Jamie Roberts Posted May 30, 2012 Share #261 Posted May 30, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) The general consensus here, and on other forums, seem to suggest that black and white is best done by converting from colour. Nobody is worried by the pretense involved. It's a fake - like fake woodcuts and fake oil painting. To me it seems a bit like tweaking a synthesiser to get a Steinway piano sound.If the M9 is a theater organ, then the MM is an electric piano - by reduction somewhat closer to the truth. Optical filters are back, like pedals on a Yamaha. No, sorry, your analogy is so off the mark it's not even funny. Pretense? As opposed to? The black and white Truth? It's all a fake--which is to say BW photography is an art form, and not a natural way of seeing something. As for method, I don't really want to explain this again, but in essence, the chromatic response of the MM is fixed; light unfortunately, is not. Unlike a film cam, I can't change films for various jobs; filters over the lens is not a good answer, however appealing that may be for some jobs. And please--the consensus around here seems to be that Leica has invented a new medium; that it will deliver double the resolution of an M9, that it's closer to helping people think in BW; that it will inspire people to create new and better work. That's fine, I guess, but I wish everyone discussing this (including Leica) would just stow the faux-philosophic appeal to some lost authenticity. It's just bogus nostalgia, and I don't use my M9 because it looks retro. In any case, there's nothing more or less natural, neutral or authentic about creating monochrome images with a monochrome sensor (which has its own baked in colour response and an IR filter to boot) or doing colour mixing in post from a colour camera, or from monochromatic film that has different colour sensitivities. They're all just technical methods. Some of these methods, however, are demonstrably more flexible than the other. That doesn't say, by the way, that one is better than the other. That's for everyone to understand themselves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Hi Jamie Roberts, Take a look here Survey: Your opinion about the new LEICA M MONOCHROM. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlanG Posted May 30, 2012 Share #262 Posted May 30, 2012 The general consensus here, and on other forums, seem to suggest that black and white is best done by converting from colour. Nobody is worried by the pretense involved. It's a fake - like fake woodcuts and fake oil painting. To me it seems a bit like tweaking a synthesiser to get a Steinway piano sound.If the M9 is a theater organ, then the MM is an electric piano - by reduction somewhat closer to the truth. Optical filters are back, like pedals on a Yamaha. The same "pretense" is involved when converting color from the real world via the MM or film. All that is different in a "color" digital photo is that it records three different grey scale images for you to use as you like. There is absolutely nothing genuine about any b/w image and the way it represents color tones from a scene. Nor is there anything genuine about dodging and burning in or contrast choices when printing from film. That all comes down to personal choice. As I showed in another post linked below, characteristics of lighting in a scene (sodium vapor, tungsten, metal halide, etc.) will cause color tones to look different in b/w even if shot with an MM, film, or a color digital camera. So which lighting is correct? But unfortunately with the images from the MM you will not have the direct method to try to compensate for this as is available with three color channels in a file and the controls in some software. Optical filters on a lens are pretty limited in comparison even if you are an expert at understanding light and how to use them... you still might not be able to get the look you want. That being said, a lot of people shot b/w film without using any filters or caring that much about how various colors were being represented in grey scale. So you could use the MM or a single color conversion method the same way. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/238887-reason-m-monchrome-7.html#post2080025 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnexpat Posted June 1, 2012 Share #263 Posted June 1, 2012 I've pre-ordered one. I've had an M9 for a month now, but lived with a Nikon D3X for YEARS. I'm stoked. To me, it seems almost magical. But, after making my way through these postings, I'm seriously wondering about simply converting my M9 pics into black and white, and moving on with my life . . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mugget Posted June 1, 2012 Share #264 Posted June 1, 2012 For any doubters who have been wondering if the MM can really offer much better image quality: http://www.reddotforum.com/content.php/231-ISO-Test-Leica-M-Monochrom-vs.-Leica-M9 Case closed. But there is nothing new there that subscribers to Reid Reviews wouldn't have already known... cdnexpat, if you need a highly specialised camera, and the MM fills your needs, then great. But not everyone will need one (or want one). In some situations it would probably be the worst possible option, for instance no one who shoots motorsports for a living is going to use a rangefinder. This is one of those times where "if you have to ask, the answer is no". What I mean is - take the time to learn all about the camera, have all your technical questions answered etc., but once you know all about it, if you're still wondering if you need it, the answer is no. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 1, 2012 Share #265 Posted June 1, 2012 There is not only cleanliness or sharpness in image quality. There is also tonality and the case is not closed there if i understand well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted June 1, 2012 Share #266 Posted June 1, 2012 For any doubters who have been wondering if the MM can really offer much better image quality: http://www.reddotforum.com/content.php/231-ISO-Test-Leica-M-Monochrom-vs.-Leica-M9 Case closed. {snipped} No, with respect, it's not at all closed, except to say the MM has inherently less noise at a given ISO than the M9. I don't think that's ever been in dispute. But turning of NR in LR 4 or C1 is something that's certainly not part of my workflow. I don't believe you are going to see any more printable detail from MM files over M9 files due to default NR in a modern raw processor. And, as LCT implied, I think "making the M9 look like the MM as closely as possible" is also not close to my black and white workflow: I'd use the M9's colour information to get *as good a BW rendering as I can* then let's see if the MM can match it in post without breaking up due to noise As you raise values in the MM for detail or tonal value shifts, you will run into effective ISO ranges that are higher than the M9s. Anyway, it's far from conclusive to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted June 1, 2012 Share #267 Posted June 1, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's very interesting seeing how professionals/artists do post processing with M9/MM files. But I wonder if not many buying the MM will use the files with minimal PP? I'm trying to do minimal PP with my M9 dng for color and M7 for B&W film, just some curve adjustments etc.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mugget Posted June 2, 2012 Share #268 Posted June 2, 2012 There is not only cleanliness or sharpness in image quality. There is also tonality and the case is not closed there if i understand well. In the case of tonality you do need to have a calibrated monitor that can actually display the subtlety of those tones (there are few monitors that qualify, and many more that don't), or be looking at a print. But on that subject the article at Reid Reviews clearly shows that the dynamic range and ability to capture tones is much improved over the M9. Anyway, I've had my fun with this for now - I'll let everyone else carry on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 2, 2012 Share #269 Posted June 2, 2012 Did you try digital coloured filters like ACR's, SilverEfex's or others? They allow to do pics like the ones below (no filter and yellow filter). At least with normal cameras. But not with the MM. With the latter, one must use optical filters during shootings. Are we prepared to do so or to renounce using those filters for the sake of getting sharper or cleaner images that we will get more or less with the M10 anyway? That is IMO the question or one of the questions. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/179026-survey-your-opinion-about-the-new-leica-m-monochrom/?do=findComment&comment=2029348'>More sharing options...
andybarton Posted June 2, 2012 Share #270 Posted June 2, 2012 You don't know what we will get in the M10, but if you want sharper cleaner images then the answer as to be "yes" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 2, 2012 Share #271 Posted June 2, 2012 In the case of tonality you do need to have a calibrated monitor that can actually display the subtlety of those tones (there are few monitors that qualify, and many more that don't), or be looking at a print. But on that subject the article at Reid Reviews clearly shows that the dynamic range and ability to capture tones is much improved over the M9. Anyway, I've had my fun with this for now - I'll let everyone else carry on. Well, if you want to do good quality color work you need a top class monitor as well... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 2, 2012 Share #272 Posted June 2, 2012 You don't know what we will get in the M10... No risk to bet that it will have less noise and more resolution than the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted June 2, 2012 Share #273 Posted June 2, 2012 Isn't the MM body only about $1000 more than the body of a M9 when it first came out? If so, the vast quality improvement is more than worth it. I can't see how the loss of ability to record colour pictures is a 'vast improvement'! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted June 2, 2012 Share #274 Posted June 2, 2012 Did you try digital coloured filters like ACR's, SilverEfex's or others? They allow to do pics like the ones below (no filter and yellow filter). At least with normal cameras. But not with the MM. With the latter, one must use optical filters during shootings. Are we prepared to do so or to renounce using those filters for the sake of getting sharper or cleaner images that we will get more or less with the M10 anyway? That is IMO the question or one of the questions. Yes, anyone that is serious about doing B&W with a color digital camera knows the use of color filtration in post. However, anyone that has scanned B&W film or prints also knows the vast array of tools for adjusting tonal values of a mono file. In your examples attached, the digital yellow filter resulted in an unnatural looking tonal scale based on the lighting in the scene, and some areas are still tonally blocked up. This can frequently happen with the application of linear digital color filters for B&W conversions. I took your original mono file, loaded it into Nik Silver Efex, and selected a preset to get the result below. Not that I think it is the end-all answer, but it shows that original mono tones can be altered with various mono presets in a number of different post programs ... with one click of the mouse. Adjust the contrast level from there to taste. One can also select various presets and use tone mapping, in layers, adjust the layer opacity and click on the blending layers option in mere seconds. B&W Mono is a different art form and takes a bit knowledge of what is available to achieve certain tonal resonses, and of course a little practice. We don't know what the M10 will be, or whether it'll excel at B&W ... to date, there has been an IQ price to pay when converting a color digital file to B&W, even with AA filters removed. So. it'll be a real surprise if the M10 completely solves this. -Marc 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/179026-survey-your-opinion-about-the-new-leica-m-monochrom/?do=findComment&comment=2029576'>More sharing options...
lct Posted June 2, 2012 Share #275 Posted June 2, 2012 Yes but the presets of Silver Efex can be used with RGB files as well. With MM files, we loose one tool, the digital coloured filters. I agree that the latters can give unnatural results in some cases but they are a mean of expression. I often use red or green filters in shadow scenes for instance and the idea of looking for another tool to mimick the same effects sounds unnecessarily complicated to me. Let alone the idea of juggling with 4 or more optical coloured filters in each lens diameter during shootings. And all this 3 months before the expected M10 launch. Hardly convincing all that i feel but YMMV needless to say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chema Posted June 3, 2012 Share #276 Posted June 3, 2012 I do not know if this is the appropriate forum, but I have an idea I'd like to share: Currently, programs for converting images to bw start with a processed color photo. If there was a software that directly, from raw data, use only brightness information of each pixel (weighing it according his color filter). Do we get the same resolution and dynamics in a M9 as the one with the MM? Best regards chema Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 3, 2012 Share #277 Posted June 3, 2012 No,only partly because the Bayer filter causes light loss and optical degradation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted June 3, 2012 Share #278 Posted June 3, 2012 If there was a software that directly, from raw data, use only brightness information of each pixel (weighing it according his color filter). The brightness information just isn’t there. You cannot calculate overall brightness from the brightness in one of the three colour channels which is all you have got. There is just one way: interpolate the missing colour info to create an RGB image, then convert that colour image to black and white. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted June 4, 2012 Share #279 Posted June 4, 2012 In the case of tonality you do need to have a calibrated monitor that can actually display the subtlety of those tones (there are few monitors that qualify, and many more that don't), or be looking at a print. But on that subject the article at Reid Reviews clearly shows that the dynamic range and ability to capture tones is much improved over the M9. Anyway, I've had my fun with this for now - I'll let everyone else carry on. No--you actually *don't* need a great monitor at all : colour tone mapping to monochrome makes huge moves, not tiny ones, generally if you try to make the M9 look like the MM, then I agree; the MM "wins" in terms of noise and detail (and I haven't actually seen this done very effectively yet, not even on Sean's site). Try reversing the test and see what happens That's what I want to see. You can *measure* the results of a transformation with a crappy monitor and Photoshop. You don't have to see something to know it will print, though I know most folks kind of hate that approach Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted June 4, 2012 Share #280 Posted June 4, 2012 Yes but the presets of Silver Efex can be used with RGB files as well. With MM files, we loose one tool, the digital coloured filters. I agree that the latters can give unnatural results in some cases but they are a mean of expression. I often use red or green filters in shadow scenes for instance and the idea of looking for another tool to mimick the same effects sounds unnecessarily complicated to me. Let alone the idea of juggling with 4 or more optical coloured filters in each lens diameter during shootings. And all this 3 months before the expected M10 launch. Hardly convincing all that i feel but YMMV needless to say. The presets of SilverFX were *designed* to be used with RGB files. Till the MM, there was no monochrome digital file to work with Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.