Chicagoist: We Know Commenting Is Broken Right Now

onlyconnect

Thu, 13 Dec 2007 06:39:34 -0600

Margaret, I personally think you should have used the term "kookybokeh." Kookybites is a cool photo taker and I like the photos that he takes very much. You can tell that his photos are from the heart. I want to see more of his bokeh/bokeh disc/soft focus/out-of-focus shots. My personal message to Kookybites: Keep doing what you're doing, girl. You're doing a great job. Fight the power. Fight the establishment. Invent your own rules. hahahaha

Jeff Cagle

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:41:56 -0600

A popular Flickr group that specializes in true bokeh.

kookybites

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:41:35 -0600

That's my bad, Margaret. I generally agree with photo-taker's definition, but I am still guilty of tagging entirely out-of-focus shots, such as this one, as having bokeh. There are a large number of people who do classify shots like this as bokeh... whether they're right or not, I don't know, but right now, I don't care, as I am ready to get my drink on.

Margaret Lyons

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:27:37 -0600

I was taking the photographers' words for it...

Photo taker

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:24:07 -0600

1) Not Bokeh, 2) Not Bokeh, 3) Not Bokeh. Bokeh is a term for a technique to accentuate a particular portion of a photographic image by keeping the accectuated are in sharp focus and using depth of field to throw the rest of the image out of focus. This picture, and many, many others that you continue to classify as bokeh, are not. They're just very simply out of focus. Now, I'm not making any sort of qualitative assesment here, if you like that kind of thing, great! I experiment with focus, depth, camera and subject movement all the time and love it...I'm just pointing out...this is not bokeh. Thanks,

matty

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:12:21 -0600

TEST

the new guest number 2

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:11:54 -0600

Please let me know when commenting has been fixed.