Creative Collective 006: 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!

Subscribe to get access

Read more of this content when you join the Fuji X Weekly Creative Collective today! Learn more here.

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