"Macro". Meaning needed.

Every photographer I know uses the term "macro" to mean "micro". Howcome?

Every scientist I know uses the term "macro" to mean "large". I know why this is so. Because that's what it means. Shouldn't a "macro" lens mean one that shot pictures of big things?

I mean (he said with a Jerry Seinfeld twang): You use a Micro Nikkor to shoot a Macro shot? What's with THAT?

How DID this start?

-iNova

Probably came about by the instructions being written by the same guy that writes all the menus in chinese restaurants?

We have a game to see who can find the most typos in instruction sheets eminating from the far east ;o)

Peter iNova said:

Every photographer I know uses the term "macro" to mean "micro". Howcome?

Every scientist I know uses the term "macro" to mean "large". I know why
this is so. Because that's what it means. Shouldn't a "macro" lens mean
one that shot pictures of big things?

I mean (he said with a Jerry Seinfeld twang): You use a Micro Nikkor to
shoot a Macro shot? What's with THAT?

How DID this start?

-iNova

Click to expand...

Quit dilly-dallying on this fourm and get yor book into print!

Rodger

Macro: from Greek makros

referring to focal length, not proximity to subject.

Makes sense if I envision how my bellows work...moving the lens away from the camera body (increasing focal length) the more microscopic the field of view.

Peter iNova said:

Every photographer I know uses the term "macro" to mean "micro". Howcome?

Every scientist I know uses the term "macro" to mean "large". I know why
this is so. Because that's what it means. Shouldn't a "macro" lens mean
one that shot pictures of big things?

I mean (he said with a Jerry Seinfeld twang): You use a Micro Nikkor to
shoot a Macro shot? What's with THAT?

How DID this start?

-iNova

Click to expand...

Member said:

How DID this start?

-iNova

Click to expand...

Maybe 'cause photographers are "result" rather than "object" oriented )
Lin

Rodger Carter said:

Quit dilly-dallying on this fourm and get yor book into print!

Rodger

Click to expand...

Yeah! Looking forward to book - when will it be finished?

But $.02 - macrophotography is done with a camera, possibly using a special lens, to make large (macro) images of closeup objects. Microphotography doesn't use a camera, has a microphotography back attached to a microscope. And electron microscopy doesn't even use light.

Coly

Must be a REALLY slow Monday at Metavision.

kunza

Peter iNova said:

Every photographer I know uses the term "macro" to mean "micro". Howcome?

Every scientist I know uses the term "macro" to mean "large". I know why
this is so. Because that's what it means. Shouldn't a "macro" lens mean
one that shot pictures of big things?

I mean (he said with a Jerry Seinfeld twang): You use a Micro Nikkor to
shoot a Macro shot? What's with THAT?

How DID this start?

-iNova

Click to expand...

I always thought "macro" was half way to "micro". Incidentally, I think "eminating" must have come from one of the menus.

Peter iNova said:

Every photographer I know uses the term "macro" to mean "micro". Howcome?

Every scientist I know uses the term "macro" to mean "large". I know why
this is so. Because that's what it means. Shouldn't a "macro" lens mean
one that shot pictures of big things?

I mean (he said with a Jerry Seinfeld twang): You use a Micro Nikkor to
shoot a Macro shot? What's with THAT?

How DID this start?

Click to expand...

Blame bad Japanese linguists, who came up with the "Micro-Nikkor" forty years ago.

And what are you doing? Shooting large images of small things? Or normal-sized images of things of no particular size? Is the image the actual film or the print? Is the thing photographed being magnified? Is it magnified on film or only after enlargement to print? etc. etc. etc. We have to define our terms.

As a general rule, microphotography means photography of really tiny things; by extension, it has come to signify the creation of images at a size larger on the film (plane) than in real life. For example, you can use a microscope with an attached camera to make magnified images at 10x, 200x, whatever, to the physical limits of light particles and wavelenghts (Then you use electrons instead of photons)... If you make a 10x image on film and then print the image at 8x10 inches, you end up with a huge magnification...in relation to the size of the original object.

Macro has come to mean photography very close up. The macro range is generally understood to be 1/3 life-size to 1:1 on the film (plane)... which is to say that, for example, a detail of a ruler photographed at 1:1 ratio would be represented on the film at a size equal to that of the ruler, and could be used itself as a ruler. Beyond that magnification, we start to enter the realm of microphotography.

Now, with the tiny CCDs in our cameras, are we really engaged in micro or macro photography? Since the "native" view of such images is a 15 or 17 or 19-inch monitor, what is the magnification? Do we talk in terms if image size vis-à-vis the ½" CCD? or vis-à-vis the viewed image? Is this micro or macro photography?

A case can be made for either definition. A logical --and generally accepted-- definition for "macro" in digital photography has yet to be drafted. Perhaps this is something we could play with.
regards
Robert Jeantet

Peter iNova said:

Every photographer I know uses the term "macro" to mean "micro". Howcome?

Every scientist I know uses the term "macro" to mean "large". I know why
this is so. Because that's what it means. Shouldn't a "macro" lens mean
one that shot pictures of big things?

I mean (he said with a Jerry Seinfeld twang): You use a Micro Nikkor to
shoot a Macro shot? What's with THAT?

How DID this start?

-iNova

Click to expand...

Peter,

A macro photograph is a photograph of an object showing detail down to that obtained by a human with the unaided eye. Another definition of a macro photograph would be a 1:1 reproduction of an object. If an object were .5 inches high, then the image on the film (or CCD) would be .5 inches also. When enlarged, of course, the image becomes much larger than the object photographed.

Brent

'twas first coined by the same 6'4" guy who, upon receiving his Ph.D., decided to call himself a "microbiologist".

Will

Amusing shots at Far-eastern translations aside. . .
The term as always made perfect sense to me:

The term "Microphotography" was taken. It refers to photographing micro-sized objects. ie, photographing things that are very small.

Regular photography usually results in making an image of an object that is smaller than the object being photographed, ie, the image recorded on film (or imaging sensor) tends to be smaller than the actual subject (4x5 format photographs of hamsters aside)

"Macro photography," is photographing something (of any size, even though it is usually used on small, but not microscopic, things) and making the image on film comparativly large, or sometimes even larger than the actual subject.

Long winded answers 'R' us!
ApK

Peter iNova said:

Every photographer I know uses the term "macro" to mean "micro". Howcome?

Every scientist I know uses the term "macro" to mean "large". I know why
this is so. Because that's what it means. Shouldn't a "macro" lens mean
one that shot pictures of big things?

I mean (he said with a Jerry Seinfeld twang): You use a Micro Nikkor to
shoot a Macro shot? What's with THAT?

How DID this start?

-iNova

Click to expand...