mobeyone Posted February 21, 2011 Author Share #21 Posted February 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) You NEED to get away from Jpg and fiddling with the camera settings. Start shooting DNG. What processing software did you get with the camera? None, camera was bought second hand. *will double check but I do not remember seeing anything in the box. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Hi mobeyone, Take a look here Swapped from 50MM cron to 35MM Cron (asph). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mobeyone Posted February 21, 2011 Author Share #22 Posted February 21, 2011 Heres one more: L1003725 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpalme Posted February 21, 2011 Share #23 Posted February 21, 2011 Yeah, hard to judge unless cleaned up in PP.( and seen side by side) These photos are a little dark but look very sharp to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted February 21, 2011 Share #24 Posted February 21, 2011 You need processing software if you are going to get the best from your camera and you need to calibrate your monitor first. Either Lightroom, Aperture (if you're a Mac user) or Capture One. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 21, 2011 Share #25 Posted February 21, 2011 None, camera was bought second hand. *will double check but I do not remember seeing anything in the box. In that case you will have to buy something. I would advise either Lightroom or Photoshop Elements, and get an appropriate book with it, otherwise you will be wasting tons of effort and time trying to figure out how to use it. Personally I find , as said before, the Scott Kelby books, that work cook-book style, extremely helpful for a flying start. Just disregard the bad jokes. Capture One has many good points, but imo is slighly less useful as "beginner"software. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scsambrook Posted February 21, 2011 Share #26 Posted February 21, 2011 Hello Mobeyone! Most of the people who've been advising you to abandon jpegs have oodles of experience and zillions of posts to their combined persona and are - not suprisingly - quite right in what they say. Even if some say it a little stridently. As a less-than-highly-advanced user, let me just say that I started out trying to get good jpegs out of my M8 and fairly soon gave up because the results struck me as being hit and miss, to say the least. The camera almost seemed to have a mind of its own. And it gave different results with different lenses - a bit like you've found, I suppose. Set on auto white balance, it gave different results on sequential shots sometimes. Unlike my cheap Pentax dslr which seemed t manage just fine. Anyway, changing from jpegs to raw files and using the supplied software (which I know you don't have) made a massive difference. All the erratic shots vanished. I have both the Capture One programme from the camera purchase and Photoshop Elements ( version 6 I think) which I was given as a present. I find Capture One easier to use with the raw files, but that's probably a personal thing. From what I see, either the latest versions of Elements or Capture One 'Lite' cost well under £100 and it will really be money well spent for you. A book might be a good idea too. I've no love for 'post processing' but it seems to me that digital photography can never be as simply managed as shooting Kodachrome used to be. You can do more, and maybe get better results, but the photographer has to provide his or her own input. Good luck! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobeyone Posted February 21, 2011 Author Share #27 Posted February 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks to everyones input, yes I will visit raw and pp when the time comes. I (well David at Stephens more like!) found out why the camera was behaving this way. I was confident that both camera and lens were spot on given their history but found that in the menu, colour management was set to sRGB.. changes to adobe RGB and now its spot on. Happy days! I must have changed it by mistake but the colours are now as they should be and the images are super sharp. Just have to get myself lightroom now) Thanks to all! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
qvsm Posted February 21, 2011 Share #28 Posted February 21, 2011 Ive got an M8 and the 35 cron ASPH - its a superb combo. The lens is very sharp and provides lovely colour and contrast. Much prefer it over the 50 cron I had previously. Ive a few galleries using it if you want comparisons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 22, 2011 Share #29 Posted February 22, 2011 Thanks to everyones input, yes I will visit raw and pp when the time comes. I (well David at Stephens more like!) found out why the camera was behaving this way. I was confident that both camera and lens were spot on given their history but found that in the menu, colour management was set to sRGB.. changes to adobe RGB and now its spot on. Happy days! I must have changed it by mistake but the colours are now as they should be and the images are super sharp. Just have to get myself lightroom now) Thanks to all! Although it is in general an excellent idea to do your postprocessing in the largest possible colorspace this cannot be the explanation. You probably had the same settings for your 50 mm lens. Unless you have a very high-end monitor (most will only render sRGB) on your computer or a professional printing service, the colorspace will be shrunk to sRGB along the way somewhere. A color profile mismatch can produce very odd results, but if you run sRGB all the way through and start out with in-camera jpg, the difference should be negligible . Anyway, if it works for you now- don't touch until you know what you are doing! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted February 22, 2011 Share #30 Posted February 22, 2011 I agree with Jaap ( is this a trend? ) JPG and RGB does not go well hand in hand,,, may look ok on your monitor but thats it,,, You must 'convert' not just assign to sRGB and include the color profile in the jpg to get it to display correctly on the internet, only few browsers accept other color profiles. I recommend; Shoot your raw files in RGB 16 bit do the PP then convert to 8 bit mode and sRGB color space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbelyaev Posted February 22, 2011 Share #31 Posted February 22, 2011 1. Leica M8 has one of the worst JPEG engines on the planet. Try to avoid using jpegs, if to want to get decent images. 2. If you you used to use modern cameras prior to leica, you will find M8 metering somewhat tricky. The problem with M8 is that non-optimally exposed images (even DNG) will produce color cast/color shift during conversion. Consider buying a small external light-meter (?Digisix). 3. Summicron ASPH does give slight magenta cast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 22, 2011 Share #32 Posted February 22, 2011 1. Agree Jpgs are useful only for PJs that have to upload images over their cellphone. 2. A small exposure meter is great for learning exposure, I agree, but once mastered, the M8/M9 internal exposure meter is highly accurate. 3. I never noticed this, but then I always balance the color of my images in raw conversion, and I tend to use C1, which is much better in my experience. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobeyone Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share #33 Posted February 22, 2011 Thanks everyone, excellent advice and information and VERY appreciated... exactly what I was looking for. I know how problematic aRGB can be and have been viewing my photos in IE and firefox to see the differences. Shooting aRGB is most definitely more bright and colourful to my eyes in firefox but when viewed in IE, its dull and bland as you would expect, the red in the logo in this shot confirms this as well as the black of the cabinet. Stephens.. | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Now, if I am using RAW can I still set to aRGB? and convert to sRGB in photoshop? or is this still problematic as above? Thanks again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted February 23, 2011 Share #34 Posted February 23, 2011 No problems just remember: You must 'convert' not just assign to sRGB and include the color profile in the jpg to get it to display correctly. I recommend; Shoot your raw files in Adobe RGB 16 bit do the PP then convert to 8 bit mode and sRGB color space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobeyone Posted February 23, 2011 Author Share #35 Posted February 23, 2011 Thanks Erik and again to all for your input. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 23, 2011 Share #36 Posted February 23, 2011 No problems just remember: You must 'convert' not just assign to sRGB and include the color profile in the jpg to get it to display correctly. I recommend; Shoot your raw files in Adobe RGB 16 bit do the PP then convert to 8 bit mode and sRGB color space. Actually it is even better to write the raw conversion in Profoto and drop down to 8-bits sRGB at the end as you recommend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted February 23, 2011 Share #37 Posted February 23, 2011 Its more the manner and the tone.. But yes, no change in what I am doing. I have tried adjusting the in camera sharpness settings etc and kept them the same but its no different. The last set of photos were taken using AWB and exposure dropped a little but I still get this blue wash over them. I just wonder if something has changed that you haven't noticed. Maybe something in a menu somewhere that you have forgotten about? But you should be shooting RAW in aRGB and simply convert the colour space to sRGB when you resize the image for web use. But I don't think its the colour space that is wrong in this case. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted February 23, 2011 Share #38 Posted February 23, 2011 But you should be shooting raw in aRGB and simply convert the colour space to sRGB when you resize the image for web use. First: There is no such thing as "aRGB". Second: When shooting in raw format then you cannot choose a specific colour space anyway. Third: When shooting in JPEG format then selecting any colour space other than sRGB usually is not a good idea. Select Adobe RGB only if you positively know what you're doing and why. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobeyone Posted February 23, 2011 Author Share #39 Posted February 23, 2011 I just wonder if something has changed that you haven't noticed. Maybe something in a menu somewhere that you have forgotten about? But you should be shooting RAW in aRGB and simply convert the colour space to sRGB when you resize the image for web use. But I don't think its the colour space that is wrong in this case. Steve Dont know if I am completely honest. All I know is that with the 50 cron, I knew what to expect... I do remember changing some of the settings but to have such a poor and over exposed flat image was not what I was expecting. I took the camera to Stephens in Manchester and after changing this setting the photos were almost instantly better so it must have been something in how the camera was processing the image? That said, I am now shooting in raw aRGB.. think I may need to get 8GB SD cards.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted February 24, 2011 Share #40 Posted February 24, 2011 I am now shooting in raw aRGB. No, you don't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.