Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Perverted language

  1. #1
    Member Ron Evers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    A little north of Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    224
    Post Thanks / Like

    Perverted language

    I use the term "macro" reluctantly in photography because it is the convention. My instinct is to call it "micro" NOT "macro". To me micro is very small & macro large. Who perverted the word macro to mean small with regard to photography anyway?
    Panasonic G1 & GF1 bodies, Panasonic 14-45, 45-200mm, various Minolta, Pentax, Canon FD, M39 & M42 mount lenses.

  2. #2
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Perverted language

    Maybe it means to view small things large (Macro).
    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  3. #3
    Member Ron Evers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    A little north of Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    224
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Perverted language

    Quote Originally Posted by ustein View Post
    Maybe it means to view small things large (Macro).
    Well, that is an interesting point of view.
    Panasonic G1 & GF1 bodies, Panasonic 14-45, 45-200mm, various Minolta, Pentax, Canon FD, M39 & M42 mount lenses.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    776
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Perverted language

    Quote Originally Posted by ustein View Post
    Maybe it means to view small things large (Macro).
    That's my take on it as well. It's seeing it from a different perspective. Oddly enough there's both macro and micro photography (even though they do the exact same thing), and it seems the delineation between the two is something like 5x magnification.

  5. #5
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,344
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Perverted language

    Change to Nikon, and the problem disappears

  6. #6
    Member Ron Evers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    A little north of Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    224
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Perverted language

    Quote Originally Posted by photoSmart42 View Post
    That's my take on it as well. It's seeing it from a different perspective. Oddly enough there's both macro and micro photography (even though they do the exact same thing), and it seems the delineation between the two is something like 5x magnification.
    I still think it is a perversion. It is like saying a microscope is a macroscope because it make small things look large.
    Panasonic G1 & GF1 bodies, Panasonic 14-45, 45-200mm, various Minolta, Pentax, Canon FD, M39 & M42 mount lenses.

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,603
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Perverted language

    LOL, I agree with what Joergen said!

  8. #8
    Senior Member RichA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    544
    Post Thanks / Like

    Term macro is (I think) accurate

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Evers View Post
    I still think it is a perversion. It is like saying a microscope is a macroscope because it make small things look large.
    The term, which originated from Greek meaning "meagre"'which could mean small too so it's likely more accurately used in cameras than in say, economics where it refers to large systems.
    Nikon and Olympus both offered so-called micro lenses that fit on bellows and produced actual magnification, as opposed to the traditional 1:1 of the regular macro lens. So, in their case, they could have used micro to describe the small high power lenses (akin to microscope objectives almost) and used macro to describe the non-magnifying 1:1 lenses. Olympus did this, Nikon did not.

  9. #9
    Tikkis
    Guest

    Re: Perverted language

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Evers View Post
    I use the term "macro" reluctantly in photography because it is the convention. My instinct is to call it "micro" NOT "macro". To me micro is very small & macro large. Who perverted the word macro to mean small with regard to photography anyway?
    There is a long tradition behind these terms. It's been thought that from larger scale to the micro scale the terms are; close-up photography (up to 1:10), macro photography (1:10 - 1:1) and micro photography (from 1:1 to larger than life).

    I really don't know if these boundaries are formed by the strictest rules but I find this order and system highly logical.

    Best Regards,
    Tikkis, Helsinki (-20 C)

  10. #10
    Member Ron Evers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    A little north of Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    224
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Perverted language

    Quote Originally Posted by Tikkis View Post
    There is a long tradition behind these terms. It's been thought that from larger scale to the micro scale the terms are; close-up photography (up to 1:10), macro photography (1:10 - 1:1) and micro photography (from 1:1 to larger than life).

    I really don't know if these boundaries are formed by the strictest rules but I find this order and system highly logical.

    Best Regards,
    Tikkis, Helsinki (-20 C)

    That is so far the most convincing argument in favour of macro.
    Panasonic G1 & GF1 bodies, Panasonic 14-45, 45-200mm, various Minolta, Pentax, Canon FD, M39 & M42 mount lenses.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •