Macro Mondays - week #1 - theme: KEYCHAIN

[Levina de Ruijter]

I thought we could start a new weekly challenge called Macro Mondays.

A new theme will be set every Monday at noon GMT and then you need to shoot that theme and post the resulting macro image(s) in that week's thread. You will have until the next Monday noon GMT to do so. As this is a personal challenge and not a competition and there are no winners you can add as many images as you like.

The rules are simple:

1. Post only macros*
2. Post only photos taken after a new theme is announced (so don't post images from your archives)
3. Photos need to be safe for work

*The standard definition of a macro is 1:1 reproduction ratio, i.e. a 35mm equivalent of 24x36mm. Members are encouraged to post "true" macros but photos that come close to the norm are also allowed.

So let's try this, see if we like it.

The theme for this week is: keychain

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

Okay, here's a shot to start with.

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

I need to find prettier keys. Amazing how old and filthy those things look!

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

 

[Jan1977]

I need to find prettier keys. Amazing how old and filthy those things look!

I would guess old and filthy work better for macro than new shiny pretty ones ;-) From a photographic perspective that is ;-)

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

I still wonder about how macro works exactly though. I shot the above with the Canon 100mm macro lens. For shots to be “true” macro do I have to take them at minimum focus distance then to get as close to the subject as I can?

 

[Jan1977]

I still wonder about how macro works exactly though. I shot the above with the Canon 100mm macro lens. For shots to be “true” macro do I have to take them at minimum focus distance then to get as close to the subject as I can?

Well there are several factors coming into play.

I think purists will state that "true macro" is 1:1, so the size of the projected subject projected onto the sensor, should have the same size as the real object. So it is determined by projected subject and not the (minimum) focus distance of the lens.

I estimate that the key in your first photo with "BUVA" on it, has a width of about 34 mm. A full frame sensor is 24x36mm, so for that photo to be true macro I would expect that key to almost fill the width of the frame. On your photo it looks like about half of the frame width, so I guess it is only 0.5 maginification.

The RF 100 Macro is capable (based on specs) to get to 1,4x, so if you go minimum focus distance with that lens, I expect you would not be on "true" macro, but even greater magnification.

My assessment is based on the size of the key I have in mind and the photo as you posted it. But since it is digital and resized, it would not be difficult to crop the photo such that the key is about the width of the frame. If you had done that, my assessment would have been that it was "true" macro.
The difference between the 'in camera true macro' and the 'post crop true macro' would be in the actual detail shown. If you framed it as true macro details would be visible which the crop would not reveal. If that had been noticable to the viewer is hard to say. It would be noticable with a true crop.

I like the idea of this challenge. I have macro lenses but do not use them real often, but sometimes think about practicing some more with them. The challenge with a macro lens is to find a composition that works or an image that works, while showing details. That is why at least getting quite close to 1:1 should be part of the challenge I think. More close up like shots do not really help learning macro, but it can off course result in nice esthetic pictures.

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

Well there are several factors coming into play.

I think purists will state that "true macro" is 1:1, so the size of the projected subject projected onto the sensor, should have the same size as the real object. So it is determined by projected subject and not the (minimum) focus distance of the lens.

Here's what I don't understand and what makes it so confusing for me. I see images of insects filling the frame which means, assuming it was taken with a full frame camera and uncropped, that those bugs are 35mm long! That means ants of 3,5 cm! If ants would be that huge I would be living in a hermetically sealed room! Ants are 1/10th of that, give or take, at least the small ones we have here. And this is the thing that confuses me about macro: bugs are or seem always larger than in real life.

I estimate that the key in your first photo with "BUVA" on it, has a width of about 34 mm. A full frame sensor is 24x36mm, so for that photo to be true macro I would expect that key to almost fill the width of the frame. On your photo it looks like about half of the frame width, so I guess it is only 0.5 maginification.

Yes! I measured the key and the BUVA part alone is 35mm so that should have filled the entire frame! Not sure I can do that with the RF 100mm though. I will try later tonight.

The keys in the second shot are quite a bit smaller but I did not shoot them large enough in the frame either. I will try those again later also.

The RF 100 Macro is capable (based on specs) to get to 1,4x, so if you go minimum focus distance with that lens, I expect you would not be on "true" macro, but even greater magnification.

Ah, that was going to be my next question: can I do a true macro of the keys with the RF 100 Macro. Okay. I will try to get as close as I can tonight.

My assessment is based on the size of the key I have in mind and the photo as you posted it. But since it is digital and resized, it would not be difficult to crop the photo such that the key is about the width of the frame. If you had done that, my assessment would have been that it was "true" macro.
The difference between the 'in camera true macro' and the 'post crop true macro' would be in the actual detail shown. If you framed it as true macro details would be visible which the crop would not reveal. If that had been noticable to the viewer is hard to say. It would be noticable with a true crop.

And a good assessment too, Jan. And also good info about cropping. Thanks!

I like the idea of this challenge. I have macro lenses but do not use them real often, but sometimes think about practicing some more with them. The challenge with a macro lens is to find a composition that works or an image that works, while showing details. That is why at least getting quite close to 1:1 should be part of the challenge I think. More close up like shots do not really help learning macro, but it can off course result in nice esthetic pictures.

I think choosing "keychain" as a starter for this challenge was not the best ideas, as there aren't too many things you can do with them. I should have gone with something like: fruit, or vegetables or flowers. But it's done, theme is set. I think this could be a really nice challenge. Also for myself because like you, I don't really do macro, but I would like to learn and experiment with it. This challenge will give me the chance. I really hope others will join and post images ... <wink wink> ...

 

[Jan1977]

Here's what I don't understand and what makes it so confusing for me. I see images of insects filling the frame which means, assuming it was taken with a full frame camera and uncropped, that those bugs are 35mm long! That means ants of 3,5 cm! If ants would be that huge I would be living in a hermetically sealed room! Ants are 1/10th of that, give or take, at least the small ones we have here. And this is the thing that confuses me about macro: bugs are or seem always larger than in real life.


Yes! I measured the key and the BUVA part alone is 35mm so that should have filled the entire frame! Not sure I can do that with the RF 100mm though. I will try later tonight.

The keys in the second shot are quite a bit smaller but I did not shoot them large enough in the frame either. I will try those again later also.


Ah, that was going to be my next question: can I do a true macro of the keys with the RF 100 Macro. Okay. I will try to get as close as I can tonight.


And a good assessment too, Jan. And also good info about cropping. Thanks!


I think choosing "keychain" as a starter for this challenge was not the best ideas, as there aren't too many things you can do with them. I should have gone with something like: fruit, or vegetables or flowers. But it's done, theme is set. I think this could be a really nice challenge. Also for myself because like you, I don't really do macro, but I would like to learn and experiment with it. This challenge will give me the chance. I really hope others will join and post images ... <wink wink> ...

Well if ants are frame filling people either use more than 1:1 macro or the picture needs to be cropped. Sometimes people use extension tubes or bellows to get greater magnification, but those accessories are not in the exif.

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

Well if ants are frame filling people either use more than 1:1 macro or the picture needs to be cropped. Sometimes people use extension tubes or bellows to get greater magnification, but those accessories are not in the exif.

That would certainly explain it, yes. Thanks again, Jan.

I'm going to reshoot my two images.