Why our beetle shots have to be "macro"

This area is for the discussion of what's new, what's on your mind, and general photographic topics. A place to meet, make comments on this site, and get the latest community news.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Mike B in OKlahoma
Posts: 1048
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:32 pm
Location: Oklahoma City

Why our beetle shots have to be "macro"

Post by Mike B in OKlahoma »

(Not necessarily a strict definition of macro used in that subject!)

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 194908.htm
Mike Broderick
Oklahoma City, OK, USA

Constructive critiques of my pictures, and reposts in this forum for purposes of critique are welcome

"I must obey the inscrutable exhortations of my soul....My mandate includes weird bugs."
--Calvin

DaveW
Posts: 1702
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:29 am
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post by DaveW »

Interesting Mike. I had read this explanation before. Also it was pointed out as you increase an insect in size, just as you increase a balloon in size, it's internal volume to surface area increases disproportionately, so unless you increased the density of the air, or as the article says the oxygen in it the insect cannot supply this increased internal volume with the air required.

I also read of a similar parallel in making scale model aeroplanes. When you scale down most aircraft designs to make models of them they fly OK, but in a few cases strictly scaling down a full sized design to model size it either will not fly properly, or flies poorly. The explanation is that though you faithfully scale down the plane you have not scaled down the density of the atmosphere to match! This remains the same density as the full sized plane was computed for.

DaveW

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic