I had my very first @$$hole commenter on this blog today. It was on my Rule of Thirds post. Don’t bother going to search the comments. I deleted the conversation and told him he was no longer welcome on this blog.
I did have difficulty achieving bokeh that day. In the post, I wrote about the trouble I was experiencing, and how it was something I usually didn’t struggle to achieve. Still, that’s really not the point. In his first comment he explained to me that what I wanted was a smooth bokeh. Really? Did I? I have been told in the past that many photographers are annoyed with the glowy bokeh spots because it’s considered “bad”, but I, as do many others, happen to love it. I told him in my reply that I had been going for the sparkly kind. After that, there were a few follow up comments implying that I’m a stupid idiot. Finally, in an effort to get him to go away, I said that we are going to have to agree to disagree. He replied with the following.
“…There is no agreeing or disagreeing. It optics not an opinion. At 5.6 there can be no classic definition of bokeh.”
While the photo in that post was not a good example of bokeh, I believe it is possible to get it at f/5.6. So… I went out in waist-deep snow today to get this shot.
This to me is bokeh. This image has both the background blur and the glittery spots of out-of-focus light. Does anyone else out there agree with the @$$hole in that you can’t get bokeh at f/5.6? If you do disagree with me, go ahead and tell me why. Up until now, all my comments, even from people who have disagreed with the way I’ve done things, have been kind. I know that the vast majority of people are capable of doing so without being a total jerk-face.
Now, I must go change my pants. I’m still soaking wet from sinking waist-deep in the snow.