What size is Macro and other CCD related terms

[ericmark]

Looking at the lovely picture of a caterpillar on a leaf amongst the many comments were a number like this.

Great macro - love the colours and the DOF.

Is the term Macro just used loosely! Or have I got it wrong? I though macro was 1 to 1 or better? Or does this refer to what would be 1 to 1 on a full plate camera. I see same with "contact prints" and "N-Prints" thought they should be same size as film/CCD but I see many so called much bigger than CCD but smaller than old 120 film size.

Not trying to be funny in any way. Real question. I think personally relating to size of CCD is daft as they vary so much. But I guess there is a traditional/historical size which is considered as "Standard" when referring to items which technically should relate to film/CCD size.

Same with lenses. My long lens will fit my film SLR or D-SLR and so is rated as 400mm on Film camera and around 270mm on D-SLR or is it 600mm not sure which way it goes? but it's the same lens. So should I call it a 400mm or 270mm lens?

When I used the old 120 brownie I knew were I was. Not enough light just didn't work. But as I have gone on to 35mm and even 110 cameras. And now a range of digital and some I have no idea of size of CCD I find I am often misunderstood because I attach some antiquated meanings to words.

And there are also a load of new words. Tone mapping, Shadow luminance, Max radiance etc. I have tried to look them up but each dictionary seems to give different meaning. May be USA, Aus, and UK do use slightly different words but with all software and cameras being world wide I would not think we have "Hood" and "Bonnet" problem with cameras. Cars do tend to be build different but can't see cameras being same!

Got a feeling this may cause some debate. So I have start new thread hope that's OK.

[AcadieLibre]

There are common explanations of Macro Photography and posted the links below. Lens length is based on what it shoots on a full frame camera or 35 mm camera so if it is 400 mm lens it still is a 400 mm lens. If I want a 50 mm lens or close on a crop body you would buy a 30 mm because you would multiply 30 mm x 1.6 which is the crop of say a Canon 40D and you have a 48 mm lens for the purpose of a cropped camera. That does not change that it is still a 30 mm lens just means that on a cropped camera it shoots as 48 mm on that camera body. Pretty basic stuff so not sure why there would be a debate. Nothing daft about any of it or it there anything to debate, it is straightforward. The only problem is when people are new to photography it can be a bit confusing and some Camera stores do not explain to people to factor in what your camera crop is when deciding on a lens well enough in my opinion. If you buy a DSLR and do not research your as much at fault as those who sell or manufacture the equipment, it your equipment and you should know what you bought. Camera manufacturers do explain if you bother to read the manuals. Most people are just too lazy. And not all lenses are compatible with full frame cameras, well at least Canon does sell lenses that are not FF camera compatible so research, read and know what you are buying before buy.

PS: On a Brownie which I also own there is enough light if there is light available just you are not exposing it long enough, it may take 10 minutes of exposure time to get the photo but you need to know how long your exposure should be in the lighting conditions along with the ISO of the film you are using. It is not the camera that is at fault it is the photographer.


Macro photography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Macro Photography

[Greg_Nuspel]

PS: On a Brownie which I also own there is enough light if there is light available just you are not exposing it long enough, it may take 10 minutes of exposure time to get the photo but you need to know how long your exposure should be in the lighting conditions along with the ISO of the film you are using. It is not the camera that is at fault it is the photographer.

Yes film reciprocity failure in all it's glory.

[Mad Aussie]

I think just adding to those points AL has made ... no matter how correct the technical explanation, if the vast majority of people use a 'loose' explanation then I have to wonder which is best to use. No point talking German if I'm in Fiji.

I think in the strictest terms 'Macro' is as you understand it ... 1:1 or closer. However, so many people call close up photography 'Macro' that it's widely accepted that way. This brings in terms like 'True Macro' which acknowledge 'Macro' as being less than 1:1 ... not correct but accepted by many. You'll spend the rest of your life trying to correct people on this so most don't bother.

As AL said ... on Lenses ... if you have a crop body you simply multiply the focal length by the crop factor (1.6 for Canon, 1.5 for Nikon) so your 400mm does indeed become 600mm. How you should express that is again ... usually not done correctly. Most people in your case would say they shot it at 400mm when they should either say it was 600mm OR 400mm with a crop factor of 1.5 or 1.6 etc.

Although most camera terms are universal not all software terms are. But most seem to try to use the same terms these days.
Tone Mapping, for instance, comes from HDR work and refers to the combination of several images for HDR that are very high bit, beyond what your monitor can display properly, so they look like crap. Tone Mapping then is the process that allows you to blend the tones and colours down to a level you can see properly on your monitor.

Shadow luminence and other similar terms I think are results of software now being able to further dissect an images digital elements and process them. Whereas before you might just have adjusted overall luminence, you can now divide that task into highlights, shadows, specific colour ranges etc.

And it's a 'Bonnet' ... a 'Hood' is a head cover connected to a garment of clothing, or a slang word for Neighbourhood!

[ericmark]

Mr M. Aussie,
Really good explanation and that is also re-enforced by AcadieLibre’s link. So to re-cap True Macro is 1:1 but anything where a regular 6×4 inch (15×10 cm) print would show a bigger image than original is considered loosely as macro.

The lens size hadn’t thought of it as cropping but I do see your point. So 400mm lens is still 400mm however my 18 – 55mm is designed for my camera and even adding a sky light filter can bring the lens hood out enough to be seen at 18mm if not rotated to correct plane. I have not tried it on old 35mm SLR but got that feeling I would get some clipping! It’s marked as 18 – 55mm not 27 – 82.5mm and more important the meta data will report it as 18 – 55mm. With cropped CCD’s varying in size from make to make this does give one some false information and I must remember that a Canon 31¼mm = Pentax 33⅓ = 35mm cameras 50mm lens. So my 18 – 55mm = 16.875 – 51.5625mm on Canon 40D.

I was about 6 year old when my dad got rid of Brownie and got a 35mm camera so I can’t remember that much except that he also than had to use a light meter after he changed. (Seem to remember pictures of cloud and sun!) Before Brownie he had German ½ plate camera with cassette that took 12 exposures but from what he remembers it would not do colour. Also film even in 1958 was getting hard to get hold of. However the new cameras could not be set through the lens but the old, although frosted glass and bag over head was required, had very good macro and one could adjust lens up/down and side to side to get buildings straight not need for Photoshop. Seems it cost him 6D on black market 1945 in Berlin.

The other terms Tone Mapping for example I found a problem as it seems different software assigns different words to same feature. With Photoshop one can set the Un-Sharp mask in two different places and the numbers used are completely different and that’s in same bit of software. (First is when loading RAW files)

HDR using Picturenaut and Photoshop seem to use completely different methods to set the compression of 32 bit to 16 bit and it takes so much to learn what each does would not want to try and use 3 or 4 programs like some people seem to do. (I do like Picturenaut seems to handle colour better than Photoshop pity I can’t use it in exam.)

And of course in UK it is Bonnet, Boot, and Track rod end same as Australia but words do change and only in embroidery is a item which is sat on called a fanny hoop anywhere else it has completely different meaning. And only Falklands and Australia do they know what a hogget is!

As to retail outlets I did not know about the CCD being smaller than 35mm until after I got camera. And I was quite surprised that my 18 – 55mm lens was no wider than my 28mm ƒ2 fixed lens. And quite upset to find I could not use slide copier without cropping image.

On the plus I had not realised I could set camera to both aperture and speed priority and camera would set gain (ISO) to match.

Also did not realise my dedicated Vivatar with Pentax base would not even be seen as being connected on New Pentax K10D.

However enough of the old gear did fit and work that I think keeping to Pentax was right way to go.

In 1986 or there about my SLR started to go wrong and after sending it away for repair a few times for same fault. It would double expose same frame twice. It was put in a cupboard and forgotten about. 25 years later, I start again at hobby and of course, things have moved on.

I am very lucky though that you are all helping so much. On the Electrical forum you would not believe the debate which goes on over silly things like is it a bulb, a lamp or a fitting.

[Mad Aussie]

You're not lucky ... you just came to the right place with the right attitude

Falklands and Aussie ... not quite ... Aussie is a huge place and there are terms and slangs that I don't know about that are commonplace in other parts of the country. Take Hogget for instance! I'll have to go look that one up. I have no idea what it is.

Picturenaut seems popular with some. I prefer Photomatix. Photoshop's HDR doesn't stack up in my opinion but I do use PS for finishing off my HDR's after I've done what I can in Photomatix.

You're obviously very technical minded and like to know the exact reasons for things.

[ericmark]

Hogget is a female sheep which is fertile but has not born young. New Zealand, Australia and Falklands seem to use word but not in UK.

And yes I do want to understand why. Sliding things up and down until it looks right is not good enough for me I want to know why.

I suppose that's because I'm an engineer.

Thanks again all best Eric

[Greg_Nuspel]

I suppose that's because I'm an engineer.

Now we have the root of the problem

[Mad Aussie]

Hogget is a female sheep which is fertile but has not born young. New Zealand, Australia and Falklands seem to use word but not in UK.

And yes I do want to understand why. Sliding things up and down until it looks right is not good enough for me I want to know why.

I suppose that's because I'm an engineer.

I actually had typed in "Are you an engineer by chance?" as the last line in my last post then noticed your reference to Electricians so I deleted that line

I don't know much about sheep.

[Greg_Nuspel]

I don't know much about sheep.

So you don't own the Velcro gloves