How do you consider a shots is macro?

[besh]

hi guys...

How do you consider a shot is macro? mus it be 1:1 ?
well... my .2 cents is some shots need not to be in 1:1 or focus too much on the small part of the object then consider macro.... e.g.... i don't really agree with some comment like.... you must buy and use a macro lens, then you can shoot the eye/face/details of the bugs...

well... in certain point of view it might be right, but why can't we shoot the whole bug itself while it landing on the leave?

share ur though..

 

[Galdor]

It really depends on what you want to achieve.

Bugs are usually very small. To me, as long as i can see the insect and some details, it's good enough. I do not need to see the fine details (eg. the hair on the head).

Anyway, that's just me and it may not be agreeable to others.

 

[zac08]

Definination :

From Wiki

 

[lifepursuer]

Quite subjective depending on what the photographer is trying to achieve, some like to show a close up with a little indication of the surroundings while others may want to zoom in on certain parts of the subject. At the end of the day if you achieve the kind of shots that you want, thats all it matters.

 

[Daedalus Trent]

Quite subjective depending on what the photographer is trying to achieve, some like to show a close up with a little indication of the surroundings while others may want to zoom in on certain parts of the subject. At the end of the day if you achieve the kind of shots that you want, thats all it matters.

yea... :think: while macro lenses have a strict definition, i think the term macro photography can be applied rather loosely.


P.S- come to think of it,the definition of macro lenses is applied rather loosely too. I mean...look at Sigma's line of 'macro' lenses! :bsmilie:

 

[astrise]

yea... :think: while macro lenses have a strict definition, i think the term macro photography can be applied rather loosely.


P.S- come to think of it,the definition of macro lenses is applied rather loosely too. I mean...look at Sigma's line of 'macro' lenses! :bsmilie:

But then very strictly speaking, 'macro' lenses are defined to reproduce an image at equal to or greater than 1:1 magnification. Nowadays the use of 'macro' to describe close-focusing lenses (which should be better described as 'micro', Nikon style) is very unscientific. IMO 'macro' as an adjective should only be applied to optics and not to photographs. After all, optics is an exact science; photography is an art-form.