M9 in theatre photography

[chris_tribble]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just back from Poland where I was documenting a new production of Shakespeare's A Winter's Tale - a really great piece of theatre if any of you are passing through Warsaw...

 

I shot the M9 alongside 5D mk2 and 5D. On the M9 the 28 cron asph proved to be a marvel. I shot at 800 ISO right the way through on the M9 (with the28 throughout the performance sequence here) and the 5D2 (almost entirely with 85 L 1.2) and at 1250 on 5D where I was using a 70-200 2.8). For white balance I ended up dialling in a Kelvin number in post (3050) - this ended up being the best way to get consistency across the work - and fortunately apart from changes in intensity there were no changes in lighting colour. The only hassle was a red / maroon floor cloth which reflected up on faces / white clothes.

 

A couple of examples of how well the M9 held up are given below. What really blew me away was how well it held shadow detail in the large scenes and how beautiful the images are for the work where it was possible to be only a couple of feet from the actors.. The 28 is a thing of great beauty on the M9 IMHO... Hugely flexible. Also interesting to note that there were loads of artificial fibre black fabrics around and no sign of the dreaded colour cast. I know that some will criticise the skin tones in some of these - but we're talking about 1650 keepers taken with 3 different camera bodies over a three day shooting period (0900-1400 / 1800-2200). I have to work on the basis that the best is the enemy of the good when there's that much pressure ...

 

If you'd like to see some examples from the whole shoot, you can see these at:

A Winter's Tale

 

If others have experience in working in this kind of environment with the M9 - challenges and solutions?

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!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[coup de foudre]

Chris,

 

thank you for posting these. i've been wondering how the M9 would work for you, knowing what you shoot... have you done any b/w conversions yet? any comment on how the shadow detail holds up to that processing?

 

cam

(who's a long way from ever affording an M9)

[Bixi]

Dear Chris,

 

This are great shots. The third image is my favorite. Well done.

[erl]

Chris, a nice opportunity you had there. I am sure you made the most of it.

 

I have shot extensively with M8's in theatre and the format is superbly suited to stage work. I have not the shadow of a doubt that the M9 can only be better. When in theatre situations, I usually select a predetermined colour temp, usually around 3600K for what I shoot, and just leave it there. There are always changes in colour through a show, but I take that as the design and leave it in. So when in PP, I correct the first (or several) in C1 and then copy that correction across the whole shoot. Probably 90% will be very close. Final selections (by client) are inspected more closely and tuned if I judge necessary.

 

I notice you had to work with out top or back light, at least in the posted pics. That make photography very difficult. Noticeable in the 3rd pic where the actors with dark hair get 'lost' in the background.

 

Compared the 5D, how would you rate the M9, or any M, as well suited to your shooting style for theatre?

 

Curious to know why the shoot extended over three days. Was this a production issue or were you shooting 'staged' and 'arranged settings? I have always shot a final dress rehearsal so the shoot is locked into 2 maybe 3 hours.

 

P.S. I should add that anyone criticizing skin colour, or any colour from a stage show is wasting their time, unless it is the lighting plot they wish to criticize.

[gravastar]

.............................I notice you had to work with out top or back light, at least in the posted pics. That make photography very difficult. Noticeable in the 3rd pic where the actors with dark hair get 'lost' in the background..................

What's very encouraging is even with the jpeg of the last image selective shadow detail can be recovered in Photoshop to bring the characters heads out from the dark background.

 

Bob.

[erl]

What's very encouraging is even with the jpeg of the last image selective shadow detail can be recovered in Photoshop to bring the characters heads out from the dark background.

 

Bob.

 

Not surprising. Would be even easier with the DNG. The biggest problem, of course, is for the audience. They don't have the benefit of PP.

[wookchang]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wow!!

 

I can see the master's touch everywhere in every single picture.

Beautiful!!

[jruffolo]

Wonderful images Chris, thanks for sharing

[chris_tribble]

Thanks for comments

 

Erl - some reflections on your specific comments / questions...

 

I have shot extensively with M8's in theatre and the format is superbly suited to stage work. I have not the shadow of a doubt that the M9 can only be better. When in theatre situations, I usually select a predetermined colour temp, usually around 3600K for what I shoot, and just leave it there. There are always changes in colour through a show, but I take that as the design and leave it in. So when in PP, I correct the first (or several) in C1 and then copy that correction across the whole shoot. Probably 90% will be very close. Final selections (by client) are inspected more closely and tuned if I judge necessary.

 

Pretty close to the way I was working - I needed to get six images to the client for poster / press release within a very tight time frame... So it was a case of batch processing, picking candidates and doing correction, and then finalising the agreed images. The only problem there is that the laptop I use for field processing is feeling decidedly underpowered with the large image sizes (XP Pro / 3 GB RAM / 100GB HDD) Replacement in the offing - anyone any experience of using the Dell Precision workstation/laptop for image editing?

 

I notice you had to work with out top or back light, at least in the posted pics. That make photography very difficult. Noticeable in the 3rd pic where the actors with dark hair get 'lost' in the background.

 

Correct - the show depended on very intense side lighting most of the time + spots (often on figures wearing lots of white) Here the M9 beat anything I could do with the Canons and the 16 / 35 I used to use for wide work. The example below shows some of the problems. I find that by adjusting Fill Light / Brightness it's possible to hold the highlights and give enough detail in the lower lit areas...

 

Compared the 5D, how would you rate the M9, or any M, as well suited to your shooting style for theatre?

 

The 5D2 remains essential - I do have to admit to being in love with the 85L 1.2... When I get the second M9 body I might be tempted to work the 28 cron asph alongside the 90 cron asph - but sometimes the auto focus can be really helpful when working quickly (though yes - it can screw up too!). For this kind of very mobile work I was using a 5D + 70-200 on a monopod - picking up and putting down as needed + carrying all the time the M9+28 and the 5D2 + 85. It felt like a very flexible combination...

 

Curious to know why the shoot extended over three days. Was this a production issue or were you shooting 'staged' and 'arranged settings? I have always shot a final dress rehearsal so the shoot is locked into 2 maybe 3 hours.

 

All the shots here are from the final dress (a 2 - 3 hour process). The reason for the three days as that as part of a long term cooperation with the theatre and its director I work with them on rehearsals. This gives them an important archive they use for teaching / historical purposes) + offers unique points of view... It's also hugely important to me to spend this time with the company on each new play so that we build trust and that when it comes to the final dress rehearsal I can pre-visualise the main shots I know I want to get and position myself to get them AND so that I can work very close without distracting the actors... As this has become a joint project I'm giving some of my time in this case - it wouldn't make commercial sense on either side to charge for the full amount of time - but I get great access!

 

Thanks for the interest...

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!

[chris_tribble]

Chris,

 

thank you for posting these. i've been wondering how the M9 would work for you, knowing what you shoot... have you done any b/w conversions yet? any comment on how the shadow detail holds up to that processing?

 

cam

(who's a long way from ever affording an M9)

 

I think that M9 images hold up well. Conversion done in Lightroom, using the excellent slider tool in Greyscale to finalise the adjustment ... I hope this gives you an impression ...

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!

[biglouis]

Chris

 

I'm not trolling but I have to ask questions of you as a professional photographer. It looks to me like the Canon image is equally good as the M9 image. (Actually, I think it is sharper). It must be easier to work in this environment with an autofocus camera and one which you can confidently use up to higher levels of iso than the M9. So, why bother at all to try and equal the convenience and quality of the 5DmkII? As an academic exercise it must be interesting to shoot with the M9 but what exactly is it giving you as a professional photographer than you can't achieve with the 5DmkII?

 

I love my M8 and I suppose all things being equal I would buy an M9 but for me the convenience has always been the size of the camera - I am limited to the heaviness of what I can carry by a weak back. I can pack my M8 with a 28/2.8 and 50/2.8 and go out and shoot outdoor landscapes until the cows come home with a wonderfully light package. However, were I able to choose to do so, I would also use a Nikon or Canon for indoor photography except for the size because of the superior operation at high iso.

 

You can see the reason why from this example of a picture taking at a gig last night using the M8. Not a bad picture but if I could have been working a Nikon D700 at iso3200 it would have been sharper (I would have been able to stop down more and work at a higher speed) and with less noise (I base this on a hire D700 I had for a weekend a couple of months back). This is my M8 at iso640 with my lux-35-asp f1.4 at 1/30

 

As I stated, I am not trolling, just interested in your reasons as a professional for working with the M9

 

LouisB

 

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!

[jonoslack]

HI Chris

these look wonderful - I'm going to have a proper look at the web pictures later on.

Glad it worked out for you.

 

Louis - of course, I can't answer for Chris, but as someone who also uses an SLR (an A900 in my case) and an M9, my answer to your question would be simply that it's much less 'in your face', much quieter and less aggressive, and the rangefinder principle means that you can see around your subject much more easily. I could actually go on and on about this, but you get the idea!

[erl]

To be brief, I have to wholeheartedly concur with Jono's comments. However, anyone who prefers a different technique is perfectly legitimate. It's the variations in us that is so interesting.

[chris_tribble]

Chris

I'm not trolling but I have to ask questions of you as a professional photographer. It looks to me like the Canon image is equally good as the M9 image. (Actually, I think it is sharper). It must be easier to work in this environment with an autofocus camera and one which you can confidently use up to higher levels of iso than the M9. So, why bother at all to try and equal the convenience and quality of the 5DmkII? As an academic exercise it must be interesting to shoot with the M9 but what exactly is it giving you as a professional photographer than you can't achieve with the 5DmkII?

 

Louis - it's a good question. Some responses:

1. the IQ from the 5D2 when combined with decent glass is IMHO as good as I need. It's very, very good. Better / worse than the M9? Not sure. But what I am confident with now is that at 800 the M9 is giving me comparably good IQ.
   
2. The big thing for me on this shoot was how well the M9 stood up in the general scene shots. I need to do these for the client so that there's a full record of all the major sets. Up until now I've tended to use the 5D/5D2 + 16-35L 2.8 for these scenes - I used the M9 this time because after a bit of trialling I found I was getting much better results. It was possible to leave shutter speed and aperture unchanged for a complete sequence and just focus on framing and focus - and the highlights held better than I've ever had with the Canons...
   
3. The other issue is what others have mentioned. When working close with the actors I'm happier with the RF - and again the M9 is a winner for me because I get the 28 FOV without having to resort to an external finder - which I find slows me down.
   
4. What you won't find me doing is trying to use a 135 on RF as an alternative to a fast prime or zoom on the DSLR. For concerts I often use a Canon 300 L 2.8 or the 70-200. This is unbeatable by RF. What I'm really enjoying now is using the Leica for wide and being able to carry such a light combination (for me this is why the 5D2 is such a great camera - I just don't want to live with 1 series Canons again... too heavy!)
   

 

Hope this makes it a bit clearer. As a professional choice, the M9 made sense because I was getting better images. An example below + 100% crop. This was a real torture test as it was top and sidelit and they were wearing artificial fibre wigs - grey for the guy in the centre, but bright white for the others... With the Canons - using manual focus + spot metering and all the gizmos, I still had problems getting this right. With the M9 it was a case of setting shutter speed on guess (SO good that the INFO screen lets you see this so that you can check where you are even in the dark), take a couple of quick shots to adjust and then hold these values for the scene...

 

Lightroom exposure values on this are:

Exposure = 0

Recovery = 19

Fill light = 33

Blacks = 2

Brightness = 71

Contrast = 35.

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!

[Guest EarlBurrellPhoto]

Thanks Chris for an informative post that I find interesting because I also shoot quite a lot of theatre jobs. Several of my colleagues likewise shoot theatre, one of them happens to have bought an M9, and we've all given it a go and arrived--quite independently I might add-- at three identical conclusions. One of which runs contrary to one of yours, and the other two which you didn't address.

 

The contrary opinion is that the M9 sans IR filters produces clean blacks. All three of us noticed quite striking examples of magenta casts. Perhaps it has to do with the type of lighting. Perhaps the theatre lighting in Poland emits less IR than here in Canada. (That's not meant to be facetious BTW). Upshot is, none of us can use the M9 sans IR filters, and the lack of in-camera cyan-drift correction precludes using lenses (in our experience) from 50mm and shorter. (By "precludes" I mean, it's clearly doable: sort the files by lens, and then batch-run them through Cornerfix. We simply feel like fools to do it simply because Leica won't man-up even though they themselves admit the sensor remains somewhat sensitive to IR).

 

The other issues are:

 

 

• We all shoot whilst the actual performance is in progress, frequently from the seats. Although it was sometimes difficult to read the M8's top display for battery condition and card capacity, having to torch up the M9's rear screen to read those parameters causes an unwanted distraction to everyone around.
  
• The M8's crop factor came in rather handy. Got bags of face-shots using a 135 as a 180. True, one can crop the M9 files to the same FOV, but it's an added step.
  

Just wondering your thoughts on those.

[gravastar]

............................Although it was sometimes difficult to read the M8's top display for battery condition and card capacity, having to torch up the M9's rear screen to read those parameters causes an unwanted distraction to everyone around.....................

You're right, there's nothing more annoying than camera screens flickering on and off in your peripheral vision during a performance. I would have thought that it would be possible to use the sensor which is needed for aperture estimation to measure the ambient and control the display brightness accordingly.

 

Bob.

[biglouis]

Chris

 

Thanks for the responses. I think working with an M8 or M9 is superior in a lot of ways to working with a DSLR. Lightness, the viewfinder, the uncomplicated controls (less to think about, even if it means less automation) are all a bonus, so I can appreciate why you'd want to use it in any situation.

 

LouisB

[erl]

You're right, there's nothing more annoying than camera screens flickering on and off in your peripheral vision during a performance. I would have thought that it would be possible to use the sensor which is needed for aperture estimation to measure the ambient and control the display brightness accordingly.

 

Bob.

 

Bob, I'm curious to know when such an event occurs for you. I'm trying to imagine a Pro shoot where it could possibly be a problem if you checked your gear, and you should, I agree. If just an amateur (nothing pejorative intended here) occasion, then starting with a full battery and a reasonable sized SD card should obviate the need to check at all. Clearly I may be missing something but I am at loss to imaging what it is.

 

Incidentally, I agree about the screen bit flicking on and off during a performance. Both cams and mobile phones. No excuse. If you shoot from an audience position, and I do at times, patrons are within their rights to complain if you disturb them. When working, I stick to my rights to be there and do what I do. If a live audience is present, I minimize my impact, but that is all.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[chris_tribble]

Thanks for comments Earl - it helps us learn.. Some reflections below...

 

The contrary opinion is that the M9 sans IR filters produces clean blacks. All three of us noticed quite striking examples of magenta casts. Perhaps it has to do with the type of lighting. Perhaps the theatre lighting in Poland emits less IR than here in Canada. (That's not meant to be facetious BTW). Upshot is, none of us can use the M9 sans IR filters, and the lack of in-camera cyan-drift correction precludes using lenses (in our experience) from 50mm and shorter. (By "precludes" I mean, it's clearly doable: sort the files by lens, and then batch-run them through Cornerfix. We simply feel like fools to do it simply because Leica won't man-up even though they themselves admit the sensor remains somewhat sensitive to IR).

 

The Winter's Tale shoot was the easiest I've had to do in a long time in terms of consistent colour temperature - very clean right the way through - this may have helped.. On the issue of magenta cast, I'm certainly not seeing it in these shots, and I've looked back over the 1000 + images that I've archived from the M9 and found only one instance where the blacks look a bit off - and were easy to adjust (a very oddly lit gallery opening - the guy was wearing a man-made fibre black zipped top). REALLY helpful if you could post some examples of the problems that you or colleagues have been having - it might help the rest of us to appreciate the challenge you're facing.

 

The other issues are:

[*]We all shoot whilst the actual performance is in progress, frequently from the seats. Although it was sometimes difficult to read the M8's top display for battery condition and card capacity, having to torch up the M9's rear screen to read those parameters causes an unwanted distraction to everyone around.

 

I shoot concerts while in progress, but this is typically done from the sides / back of the hall. This isn't the case with the theatre companies I work with... However, in concert settings having access to the back information (mainly manual shutter speeds) has been invaluable.. different experiences...

 

[*]The M8's crop factor came in rather handy. Got bags of face-shots using a 135 as a 180. True, one can crop the M9 files to the same FOV, but it's an added step.

 

I can relate to this - and have had similar experiences in quiet spaces - I certainly always keep the 135 in the bag and I DO miss having a usable 180 for RF... This could be a reason for holding on to one M8. I just decided that I couldn't justify holding on to three DRF bodies ...

 

Thanks again for your comments - and really helpful if you could post some of the problem images you've mentioned.

[chris_tribble]

Incidentally, I agree about the screen bit flicking on and off during a performance. Both cams and mobile phones. No excuse. If you shoot from an audience position, and I do at times, patrons are within their rights to complain if you disturb them. When working, I stick to my rights to be there and do what I do. If a live audience is present, I minimize my impact, but that is all.

 

Erl - agree on both your points (especially re battery and SD card - I use 8GB Sandisk Extreme IIIs and one will last me a three hour shoot with ease). My experience has been that it's amateurs who use burst mode and then chimp throughout a gig who are the real bane... I've been asked to do some jazz concerts where there's a "freedom to shoot" down in the pit and I just walk away these days.

 

Occasionally using the rear screen to check a manual shutter speed (especially if you've reduced the rear display light level) really needn't be an issue.