight, because things are about to get fuzzy!

Note: This was a Creative Collective article, but now it is available to everyone.

This is a common use of “bokeh balls.”

The picture above is an example of how you most commonly see bokeh balls used in an image. The method is simple: subject closely focused to the lens, large aperture, and some background lights. In this case, the subject is holiday decor, the lens is the Fujinon 90mm f/2 at f/2, and the background is a lit Christmas tree. The bokeh balls aren’t the subject—they’re the background—although without them the picture would be a lot less interesting.

A similar technique can be used to make bokeh balls a more prominent part of a picture. Photograph wet glass, such as a car window, focusing on the drops, with some lights in the background. The two pictures below are examples of this. The first is a wet car windshield. The drops in the center are in focus, which is also where the bokeh balls are. Because of contrast, the water drops are secondary to the bokeh, and the fuzzy light circles are the subject. I used a Fujifilm X100V for this picture, programmed with the Kodachrome 64 film simulation recipe. The second picture is actually the glass from a picture frame that I removed and took to downtown Salt Lake City. I sprayed it with water, and focused on the drops. The city lights in the background became bokeh balls, which (again), because of contrast, is the subject. I used the Fujifilm X-T30 and 90mm f/2 lens, and the Jeff Davenport Night recipe.

Out-of-focus lights are the subject of this picture.
Even though you also notice the water, the lights are the subject of this picture.

Let’s take this a step further. What if none of the picture is in focus? What if everything is fuzzy? Certainly nobody actually purposefully captures a completely unfocused picture, right?

One technique is like the picture below. You can still tell what everything is. Even though the picture is entirely fuzzy, you know that it’s a tree with some string lights in it. It was captured with an X100F at f/2.8, manually focused short of the subject so that it would all be out-of-focus.

I don’t have to tell you that this is a tree.

Let me pause for a moment to talk about gear. In this case the camera doesn’t really matter, but the lens does—sort of. You can use any lens, but I find that telephoto tends to work better than wide-angle. The larger the maximum aperture the better—I used f/2.8 or larger. The close-focus capability of the lens is another factor to consider; you don’t need a macro lens, but it’s good if it can closely focus. You will manually focus the lens—typically, you’ll focus it to the close end, although occasionally you might focus to infinity if you are photographing something close.

What I wanted to do with this project is capture images like Bokeh Abstract at the very top of this article. The pictures would need to be completely out-of-focus (like the one above), but where you cannot tell what it is (like the top picture). Something more fanciful and even perhaps dreamlike—maybe more like that moment between sleep and wake when we’re wiping the slumber from our eyes and attempting to become aware of our surroundings but aren’t quite there yet. I wanted to create abstract art.

Let’s look at some images!

Holiday lights in a tree.
Lights above a dining room table.
Control panel in a car.
Lights on the front of a Costco building.
Lights on a strip-mall.

What’s great about this type of photography is that very ordinary and not especially photogenic scenes can become extraordinary. Yes, the tree covered in holiday lights could make a nice picture if in-focus, but out-of-focus it’s much more interesting. The other scenes I promise were not particularly intriguing, but make for compelling abstract pictures nonetheless. These are subjects that you might typically encounter in the course of your day, and, as long as you have a camera with you, the opportunity to create art is there for the taking. These were all captured after dark (after all, you need points of light, and, while not impossible, it is much less practical to do this in daylight), and with days getting shorter (in the northern hemisphere), the opportunities increase to create blurry bokeh balls as abstract art.

You don’t even need to leave your home! Crumple up and then unfold a small sheet of tinfoil. Shine a flashlight at it and—boom!—instant bokeh orbs to capture. That’s how I made the two photographs below. If you are bored one night, try this technique, and see what you capture.

Made with tinfoil and flashlight.
Shining the light from different angles creates different looks.

What about the picture at the very top? What is that?

The story behind Bokeh Abstract is interesting. I was sitting on my living room couch, getting ready to transfer the pictures from my camera to my phone. The camera was sitting on my lap, and when I powered it on, that’s what I saw on the rear screen. My four-year-old daughter has a mermaid blanket that’s covered in sequins, which was right in front of me reflecting the ceiling light. I quickly captured it before anything changed. After I snapped the picture, she got up and left the room, taking the blanket with her. It really was by happenstance that the lens was facing just right (and out of focus just right), and I had the awareness to snap the picture the moment that I saw it. That was an easy-to-miss picture opportunity that I was fortunate to capture. Keep your eyes peeled for not just lights, but reflected lights, too!

The Oxford dictionary defines abstract art as “art that does not attempt to represent external reality, but seeks to achieve its effect using shapes, forms, colors, and textures.” I don’t think any of these pictures will ever find themselves in an art exhibit, but they’re absolutely abstract art nonetheless. Maybe they’d make an interesting series if I captured enough of them.

Now it’s your turn! As the days get shorter, opportunities increase to create abstract photographs. Use a large aperture and don’t focus correctly, so that the points of light in the frame are bokeh orbs. See what interesting colors and patterns (or even randomness) that you can discover.

Why Bokeh Is Overrated

43255159744_3ca762eac6_z

Kitchen Flowers – Pawhuska, OK – Fujifilm X-Pro2 & 60mm

Within photography circles, bokeh is an often discussed aspect of an image, and this is especially true over the last ten or fifteen years. If you aren’t sure exactly what bokeh is, don’t worry, you are not alone, as a lot of people misunderstand it. I will do my best to explain it to you and also explain why it’s not as important as many people think.

Bokeh is defined as the quality of the out-of-focus area of an image. It’s how well a lens renders blur, the aesthetics of it. It’s often described in terms like good, creamy, smooth, bad, harsh, distracting, swirly, soap bubble, and so forth. It’s very subjective, and you can use any adjective you want to help describe it. What might be characterized as good bokeh by you might be described differently by another person.

I don’t remember hearing the word bokeh spoken even once when I studied photography in college 20 years ago. It’s not that it didn’t exist, because obviously bokeh did exist, but it didn’t really matter. You either liked how a certain lens rendered blur or you didn’t, and few were trying to quantify it or rate it. Nowadays people spend a lot of time and energy searching for lenses that produce the best bokeh, analyzing reviews and charts that attempt to rate it.

You will hear terms like “bokeh monster” when describing a lens and “bokeh master” when describing a person. People will say that a certain lens produces a lot of bokeh, which doesn’t make any sense, because bokeh is defined by character and is not a measurement. It’s a misunderstanding of what bokeh is. You can’t have more bokeh or less. You can only have nice or ugly bokeh, or some other description of the quality of the aesthetics.

45592498604_8857fd9faa_z

Holiday Decor – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X-T20 & 90mm

People confuse bokeh with depth-of-field, but they are two entirely different things. Depth-of-field is the amount of an image that is in focus, determined by the aperture, subject distance and non-subject distance, focal length of the lens, as well as the physical size of the sensor or film. A lot of people mean depth-of-field when they say bokeh. It’s a misunderstanding of terms! Depth-of-field is a mathematical calculation, while bokeh is subjective. Depth-of-field is objective and can only be described by measurement terms. A shallow depth-of-field creates a blur in a photograph, while bokeh is the description of the quality of that blur.

To achieve an out-of-focus area within an image, one needs to use a large aperture or focus really close to the end of the lens or both, which will create a shallow depth-of-field. A lot of people think that you need a large aperture, such as f/2, to achieve blur, but it depends on how close the subject is to the end of the lens. For example, in macro photography, you might have a shallow depth-of-field with an aperture of f/16 because the subject is so close to the lens. It is a math equation, and people have created calculators to help more easily understand what settings are needed to attain certain results. Generally speaking, you will have a smaller depth-of-field, which will render more blur, when using a larger aperture.

Rating bokeh is overrated. It’s something photographers on message boards talk about much too much. It doesn’t matter anywhere close to what some people would have you believe. The vast majority of people who view your pictures have no opinion whatsoever on the quality of the blur that they’re looking at. For anyone to even notice, there has to be something about it that stands out, such as swirly bokeh or really bad bokeh. Most modern lenses are precision engineered, so the flaws that make bokeh stand out don’t exist. Almost all newer lenses produce bokeh that’s at least mediocre, and most people, particularly non-photographers, cannot distinguish mediocre bokeh from great bokeh.

34497306045_54807e81e5_z

Tricycle In The Woods – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X-E1 & Helios 44-2

Bokeh doesn’t matter because it’s subjective. What looks mediocre to you might look fantastic to someone else. People have different opinions. As long as it’s not bad bokeh, which I would define as being distracting to the image, then I’m perfectly fine with the quality of the blur, however the lens renders it. It’s actually difficult to find a lens that produces bad bokeh. Perhaps some cheap zoom lenses are prone to it. Most lenses render blur decently enough that viewers don’t notice the quality of it and, perhaps more importantly, they don’t care.

Ansel Adams said, “There’s nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.” A fuzzy image of a fuzzy concept might be worse. Either way, the point is that the concept is what’s most important, and the other aspects, such as sharpness and bokeh, are not particularly critical. You can have a great image with poor bokeh and a poor image with great bokeh. The quality of the bokeh has little to do with the outcome of a photograph. It’s better to spend time and energy on image concepts than technical qualities.

Bokeh is the quality of the blur in an image. I’ve already said that, but it’s a good reminder of just how insignificant it really is. Think about it, we’re talking about the background blur. There are so many other more important things that we could be discussing! Bokeh is a popular topic, and a lot of people want to know more about it and are searching the internet for opinions. It’s good to know what it is, but it’s not something to get wrapped up in. You either like how a lens renders blur or you don’t, and either way it’s not a big deal.

Fujifilm X100F & Bokeh

38834122044_16957ed166_z

The Bokeh Tree – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F @ f/2.8

Let’s talk about bokeh on the Fujifilm X100F! Bokeh is an often discussed aspect of an image, and this is especially true over the last ten or fifteen years. If you aren’t sure exactly what bokeh is, don’t worry, you are not alone, and a lot of people misunderstand it. Bokeh is defined as the quality of the out-of-focus area of an image. It’s how well a lens renders blur, the aesthetics of it.

I don’t remember hearing the word bokeh spoken even once when I studied photography in college almost 20 years ago. It’s not that it didn’t exist, because obviously bokeh did exist, but it didn’t really matter. You either liked how a certain lens rendered blur or you didn’t, and few were trying to quantify it or rate it.

39542940191_784a95f262_z

Christmas Joy – Scottsdale, AZ – Fujifilm X100F @ f/4

Today you’ll hear terms like “bokeh monster” when describing a lens and “bokeh master” when describing a person. People will say that a certain lens produces a lot of bokeh, which, frankly, doesn’t make any sense, because bokeh is defined by character and is not a measurement. You can’t have more bokeh or less bokeh. You can only have nice bokeh or ugly bokeh.

People confuse depth-of-field with bokeh, but they are two entirely different things. Depth-of-field is the amount of an image that is in focus, determined by the aperture, subject distance and non-subject distance, as well as the physical size of the sensor or film. A lot of people mean depth-of-field when they say bokeh, it’s a misunderstanding of terms. Depth-of-field is a mathematical calculation, while bokeh is subjective, and what one person might think is nice another might think is ugly.

39394371451_08bd8b59ce_z

Yellow Rose – Peoria, AZ – Fujifilm X100F @ f/4.5

To achieve an out-of-focus area within an image, one needs to use a large aperture or focus really close to the end of the lens or both, which will create a shallow depth-of-field. The Fujifilm X100F has a maximum aperture of f/2, which is plenty large enough to attain a shallow depth-of-field. You can attain blur with a much larger aperture, even f/16, if your subject is really close to the end of the lens.

The quality of the out-of-focus area, or bokeh, on the Fujifilm X100F is smooth, pleasant, relaxed, creamy, and otherwise how bokeh should be. I rate it as good, perhaps even great. I give it two thumbs up! Again, it’s subjective, and just because I like it doesn’t mean that you will. Perhaps you like bokeh with a little more character, such as a soap-bubble or swirly effect that some vintage lenses provide. The X100F has a rather bland bokeh, but that’s not a bad thing, just as bokeh with a lot of character may not be a good thing. It’s all what you like and dislike.

39543256431_c3f460da77_z

Evergreen Snow – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F @ f/5.6

I think rating bokeh is overrated. It’s something people on message boards talk about much too much. It doesn’t matter anywhere close to what some people would have you believe. The important thing is whether the blur is distracting or not. You don’t want bokeh to take the viewer’s eyes off of what’s important in an image, unless, perhaps, bokeh is what’s important to a particular image. And bokeh can’t be used to cover up something distracting in the background, because it’s just as distracting blurred as it is sharp.

You can have a great image with poor bokeh and a poor image with great bokeh. The quality of the bokeh has little to do with the outcome of a photograph. Since photographers often worry about insignificant things (while sometimes ignoring what is significant), especially on the internet, this is a topic that’s brought up over and over again. It’s worth discussing, but with the caveat that it is an extraordinarily tiny part of the big picture. Whether good or bad it’s not a big deal. In my opinion bokeh on the Fujifilm X100F is good, so take that for what it’s worth.

38513506215_a26a6c9740_z

Arizona Bougainvillea – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X100F @ f/10