MarkP Posted February 9, 2015 Share #41 Posted February 9, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) In the decades I've used Photoshop, I've never used the burn and dodge tools. Masks, yes, curves and channels, yes. Oh, you're missing out on so much fun Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 9, 2015 Posted February 9, 2015 Hi MarkP, Take a look here Prints 60 x 40 cm: Which Leica does the best job?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
A miller Posted February 9, 2015 Share #42 Posted February 9, 2015 I don’t know if i’m such a terrible photographer, but to be on the safe side i would imagine half a roll (18 pictures) of every person, which, including discount from the lab, gives a total price around 4500 USD.. If you are willing to use the mail, I will do it for you from NYC $1000 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2015 Share #43 Posted February 10, 2015 I live in the Faroe Islands, which couldn’t be selected in the list of countries when i made my profile on this forum. If i should send the films to other countries i’m bound to send by airmail, where X-ray scanners could damage undeveloped films. Digital images isn’t new to me, neither is Photoshop. I’ve been shooting digital for 6 years - first Canon and the last two years Fuji. The question from the start was which digital Leica would be the best for my project, if i made the switch from my trusted M6 to a brand new digital Leica. I don’t know if i’m such a terrible photographer, but to be on the safe side i would imagine half a roll (18 pictures) of every person, which, including discount from the lab, gives a total price around 4500 USD. Bjarni - given your Old Norse name, which I suppose is used only in Iceland and Faroe — I grew up in Sweden where the name is "Bjarne" or "Björn" — I assumed that you had to be in the Faroe Islands, since Iceland is not as remote and as small. I sympathize with your dilemma and am (alternatively) amused and annoyed at the type of responses that you are getting: Good number of howlers here — as this is an international forum I should clarify that a "howler" is a statement of such absurdity that it causes people to "howl" with laughter. The idea of three rolls of 35mm film for 100 pictures for a book is "Alice in Wonderland" if not a howler. Given the type of quality any photographer would want for a book, for many photographers even 18 frames per subject may not be enough, particularly if you end up photographing more 100 people to end up with the 100 book photos that you are happy with. For a project like this, one could easily end up with one or two, or even three, rolls for each of the final pictures — assuming that you end up photographing substantially more than 100 people. I appreciate that you have experience with Photoshop, but feel you ought to try Silver Efex — you can run it under either Photoshop or Lightroom. The advantage of running Silver Efex in Photoshop is that you can run it as a "smart plugin", which keeps all the steps you made in Silver Efex within the TIFF file generated by Photoshop and you can go back and undo anything — you cannot do that running Silver Efex under Lightroom; but Lightroom has the advantage that dodging and burning is much easier than in Photoshop, using the "Radial Filter". (You can also dodge and burn within Lightroom, but I find it easier and better to do it in Lightroom.) Someone said that Silver Efex is not necessary because you can do everything just as well in Lightroom. I process my M-Monochrom pictures first in Lightroom (often applying VSCO presets) in order to see what I want to achieve in Silver Efex, but have found that perhaps only in 1 out of 100 images is the Lightroom image as good as what I get in Silver Efex: it's hard to describe, but the Silver Efex images have better depth and contrast where you need it: much more film-like — and as I said above there's also some of the randomness of film. Someone else has said that Silver Efex is so easy because you can just use it by selecting one of the presets, as there are so many to choose from. This is the road perdition. As I wrote in my post above, SEFEX can be a nightmare when you first start using it, if you try to search through the myriad of presets and sliders to get the combination that you want. No one preset is likely to be anywhere near what you want — and searching and trying many of them is a colossal waste of time. I urge you to look at the video that I linked in my earlier post because it can be the basis of a powerful, fast and effective workflow, once you tune it for what you want. As for the camera, I have no doubt that you would be happy with the M-Monochrom: going directly to a B&W file without the intermediary step of conversion from a color file is a great, liberating step; and M-Monochrom files are so malleable that you can get almost any look that you want, from what I would call the "35mm aesthetic" to a "medium format" film look. I'll be interested in what you finally decide — and also in seeing the book. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted February 10, 2015 Share #44 Posted February 10, 2015 I think that the reason why people use SilverFX over straight LR adjustments is that is works very much like a tone mapping software. It helps you pull out definition out of highlights and shadows while preserving nice mid-tone contrast. I'm sorry but I have to disagree that the presets are a waste of time. There are many people that find three to five presets that work for them as a very good starting point. Especially when you shoots something as unified as a portraiture project in similar lighting conditions, you can apply the same preset to every picture and get predictable results. It is the same as figuring out your processing time and chemicals with film. I have a good friend who doesn't know much about Lightroom or Photoshop and he loves Silver FX. Again, just look at the thumbnails of your picture and choose whichever one you like. It is not that hard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2015 Share #45 Posted February 10, 2015 ...I'm sorry but I have to disagree that the presets are a waste of time. There are many people that find three to five presets that work for them as a very good starting point. Especially when you shoots something as unified as a portraiture project in similar lighting conditions, you can apply the same preset to every picture and get predictable results. It is the same as figuring out your processing time and chemicals with film...Actually, I wrote that going repeatedly looking for presets for each picture is a waste of time. If you look at the video that I linked earlier, you'll see that it is based on selecting one initial preset (I use #11) and one film preset (I use Tri-X) — and then adjusting. The key, however, is to flatten the file in Lightroom (or Photoshop, if you will) before going into Silver Efex. Flattening the file makes a great difference: on the basis of the method used in the video one can develop a range of one's own presets for different types of lighting or looks that one wants. This approach makes the processing very quick as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted February 10, 2015 Share #46 Posted February 10, 2015 In the decades I've used Photoshop, I've never used the burn and dodge tools. Masks, yes, curves and channels, yes. I think the point is there are very few things that need learning in Photoshop (most of it can be ignored even for an experienced user) but brightness, contrast, and dodging and burning are the four most basic things that replicate a darkroom setup and are easily grasped. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 10, 2015 Share #47 Posted February 10, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) brightness, contrast, and dodging and burning are the four most basic things that replicate a darkroom setup and are easily grasped. Sorry Steve but I disagree. I can, but very rarely do, dodge or burn. Its each to their own. Whatever works for your own requirements. I have a variety routeways of working in Photoshop. These do what I want. I don't like being prescriptive though, and would rather do what is needed rather than stick rigidly to any specific tools. To get back to the OP. Given tour digital experience, personally I'd go for the digital M that you can afford. ALL are capable of producing superb images but all will require a degree of 'learning' - they are not like Canons (which I also have) and do need some getting used to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 10, 2015 Share #48 Posted February 10, 2015 There's obviously no obligation to use the dodge and burn tools in Photoshop but IMO the software would be only half as useful without them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 10, 2015 Share #49 Posted February 10, 2015 It doesn't matter how you do it so long as you get what you want. As you need more you can learn how to do it, photoshop has been brilliantly implemented like that. You can jump in as a total newbie and function as you would, quite intuitively, with a darkroom. I agree all you really need is the basics. Contrast, Colour Balance, Dodge and Burn. There are simple and advanced ways to do these things. I do almost everything I need, all of the above, with the Curves Panel, blending modes and masks. In terms of the OP, I think it's a perfect excuse to buy the monochrom, it sounds the perfect fit for that project. But if like me you are going to want to shoot colour too then either the 240 or the M9 would be great. I personally would go for the M9-P and put the extra to your lens choice. Enjoy it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anusia Posted February 10, 2015 Share #50 Posted February 10, 2015 Digital images isn’t new to me, neither is Photoshop. I’ve been shooting digital for 6 years - first Canon and the last two years Fuji. The question from the start was which digital Leica would be the best for my project, if i made the switch from my trusted M6 to a brand new digital Leica.. Once you get use to the MM, its jpegs are good to go without PP. Off topic you might want to look at the Sigma DP3 Merrill for black and white studio use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted February 10, 2015 Share #51 Posted February 10, 2015 The Sigma DP3 Merrill will drive you nuts though. I have a DP2 Merrill and while I love the results, it gets very tedious. The focus is not fast, and once you take the photo you are in a 15s buffer loop. Not ideal for portraiture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted February 10, 2015 Share #52 Posted February 10, 2015 I live in the Faroe Islands, which couldn’t be selected in the list of countries when i made my profile on this forum. If i should send the films to other countries i’m bound to send by airmail, where X-ray scanners could damage undeveloped films. Digital images isn’t new to me, neither is Photoshop. I’ve been shooting digital for 6 years - first Canon and the last two years Fuji. The question from the start was which digital Leica would be the best for my project, if i made the switch from my trusted M6 to a brand new digital Leica. I don’t know if i’m such a terrible photographer, but to be on the safe side i would imagine half a roll (18 pictures) of every person, which, including discount from the lab, gives a total price around 4500 USD. The same lab who should be developing the films. You live on a stunning part of the world. Maybe something to think about: Order enough rolls of film, development set, liquids, and a Plustek 8100 scanner. Develop and scan everything yourself. Judge them on the computer and after selection you send the ones out for drumscanning. I bet that will keep you far away from 4500 USD, which already is far less than the price of a Monochrom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted February 10, 2015 Share #53 Posted February 10, 2015 I don't think you would regret buying the Monochrom. It is a fantastic camera, it will bring you joy, and over the years it will save you time and money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted February 10, 2015 Share #54 Posted February 10, 2015 Sorry Steve but I disagree. I'm sorry but I don't know what you are disagreeing about? If you don't use dodging and burning fair enough, I was recommending it as a way for the OP to see that the basic's of the darkroom, which he understands, are there in Photoshop. There are as others have said plenty of ways to do the same thing, put alienating somebody with little digital experience by launching into essays on Curves and Levels and Masks etc. isn't the way to make a task easy. 'Keep it simple stupid' is the principle to follow. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anusia Posted February 10, 2015 Share #55 Posted February 10, 2015 The Sigma DP3 Merrill will drive you nuts though. I have a DP2 Merrill and while I love the results, it gets very tedious. The focus is not fast, and once you take the photo you are in a 15s buffer loop. Not ideal for portraiture. Well then, for 60 x 40 cm prints in a studio shoot, do you need speed or do you need quality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted February 10, 2015 Share #56 Posted February 10, 2015 Although everyone would love to have ultimate quality, such a slow camera would drive me nuts. I don't mind having to wait 3 months before I develop a couple of rolls. I don't mind having a first look at the photos after a week if I use the digital M. I do mind having to wait 15 seconds for a camera to be able to take the next shot! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted February 10, 2015 Share #57 Posted February 10, 2015 I'm working on a book project, where some of the prints (all portraits) [...] First, consider the doom-and-gloom of new Leica failures to be outliers, unusual cases, and proceed with optimism. Next, making good digital prints is not a dark mystery. If you have done wet-work, there are many resources that translate, for example, Photoshop into terms you will understand and besides, other rendering programs are even easier to use. I say, Go for it with digital. By doing so you will be liberated from the mail-order processing and printing and able to share (if you wish) your work to the 'net as you please. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manolo Laguillo Posted February 11, 2015 Share #58 Posted February 11, 2015 The MM, without doubt. Now you think about 40x60 cm enlargements, but in the future they could be even bigger. The MM will easily satisfy this need. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym911 Posted February 11, 2015 Share #59 Posted February 11, 2015 For black and white prints in 40/60 size you can use any digital M. The best is open to discussion but after using them all ( some I still,have) the best for me is the M8 or M8.2. No other digital M creates black and white like the M8 in print. For web stuff the MM Is unbeatable. Just my view but if you want a distinctive look this is the way to go. If you want amazing quality but a bit mainstream go with Nikon . Best Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted February 11, 2015 Share #60 Posted February 11, 2015 I disagree. For my taste, the M8 creates beautiful B&W for web, but the MM creates wonderfully luminous prints. I guess it depends whether you like a modern high contrast look (M8) or a classic black and white print with lots of tonality in the grays (MM). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.