Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

There were many proposals for this month theme, so I made a compromise and I hope everyone is happy after reading short instructions...

So theme is "Macro" but the target/object can be any; cat, bus, fish, sushi ;), bird, moon or sun. Last two of the list are
almost impossible to implement because the photo must be taken at macro range...

Here is one example:
http://huispaus.ucs.fi/tmp/example.png



(Copy/paste rules)

Photos must be taken during this month (after theme is announced?)
Photos must be taken by the posting member
Photos must be taken with a camera phone
Users post only one photo per entry
Users can change the entry only once
Users must name the phone they used (software would be nice too?)

Last three days of this month are for voting

Ladies and Gentlemen... Start your phonecameras...

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

History comes around in circles ;)

(BTW, the plural of "gentleman" is "gentlemen" ;))

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

This will be fun. I have a strong feeling we will see at least one photo of sushi very close up...

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

no, i already crossed the line to shameless self plugging in absence of a different darkness pic and borderlined at many other occasions.
Note to self, refrain from last minute plan c pics at work. :o

Nice topic!
I did not participate as early as macro was going down last time.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Actually I liked your photo very much for the "Darkness" competition, but it didn't match the topic as well as a few others.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

...with music and clothes too... :p - But yes, my bad... I hope theme is still OK?

Ladies and Gentleman... and other men - Start your phonecameras... <- is it now correct? :confused:

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I guess so

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I found myself wondering, "Just what constitutes macro in a photography sense?"

Wikipedia makes some efforts to define it, which I paraphrase and list in no particular order:

An extreme closeup where . . .

1. Subject in finished photo is larger than life.
2. Subject appears larger than life on film, negative or image sensor.
3. Subject appears larger than life on camera display/viewfinder.
4. Made with a lens with a reproduction ratio of at least 1:1.
5. Subject vertical height is 24mm or less.

Clearly, a picture of the sun that is larger than the sun itself will require more than all the monitors to display . . . ;)

I didn't realize there were so many available definitions, but I bet we could get more if we asked around on the internet.

Anyway, I'll do my best with something. Thanks for the challenge.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I don't know where you live but from my place the sun is never larger than my hand. My monitor is bigger than that ;)

You can take macro pictures of celestial objects, in the same way you take a macro of an elephant. You just take a closup of its surface. The problem might be the cost. I cannot afford a flight ticket to Kenya or wherever the elephants grow but you might. But I doubt even you could buy a ticket to the sun. Besides, an elephant may allow you to come close enough to macro but I don't think the sun would be that friendly.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

This part is a bit confusing! Does this mean there is a limitation on the dimension of subject we shoot? Sun, Elephant or even a Cat is out of the frame, if that is the case!

Or did I get it wrong?

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

That's not how I read it. The subject is not the whole cat but the part of it that you are taking a picture of. It could be a patch of skin or a single hair.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

The defenition of macro in photography read: 1:1 reproduction ratio. Often close-up photography is falsely labeled as "macro" but most of the time a closeup isn't a true macro. True macro means that an our subject appears in real life size in the photo. That means if you would print it then 1cm in the picture should be still 1cm in the print.
With the tiny sensors we have in our phones means we have a lot of enlarging to do to meet this criteria of "true" macro.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

ITYM ">=1:1" and ">=1cm".

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Nokia N9 with camera+. Is this enough Macro? :)

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Wow! Talk about raising the bar for this months competition...

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Ya, I never figured that one out . . . Perhaps it means a feature of interest in the photo is the subject, like an elephant's hair, not the necessarily the entire elephant -- but at this point I'm in WAG territory.

I'm gonna go for a tightly-framed extreme close-up and call it good.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I don't know macro, but I know what I like. Looks good to me -- what have we got there, a swallowtail? Looks like it's already had a nice meal there.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Yes :)

Claustn, Nice. And its onlusten the begin of the month...

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Superb !


You could have won last month competition with that one

https://wiki.maemo.org/CameraPhoneCompetition

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Parental guidance recommended. N9, camera+. :D

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Bought some lunch the other day.

iPhone 6s Plus, iOS 10.0.2

I don't want to win, I just want to participate.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I hope this one could match the "macro definition" that i need to confess, i did not understand very well. Should i put a ruler along side the subject ? :D
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qd4tgho9fq...0_003.jpg?dl=1

Taken with N900, as always.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Ohhh That was an ugly one !!! Sorry, just kidding :D:D:D. Welcome to competition !!!

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

You don't like monkfish? You should try it...

Taste great with a creamy sauce, fried, mashed or cooked potatoes. We can even squeeze in your mushroomS if you dare to eat em ;)

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...k_1946471b.jpg

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Close up of the sun https://www.dropbox.com/s/k3b5vpdb1y...93129.jpg?dl=1

Taken with a BlackBerry Passport.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Hmm. Of all the pictures on this page, so far only the mushrooms can be considered as "shown larger than life" on my screen.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

If that is true, then you drink VERY large bottles of beer...

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I don't happen to have a can of beer with me right now but I put an ordinary 330ml can of Fanta next to that picture and the Fanta was about 3x as wide. It could have something to with my screen being an 8" tablet but by my rough calculations, you need at least 20" to blow up that beer can to a real life size. Not many people have such large screens.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I sense different basic assumptions :D

From what i understand, pichlo judges the image when its shown scaled to fullscreen. Possible pixel density of the image exceeds the one of the screen in that case.
Another approach is to view the image at "100%", which gives a rather gigantic impression given a 13Mp image viewed on 200-330ppi screens larger than 7".
I tried to make a screenshot from 100% scale displayed on Jolla Tablet, just to realize there is no possibillity to view the scaling factor in sfos gallery or lock it to 100%...

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Naturally! Exactly according the definitions 2 and 3 in this post.
Is there any other interpretation? Sure, you could print the picture on a huge billboard at the side of the road but that is not how most of us are viewing them. Most of us are viewing them on a computer screen. (In fact I was viewing them on a phone screen before imaginaryenemy's post.)

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Yes, because macro can be achived by cropping the image.
Admitted, technically it is a complete difference to do it manually and just crop pixels, but if we are allowed to do, it could result in differences like with this attempt of mine.
Cropped from 4000x3000 to 50% at 2000x1500:

http://mosushi.net/misc/photocomp/20161011_102243.jpg

http://mosushi.net/misc/photocomp/20...02243_crop.jpg

It is a 1.5cm bush rose blossom.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I cropped My photo. Am I discolofied?

Whoho. Im out! :D

Also, the fish is much bigger and bader in real life :D I think we need a new rule: Size matters :D

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I don't care if it's big or small, it's beer o'clock!!

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I wouldn't trust that guy. He's unreliable. Irresponsible. Throw in undependable.

But whether one's pic is life size -- or any particular size -- for any particular viewer is awfully dependent on stuff out of the photographer's control. It'll be up to the judges to decide -- high stakes as this is, right?

BTW, the sunburst on the beer bottle is about 9 inches tall on my monitor viewed at a 1:1 pixel ratio. That's ~0.5 cubits if you use the metric system. Obviously I don't have one of those super-high-res displays -- I paid for those pixels, I want to see 'em!

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

This. It filled up my whole monitor (with the image at only 24%), making it MUCH larger than a real bottle of beer. If viewed on the wrong (read: small) screen those mushrooms might not be larger than actual size either.

I have always used the assumption that macro meant super close-up. No math involved, no deep thought or consideration. Just a real close-up shot. With the focal lengths being what they are on certain smartphone cameras, this might not be possible- but we try!

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

Oh yes, the so-called "digital zoom".

In my mind, it does not matter how you made that picture. Move your camera close to the subject, take the photo through a microscope, crop, beg, borrow or steal... the only thing that matters and defines it as macro is that the resulting picture shows larger than the real life subject on the display medium.

By that definition a billboard of a car can be a macro if that billboard is large enough so I agree that the definition is a bit fuzzy.

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

In my opinion a macro is all about the resolution of detail.
A well done macro picture needs to reveal details one could otherwise hardly appreciate with the naked eye.
This is up to lens / sensor / film and of course skill of the photographer to focus correctly and eliminate motion blur.

To review the marco, the display medium (screen / paper print) should be capable to display the necessary amount of graphic image data from the original file or film in order for the viewer to observe the enhanced detail not visible throught normal observation.

The display / paper should be large enough and have enough resolution to reveal all graphic data at once or in case of screen display it can be achieved by zooming in on parts of interest to confirm marco nature of the image.


In theory a mini display with an insane pixel density could still display the macro photo with all enhanced details inherent to a macro but for the observer it would be pointless unless he was going to zoom in partially and / or use a magnifying glass over the mini displsay to confirm this is in fact a macro image.

To only blow things up larger than life but out of focus does not qualify for a macro if looking at the original with the naked eye still reveals more details.

Below cropped shot with a Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge blows up :D the subject well enough but hardly reveals more detail compared to real life so with my current level of eyesight I personally would call this an average macro picture and camera.

Attachment 38739

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I take issue with the "hardly reveals more detail compared to real life" bit. In fact I frequently use my phone to read labels on products because I cannot read them otherwise. Your zika (:)) mosquito is just another example of the same thing. As far as I am concerned, it reveals a tremendous amount of detail compared to real life ;)

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

I think the Aedes mosquito has bigger, whiter spots than that lovely closeup of a nasty creature. That's some great detail in that photo!

I see what you did there.

(BTW, I've never actually wished that the subject of one of our photo contests be killed before. It was killed after posing for that photo, wasn't it, ste-phan?)

Re: Camera phone competition October 2016: "Macro"
 

http://i.imgur.com/J9tS23I.jpg

Seed head, Rattlesnake master.

Eryngium yuccifolium. A plant native to the central and eastern prairies of North America. This example is deliberately cultivated by the photographer. When in bloom, the flowers appear like white puffballs. Unlike some gardeners, I prefer not to cut down the spent stalks -- they're stiff enough to remain upright through the winter, and look attractive with frost or snow on them. As the binomial suggests, it does have leaves that resemble a yucca.

Photo shot with N9 and stock camera. Homemade "macro" setup consisting of pocket-sized magnifying glass held in front of lens. Kinda gives a trippy bokeh, I think.