[M_Six]

Depending which site you visit, bokeh can have many different interpretations. Some sites define it as the round, blurred light highlights in the background. Other sites define it as "any pleasing blur" or some such thing. Some sites I've seen consider any visible straight lines, blurred or not, to be "bad bokeh."

TL, khaye1, and 1sikbmr have the rounded points of light that some consider real bokeh, whereas dcstep's, paul's, and signes's bird images have the "pleasing blur" that completely removes any background definition. All you see is a greenish blur. That is also considered great bokeh by many sites. But many of the other shots simply have OOF areas with still discernible backgrounds (or foregrounds).

skinrock's guitar image, which is awesome, btw, would be a huge point of argument on many "bokeh" forums. Some would claim it has great bokeh, while others would say it has bad bokeh. Depends on what your personal definition is.

So bokeh is very much in the eye of the beholder. But if any blur or OOF is going to qualify as bokeh, then what's the point of having the term in the first place?