Anyone use Alien Skin's Bokeh?

[heard03]

I was checking out Alien Skin's Bokeh. The $199 price tag about made me choke, though. Has anyone used it or heard firsthand how it is?

[venchka]

I much prefer Leitz, Nikkor, Konica and Canon bokeh. For $200 I bought a Nikkor 85/2.0 that is a Bokeh Machine!

What will the Geeks think that they can simulate next?

[heard03]

Touche' Wayne. My 100-400 produces nice bokeh, just not when I'm shooting from the fence standing on a bucket about 30 yards away from my subject. My access to my subject and options to control the background at a baseball game are limited and I want to blur out my background more. Not everyone can afford to drop $4000+ on a 2.8 prime.

[ldelacruz]

Philip,
Give it a try and let us know? I have always been curious how a program like this works and how much work it is to use?

[heard03]

Lonnie- I downloaded the free demo I found at their site(which I think is good for 30 days): Alien Skin Software: Bokeh
I'm gonna mess around with it and see what I can do. By the way, Lonnie- if anyone doesn't need it- it's you!

[S-Man]

I remember seeing this when looking at A.S. filters. I know it's been mentioned, but a 50 1.8 is cheaper and looks better. It's usually not that hard to spot fake bokeh.
Post some examples when you work some over. I'd like to see some results.

[Rson]

I am not a fan of it.

[jeffclow]

I tried the 30 day demo last year and found it worked well on certain types of shots, but not on others.

Is it worth $199? No. If it was $79 .... then I would recommend it.

As others have said, for $199 you can get a used lens that will produce natural bokeh.

[JohnT]

Originally Posted by venchka

I much prefer Leitz, Nikkor, Konica and Canon bokeh. For $200 I bought a Nikkor 85/2.0 that is a Bokeh Machine!

What will the Geeks think that they can simulate next?

Amen.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by heard03

Touche' Wayne. My 100-400 produces nice bokeh, just not when I'm shooting from the fence standing on a bucket about 30 yards away from my subject. My access to my subject and options to control the background at a baseball game are limited and I want to blur out my background more. Not everyone can afford to drop $4000+ on a 2.8 prime.

Try a Gaussian blur brush if that's what you want.

[dmcantrell]

Originally Posted by jeffclow

I tried the 30 day demo last year and found it worked well on certain types of shots, but not on others.

Is it worth $199? No. If it was $79 .... then I would recommend it.

As others have said, for $199 you can get a used lens that will produce natural bokeh.

I tried the demo as well. I found that it could help provide some subject-to-background definition for photos that had already been taken. Sure, a new lens will help you correct photos you take in the future, but I have yet to see a lens yet that will correct photos already in the can.

The usage of the filter and the quality of the corresponding results are directly proportional to the user's ability to make clean and accurate selections and masking in Photoshop.

Also, the Gaussian blur method is immediately noticeable and looks pretty terrible in my opinion. Although, I have only seen examples where it was totally overdone so I may not have good data on which to base my opinion.

Here's a nice little write-up with some before and after examples.

John Milleker Photography Blog Archive Review: Alienskin Bokeh

[heard03]

Originally Posted by dmcantrell

The usage of the filter and the quality of the corresponding results are directly proportional to the user's ability to make clean and accurate selections and masking in Photoshop

I messed around with it and couldn't figure out a way to make it work. This is not surprising since I have the PP skills of a garden hose.

[dmcantrell]

Here is a before and after I made using the filter when I had the trial version.

BEFORE:


I made a selection of the plane and the foreground, then inverted the selection, then used the Bokeh filter on the background with some very modest settings.



Once that was done, I applied a gradient layer mask to that layer to fade the effect from background to foreground.





AFTER:


The overall effect is minor, but I think it sets the plane off from the background just a little. Just my opinion, though.

I shot this with a Tamron 200-500 f/6.3. This lens is rather soft at f/6.3, and is sharpest at f/8 or f/11. This particular shot was done at f/11.

Would a better lens with a wider aperture have helped me? Sure, but I didn't have a better lens on that day, and I only found out that this plane made a quick stop to Addison at the last minute so I didn't have time to rent a better lens. I could wait for a re-shoot with different equipment or I could use the Bokeh filter to blur the background on the images I already have.

[heard03]

That came out good, David. The use was subtle and I think succeeded in emphasizing your subject. I don't think anyone would even suspect that you used software to enhance the bokeh. I saved your tutorial, thanks for posting!

[dmcantrell]

Here's a video from Adobe about the subject using only Photoshop CS4 built-in features :

The Complete Picture with Julieanne Kost - Selective Focus | Adobe TV