January 2011
Jan 29th
73 notes
Jan 29th
310 notes
Jan 29th
76 notes
Jan 29th
344 notes
Jan 29th
352 notes
Jan 29th
50 notes
2 tags
Jan 29th
5 notes
2 tags
Jan 29th
36 notes
Jan 29th
576 notes
Jan 29th
638 notes
Jan 28th
605 notes
Jan 28th
97 notes
Jan 28th
175 notes
Jan 28th
41 notes
2 tags
Jan 28th
3 notes
2 tags
Jan 28th
20 notes
2 tags
Jan 27th
8 notes
2 tags
Jan 27th
18 notes
Jan 24th
610 notes
Jan 24th
117 notes
2 tags
Jan 24th
10 notes
“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time...”
– Jim HensonĀ  (via madcity17)
Jan 23rd
2,171 notes
Jan 23rd
16 notes
Jan 23rd
348 notes
Jan 23rd
63 notes
2 tags
Jan 23rd
396 notes
2 tags
Jan 23rd
12 notes
2 tags
Jan 23rd
14 notes
2 tags
Jan 21st
10 notes
Jan 21st
46 notes
2 tags
Jan 21st
2 tags
Jan 21st
7 notes
2 tags
Jan 21st
50 notes
Jan 21st
6 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
10 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
12 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
17 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
26 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
52 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
10 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
2 tags
Jan 19th
13 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
198 notes
2 tags
Jan 19th
2 tags
Jan 18th
2 tags
Jan 16th
Jan 16th
36 notes
ehalcyon asked: I am not a photographer, but I thought that having the blurs form "circles" of light was not necessary for bokeh to be considered of good quality. I mean, bokeh encompasses all blur, and there can be good bokeh and bad bokeh. Whether it is good or bad depends on the aesthetic quality, but aesthetics is very much subjective. Am I mistaken? Is there actually a formal, objective...
Jan 16th
8 notes
2 tags
Jan 16th
11 notes
Jan 16th
25 notes