Tenebrous Posted January 7, 2012 Share #1 Posted January 7, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, call me a dummy, but I had never considered that there might be a starting point for the characteristics of a digital sensor. In my ignorance, and never having given it any thought, I assumed that a digital sensor was more or less agnostic to any previous film standard. I realize that there are post processing plug-ins, etc. that emulate the look, touch and feel of Fuji and other brands of film (I don't believe I've run across an Ilford filter). I just belatedly read Thorsten Overgaard's update to page 16 of his M9 blog/subjective review/guide (which I find very useful). In it he states: "It might be of interest to know that the Leica M9 and Leica M9-P, as well as the Kodak-Leica developed CCD-sensors for Leica M8 and Leica R9/DMR digital back, were developed with Kodachrome slide film as the ideal color look." Yes, it is of great interest to me. Since I had not considered this at all (apart from maybe thinking about Paul Simon's "Kodachrome" hit tune), it perhaps helps explain the pleasure I derive from looking at well exposed M9 color images and the outcome of some moderate tuning in Aperture. TO does clearly state that the standards for the "ideal" look do change over time. But having grown up with Kodachrome and Tri-X it is indeed a comfort to have that as a starting point. Again, having made the leap to digital quite a number of years ago I am flabbergasted that I had never even considered that a sensor may have used a film aesthetic standard as a known starting point. DOH! It is confirmed, I am a knucklehead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 7, 2012 Posted January 7, 2012 Hi Tenebrous, Take a look here Kodachrome. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
hydeca Posted January 7, 2012 Share #2 Posted January 7, 2012 right Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overgaard Posted January 7, 2012 Share #3 Posted January 7, 2012 This information was given by Stefan Daniel during the briefing for the LHSA at Leica Camera AG in September 2010. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 7, 2012 Share #4 Posted January 7, 2012 Interesting. I have always been a fan of Kodachrome (about 80% of my pictures) when I first started with the M6. Maybe that is why the results on the M8/9 feels so familiar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Pop Posted January 7, 2012 Share #5 Posted January 7, 2012 I love - and absolutely miss - Kodachrome 64. Does anyone have any WB suggestions for the M9 that can help with this...I've always found the M9 to be far more Ektachrome in it's rendering. Ken Rockwell talks about this as well (I know that in itself will spark a debate). I would love to get as close to the Kodachrome look as possible for my colour work...I find I use my M9 very little for colour because I can never seem to get what I'm looking for...but I know that's my own limitation, so I'd welcome tips/thoughts/suggestions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 7, 2012 Share #6 Posted January 7, 2012 The thing to do is to shoot a scene under ideal circumstances, spend as much time as you need getting it absolutely right in your raw converter and set that as the default profile. It will give you the best starting point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted January 7, 2012 Share #7 Posted January 7, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I presume this is with reference to the in camera jpeg not the DNG or am I wrong Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted January 7, 2012 Share #8 Posted January 7, 2012 good question viramati -- would like to know the answer .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted January 7, 2012 Share #9 Posted January 7, 2012 I presume this is with reference to the in camera jpeg not the DNG or am I wrong Jaap's referring to the raw conversion, do I doubt that it's Jpegs he's talking about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 7, 2012 Share #10 Posted January 7, 2012 Jaap is referring to settings in RAW conversion, and I suspect Stefan Daniels is talking about in camera jpegs - which is mostly irrelevant for serious users isn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick in CO Posted January 7, 2012 Share #11 Posted January 7, 2012 So that's why I like my M9 so much (and the M8 that preceded it)! I hadn't read that interview before, but it is obvious to me now. Does this have anything to do with the CCD sensor? - the last Nikon I liked was the D200. When Kodak re-introduced 120 Kodachrome I went out and bought a Linhof Technika 70 (still have a few rolls frozen in the freezer) and never regretted it - the pictures were fabulous! All I know is that I can get that look out of the M9 DNG with very little post-processing effort. I'm trying out the new Moab Slickrock Pearl paper and getting close to my old Ciba/Ilfochromes. Gotta love it: "Everything old is new again!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overgaard Posted January 7, 2012 Share #12 Posted January 7, 2012 I've speculated a bit about that myself. Is it the sensor and/or the camera profile used in Lightroom. I don't consider the JPG out of camera, in color, that valuable, and it's not my impression Leica worked a lot on that. And I didn't get the impression that Stefan Daniel was talking about the JPG, he was talking about the sensor. But without a RAW conversion tool as Lightroom with the proper profile it's not going to get there with a sensor alone. I wonder if the Kodachrome philosophy goes back to for example the Leica DMR as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 8, 2012 Share #13 Posted January 8, 2012 Sure - the color filters on sensors are not standardized, so Kodak could bias the filtering to reflect the spectral sensitivity of Kodachrome, or anything the wanted (and that would affect .dngs as well as jpegs). I think the filtering on all the (formerly Kodak) Leica sensors have/had harder spectral cutoffs, which means less green contamination of red or blue pixels, but also less light getting through overall, thus the challenge at higher ISOs. Conversely, my impression of the Canon and Nikon sensor filters is that they pass more light (good in low light), but the color purity suffers, leading to slightly muddier colors. Rough analogy - Kodak/Leica use something like a 29 red filter (filter factor of 9: #29 Deep Red Filter) while Nikon/Canon use something more like a 23A (filter factor of 5: #23A Light Red Filter). But heck - even the jpgs from the Digilux 2 looked "Kodachrome-y" to me - cyanish skies (as opposed to Fuji purple), brown (as opposed to pink) causcasian skin, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 9, 2012 Share #14 Posted January 9, 2012 The M8 images look way different than Nikon professional cameras. Thinking about remapping the Nikon to match the Leica. Adobe has a procedure for matching different cameras. The problem is both cameras provide a different look and sometimes I like one, sometimes the other. Overall I am inclined to prefer the Leica colors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted January 9, 2012 Share #15 Posted January 9, 2012 if it is the raw not the jpg that matches to kodachrome -- then does it matter whether you use capture one or lightroom or aperture or whatever? i presume all of these software companies work with the manufacturer in producing the conversion . . . or is that a mis-presumption on my part? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted January 9, 2012 Share #16 Posted January 9, 2012 Well, call me a dummy, but I had never considered that there might be a starting point for the characteristics of a digital sensor. In my ignorance, and never having given it any thought, I assumed that a digital sensor was more or less agnostic to any previous film standard. I realize that there are post processing plug-ins, etc. that emulate the look, touch and feel of Fuji and other brands of film (I don't believe I've run across an Ilford filter). I just belatedly read Thorsten Overgaard's update to page 16 of his M9 blog/subjective review/guide (which I find very useful). In it he states: "It might be of interest to know that the Leica M9 and Leica M9-P, as well as the Kodak-Leica developed CCD-sensors for Leica M8 and Leica R9/DMR digital back, were developed with Kodachrome slide film as the ideal color look." Yes, it is of great interest to me. Since I had not considered this at all (apart from maybe thinking about Paul Simon's "Kodachrome" hit tune), it perhaps helps explain the pleasure I derive from looking at well exposed M9 color images and the outcome of some moderate tuning in Aperture. TO does clearly state that the standards for the "ideal" look do change over time. But having grown up with Kodachrome and Tri-X it is indeed a comfort to have that as a starting point. Again, having made the leap to digital quite a number of years ago I am flabbergasted that I had never even considered that a sensor may have used a film aesthetic standard as a known starting point. DOH! It is confirmed, I am a knucklehead. It happened a long time before Leica got onto Kodak Sensors. The Olympus E-1 was the first consumer camera wit the Kodak Sensor and is still touted for it's "different" color rendition. With the advent of live view the sensor went by the wayside for Olympus. If Leica chooses to do live view i fear the Kodak Sensor will depart there as well....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 10, 2012 Share #17 Posted January 10, 2012 The M8 images look way different than Nikon professional cameras. Thinking about remapping the Nikon to match the Leica. Adobe has a procedure for matching different cameras. {Snipped} Nikon has it's own look for sure. Skin tones are too often cyan or too saturated in the yellows. Nevertheless, I used a D3 alongside an M8 and M9 for years; a few simple colour tweaks in C1 and the Nikon "look" (which I didn't like at all) was more or less tamed. Occasionally a D3 file will be so off (hands and face totally different colour balances in the same light) that I've needed to do major work to fix it... (and this isn't a function of make-up or something like that). Canons, on the other hand, tend to produce a lot more red and magenta in skin. So they're different from the Nikons (and the Leicas) as well. Now both Nikon and Canon have new pro flagship cameras coming out, so it will be interesting to see what they've done (if anything) on the colour balance issue. It's interesting to me that Canon's new C300 cinema camera has "improved skin tones" according to their marketing... I wonder if any of that research has hit the 1dx? In any case, I've always preferred colour from the M9 and DMR... so Kodak did something right, IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted January 10, 2012 Share #18 Posted January 10, 2012 You guys don't calibrate your raw input through custom camera profiles in Lightroom? All it takes is two shots of a Gretag McBeth card, push some LR buttons (it's automated) and all your camera's colours will match up. You can then do what you like from a common starting point, Kodachrome preset to boot! My 5DII and M9 colours are pretty much identical, makes shooting two different bodies a breeze. PS - I've always wondered what people meant by "love the colours" when talking about M9 files. "It's a raw file" I always thought, "what colours? depends on which import settings you use, which calibration profile, which process version, which preset etc etc..." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted January 10, 2012 Share #19 Posted January 10, 2012 Yep, a RAW file is gray tones, it's how the color interpretation is done in the raw converter that matters, and how good you are at that. Of course there is differences in how the bayer pattern and in camera processing is done, but knowing about light and problems when mixing natural and artificial lights is mandatory... I too shoot Nikon D3 and M8 side by side, no problem at all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmond_terakopian Posted January 10, 2012 Share #20 Posted January 10, 2012 Well, call me a dummy, but I had never considered that there might be a starting point for the characteristics of a digital sensor. In my ignorance, and never having given it any thought, I assumed that a digital sensor was more or less agnostic to any previous film standard. I realize that there are post processing plug-ins, etc. that emulate the look, touch and feel of Fuji and other brands of film (I don't believe I've run across an Ilford filter). I just belatedly read Thorsten Overgaard's update to page 16 of his M9 blog/subjective review/guide (which I find very useful). In it he states: "It might be of interest to know that the Leica M9 and Leica M9-P, as well as the Kodak-Leica developed CCD-sensors for Leica M8 and Leica R9/DMR digital back, were developed with Kodachrome slide film as the ideal color look." Yes, it is of great interest to me. Since I had not considered this at all (apart from maybe thinking about Paul Simon's "Kodachrome" hit tune), it perhaps helps explain the pleasure I derive from looking at well exposed M9 color images and the outcome of some moderate tuning in Aperture. TO does clearly state that the standards for the "ideal" look do change over time. But having grown up with Kodachrome and Tri-X it is indeed a comfort to have that as a starting point. Again, having made the leap to digital quite a number of years ago I am flabbergasted that I had never even considered that a sensor may have used a film aesthetic standard as a known starting point. DOH! It is confirmed, I am a knucklehead. Interesting thread :-) On the topic of Tri-X (my favourite B/W film!), I'd strongly recommend trying Nik Software's Silver Efex Pro 2 :-) Cheers, Edmond Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.