Macro...?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

JBreezy

Registered
Messages
58
Reaction score
35
Location
Arkansas, US
# of dives
100 - 199
A question for all of you that may know more than myself:

Why are the tiny critters we find called 'macro?'
A quick google suggests this is because to photograph such specimens, one would need a larger, 'macro' lens, however, this seems a bit backwards to me. Was the term truly coined due to the need for a certain lens type? Micro seems much more appropriate... (I'm not super familiar with photography)

Post all of the pictures that you want! I've visited the nudi lovers thread but still love looking at them.
Found my first nudibranch in Grand Cayman in January. Unfortunately no photos, but as I recall it was about an inch long, mostly brown with uneven white stripes. Hoping to find many more while in Bonaire in a week and a half!

Thanks in advance.
 
My understanding is that macroscopic in relation to photography comes from microscopic - where macroscopic subjects are visible to the naked eye and microscopic would be invisible without a form of magnification.

So because you don't need something to physically see the subject it is called macro photography.

If we were to proceed with my current definition of macro and micro - underwater micro photography would be so very hard to find your subject - you've have to look through your camera at all times to even see anything.

nudibranch etc are all macro because you can see them with your plain eyeball without needing something in addition.

Although I could be wrong. :)


Mods may want to relocate this to the photography forum - we might get more answers there.
 
"Macro" generally refers to "big stuff"; groupers, sharks, etc. "Micro" refers to really tiny creatures like Pygmy Seahorses and such.

What gets confusing is when you get into photography because a "macro shot" is a picture of a really small critter. Specifically, it is where the picture of a critter is larger than the critter itself. And, you need a "macro" lens to do it. So, you need a "macro" lens to take pictures of "micro" stuff.
 
Macro, in photo terms, means the actual object is the same size as the image burned into the film itself, as it was called 1:1.

Micro means that the image on the film is larger than the actual object.

With the advent of digital imaging, these distinctions are nebulous.

If you want to see some true micro, click on that link in my signature line.
 
That makes more sense from a photography perspective. I guess I was confused as it seems 'photo' or 'lens' is often dropped in conversation so you wind up with 'looking for macro (creatures),' and such sentences. And from the macro vs. micro perspective didn't make sense to me as usually people are referring to nudis and other such small creatures when they say macro, but not larger creatures (fish, sharks, whales, etc.).

Thanks for your responses!
 
Was the term truly coined due to the need for a certain lens type?
Not in a general sense. The word may be better known to the general population as a result of photography (and of course there's macro/micro economics, macrobiotic diets, and other things), but I think photographers (mis?)appropriated it from science. In science macroscopic just refers to stuff that's large enough to be seen with the naked eye whereas microscopic refers to stuff that's too small to be seen without magnification.

That means that in general a 1/8" critter and a blue whale are both macroscopic, but even outside of photography "macro" (without adding "scopic" to the end) is commonly used to refer to small stuff. "Small" stuff is of course subjective. Telephoto lenses arguable magnify images because they capture a much narrower field of view than the human eye. Macro lenses are commonly described as magnifying images, but they do it by allowing focusing at very close distances, so in photography it might be more correct to say that macro refers to close up photography than the size of the image on the film or sensor. In the old days of 35mm film macro meant capturing images that were from 1/10th of life size up to life size (1:1) but the the wide range of sensor sizes and resolutions that distinction is largely meaningless.

I imagine that a lot of divers who aren't photographers refer to all small stuff as macro. Maybe Doc does that in general, too, but at least when he's diving at CocoView I suspect he's probably thinking about stuff that he'll use a magnifying glass for. While a magnifying glass obviously does magnify things, letting your eyes focus from much closer is also significant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc
letting your eyes focus ... much closer is also significant.

That is the grail.
 

Back
Top Bottom