lct Posted January 15, 2014 Share #441 Posted January 15, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) It is always a problem in practice, at least for me, so i'm interested to know how to solve it actually. One way to do so is to underexpose, which is what you advise doing if i understand well. Another way is to recover highlights in PP as usual with normal cameras. I just wanted to know if it is still impossible with MM files or if some progress have been made in this area. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 15, 2014 Posted January 15, 2014 Hi lct, Take a look here Survey: Your opinion about the new LEICA M MONOCHROM. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted January 15, 2014 Share #442 Posted January 15, 2014 If you've blown highlights they're blown for good. Same with film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 15, 2014 Share #443 Posted January 15, 2014 So you never recover blown highlights in PP with any camera if i understand well. Congrats folks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
paga Posted January 15, 2014 Share #444 Posted January 15, 2014 What's PP? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 15, 2014 Share #445 Posted January 15, 2014 So you never recover blown highlights in PP with any camera if i understand well. Congrats folks. All digital cameras have that in common. If the sensor receives too much light at one pixel location, it assigns the maximal possible value to that pixel. It does not matter if the amount of light was just a tiny bit or a huge amount greater than what the sensor can resolve.This is quite similar to the behavior of color slide films. The cure is the same and is called Expose To The Right (ETTR) which means to expose at most so much that no relevant parts of the image are blown.In a color camera, if it's only one of three color channels which is blown, PP software might be able to reconstruct the lost values of the blown channel by interpolation from the other color channels which are not blown. That's not an option with monochrome cameras which leads to the perception that they are more prone to overexpose.PP means, BTW, Post Processing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted January 15, 2014 Share #446 Posted January 15, 2014 If you've blown highlights they're blown for good. Same with film. Well no, it's not the same with negative film. Negative film is quite the opposite as it's the shadows that can't be recovered if they're blown, not the highlights. Highlights come from film density and you've got at least 3 stops to recover by extending exposure at the printing or scanning stage (with gain). When printing, not only can you burn-in, you can flash to lower the threshold of the paper. In my experience, rarely could a sky highlight not be recovered with paper grade, flashing and exposure. Paper base white was just not acceptable. Digital highlights fall off a cliff and need replacing, not recovering. p.s. You talking about slide film ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 15, 2014 Share #447 Posted January 15, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Matisse used paper white for white places in his paintings, IIRC.It's a bit like the difference between (older) amplifier with transistors versus those with tubes. Transistors just clipped waves which exceeded their maximum voltage while tubes reduced the amplification of those peaks, resulting in rounded wave forms. That's why the distortions added by the transistor amplifiers sounded so much more unpleasant than those added by the tubes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
paga Posted January 15, 2014 Share #448 Posted January 15, 2014 It's a bit like the difference between (older) amplifier with transistors versus those with tubes. Transistors just clipped waves which exceeded their maximum voltage while tubes reduced the amplification of those peaks, resulting in rounded wave forms. That's why the distortions added by the transistor amplifiers sounded so much more unpleasant than those added by the tubes. It is the best explanation I have read of the topic so far, I love it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted January 15, 2014 Share #449 Posted January 15, 2014 Matisse used paper white for white places in his paintings, IIRC. I have no idea about the truth of this, but I'd be amazed if he ever let the raw canvas show through his pictures. More, I doubt that his canvases were paper white. You can tell me different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 16, 2014 Share #450 Posted January 16, 2014 I have no idea about the truth of this, but I'd be amazed if he ever let the raw canvas show through his pictures. More, I doubt that his canvases were paper white. You can tell me different. That's what they told us in the exhibition; might be pure hearsay, of course, but it makes for nice conversations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tanks Posted January 16, 2014 Share #451 Posted January 16, 2014 Necro post. I actually thought there was a new "M" Monocrom Answering it though, a couple of years later, I like it better than the really new "M" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcarrera Posted January 17, 2014 Share #452 Posted January 17, 2014 In a few words: if you do really like black and white, it is simply fantastic. My best camera ever! Enviado desde mi iPad con Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Lord Posted January 17, 2014 Share #453 Posted January 17, 2014 About 6 months in with the monochrom and it has totally resuscitated my interest in photography. Worth the cover price alone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 18, 2014 Share #454 Posted January 18, 2014 Matisse used paper white for white places in his paintings, IIRC. He frequently left areas of 'naked' canvas as a source of light and texture. And sometimes that was stark white. More here. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted January 18, 2014 Share #455 Posted January 18, 2014 He frequently left areas of 'naked' canvas as a source of light and texture. And sometimes that was stark white. More here. Jeff Interesting read, Jeff and it confirms Pop's statement. Notre Dame 1914, I'd call it unfinished, but I'm sure it would look great in my gallery with its price tag on it. I had my car re-sprayed by a painter of the same name and style ! He might have missed 'e' off the end of his name as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leopold Green Posted January 19, 2014 Share #456 Posted January 19, 2014 For me the real eye opener was editing the MM files on a good monitor and seeing them printed on my Epson R3000. MindfulPhotography I don't know if they are from the MM - it doesn't really matter - but you have some quite spectaclular photographs on your website! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dent Posted January 20, 2014 Share #457 Posted January 20, 2014 I don't know if they are from the MM - it doesn't really matter - but you have some quite spectaclular photographs on your website! Thanks for Your lovely feedback. I certainly do not deserve it. There are no MM pictures yet. I only recently acquired a used MM. What You see there is a mostly mix of 1Dx and M9. Some scanned film, some D3. Sometimes I can not tell what camera I used. It comes down to lens character and post processing. I tend to take the 1Dx when things get wet, dirty, fast or cold. High ISO performance is no longer an issue since the MM :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted January 20, 2014 Share #458 Posted January 20, 2014 Based upon the quality of the B&W conversions on your website, I'm wondering if the MM is going to offer you anything you cannot already achieve with your color sensors. These are some of the very best B&W conversions I have seen. I could not distinguish one camera from another, and I'm sure once you throw the MM images into the mix, that will still remain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dent Posted January 21, 2014 Share #459 Posted January 21, 2014 Thanks Jeff. I somehow still like the form factor and simplicity of the M cameras and I found the high-ISO capabilities of the M9 often limiting (in comparison to the 1DX). As I said I like shooting stopped down and prefocused. I do not care much about resolution. All modern cameras have plenty. Perhaps it´s convenient for heavy cropping but I try to avoid that because it brings inconsistency to a series. If I have to crop heavily, I tend to trash the file because in most cases obviously there was a better position for taking this particular photograph and I just did not make it (speed/timing, shyness, sluggishness, lack of discipline/attitude…) Most of the pics are no "simple" conversions. I use dodging and burning freely if it does not alter but enhance the visual message of this frame. In my view, it´s one of the great artistic freedoms that come with bw photography and has a long and proven history. The files of the MM hold up very nicely in global and local adjustments. I´ll work with the camera for the next three month and decide if it stays or not. I bought it used so the re-sell value is OK. Perhaps in the end You might be right. Perhaps the MM does not add much value for me. I´ll see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted January 25, 2014 Share #460 Posted January 25, 2014 It's the most exciting camera I've ever owned! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.