Macro Home - Please Feedback Me

tkj365 · 07-10-2012, 12:22 AM

Hi, here is another 'Quick Shot With New Lens' that I wanted to get some thoughts on.

Attached Images

backpacker13 · 07-10-2012, 01:40 AM

Hi,
This is great shot, but this isn't macro....

tkj365 · 07-10-2012, 02:09 AM

What makes this not Macro. It is taken with a Pentax-DA 1:2.8 35mm MACRO Limited Lens.... Just because it is not close up does not mean it is not macro, no?

backpacker13 · 07-10-2012, 02:14 AM

The term "macro photography" is often used to describe any close-up shot.
However, in DSLR photography, it should really only be used to describe a photograph with a 1:1 or higher magnification.
Macro photography is commonly used by still life DSLR photographers to capture small details of objects.

kaiserz · 07-10-2012, 03:58 AM

So a 1:2 would not be considered as macro?

backpacker13 · 07-10-2012, 04:05 AM

Everyone can interpret how they want,but the real macro photography is 1:1 or higher magnification...

1:1 is fairly simply, and best explained with a frame of film.

Let's say you set up a wonderful shot of a dime (a 10¢ piece) with a macro lens set to 1:1. You take the shot on a roll of film, have it developed, etc.

If you place that frame of film next to the dime, the image of the dime and the dime itself will be the same size.

What it means is that you're reproducing your subject on the imaging plane (film or sensor) at the same size that it exists in real life.

This is the same on digital, and is NOT affected by crop factor. What it means is that of your subject is, say, 12mmx12mm in size in real life, it will occupy a space of 12mmx12mm on your sensor.

If you're using a lens with "macro" capabilities (as some off-brand zooms are labelled), you're not getting true 1:1 reproduction. Some offer 1:2 (half size) but most are 1:3 or less (third size). What this means is that a subject that is 12x12mm would be 6x6mm or 4x4mm, depending on the lens.

top-quark · 07-10-2012, 05:02 AM

Beautiful pic. I'd have been inclined to file it under "Nature". There's a macro lens club that you can submit it to, though.

SpecialK · 07-10-2012, 06:09 AM

I would crop off the top just below the shadow line and orange blob at the top right, or at least clone that out. While there is some gray area on what a macro is, this is not it :-) Part of a singe flower would be closer to it.

smf · 07-10-2012, 01:26 PM

It's a nice photo. Here's another vote for cloning out the bright oval light. I'd recommend the cropping Special K suggested, but I think that makes the photo slightly too shallow for my taste. If you do crop down, I suggest going far enough to eliminate the white flower that's partially at the shadow line.

Best wishes, and I look forward to seeing more of your photographs.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Architecture Home Sweet Home	RobG	Photo Critique	9	07-04-2011 03:42 PM
Landscape Home Sweet Home	Scottnorwo	Post Your Photos!	13	03-08-2011 04:58 AM

07-10-2012, 01:40 AM	#2
backpacker13 Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Croatia;Europe Photos: Albums Posts: 29	Hi, This is great shot, but this isn't macro....

07-10-2012, 02:09 AM	#3
tkj365 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Chandler, AZ Posts: 142 Original Poster	What makes this not Macro. It is taken with a Pentax-DA 1:2.8 35mm MACRO Limited Lens.... Just because it is not close up does not mean it is not macro, no?

07-10-2012, 02:14 AM	#4
backpacker13 Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Croatia;Europe Photos: Albums Posts: 29	The term "macro photography" is often used to describe any close-up shot. However, in DSLR photography, it should really only be used to describe a photograph with a 1:1 or higher magnification. Macro photography is commonly used by still life DSLR photographers to capture small details of objects.

07-10-2012, 03:58 AM	#5
kaiserz Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: NoVa The "burg" Photos: Gallery Posts: 899	So a 1:2 would not be considered as macro?

07-10-2012, 04:05 AM	#6
backpacker13 Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Croatia;Europe Photos: Albums Posts: 29	Everyone can interpret how they want,but the real macro photography is 1:1 or higher magnification... 1:1 is fairly simply, and best explained with a frame of film. Let's say you set up a wonderful shot of a dime (a 10¢ piece) with a macro lens set to 1:1. You take the shot on a roll of film, have it developed, etc. If you place that frame of film next to the dime, the image of the dime and the dime itself will be the same size. What it means is that you're reproducing your subject on the imaging plane (film or sensor) at the same size that it exists in real life. This is the same on digital, and is NOT affected by crop factor. What it means is that of your subject is, say, 12mmx12mm in size in real life, it will occupy a space of 12mmx12mm on your sensor. If you're using a lens with "macro" capabilities (as some off-brand zooms are labelled), you're not getting true 1:1 reproduction. Some offer 1:2 (half size) but most are 1:3 or less (third size). What this means is that a subject that is 12x12mm would be 6x6mm or 4x4mm, depending on the lens.

07-10-2012, 05:02 AM	#7
top-quark Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Aylesbury, Bucks Photos: Albums Posts: 492	Beautiful pic. I'd have been inclined to file it under "Nature". There's a macro lens club that you can submit it to, though.

07-10-2012, 06:09 AM	#8
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	I would crop off the top just below the shadow line and orange blob at the top right, or at least clone that out. While there is some gray area on what a macro is, this is not it :-) Part of a singe flower would be closer to it.

07-10-2012, 01:26 PM	#9
smf Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Midland, MI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,083	It's a nice photo. Here's another vote for cloning out the bright oval light. I'd recommend the cropping Special K suggested, but I think that makes the photo slightly too shallow for my taste. If you do crop down, I suggest going far enough to eliminate the white flower that's partially at the shadow line. Best wishes, and I look forward to seeing more of your photographs.