The beautiful side of noticing details

Post Reply New Topic

That's why I like to do macro photography. And I'm good at untangling tiny chains on necklaces and all the wildflowers planted in the freeway medians are a huge source of frustration for me because I can't pull over and examine them when I catch a glimpse of an unfamiliar one.

At a stoplight, I saw a squirrel lugging a pear as large as he was across the street. I watched a hawk fall off a rotten branch way up in a pine tree. Looking at stars makes me dizzy because it looks like they're moving.

I am like skibum and Marybird in that I love to see patterns in wallpaper, painted walls, tiles, or whatever structure I happen to be in. I once saw this Manchurian looking man repeated over and over on my stippled bedroom wall. I also see children and animals in paint swirls, and in clouds.

Finally! I've found the reason I love macro photography! Everything else I do seems large scale, for all I focus on the details. Starship designs, entire universes, but I always like photos of tiny little things. It's the detail no one else sees My lock screen on my phone right now is of a little flower, tucked into a wall in a village in Mallorca. I took the picture while I was there with my family, and no one else had any idea what I was even looking at.

I love patterns and textures on brick walls, running my fingers through the mortar. Or spotting the 'veins' in leaves. I just wish my eyes were a higher resolution, so I could see the really small things. That's where the camera comes in.

What is Macro photography? I am a bit confused because if it is photos of little tiny things wouldn't that be micro photography? Sorry. I don't really understand.

Did the hawk take flight when he fell?

I see how that's confusing. Thinking about it, you're right, that's really how it should be
But apparently someone decided macro was a good name for taking photos of small things and it stuck. Perhaps it comes from making those small scale objects appear larger, hence becoming macro rather than micro?

I don't really understand the macro thing properly myself, but yes, I think it is to do with the fact that the ratio of a macro lens is supposed to be at least 1:1, and so the image created is equal to or larger than the object itself (unlike most lenses where you have to zoom to get the object to appear "actual size" or larger).


(On a similar note, I'd love any macro photographers to share there contributions in this photography thread!)

Macro is a description of the object size. A macro object is viewable with the unaded eye. Micro on the other hand requires a microscope to view it.

I love texture and colour. So as an example, I often walk along our local river of an afternoon. I love to view the water and see the texture of waves scattered over the surface. I then look at the reflection in the water and see the distorted colours and shapes in mirror to their original selves. Then I look at the colour of the water as it changed from short to shore and up the expance of the river. Soldure crabs and their little round sand balls, foot prints in the sand of birds, crabs, kids.

I'm a civil designer, designing roads for the local authority. So I take note of everything along the roads and try to memorise things for future reference during my work. Telecom pits, power poles, light poles, road intersections, sight distances, taps, number of people walking, density of traffic, number of cylcalists, road line marking, the size of trees (mainly the big ones), fire hydrants and stop valves, the type of kerb & channel... as I said, everything.

Also; foot prints in the sand.

I notice many things that others never see, like if people I know and I entered a room with the swimming pool they would see the water and I'd be looking at the marks/designs on the bottom of the pool.

The thing with the hawk was kinda funny. That powerful, dignified bird comes swooping down and,BLAAH! Its wings went up in the air and it flailed frantically for a few seconds, then took off.

Yes very sad that they don't see more

My Consultant told me about an experiment where they got NT's to do drawings from a series of photographs. Then they attached strong magnets to their heads to disable the visual filtering part of the brain. This effectively gave them Autistic perception because this is one of the brain functions that malfunctions in ASD. When asked to do more drawings the NT's then found they could actually draw a lot better and in significantly more detail. So there is scientific evidence that NT's really don't see the world in as much detail as we do.

I don't do macro photography as such, but I do like to focus on details a lot. For example I once spent a day in Venice photographing doorbells, door handles, windows, and other isolated aspects of boats and buildings:

https://www.icloud.com/photostream/#A953qWtHG6wB8w

What an interesting experiment. It suggests that the things which are hardwired, such as the visual filter, are actually somewhat malleable. It may be possible to develop a way for people to externally control their visual filter (and perhaps other senses), at least for short spans of time. (There may be negative side effects to having magnets by your head for extended periods). Imagine the possibilities, especially if this could go both ways and be done safely. NT people could turn the filter off as needed for example to create art or find crime scene clues. AS people could turn the filter on as needed, for example to go into a visually chaotic enviroment like a crowded grocery store.

Very interesting research. It would be exciting if it became possible for anybody to have the best of both worlds and turn a sensory filter on or off as needed. We already do that in a clunky, inelegent way with magnifying glasses and sunglasses (to name just 2 modifiers going in either direction) but this sounds much better.

I was at a music festival this weekend, and in the middle of a set by a headliner, somebody released a single sky lantern. I watched it float above the crowds, away from the festival grounds, between the skyscrapers, and into the heart of the city until it was just a tiny dot of light that finally disappeared. I thought it was beautiful, and I looked around to see if anybody else was looking up, but nobody was. I would bet just a handful of the thousands there were watching it.

Animals lurking in the trees or on the ground
Loose change on the ground
dust in the air or in liquids

I've seen so much that I don't remember it all.