Jump to content

Leica Monochrom - Correct exposure


flanoizele

Recommended Posts

And I guess Walker Evans never took the class on exposing bridges and shadows.

 

Jeff

 

Thats one you have to see in person. It might have detail in the deep shadows (nice) or perhaps it veers to 2D abstraction (also nice). It might also vary print by print. One of the things that we often forget is how much variation there was in the masters' prints. Cartier-Bresson was notorious for a very wide range of print exposures, but even Ansel varied some (albeit much less) in his work. But the rigor we are now asking for in printing is an idealized goal which we can now reach, which was not always the "holy grail" we tend to think it now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats one you have to see in person. It might have detail in the deep shadows (nice) or perhaps it veers to 2D abstraction (also nice). It might also vary print by print. One of the things that we often forget is how much variation there was in the masters' prints. Cartier-Bresson was notorious for a very wide range of print exposures, but even Ansel varied some (albeit much less) in his work. But the rigor we are now asking for in printing is an idealized goal which we can now reach, which was not always the "holy grail" we tend to think it now.

 

I have seen the print, and own vintage prints from various photographers, including Evans. Been doing it for decades. You're preaching to the choir. And my comments still apply.

 

FYI, Adams prints varied widely, and often intentionally, over the years, as this 34 year evolution of Moonrise shows. In fact, this further supports my point that artistic intent matters, not some arbitrary and silly rule like "don't block shadows." Just look at the sky over time.

 

And HCB rarely did his own printing, but he oversaw the process carefully.

 

Have you seen DeCarava's prints, as I posted above?

 

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to expose for the main subject. If some detail in unimportant areas becomes too light, so be it. If you consider the small area important, then you must expose less sacrificing some shadow.

 

HDR is always possible and if you work properly, it need not look like a cartoon. The latest programs will register hand held exposures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Jeff

Guess you are another that misses the point, and rides your high horse...:rolleyes:

cheers Dave S :)

 

I posted examples from 4 noted photographers that clearly support a view contrary to yours. You're the one with rigid ideas, apparently reluctant to accept diverse approaches. You should look at more photos.

 

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jeff

Guess you are another that misses the point, and rides your high horse...:rolleyes:

 

And btw, David, I made my point quite clearly in post #15, taking issue with your stated view. If you have a different point to make, you should engage in the discussion rather than resorting to eye rolls.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original question/issue raised in this thread, I am attaching an example of an image that I was more or less able to successful process to my satisfaction. I shot this through very thick glass from my office.

 

First is the original unedited DNG file., which you'll see looks underexposed, which was necessary to avoid meaningful clipped highlights in the sky (Believe it or not even with this exposure the top right part of the sky was slightly clipped, which I think it completely normal and not an issue).

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!

 

 

Here is the edited version, which attempts to achieve a dramatic contrast while avoiding zones 0 and 10. I have having this printed on baryta paper for kicks and even the lab manager was impressed at how the resulting tones were achieved with such a seemingly underexposed starting point. My theory is that the printed image will look less HDR (which was not my intention, and it should be noted that the bright spots in the corners of the crevices of the roof and side of the large Trump building is snow) as the shadows and highlights will print darker; part of the printing process is to test this theory.

Edited by A miller
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dera Mr Miller,

OMG what an awsome office view...!

I would love to live in NYC, so beautiful!!!

:)

Cheers

 

Back to the original question/issue raised in this thread, I am attaching an example of an image that I was more or less able to successful process to my satisfaction. I shot this through very thick glass from my office.

 

First is the original unedited DNG file., which you'll see looks underexposed, which was necessary to avoid meaningful clipped highlights in the sky (Believe it or not even with this exposure the top right part of the sky was slightly clipped, which I think it completely normal and not an issue).

[ATTACH]421620[/ATTACH]

 

 

Here is the edited version, which attempts to achieve a dramatic contrast while avoiding zones 0 and 10. I have having this printed on baryta paper for kicks and even the lab manager was impressed at how the resulting tones were achieved with such a seemingly underexposed starting point. My theory is that the printed image will look less HDR (which was not my intention) as the shadows and highlights will print darker; part of the printing process is to test this theory.

[ATTACH]421619[/ATTACH]

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Beautiful view! I still maintain that if you would have increased the RAW exposure and let the highlights blow a bit, you would have an even better range of tones with less noise. I'm not a fan of underexposure. If your main subject is the skyscraper then why not expose for it correctly? It appears that the highlights in the sky are going to blow anyway when you bring up the shadows. If your main subject is the sky then I would expose for that (which you apparently did). Nice photo overall. How do you get any work done with that view?

Edited by sm23221
Link to post
Share on other sites

Beautiful view! I still maintain that if you would have increased the RAW exposure and let the highlights blow a bit, you would have an even better range of tones with less noise. I'm not a fan of underexposure. If your main subject is the skyscraper then why not expose for it correctly? It appears that the highlights in the sky are going to blow anyway when you bring up the shadows. If your main subject is the sky then I would expose for that (which you apparently did). Nice photo overall. How do you get any work done with that view?

 

Hi Mike and Mr Shmolinski - Thanks both of you for you thoughtful comments.

 

Mike - I think this is a really good example of why you need to underexpose a bit in cases in which the image is destined for the printer. Not being able to do any of my real work due to this phenomenal view, I of course took the time to bracket my exposures. Just a half a stop more resulted in meaningfully more clipped highlights in the center of the open sky. For web use, this would be no big deal and your point is well taken. But for prints, my main concern is that having a meaningfully greater amount of highlights in that center part of the open sky would result in NO information at all which in the print would translate into NO INK being applied to the clipped areas and I would be left with a variance of tonality b/c the zone 9 highlights have a different tone than an inkless zone 10 whichwould look blotchy.

 

It's relevant to also note that I could have open the shadows a lot more on the building but I restrained myself so as to avoid too much of an HDR look. I stuck with having the sides of the large building in zones 2, 3 and to some extent 4 and I want to see how rich the tonality shows up on the baryta paper.

 

Thanks again and I'm happy to discuss any aspect fo this that you or others question or simply disagree with!

 

Adam

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam -

 

You clearly took a lot of care in the exposure side, and I'm sure your conclusions are right. For me, the screen image has too much sky contrast, HDR, but again, this could be either aesthetic preference (different eyes, different viewpoints) or the difference of print vs. web (compressed). Most people today shoot for the web, but the real proof IMHO is the print.

 

It might be interesting to see the 1/2 stop more reworked like this to see what it would yield.

 

Geoff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Geoff. I am indeed eager to see how this prints on baryta paper and whether my theory that the highlights will be muted prevails (although it will still be a dratic picture, which is how it was in real life). Will report back for sure. I don't think I kept the other bracketed exposures. I just picked one an went with it. Fortunately for me, I have unlimited photographic opportunities up here and need to keep my hard disk above water :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

Another newbie here, trying to understand exposure on my LMM. (BTW, I love the feel of the camera; really serious.)

 

I have read on several sites that I should expose to the left (ETTL) on this camera. If I am shooting outdoor with A, auto, at 320 ISO, and see white clipping in the lcd image, what should I do?  If I see black clippings, what should I do?  I shoot a lot of landscapes -- we live in the suburbs, so no city lights and rain washed streets -- and favor evening as the sun is going down and there are clouds in the west.  I can attach an example if anyone wants to see.  

 

Also, should I use center-weighted, spot, or multi-field?  I have had pros strongly advise one or the other. Sigh!

 

Thanks. Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hello Matt,

 

- in your place, I'd leave the "A" mode and learn "the lighting" with "M" mode in tricky lighting.

- in "A" mode, it's the camera that "adjust it's setting" to have "average exposure"

you can't "precisely tell the camera" what you want the exposure to be.

 

- when you understand how the in-camera reaction in exposure with tricky lighting, then you can rely on your experience

 

- in your place, I'd begin with center-weighted metering aiming at the main subject (remember to use "M" mode or "half-push" in "A" mode)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

 

Monochrom with Fish-Eye Takumar 17mm

 

 

...

Some artifacts may occur...

 

This one is "compressed": banding in sky not seen in DNG file

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Thank you Arnaud.  That will probably be the best piece of fundamental advice I will get.  Over the next while, I will practice center weighted metering on the main subject with a half press on the shutter button. 

 

BTW, do you have any recommendations on videos or tutorials about post processing Leica M images?  In scanning the web, I have not found anything very helpful.  I use Lightroom and Silver Effex Pro in my workflow.  Thanks.  Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not sure about the M246 Monochrom, but on the CCD based Monochrom (Henri), I set profiles. Profile 1 (my default) has -2/3 exposure compsensation. My camera only has centre weighted/average metering, and I tend to have it set in Manual with Auto ISO.

 

It’s only a starting point - you can do a lot in post processing. I don’t use LightRoom anymore, but the approach of starting with the adjustments from the top - exposure, contrast etc - and working down is a good start. I don’t think it takes a lot to get it the way you like - the changes really only need to be subtle. I use the tone curve a lot.

 

Cheers

John

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...