www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - 10 GOOD REASONS FOR YOU TO QUIT OF MACROPHOTOGRAPHY IN 2017
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
10 GOOD REASONS FOR YOU TO QUIT OF MACROPHOTOGRAPHY IN 2017
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum and Community Announcements
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Pau
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Jan 2010
Posts: 4000
Location: Valencia, Spain

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2017 10:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Each one has his own preferences, I must recognize that I'm old fashioned, but I like very much the forum as it its: a quiet place to discuss on images and on how to make them with little noise (not noise due to sensor Wink )...
...and I dislike Facebook and other social networks
_________________
Pau
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MarkSturtevant



Joined: 21 Nov 2015
Posts: 273

PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A good thread! See? You can get some activity if you push the right buttons.

For those who are longing for reliable comments, mostly positive, also try the True Macrophotography forum at the site known as Ugly Hedgehog. Here is the Macro forum url: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-102-1.html
I say 'also' try since the posters there are generally different from the ones over here.
_________________
Mark Sturtevant
Dept. of Still Waters
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anvancy



Joined: 05 Dec 2009
Posts: 309
Location: India

PostPosted: Wed May 03, 2017 1:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I laughed loudly in the office after reading this post. Lot of points have been faced by me.

There are some points which I agree totally with you as being from the Asian territory which you point out bang on.(I am from India.)

With the rapid Facebook groups, Facebook is flooded with one particular style of macro photography. You can see the trend happening in between the photos. Same style of light, same style of setup,same style of vision. People view these images and set standards according to that. If they cant perform people quit macro. If somebody else is doing something different, they are either shown the path to do the standard set by Facebook or get lost.At first I was also running behind in creating the *best* concave diffuser for the Venus KX-800.Then I realised the concave design sort of negates the biggest advantage of the venus flash - flexibility. Now I am trying to make new designs that are suitable for the venus.

It is a well known fact now that many(including myself) are addicted to the facebook style "like" or insta "like". It took me time back then to understand this is not the case and thats why believe in forums like these where real information is there.There are like minded people who are ready to help out step by step in gaining more knowledge for macro.That is what I truly like here. Whether it is Peter's photo documentary series on Ecuador or Sharks detailed thread on the wemacro rail, other members helping me out to buy the MPE and use it properly...the list is endless.

My mom has asked me this particular question to which I have no answer - yet. Why cant we earn being macro photographers? Why is macro photography is still looked down upon?

Thanks for reading

Anvancy
_________________
www.anvancy.com

Raynox 150|Raynox 250|Raynox MSN 202|Canon MPE 65mm|Canon 100mm.|Wemacro Rail
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Beatsy



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 911
Location: Malvern, UK

PostPosted: Wed May 03, 2017 2:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

anvancy wrote:
...Why cant we earn being macro photographers?


My flippant answer is 'why would you want to'? The one sure-fire way to ruin a hobby is to make it your job!

More seriously: there are jobs out there that contain elements of macro (and micro) imaging, but they're generally tied to some other discipline - for which you need to be qualified. The photography dept at he London Natural History Museum is one example, and I'm sure there are many others. Trouble is, the number of 'vacancies' around the world is vanishingly small compared to the total number of macro shooters who'd like to do it for a living.

You could try selling macro art (prints) but I think the demand would be far too small for it to be a regular income. Perhaps a book - but 'ditto' on demand. Of course, this slips towards making it a job again. Not good (IMO).

Surely it's best to enjoy it for what it is and create your images simply for the love and wonder of it all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anvancy



Joined: 05 Dec 2009
Posts: 309
Location: India

PostPosted: Mon May 08, 2017 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Beatsy,

First of all love your images.

The question arised as it was pointed out before. The money in macro photography only goes one way - out. Unlike other fields of photography,macro has one of the slowest traction rates in terms of appreciation.

Why will I put an insect photo up on my wall is the general feedback I get.Flowers ok,but insects?

In my area, this is mainly compensated by taking macro workshops. The problem is, the "macro workshops" have grown so odd in giving education that a certain system is developed. Example, some macro workshops say that you dont need costly equipment to take a macro photo. A reverse ring and/or extension tubes are enough. So when these people meet a person like me, who takes photos with the MPE and the Venus KX-800 and other macro equipment, either they are stunned or mainly answer back saying I can achieve what you can achieve in a fraction of a cost.

I have kind of observed that here in my area,if a person is entirely dedicated to macro,he/she is kind of looked down upon.Eh.insects.there is no glamor to it.Thats the reaction which puts me off.

Anvancy
_________________
www.anvancy.com

Raynox 150|Raynox 250|Raynox MSN 202|Canon MPE 65mm|Canon 100mm.|Wemacro Rail
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Beatsy



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 911
Location: Malvern, UK

PostPosted: Mon May 08, 2017 7:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Anvancy

Extreme insect macros in camera club comps are usually described as "great record shots". Sounds good at first, but it's a put-down in reality. Like being told your face "has lots of character", which basically means "you're ugly" Smile Straight macros in wildlife competitions tend to do better though - and those can be produced with simpler kit - although great skill is still required to make a good, memorable image. They're largely helped by the stringent rules of wildlife photography though (shot live in natural environment, no stacking and minimal photoshop are the main ones).

I've also heard the same responses you listed, but as a photographer in other genres too, I think I understand why non-enthusiasts react that way. Most people on this forum actually study insects close-up AND want to know how an image is captured (on a technical level). They start out interested. But "Joe Public" isn't motivated that way; they couldn't give two hoots how hard it was to make the image, they just need to "connect" with it and relate it to their own outlook and experience on some level. This "connection" must be achieved with minimal effort on their part (usually described as the "impact" a picture has). Insects are just "icky" in their view, and the fine structure is something they rarely see or appreciate in real life. They may be briefly wowed by the surprise-factor of a detailed insect macro but they can relate more directly to a portrait or landscape - and this makes it more attractive and/or interesting to them overall. I wouldn't say they're "looking down" on the pure-macro photographer, it's just that (in general) macro is a specialist genre that doesn't engage them in the same, familiar way as portraits or landscapes (etc) can.

But therein lies an interesting challenge. What does it take to make macro imagery that can thrive in the mainstream? Or commercially? A good image is a good image whatever the genre - but a lot of that is down to composition, lighting and (often) the story told" as much as it is to subject matter. Record shots will rarely cut it (except when they're printed barn-sized perhaps). But there are members on this forum who produce amazingly artistic macro/micro images. Easy as breathing it seems (I hate them Smile ). In the vast majority of cases, you don't even need to know what the subject is; you can appreciate their images for the near-abstract artistry alone! Food for thought...?

Hope the mods don't mind the non-macro pic, but just to finish up, here's two "heads" to emphasize the point. The woodlouse is a stack of hundreds of images, the portrait is a single shot. The stack was complex and time consuming to produce, the snapshot wasn't. Which would you prefer to see hung on a wall *as decoration*? Be honest now...




Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
piczzilla



Joined: 26 Apr 2017
Posts: 12
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Mon May 08, 2017 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A lot of these points really hit home Laughing

01 Macro photography is not cheap to begin with, and if there's anything I learned from macro shooters, we are never/rarely ever satisfied with what we have (awaiting eBay stuff as we speak...)

04 So true! I Got so many eww's from showing my macro shots to friends Sad while the more polite ones delicately looked away...

07 I'm very new to this forum, and I realized it is indeed a little slow compared to some other forums I joined, but I reckon everyone is too busy chasing critters Very Happy (and stacking). It is a very time consuming genre after all...

And I have to agree with the others - it's addictive! Send help!
_________________
Feedback/critiques/ideas are always welcome

https://www.flickr.com/photos/145082278@N08/
https://www.instagram.com/piczzilla
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
anvancy



Joined: 05 Dec 2009
Posts: 309
Location: India

PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Beatsy wrote:
Thanks Anvancy

Extreme insect macros in camera club comps are usually described as "great record shots". Sounds good at first, but it's a put-down in reality. Like being told your face "has lots of character", which basically means "you're ugly" Smile Straight macros in wildlife competitions tend to do better though - and those can be produced with simpler kit - although great skill is still required to make a good, memorable image. They're largely helped by the stringent rules of wildlife photography though (shot live in natural environment, no stacking and minimal photoshop are the main ones).

I've also heard the same responses you listed, but as a photographer in other genres too, I think I understand why non-enthusiasts react that way. Most people on this forum actually study insects close-up AND want to know how an image is captured (on a technical level). They start out interested. But "Joe Public" isn't motivated that way; they couldn't give two hoots how hard it was to make the image, they just need to "connect" with it and relate it to their own outlook and experience on some level. This "connection" must be achieved with minimal effort on their part (usually described as the "impact" a picture has). Insects are just "icky" in their view, and the fine structure is something they rarely see or appreciate in real life. They may be briefly wowed by the surprise-factor of a detailed insect macro but they can relate more directly to a portrait or landscape - and this makes it more attractive and/or interesting to them overall. I wouldn't say they're "looking down" on the pure-macro photographer, it's just that (in general) macro is a specialist genre that doesn't engage them in the same, familiar way as portraits or landscapes (etc) can.

But therein lies an interesting challenge. What does it take to make macro imagery that can thrive in the mainstream? Or commercially? A good image is a good image whatever the genre - but a lot of that is down to composition, lighting and (often) the story told" as much as it is to subject matter. Record shots will rarely cut it (except when they're printed barn-sized perhaps). But there are members on this forum who produce amazingly artistic macro/micro images. Easy as breathing it seems (I hate them Smile ). In the vast majority of cases, you don't even need to know what the subject is; you can appreciate their images for the near-abstract artistry alone! Food for thought...?

Hope the mods don't mind the non-macro pic, but just to finish up, here's two "heads" to emphasize the point. The woodlouse is a stack of hundreds of images, the portrait is a single shot. The stack was complex and time consuming to produce, the snapshot wasn't. Which would you prefer to see hung on a wall *as decoration*? Be honest now...






You explained it in a beautiful fashion.

So here is another question or statement that I usually hear is studio stacking is a mundane task. There is no art involved like there is in on field macro. The entire picture taking part is automated. But when I ask them who decides how to place the camera,the lighting,the pose,the effects? I get a blank stare or am told to cut off the topic. Many confuse studio macro as "staged" macro and onfield macro is the only way to do it.But as you explained,to these,they are just "record shots".

Anvancy
_________________
www.anvancy.com

Raynox 150|Raynox 250|Raynox MSN 202|Canon MPE 65mm|Canon 100mm.|Wemacro Rail
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
johan



Joined: 06 Sep 2011
Posts: 964

PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Beatsy wrote:
Extreme insect macros in camera club comps are usually described as "great record shots".


I had the opposite experience. In the one season that I was a member of a camera club, once they saw I did these they used them to enter inter-club and county competitions, and got the highest scores ever recorded by the club. And the members of the club were ever so complementary about them, they just couldn't get enough of them. It was embarrassing!

The only people who behaved completely the opposite to that were a couple of ladies who had been the club's only macro shooters till I came along. Unfortunately they were less than generous calling stacked shots "fake" and "not a challenge". Such antipathy between different types of macro shooters does seem to happen quite a bit, I've seen it at the pentax forums I moderate as well. Sad Sad
_________________
My extreme-macro.co.uk site, a learning site. Your comments and input there would be gratefully appreciated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Beatsy



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 911
Location: Malvern, UK

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

johan wrote:
...Such antipathy between different types of macro shooters does seem to happen quite a bit...


First, just to clarify, the members of my club are generally receptive to stacked macros. In my case, it was the judges that were sniffy about the few entries I tried - to the extent that I stopped entering stacks into comps. But judges are a very mixed bag so perhaps I should try again.

The antipathy thing mystifies me. I can only think that the naysayers are comfortable in their little niche, content to use the same techniques they've always used and somehow feel "threatened" when others present a different approach. I feel a little sorry for them really, it's such a limiting outlook. I love to see new techniques and better results, and then copy the hell out of them when they appeal to me!

Handheld stackers have my utmost respect at the moment. Working on it... Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GrayPlayer



Joined: 14 Nov 2009
Posts: 38

PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

abpho wrote:
MacroLab3D wrote:
How can give love?
You could leave a simple comment stating "Like".

And Facebook is evil.
Been wanting to say this for awhile. Why isn't everyone from Canada!?
_________________
Fred H.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum and Community Announcements All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group