how can you tell a close-up Shot from a Macro Shot?

[DinoThePhotoGuy]

Can you explain it......I can never figure it out. Do you have any image to post as examples along with your reply to help me understand better?

 

[Trever1t]

Oy...macro is closer than close up

 

[snowbear]

A macro image is considered to be at least "life size" on the sensor. That means in a macro of a dime, the image on the sensor would be the same size of a dime. It's easier to see it on film, where you can actually see the size of the subject on the negative or slide. I suppose, you could take some measurements and work it out mathematically if you wanted to.

edit: fixed definition

 

[480sparky]

There is no official definition of either. So one could easily say 'close-up' is closer than 'macro'.

But as a general rule, 'macro' is 1x or 1:1 or more.

480sparky's 52 in 2015 thread......... with a twist!

 

[dennybeall]

Close-up is also a relative term since you could take a close-up of a battleship but might find it hard to take a macro of a battleship....

 

[curly]

Close-up is also a relative term since you could take a close-up of a battleship but might find it hard to take a macro of a battleship....

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3272/2323685852_21e55598dc.jpg

 

[snowbear]

Close-up is also a relative term since you could take a close-up of a battleship but might find it hard to take a macro of a battleship....

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3272/2323685852_21e55598dc.jpg

I was just going to get ours and take this very shot.

 

[DinoThePhotoGuy]

Oy...macro is closer than close up

Close-up is also a relative term since you could take a close-up of a battleship but might find it hard to take a macro of a battleship....

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3272/2323685852_21e55598dc.jpg

that's kinda cute. Is this what a Macro is?

 

[Overread]

Close up

Macro

As said above there is no universal rule (which is why Nikon can call their macro lenses "micro"). However in photographic worlds "true macro" is typically considered to be a magnification ratio of at least:

1:1
Size reflected on the sensor by the lens : size of the subject in real life.

Close-up is then basically anything that isn't as great as that magnification; whilst everything greater is just macro (although once you get to extremes words like super/hyper/extreme etc.. start appearing).

The world of science probably has its own formal definition.





THAT said macro to photographers also has a subject context meaning. That is to say a photo of a full bodied dragonfly or butterfly such as this

Might also be generally considered "macro" because its a butterfly. You see similar for things like the heads of roses/flower buds and other similarly "small" and truly "close up" shots counting. A little depends on how strict a definition the site/group is going for.

 

[annamaria]

Close up

Macro

As said above there is no universal rule (which is why Nikon can call their macro lenses "micro"). However in photographic worlds "true macro" is typically considered to be a magnification ratio of at least:

1:1
Size reflected on the sensor by the lens : size of the subject in real life.

Close-up is then basically anything that isn't as great as that magnification; whilst everything greater is just macro (although once you get to extremes words like super/hyper/extreme etc.. start appearing).

The world of science probably has its own formal definition.





THAT said macro to photographers also has a subject context meaning. That is to say a photo of a full bodied dragonfly or butterfly such as this

Might also be generally considered "macro" because its a butterfly. You see similar for things like the heads of roses/flower buds and other similarly "small" and truly "close up" shots counting. A little depends on how strict a definition the site/group is going for.

Good comparison of the macro and close-up photos. It's so much better understood when it's visually explained.

 

[DinoThePhotoGuy]

Close up

Macro

As said above there is no universal rule (which is why Nikon can call their macro lenses "micro"). However in photographic worlds "true macro" is typically considered to be a magnification ratio of at least:

1:1
Size reflected on the sensor by the lens : size of the subject in real life.

Close-up is then basically anything that isn't as great as that magnification; whilst everything greater is just macro (although once you get to extremes words like super/hyper/extreme etc.. start appearing).

The world of science probably has its own formal definition.





THAT said macro to photographers also has a subject context meaning. That is to say a photo of a full bodied dragonfly or butterfly such as this

Might also be generally considered "macro" because its a butterfly. You see similar for things like the heads of roses/flower buds and other similarly "small" and truly "close up" shots counting. A little depends on how strict a definition the site/group is going for.

Good comparison of the macro and close-up photos. It's so much better understood when it's visually explained.

Indeed that Is what I wanted.................






Thanks Guys.. Now I think I get it.

 

[Torus34]

"Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close-up." ;-))

 

[480sparky]

Let's toss in everyone's definition of photomicroscopy just to muddy the waters further.