Terminology, does it really matter?

[Guest DaveW]

On another site there was a discussion of what is macrophotography. Fuji (as I used to do) belongs to a site that correctly uses the scientific term photomacrography for images of 1:1 and greater on the sensor, and close-ups for images from around 1:10 down to 1:1. The hobbyists and photo press, along with non-scientific photographers, usually call all this range macrophotography and lens manufacturers even brand their lenses as macro.

Does it really matter as long as we all know what we are talking about? Probably not, but it is nice to know the correct terms even if we always use the shorthand term macro wrongly for convenience.

This is how Kodak in their book on the subject delineated the terms many years ago when it was mainly used by scientists, before most amateurs indulged in such photography. (The words in brackets are mine).

Close-up Photography = photographing subjects at between 1:10 and 1:1 (usually called Macrophotography by the photo press!)

Photomacrography = photography using the camera and usually extension from 1:1 upwards. (still called Macrophotography by the photo press!)

Photomicrography = photography through the microscope.

Macrophotography = making very large photographs e.g. advertising hoardings or large display photographs.

Microphotography = making very small photographs e.g. microfilm or microdots (beloved by spy writers in James Bond type novels.)

See also

http://www.g-w.com/pdf/sampchap/9781605254761_ch07.pdf

DaveW