Talk:Defocus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Revert[edit]

I'm going to revert today's edit. Per WP:MOSDAB we usually don't make dab pages with only two entries. The usual solution if there are two entries is to redirect to one of them and add a dablink at the top of that article that points to the other.

In this case, there is another issue: the new meaning is, as far as I can tell, not distinct from defocus aberration. The best solution here would be to add a paragraph on this intentional use of defocus to that article, with links to shallow focus. I'm not familiar enough with the technique to do that; I recommend that the editor who added the entry here consider doing that.--Srleffler (talk) 04:40, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Excellent suggestion, now implemented.
The thing that prompted me to do the edit was this press release by Sony, that states that the new Sony NEX-VG900 has "robust defocusing capabilities". The target article of the redirect makes no effort to explain why anyone would want "defocusing capabilities". And yes, this is a neologism, even my browser spell checker fails to recognize the word. The real mystery here is that did cinematographers and photographers only learn to defocus in 2008? From memory, I would say yes. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 00:14, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
P.S. – This extreme form of defocusing seems to be known as bokeh porn. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)