Bokeh is much faster than Photoshop's Lens Blur, especially on very wide blurs like the ones used in these pictures. There are easy to use tools in Bokeh for placing a radial or planar blur, which requires more work to setup in Lens Blur. Bokeh also has more customization of aperture shape (even a heart shape) and it can also do vignetting.
That's right. Cheap effects. What have these for goodness sake to do with photography? It's all Photoshop and not even pure Photoshop, but an add-on filter by a third party company.
This and other rubbish is sending photography down the lane of textual content on the web: it's becoming a commodity because everybody can do it, so why should you buy a print from a real photographer who loves his craft?
Too much technology can make your business go away!
This is a very VERY poor way of simulating depth of field. Spend about 5 more minutes and a couple more steps and you would not even be able to tell it was fake. I mean come-on, look at the last picture. Terrible, the blur remains the same off of the depth
Interesting effect. How is
Interesting effect. How is this different from using Photoshop's Lens Blur?
Difference from Lens Blur
Bokeh is much faster than Photoshop's Lens Blur, especially on very wide blurs like the ones used in these pictures. There are easy to use tools in Bokeh for placing a radial or planar blur, which requires more work to setup in Lens Blur. Bokeh also has more customization of aperture shape (even a heart shape) and it can also do vignetting.
-Jeff Butterworth, Alien Skin Software
We call those "cheap effects"
That's right. Cheap effects. What have these for goodness sake to do with photography? It's all Photoshop and not even pure Photoshop, but an add-on filter by a third party company.
This and other rubbish is sending photography down the lane of textual content on the web: it's becoming a commodity because everybody can do it, so why should you buy a print from a real photographer who loves his craft?
Too much technology can make your business go away!
Poor
This is a very VERY poor way of simulating depth of field. Spend about 5 more minutes and a couple more steps and you would not even be able to tell it was fake. I mean come-on, look at the last picture. Terrible, the blur remains the same off of the depth
How to make really phoney looking pictures.
Alien Skin produces some very useful stuff that I own and use.
But we programmers have often been accused of "finding a cure for which there is no desease."
I fear that this is one such undertaking.
--Greg Peterson
tilt effect
Thank you very much, its much better than using a plunger... lol
Vietnam Pictures
Hi, this is out of the topic but I noticed how those mountains/fields look very similar to the ones here in the Philippines.
Great tutorial!