Jump to content

S conversions to B&W vs. MM1?


Deliberate1

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have pined for a Monochrom (MM1) but could not justify it until now. Prices on the used market (ebay) run between $2500-3500, which lessens the sting. Since I have an M9, the platform is very familiar to me. My question is how S images converted to B&W compare with images from a dedicated B&W sensor taken with the best of my glass - 50mm Lux. I understand all the variables that make such a comparison unwieldy, or favor one tool over the other given the venue. That said, I would appreciate hearing from those of you who have eyeballed enough images, preferably prints, from both to share your observations. May I also add that I print images on an Epson 7800, I would not expect to print larger than 16x20 (or whatever the closest proper ratio is for the M platform) with the M.

Obliged,

David

Edited by Deliberate1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll find relevant discussion from owners of both cameras in this thread (and others)...  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/259866-s-bw-camera/

 

Of course, as always, print results often depend as much on one's overall print workflow, user skills and evaluation criteria, etc, as the gear itself.  Always best to test and judge for oneself.  

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff, your post got me thinking about work flow options that might scratch that itch. I see that the NIK  processing is now free thanks to Google's largess. Most speak very highly about the Silver Efex program which I will try. I typically do my conversions in LR and then tidy up in CS5. The SEP seems to be a more sophisticated approach.

Cheers,

David

Edited by Deliberate1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff, your post got me thinking about work flow options that might scratch that itch. I see that the NIK  processing is now free thanks to Google's largess. Most speak very highly about the Silver Efex program which I will try. I typically do my conversions in LR and then tidy up in CS5. The SEP seems to be a moherre sophisticated approach.

Cheers,

David

 

Workflow preferences, including software choices, are of course personal.  There are many good alternatives, and one tends to favor the ones in which they've invested the most time and discipline.  My best prints have come via LR, with final print output using ImagePrint 10.  

 

But there are dozens of other important variables besides the software that influence print results (beyond the picture itself)....workflow, materials, lighting/display and, most importantly, the skill, eye and judgment of the user; knowing when, where and to what degree to apply those techniques.  Otherwise we'd all get the same results using the same gear, software, etc.  No different than in the darkroom days.

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jip,

Obliged for your very interesting and well done images. I am a sucker for horse shots. Every summer, I travel to the myriad country/agricultural fairs in my home state of Maine. The indirect lighting in the horse barns can be magical. Some of the events can be quite dramatic, especially the horse pulls where teams of draft horses drag in excess of 5000lbs. Muscular poetry in motion. Once I figure out how to get my images compatible with the posting criteria, I will post a few. In the meantime, much obliged for yours.

David 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff's comments are very sensible, there are indeed a lot of variables.

 

My own 2c is that I used to think plugins with their fake grain could simulate the feel for film, but now I'm not sure that I still feel it's a good look. Out of all of them, I thought Capture One got the closest.

 

Now, in fact, I'd rather post process and keep it clean and without fake grain ......that way, it kind of reminds me of large format film, which to me is a lot better than trying to simulate the grit of 35mm or (to a lesser extent) 120 film.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! Stunning image, Matt. Workflow?

David

 

 

Thank you, David! My workflow these days is all Lightroom with bits of PS. It was during a snowstorm, so there wasn't much (or any) color to adjust in the conversion sliders. The rest is just like a darkroom. Dodge, burn, contrast, black point, white point, a bit of clarity (or not). I used to use SilverFX, and I very much liked the results, but I don't use it much anymore. Usually (for me) the color conversion sliders are the most important things for changing the mood.

 

I bet that makes a lovely print.

 

Jeff

 

Indeed, Jeff! I've only printed it 13x19 so far after sharpening in PS (I like the high-pass filter soft light sharpening. It's old fashioned, but subtle and effective). At home I can go 17x25, which is good because there's no wall space left for anything larger.  :)  

 

Matt

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS

I have pined for a Monochrom (MM1) but could not justify it until now. Prices on the used market (ebay) run between $2500-3500, which lessens the sting. Since I have an M9, the platform is very familiar to me. My question is how S images converted to B&W compare with images from a dedicated B&W sensor taken with the best of my glass - 50mm Lux. I understand all the variables that make such a comparison unwieldy, or favor one tool over the other given the venue. That said, I would appreciate hearing from those of you who have eyeballed enough images, preferably prints, from both to share your observations. May I also add that I print images on an Epson 7800, I would not expect to print larger than 16x20 (or whatever the closest proper ratio is for the M platform) with the M.

Obliged,

David

 

No comparison Davis no comparison, I have both and the S wins hands down................I still have the S and sold the MM (V1) after getting the S as it basically made the MM redundant.

Keep your S and keep your 2500 bucks for more S lenses :) :)

S007

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by Neil D
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

 

If you have one layer, duplicate it, set the duplicate to "soft light" mode, then apply the High-Pass Filter to the duplicate layer (found under "Other..." in the Filter menu. Set the High Pass to around 3 (pixels?), but adjust to taste. 

 

If you have a complicated multilayer file, add a layer on top with Command-Option-Shift-E (google for Windows equivalent if needed), which adds a new layer consisting of what you'd have gotten if you'd flattened all the layers. Then proceed as before.

 

--Matt

 

(Didn't see the link above. It seems more detailed, although I've never gotten the hang of Smart Objects)

Edited by mgrayson3
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

 

If you have one layer, duplicate it, set the duplicate to "soft light" mode, then apply the High-Pass Filter to the duplicate layer (found under "Other..." in the Filter menu. Set the High Pass to around 3 (pixels?), but adjust to taste. 

 

If you have a complicated multilayer file, add a layer on top with Command-Option-Shift-E (google for Windows equivalent if needed), which adds a new layer consisting of what you'd have gotten if you'd flattened all the layers. Then proceed as before.

 

--Matt

 

(Didn't see the link above. It seems more detailed, although I've never gotten the hang of Smart Objects)

 

 

Yes, I too finish my flattened images in photoshop with a duplicate "soft light" layer (but reduce the opacity to about 20-30% depending on the image), and then a duplicate minimal high pass filter (just enough to outline the main features of the image).  I also tend to add just a tad of monochrome Gaussian noise to give the photograph a bit of texture. It's very easy to move those sliders a bit too far to the right!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

No comparison Davis no comparison, I have both and the S wins hands down................I still have the S and sold the MM (V1) after getting the S as it basically made the MM redundant.

Keep your S and keep your 2500 bucks for more S lenses :) :)

S007

Neil, obliged for yours. Very helpful to hear from an owner of both. As for buying more lenses, ten minutes ago I pulled the trigger on eBay for a Zeiss for Contax 210mm. I have the Zeiss 35mm and 120mm which are brilliant performers irrespective of the price. I paid $225 for 210mm. All I can say is thank you Leica for making that adapter available. It is the gateway to superb (and reliable) performance at an extraordinary price point.

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...