colint544 Posted September 1, 2014 Share #41 Posted September 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I love how passionate people can become on internet forums, when the subject of the M Monochrom comes up. I include myself - I adore my M Monochrom - I've been shooting it daily for two years now. The shooting experience just seems to get better with time - it's a camera, I think, that you learn. An argument which comes up often is the one which goes - "if you like black and white so much, why not just shoot black and white film, and save yourself a fortune?" I think that if you shoot your MM a lot, it doesn't cost a fortune per shot, but if you shoot a lot of film, you might eventually spend the price of the MM body. Besides, the two formats are not mutually exclusive, and there's something deliciously tangible about negatives, as opposed to hard drives. Here are some shots I took at the fabulously ruined St. Peter's seminary, in Cardross, Scotland. The first two pictures were shot in 2006, on my M6 and 21mm Elmarit ASPH (I've since sold this lens, and wish I hadn't), using Tri-X film. The other pictures were shot in 2014 on my M Monochrom, on a 50mm Summilux ASPH, and a 28mm Summicron. Unless you're making enormous prints, you'd be hard-pressed to see much difference between the film shots, and the digital shots. I've exhibited these images as (small) prints, and nobody seemed to notice or care about anything other than the content. I think that's one of the nice things about the M Monochrom - its images really can sit very nicely alongside black and white analogue shots. Oh, and I think the second picture proves that it isn't only digital that can give you blown highlights. Best wishes all, Colin 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/233114-it-only-shoots-bw/?do=findComment&comment=2661323'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 1, 2014 Posted September 1, 2014 Hi colint544, Take a look here It Only Shoots B&W!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wilfredo Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share #42 Posted September 1, 2014 Colin: Thank you for sharing these. In my experience one of the things I most love about the MM are the rich tones it produces. Personally, I'm no longer tempted to use any of my film cameras. I find that the MM surpasses film, and this statement is not meant to start a riot here. I was one of those persons who once thought digital photography could never surpass film but that is no longer the case. Just like my previous M8, I feel the MM has a unique signature. Most of the time I can tell an MM shot when I see one. To me it is a genuine evolution, the next evolutionary leap in B&W photography. On another note, if ever I am in your neck of the woods I would love photographing in that place. It reveals the decrepit state of religion today which is another topic close to my heart. Religion Is Garbage. Why Bother?. The faded sign on the wall has a very Buddhist message. Something has died in that place. The place has become a carcass, and you've captured that feeling well. Cheers! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share #43 Posted September 1, 2014 I think this applies to most of us. The thing (for me at least) that made me get the MM is that it forces me to think in B/W; there´s just no other alternative available. Just like my old M2 with TriX, or my Rolleiflex with Neopan 400. And, persevering with this, one will slowly get better at ´seeing´ a scene as a B/W image; having the option to choose afterwards just will not do that for you. Obviously, the world is full of subjects, scenes and situations that simply won´t work in B/W. One has to accept that and live with it. Just like most of us have to live with being without an 800 mm lens, or a Noctilux, or a 15 fps motor drive. I think many of us share your thoughts. I'm not shutting the door on Color photography but at a poetic level, B&W simply touches something deep down inside of me that Color doesn't seem to reach all the time, perhaps because it's too raw? Just think of an Ansel Adams print in color, and it will lose it's magic. I would love a Noctilux, but I suspect I will never own one, but the universe is always full of surprises, so who knows? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share #44 Posted September 1, 2014 I absolutely trust the words of who loves unconditionally the MM and myself would love to have one but something restrain me. It might be my inability or simply a different way of feeling but I am not able to have a full awareness of the mental transposition in B&W of the scene that I have in front of me. So, apart from some specific situations, I could not decide if it is better to shoot in color or in black and white. I recognize the great beauty of the latter, but even if a little more than half of my photos with M9 are then converted, many images just look better if I leave them in color. For example, some in which one or two color are the dominant "actors".In my approach to photographing matters a lot if a situation strikes me and this depends more on the content of the action, so I'm not much to think whether it will be better in color or in B&W. Then I will see... Maybe I'm just too lazy but my ideal would be a camera that has the same quality in color and in black and white conversion... I hear you. In my perfect world my main Leica would produce the same level of excellence in Color, as it does in B&W, but alas that is not to be, and although I've seen some excellent B&W files from the M240, most of what I've seen has not convinced me. The M9 gives you a middle ground, and it sounds like it suits you very well. I can't say I always have "a full awareness of a mental transposition of the scene that I have in front of me," But something is operating in me that allows me to see, more and more, an image in it's B&W potential, and honestly, sometimes it is a surprise to capture something I didn't anticipate, as if there were another sense operating in me, beyond my conscious knowing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldash Posted September 1, 2014 Share #45 Posted September 1, 2014 I only watch B&W movies, mostly of the 1930's and early 1940's! My Leica 3G gets fed only Plus X, and I keep the lenses out of focus for that ethereal experience and great bokeh! A pox on reality! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_OOF Posted September 1, 2014 Share #46 Posted September 1, 2014 Wilfredo, in my very limited experience (not possessing a Monochrome but just by looking at pictures on the net), I formed the idea that the ability of the MM is to produce images that, as you say "in their richness of tone", keep strength and ability to excite with no need to be supported by an excessive "push" in contrast or in the shadows. I am very satisfied with the M9 but In my B & W conversion. also if I feel to reach often a good impact, examining well the situation it seems to me that this happens at the expense of some "simplification" in tonal transitions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richfx Posted September 1, 2014 Share #47 Posted September 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I would love to see some of the photos with the Canon lenses. If you don't wish to post them here please send me a PM and I can share my e-mail with you. I don't think there are any bad lenses on the MM. These older lenses probably give the image a very classic look. That's a plus IMHO. Cheers! __________________ Wilfredo Wilfredo: Here are several shots at a local street fair yesterday with the Canon 35 f/1.8 LTM. All are ISO 1000 and f/5.6 or f/8, processed in SEP 2. Rich 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/233114-it-only-shoots-bw/?do=findComment&comment=2661612'>More sharing options...
XVarior Posted September 1, 2014 Share #48 Posted September 1, 2014 Since day one of its existence and until today, the MM is my ultimate tool, no matter how long it gonna takes me to get one, but I'm getting one, sooner or later. On the meanwhile I will be practicing and getting ready for it using my M9 :-) I wish that someone on this forum with an MM can send me a nice DNG file of his choice so I can do some PP on it to see how far it could be taken and what it can be done. Can you Wilfredo? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share #49 Posted September 1, 2014 Since day one of its existence and until today, the MM is my ultimate tool, no matter how long it gonna takes me to get one, but I'm getting one, sooner or later. On the meanwhile I will be practicing and getting ready for it using my M9 :-) I wish that someone on this forum with an MM can send me a nice DNG file of his choice so I can do some PP on it to see how far it could be taken and what it can be done. Can you Wilfredo? Send me a PM. I'll be happy to share something with you. I suspect the barrier for most is the insane price of a Leica MM. I have to admit that I don't dwell on it, I took the plunge, it was a financial sacrifice, but I haven't looked back. If you own an M9, you already know Leica doesn't come cheap. I never owned the M9, I went from the M8 to the MM, but I can't tell you how much I'm enjoying my images when it all comes together. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
XVarior Posted September 1, 2014 Share #50 Posted September 1, 2014 I can imagine. My email is roudy at mac dot com, waiting for some DNG files! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgenper Posted September 1, 2014 Share #51 Posted September 1, 2014 I can imagine.! If you need even more raws than Wilfredo´s generous contribution, Jono Slack still has a number of MM files for download here. I used them before deciding to get my MM, and found them very helpful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fursan Posted September 1, 2014 Share #52 Posted September 1, 2014 Barring those that unfortunately physically suffer from being unable to see color, b&w photography is unnatural. We see in color, the world around us is in color. Early photography, due to limitations in technology was restricted to b&w. Remember when technicolor hit the movie screens. That one chooses, consciously, to shoot in b&w is a personal decision..for whatever reason. Some might feel a nostalgia for days gone by. Might be other reasons too. But b&w images do not exist in nature, nor in a camera without specifically manipulating during of after the image capture. And either before or after the image is recorded on the Capture medium. I, too, like to see some images in b&w. I use my M7 or MP, a HP5 or Tri-x, and presto.. Nostalgia and preferance. I do not intend to buy a MM currently. My M8 does it well enough except the real thing...film. I can understand the love for b&w, and the superb MM. And M cameras in general. This enthusiasm, I feel equally with the golden rays of the sun in color and the brilliance Of fresh vegetables in a market. No better and no worse than superb image in b&w or color. Only the technology has advanced. We still see in colour, or visit an ophthalmologist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share #53 Posted September 1, 2014 Your views above are appreciated. The intention here is not to say that one form is better than the other. Going back to my original point, B&W photography whether it's natural or not, need not be a limitation. I can see why color films have a greater preference, but we are not talking about the same thing. Artistically, nothing needs to be natural. Going back to Ansel Adams, he could have done his iconic work in color, at least some of it, but he didn't. I think he would have embraced the MM. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fursan Posted September 1, 2014 Share #54 Posted September 1, 2014 Wilfredo, I do agree with what you say. And Color and B&W both have a role in artistic and/or other forms of photography. I think Steve MCcury too has, and could have shot all in B&W, but most of his images ( and the iconic one ) is shot in color. In our photography ( hobby or professional ) none is better than the other. Take care. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted September 1, 2014 Share #55 Posted September 1, 2014 How does or does not an indidual's ability to see or not see color enter into this discussion? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted September 1, 2014 Share #56 Posted September 1, 2014 I guess you can't see it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 1, 2014 Share #57 Posted September 1, 2014 Going back to Ansel Adams, he could have done his iconic work in color, at least some of it, but he didn't. I think he would have embraced the MM. Adams worked extensively in color….examples here…including some of the same locations as his b/w work. He came close to producing a book on color theory using some of his known works. [There are one or two books published after his death that show a cross-section of his color images.] Color didn't allow the control, at the time, that Adams sought, but he was clearly not oblivious to its potential, nor averse to its use. And, yes, he embraced digital long before it became a reality, correctly predicting that it would change/enhance photographic methods. His enthusiasm wouldn't have been limited to be the MM for b/w. Jeff BTW, the first color photographic attempts were made in the 1840's, not long after the first successful b/w photos. But it took a couple of decades to create more stable colors, and of course a lot of better technology in the decades following. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 2, 2014 Share #58 Posted September 2, 2014 Actually the first successful colour photograph was by James Clerk Maxwell in 1861. By the early 1900s the additive process was well established, with photographers like Albert Kahn producing work the was quite accomplished. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 2, 2014 Share #59 Posted September 2, 2014 Actually the first successful colour photograph was by James Clerk Maxwell in 1861. Yep, I'd say that's a couple of decades after the 1840's. Others would argue of course with the definition of 'successful' (red limitations, color stability, etc.) Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 2, 2014 Share #60 Posted September 2, 2014 Well, stable enough as we can still see it today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.