Ugly Bugs Bawl?

Started by: jo anne (33735) 

These cry out for closer inspection:


Started: 10th Feb 2012 at 15:14

Posted by: mache (inactive)

is the second a pic rolf harris

Replied: 10th Feb 2012 at 15:16
Last edited by mache: 10th Feb 2012 at 15:24:51

Posted by: dostaf (inactive)

Golf balls?

Similar thing was on Country Tracks the other day.

Replied: 10th Feb 2012 at 15:34

Posted by: jo anne (33735) 

I thought that moustache looked familiar, Mache.

I missed the Country Tracks programme, Dostaf.

Amateur macro photo.

Replied: 10th Feb 2012 at 17:20

Posted by: dostaf (inactive)

They (CT) were photographing a particular type of butterfly egg, Jo Anne.

Replied: 10th Feb 2012 at 17:22

Posted by: jo anne (33735) 

(Which came first - the caterpillar or the butterfly?)

(My sister took a beginners' digital photography course and gave me a detailed explanation of how to take macro photo's, using the 'tulip setting' on my camera. I'd never tried before. I still need practice.)

Replied: 10th Feb 2012 at 17:37
Last edited by jo anne: 10th Feb 2012 at 17:37:57

Posted by: kenny (inactive)

How can that work Surely the lens cant fix to the camera properly if it's reversed

But bloody gud pics never the less

Replied: 10th Feb 2012 at 18:16
Last edited by kenny: 16th Feb 2012 at 06:50:51

Posted by: jo anne (33735) 

Kenny - there's a comment from below the article (10/02/12 10:29) that seems to explain it:

'Using a camera lens in the reverse position was known and used well over 60 yrs ago in the time before the development of the modern specialised "macro" objectives. It is based upon a well-known optical principle ... that in the case of a "normal" camera with the lens in "normal" position, the distance between the subject and the front of the lens is very much greater than the distance between the back of the lens and the image formed on the film or CCD sensor. The lens design is corrected on this assumption. However, when doing close-up photography, the distance between subject and lens now becomes very small and can well be less than the distance between the rear of the lens and image. Reversing the lens orientation gives the photographer a better-corrected lens system for this work. With that said, these photos are very nice and demonstrate that the photographer thoroughly understands his equipment.'

Replied: 10th Feb 2012 at 18:54

Posted by: kenny (inactive)

jo anne

I did read that part,and he must really know his equipment,but every piece of foto equip,I ever owned would not allow me to reverse my lenses onto the camera body,I have had macro attachments,(filters)but they never had that effect

He must have very special & expensive equipment

Replied: 11th Feb 2012 at 10:08

Posted by: jo anne (33735) 

I think so, Kenny. I've only been able to find this one photo of the man behind the camera, but no details about the equipment he uses and how. The information might be out there somewhere though.

Replied: 11th Feb 2012 at 11:01

Posted by: kenny (inactive)

We will find out some day

Replied: 11th Feb 2012 at 22:58

Posted by: elmos (2784) 

just been listening to burl ives on u-tube singing

"the ugly bug ball", av always loved that song.

Replied: 14th Feb 2012 at 18:38

Posted by: jo anne (33735) 

Replied: 14th Feb 2012 at 18:44

Posted by: elmos (2784) 

can't get the tune out of my head now,

thanx again jo-anne.

Replied: 14th Feb 2012 at 20:10


Note: You must login to use this feature.

If you haven't registered, why not join now?. Registration is free.