Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,751   Posts: 1,515,823   Online: 1080
      
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 70
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    18
    Close enough? I definitely wasn't shooting for science.


  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,355
    O.K. I'll join in...
    As Spring is round the corner and the sap begins to rise
    I know the subject matter itself isn't original (an amaryllis) tho this is closer than I've seen.
    DoF is intentional...
    & Just to show I sometimes shoot colour aswell
    edit: forgot to say about the artistic/scientific bit - I don't know about artistic but I wasn't aiming for max dof or detail - the first one is just something about that brief time in the reproductive span, the second one I wanted to lose almost entirely to blocks of colour with the smallest possible amount in focus. I wanted something a little mysterious and awesome and these are meant to be printed large - especially the second one.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Amaryllis3.jpg   amaryllis4.2nd.jpg  
    Last edited by catem; 02-18-2007 at 03:03 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: added edit

  3. #23
    darinwc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,037
    Images
    157
    Glad to see this thread is still alive.
    Heres a little more of my thoughts...
    Insects: The problem with insects is that we, as humans, have a hard time relating to them. You cant read the emotion on an insect, you cant tell what it is thinking. So when i look at a macro of an insect, i feel nothing. In contrast, when I see a photo of say a lion, I can tell if it is relaxed or ready to pounce.
    Fuzzy flowers: I am so friggin tired of fuzzy flowers. Well i've never been a fan of abstract art. So I guess i am a little biased. But again, i see a pic of a fuzzy flower and I feel nothing.

    Hardships of macro: macro photography is not easy. i'm sure that many photographers are delighted just to get one or two decent shots. Maybee the rigors of getting the image distract from the idea of communication.

    Oh, BTW one of the examples posted previously was of a dandelion with one seed left. I liked this very much and it reminds me of my daughters and when I was young.

  4. #24
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by darinwc View Post
    Anyone have examples of what they would consider artistic macro photography?

    Would this qualify?


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  5. #25
    darinwc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,037
    Images
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy K View Post
    Would this qualify?
    Are you serious?

  6. #26
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    Yes.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  7. #27
    darinwc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,037
    Images
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington View Post
    What I meant was that technical and scientific macro work is meant to be (and is) completely non-artistic (i.e.factual) and therefore uses a certain style, which, however, is not the only possible style - I was suggesting that a different approach could be more artistic.
    Therein lies a problem... its not a certain style that is more or less artistic, but how it is used. A sharp photo of a comuter chip would be no more or less artistic than a half fuzzy photo of a computer chip.

  8. #28
    jimgalli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tonopah Nevada
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,396
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    155
    Take a peek at some of the antique toys I've photographed with the big 8X10 Century 9a and Petzval lens on page 3 of my gallery here. Let me know what you think. Those scans are a bit dark but good enough to get the idea accross.
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

    http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

  9. #29
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by darinwc View Post
    Therein lies a problem... its not a certain style that is more or less artistic, but how it is used. A sharp photo of a comuter chip would be no more or less artistic than a half fuzzy photo of a computer chip.
    This is true, but I think a photographer's chances of achieving artistic expression are signficantly increased if he/she is actually allowed to use some light and shade effect and differential focus. The ideal in technical photography is, as I mentioned, flat lighting, deep focus, high sharpness, in other words emotional sterility (and I speak as someone who worked professionally as a technical photographer for years!) .

    Regards,

    David

  10. #30
    darinwc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,037
    Images
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington View Post
    This is true, but I think a photographer's chances of achieving artistic expression are signficantly increased if he/she is actually allowed to use some light and shade effect and differential focus. The ideal in technical photography is, as I mentioned, flat lighting, deep focus, high sharpness, in other words emotional sterility (and I speak as someone who worked professionally as a technical photographer for years!) .
    Agreed. The artistic use of lighting and focus will make or break a peice of art. Whereas a scientific documentation strives to capture the most detail possible, which pretty much defines the use of sharp focus and flat lighting.
    Last edited by darinwc; 02-21-2007 at 02:45 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin