Monochrom filter discussion

[coup de foudre]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't use red filters on the MM, whenever light skinned people are in the frame - it makes them look like zombie plastic mannequins.

 

I use everything from no filter to medium Yellow filters so far, depending on lenses and the weather.

zombies? hmmmmmm... i can handle zombie but wouldn't be too thrilled with the plastic mannequin bit.

 

i only have yellow, green, and red E39 filters (that i used on my M2) so i am going to play today with an old lens (v/1 35 Cron or pre-asph Lux) and see what i get using my boyfriend as a test-dummy.

[jaapv]

Given that you can handle Zombies that should turn out well....

[menos I M6]

zombies? hmmmmmm... i can handle zombie but wouldn't be too thrilled with the plastic mannequin bit.

 

i only have yellow, green, and red E39 filters (that i used on my M2) so i am going to play today with an old lens (v/1 35 Cron or pre-asph Lux) and see what i get using my boyfriend as a test-dummy.

 

;-)

 

I found, that while red filters almost completely reduced any healthy bit of skin detail, while turning skin into a plastic mush, it deepens shadows and eye colours enough, to really make humans look nasty.

 

In the same regard a medium yellow filter turned a low contrast lens (a 3.5 cm coated Elmar in that case) into a nicely balanced, contrasty piece on the Mono.

I think, the pre ASPH Lux will look great on the MM with a Y filter (don't have one yet).

 

I treat colour filters on the MM really absolutely selective on a lens to lens basis, as every single vintage lens, I use reacts very different.

[Peter Branch]

The yellow-green filter to which I alluded was the Wratten 11 and its many clones. These were made by virtually every filter manufacturer and were part of every serious photographer’s kit.

 

A comparison of the absorption curves of the Wratten 11 and a CC050 Cyan shows that in the red part of the spectrum they are virtually identical. Hence, if the reason for using a filter is to deal with the problems of excessive red sensitivity, (Not, as has been pointed out, Extended Red Sensitivity which relates to sensitivity in the near Infra-red, e.g. M8.), then the readily available Wratten 11 will do the task just as well. CC050 Cyan filters of the right size and optical quality are special order items, hence very high cost, based on a gelatine filter sandwich which has limited durability.

 

The main reason why the Wratten 11 was, and maybe still is, very useful relates to the response of the human eye and the way it differs from photographic sensors. In general terms the human eye is more sensitive to green, (One of the reasons why the Bayer Filter Pattern in digital colour cameras has 2 green sensors for each red and blue sensor), and visualises this colour as lighter in tone than do most B&W sensors.

 

For many applications in general B & W photography the Wratten 11 gives an image which most closely matches the response of the human eye. This can be particularly significant in landscape work.

 

However – and it is a very big however – B & W photography is essentially a representational rather than a literal medium. It involves a high degree of abstraction and transformation. Every practitioner has their own way of seeing things and presenting them in B & W. There is no right or wrong way.

 

One of the questions favoured by Cambridge University admission panels was, (is?), - “Is colour or B&W photography the most difficult – and why?” It is reported that more than 80% of candidate unhesitatingly answered colour and go on to explain the technicalities. It is not the answer they are looking for.

[Jamie Roberts]

Just a caveat for my previous comments. First, I don't have an MM, so I'm going by what others provide (and Thorsten's extensive shots in particular). To my eye, something is just off with the skin tone response. It's just too dark. Since skin (all skin) has a large red component, logically a red filter should help (and a green filter should make it worse and darken reds).

 

So if not a red filter, because that makes people look like zombies, then an orange at least, for skin. And the light has to be good (and probably daylight too).

 

BTW--@ Peter--saying the MM is like Tech Pan, (and it's not--it's the opposite of tech pan, where faces are dark instead of overly light) and therefore like BW film, is pushing the analogy a lot, since Tech Pan wasn't exactly the most popular film for portraits (or even a very popular choice, though I remember Kodak marketing it as "4*5 from a 35mm," because it did have a tiny grain structure at ISO 12 (pushed from 6).

 

Remember too--the MM is a BW positive cam: not a negative one.

[jaapv]

The yellow-green filter to which I alluded was the Wratten 11 and its many clones. These were made by virtually every filter manufacturer and were part of every serious photographer’s kit.

 

A comparison of the absorption curves of the Wratten 11 and a CC050 Cyan shows that in the red part of the spectrum they are virtually identical. Hence, if the reason for using a filter is to deal with the problems of excessive red sensitivity, (Not, as has been pointed out, Extended Red Sensitivity which relates to sensitivity in the near Infra-red, e.g. M8.), then the readily available Wratten 11 will do the task just as well. CC050 Cyan filters of the right size and optical quality are special order items, hence very high cost, based on a gelatine filter sandwich which has limited durability.

 

The main reason why the Wratten 11 was, and maybe still is, very useful relates to the response of the human eye and the way it differs from photographic sensors. In general terms the human eye is more sensitive to green, (One of the reasons why the Bayer Filter Pattern in digital colour cameras has 2 green sensors for each red and blue sensor), and visualises this colour as lighter in tone than do most B&W sensors.

 

For many applications in general B & W photography the Wratten 11 gives an image which most closely matches the response of the human eye. This can be particularly significant in landscape work.

 

However – and it is a very big however – B & W photography is essentially a representational rather than a literal medium. It involves a high degree of abstraction and transformation. Every practitioner has their own way of seeing things and presenting them in B & W. There is no right or wrong way.

 

One of the questions favoured by Cambridge University admission panels was, (is?), - “Is colour or B&W photography the most difficult – and why?” It is reported that more than 80% of candidate unhesitatingly answered colour and go on to explain the technicalities. It is not the answer they are looking for.

 

This thread is an illustration of the last part of your post About green and cyan - it is an interesting point, the cyan suggestion coming from the Kodak fact sheet. I think the difference in blue and red response of the MM compared to film makes the green and cyan filters less important than in the past. But we will see in due course.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the difference in blue and red response of the MM compared to film makes the green and cyan filters less important than in the past..

 

If true, probably just as well because those colours seem quite hard to obtain new. B+W, for example, no longer seem to make them in Leica friendly sizes.

[jaapv]

I found Vivitar ones quite easily on eBay.

[wattsy]

I found Vivitar ones quite easily on eBay.

 

Yes (and there are loads of no-name filters from China available for a few quid) but wouldn't you have rather bought a B+W or Heliopan filter?

[jaapv]

Beggars can't be choosers Still, Vivitar is not the worst. Heliopan still makes green and green-yellow though.

[Peter Branch]

This thread is an illustration of the last part of your post About green and cyan - it is an interesting point, the cyan suggestion coming from the Kodak fact sheet. I think the difference in blue and red response of the MM compared to film makes the green and cyan filters less important than in the past. But we will see in due course.

 

It is as well to remember that many Technical Publications from Kodak were written by people in their Research / Apps. Lab. departments. If they wanted a CC050C filter they just requisitioned one from the lab stores. I know; I was there. It is also true that in some scientific applications the "yellow" part of the Wratten 11 might be unwelcome.

 

The more practical people in Professional Photography used Wratten 11 filters because they worked well and could be purchased - and hence could be recommended.

 

On the subject of the MM I'm lost. The original post to which I responded suggested that the sensor in the MM has high red sensitivity. Now it seems that it has low red sensitivity resulting in dark skin tones. If we can sort this out then it will be possible to suggest filters for different applications - otherwise not. The consequence of not resolving this fundamental point will be a continuing slew of contradictory posts which just confuses everyone - including me.

[jaapv]

I was referring to 690 to about 775 nm, which will not be rendered on film. I know Leica has been trying to match panchromatic film by filtering, so it is not impossible ( I have not seen the actual curve) that they created a dip in middle-red.

[algrove]

I have been in good light lately while using my MM and find the B+W orange 040 to my liking, but then I like contrast and perhaps too much darkness for others, other than our friend Overgaard.

 

I have tried the red 090 (5x) with some positive results, but then this is experimentation and I have yet to try the red 091 (8x).

 

Also got some lenses while in Germany from a guy recommended here and he sold me a dark orange B+W 041 (4x) which I have not yet tried, but on white paper it looks considerably darker than the 040 (4x). Very good prices by the way and he also sells a little flat zipper pouch for holding 4 say 46 or 55mm filters. 60mm would be pushing it. His name was Der Filter-Berg, Neuburg, DE +49 84 31/ 47166. He sends the stuff and then asks you to send him the funds. Old school which I like. Deutsch only-no English which is good too.

 

Yellow 022 gave me a non-plus so far. The same chap sent me a Heliopan Gelb 12 (3x) which looks considerably darker than the 022. Have not tried it yet, but perhaps that will be more to my liking.

 

Forgot but the same guy sent me a Heliopan Rot 29 (8x) which is the darkest of all the red filters I have.

 

And then there is the B+W green 060 (2x) which has not come out for use yet.

[Guest borge]

Deutsch only-no English which is good too.

 

How is that a good thing? Unless you live in a cave or something.

 

I have mostly all B+W MRC color filters and 3 and 6 stop ND filters now, and the Heliopan green, IR filter and kaesemann CPL MRC. Can't wait till the days get a bit brighter so that I can play with it all!

[Peter Branch]

I was referring to 690 to about 775 nm, which will not be rendered on film. I know Leica has been trying to match panchromatic film by filtering, so it is not impossible ( I have not seen the actual curve) that they created a dip in middle-red.

 

If we are talking about Extended Red Sensitivity, (as exhibited in the M8), that is sensitivity to wavelengths longer than ~690 nm, i.e. the near IR, then everything I have posted on this subject can be ignored. A Wratten 11 has little effect at these wavelengths.

 

BTW there are, (were?), plenty of B&W films with Extended Red Sensitivity, e.g.Ilford SFX200, but they are not in general use.

 

It would be interesting to know if Leica have allowed some Near-IR sensitivity in the MM. I suspect it would not have the same highly detrimental effect it had in the M8 but it would always be a potential problem not least for CA.

 

Those posters who have seen significant effects when using even quite pale yellow filters on old lenses should not be surprised. Many old lenses transmit significants amounts of UV. Leica dealt with this when it started to use UV absorbing cement, Absorban, the yellow filters have the same effect.

[jaapv]

Yes they have; an 092 B&W filter works well.

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

On the subject of the MM I'm lost. The original post to which I responded suggested that the sensor in the MM has high red sensitivity. Now it seems that it has low red sensitivity resulting in dark skin tones. If we can sort this out then it will be possible to suggest filters for different applications - otherwise not. The consequence of not resolving this fundamental point will be a continuing slew of contradictory posts which just confuses everyone - including me.

 

Again, it's hard to figure out without having the camera in hand, but from the anecdotal and pictorial evidence:

 

-- It looks like folks mis-spoke (and I might have too--writing too quickly). Since the MM is very dark on skin tones, that actually suggests (unlike Tech Pan) that it's not very red sensitive (since skin is red) and is rather too cyan or green-cyan sensitive. Faces are IMO too dark in many cases, and lack the "life" that you'd find in a normal Agfa or Kodak BW film. So that much makes sense, since people with the camera are reporting that a red filter works directly to lighten skin (too much so in some cases). So an orange filter is probably a good place to start. Of course the colour of the light will also play a role here.

 

-- Tech Pan, on the other hand, produces very light skin tones, because (relative to other BW films) it's red extra- sensitive. So its increased exposure in the red spectrum can be offset with a cyan filter (which is what Kodak's spec. sheet on Tech Pan says too, FWIW).

[kidigital]

I've been experimenting with red, yellow and orange filters on the MM. I'm not certain there are any easy shortcuts ... and I like that. There is a lot of room to end up with a result that matches your vision (as long as you are careful not to overexpose.) Most often, I find that I more effectively get what I want with no filters and some time in the digital darkroom (post processing.)

 

Working with the MM is not for those who want a simplistic, push the shutter and walk away black and white image. The more thought and effort you put into your images before you push the button and afterward through an excellent working knowledge of programs like Lightroom will impact your results in significant ways.

 

There is a steep learning curve in getting the best images out of the MM ... just like there is with most cameras. It takes time and work to develop a process that maximizes results. Personally, I feel like I'm just scratching the surface.

 

But when you put it all together, the MM can deliver results that are luscious. And I find that to be a worthy pursuit.

[Peter Branch]

Again, it's hard to figure out without having the camera in hand, but from the anecdotal and pictorial evidence:

 

-- It looks like folks mis-spoke (and I might have too--writing too quickly). Since the MM is very dark on skin tones, that actually suggests (unlike Tech Pan) that it's not very red sensitive (since skin is red) and is rather too cyan or green-cyan sensitive. Faces are IMO too dark in many cases, and lack the "life" that you'd find in a normal Agfa or Kodak BW film. So that much makes sense, since people with the camera are reporting that a red filter works directly to lighten skin (too much so in some cases). So an orange filter is probably a good place to start. Of course the colour of the light will also play a role here.

 

-- Tech Pan, on the other hand, produces very light skin tones, because (relative to other BW films) it's red extra- sensitive. So its increased exposure in the red spectrum can be offset with a cyan filter (which is what Kodak's spec. sheet on Tech Pan says too, FWIW).

 

It seems that the Tech Pan analogy is indeed wrong. Tech Pan has enhanced red sensitivity and cyan filters can be used to compensate as can a Wratten 11. It is now being suggested that the MM far from having enhanced red sensitivity actually has reduced red sensitivity combined with sensitivity extended into the Near-IR. This is quite different. Given the observations from users about Orange and Red filters this seems credible.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

+1

I've been experimenting with red, yellow and orange filters on the MM. I'm not certain there are any easy shortcuts ... and I like that. There is a lot of room to end up with a result that matches your vision (as long as you are careful not to overexpose.) Most often, I find that I more effectively get what I want with no filters and some time in the digital darkroom (post processing.)

 

Working with the MM is not for those who want a simplistic, push the shutter and walk away black and white image. The more thought and effort you put into your images before you push the button and afterward through an excellent working knowledge of programs like Lightroom will impact your results in significant ways.

 

There is a steep learning curve in getting the best images out of the MM ... just like there is with most cameras. It takes time and work to develop a process that maximizes results. Personally, I feel like I'm just scratching the surface.

 

But when you put it all together, the MM can deliver results that are luscious. And I find that to be a worthy pursuit.