Adam Posted September 5, 2015 Share #21 Posted September 5, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) WTF does organic mean here? It is explained in the post as "the more realistic depiction". You might not agree with the post, or even have issues with the approach, but you should have no trouble reading it, should you now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 Hi Adam, Take a look here Leica's organic rendering versus plasticized Sony 7RII. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
CheshireCat Posted September 5, 2015 Share #22 Posted September 5, 2015 Do you see what raw converter(s) have been used and the settings chosen by the OP? Nope. It would be nice the OP could tell us - just out of curiosity. These comparisons cannot be made without at least matching WB, let alone exposure... and don't get me started on sRGB. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted September 5, 2015 Share #23 Posted September 5, 2015 Also note that the "plasticized look" can be due to the tone mapping algorithm displaying a raw image with a high dynamic range on a normal display. In my opinion, the higher the dynamic range, the less realistic the rendering on current gen displays is. Same as with HDR files: quite difficult to render the entire dynamic range without the "weird overdone HDR effect". Future HDR displays will fix this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
uhoh7 Posted September 5, 2015 Share #24 Posted September 5, 2015 The M240 needs more PP than M9. The A7r2 need more than the 240. I don't know how the APO really does on the r2, but the straight 50 Cron is real good on the stock sonys. 50 Lux asph is awful at infinity. Anyway it is weeks of practice to learn the little touches to make the Sony RAWS sing. First thing is change the Camera Calibration. Camera standard is pretty good in LR. The default is crap. Once you get it down it's not so hard, and it gets hard to tell differences. Kolari has just announced the thin cover glass mod is available for the r2. That will be another animal entirely. I like my M9 bestest. Second best for me would be the 240. I would not own an r2. But I gave my A7.mod some love and bought her a new case: L1038349 by unoh7, M9 75 Lux Here tonight with my pet elk and 30 secs PP: Pet Elk by unoh7, A7.mod Canon LTM 100/2 WO She don't mind Sony, but AF? She'll charge ya! LOL and I'm not kidding. No Q for me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bab Posted September 5, 2015 Share #25 Posted September 5, 2015 The reality is the Leica image looks like an image made looking through glass it has the look of a familiar image you have seen for years. Compared to my Fuji images when sharp focus is achieved on either body the Leica files are clearly distinctive! This is a look that can be gotten without PP ot LR expertise however if you have never worked with Leica files you would never know the difference . It's true sometimes the Leica is not up to the tasks but when it is no system has the same look, and so no system can be directly compared because they all seem to have their own unique look until you fool with them pulling, masking and stretching the files to look the same with software. First making the financial commitment to buy into a Leica system then using it until you master it by that time your hooked and any other looking files just aren't the same. I had a pioneer elite TV for 12 years it was time because of a hot spot to get a new tv I choose a Sony it's nice its sharper but the picture is not real looking to me after 8 months it's too fakey if you know what I mean. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 5, 2015 Share #26 Posted September 5, 2015 The issue is not so much the clarity but the behaviour with colours. I've owned the A7R. It does have a different colour tone to the sensor on the M240. Of course it has. The Bayer filter will undoubtedly be different. But that is irrelevant as the user will set the colour to his own taste in postprocessing anyway, and if needed the cameras can be matched to virtually identical colour performance if you colour profile them using a colour chart. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted September 5, 2015 Share #27 Posted September 5, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Perhaps some of the differences you guys are seeing are explained in the recent DPR article dealing with Sony RAW compression, some interesting observations....... http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2834066212/the-raw-and-the-cooked-pulling-apart-sony-raw-compression Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Root Posted September 5, 2015 Author Share #28 Posted September 5, 2015 So which was which? My preference for the lower pic is probably the wrong answer! The top photo is the Leica and bottom picture is the Sony. I should have labeled the pictures but did not know how to attach labels to photographs in the context of this forum, but the pictures have the file names "leica" and "sony" and file names appear as captions when a person clicks on the pictures for a larger view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 5, 2015 Share #29 Posted September 5, 2015 So no raw files available? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 5, 2015 Share #30 Posted September 5, 2015 In the uploader screen there is a link "add to post" next to the small image icon. Click that and the attachment will be put in the body of the image. I've edited your post to do so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Root Posted September 5, 2015 Author Share #31 Posted September 5, 2015 So no raw files available? I would be pleased to share the raw files, but do not know how to post anyhthing other than dumbed down jpg to this user forum. Perhaps someone can give me a brief on how to upload the raw files to this user forum so individuals can pixel peep and tweak the files to their hearts content. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Root Posted September 5, 2015 Author Share #32 Posted September 5, 2015 In the uploader screen there is a link "add to post" next to the small image icon. Click that and the attachment will be put in the body of the image. I've edited your post to do so. Thanks for these directions and I'll give it a go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 5, 2015 Share #33 Posted September 5, 2015 I would be pleased to share the raw files, but do not know how to post anyhthing other than dumbed down jpg to this user forum. You may wish drop them in a dropbox. Easy to do. https://www.dropbox.com/en/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted September 5, 2015 Share #34 Posted September 5, 2015 You can't upload the raw files to the forum but you can put them in dropbox or similar cloud storage, and provide a link to them here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 5, 2015 Share #35 Posted September 5, 2015 Thanks for these directions and I'll give it a go. As I said, already done Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Almulla Posted September 5, 2015 Share #36 Posted September 5, 2015 Some artists prefer a thinner brush, others prefer a thicker/wider brush. Approx 1 or 1 ½ years ago on with my Fuji X100s I found converting the image from Raw to JPG in camera was superior to whatever software I tried it with on my Mac, I think I tried LR and either DXO or ON1, not sure. Just saying whatever tool a person feels comfortable with will work and so many variables affect final outcome, including whatever bias we each have. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted September 5, 2015 Share #37 Posted September 5, 2015 The top photo is the Leica and bottom picture is the Sony. I should have labeled the pictures but did not know how to attach labels to photographs in the context of this forum, but the pictures have the file names "leica" and "sony" and file names appear as captions when a person clicks on the pictures for a larger view. Then I was right the Sony looks better Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loren Posted September 5, 2015 Share #38 Posted September 5, 2015 WTF does organic mean here? It means the picture is composed of carbon atoms bound in either rings or long chains that are attached to hydrogen and oxygen atoms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Root Posted September 5, 2015 Author Share #39 Posted September 5, 2015 raw pictures can be downloaded from public dropbox at: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/rxs6elnb4auhwad/AAAO43hnCfRzZvJyklXQqUQGa?dl=0 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Root Posted September 5, 2015 Author Share #40 Posted September 5, 2015 Then I was right the Sony looks better Then I was right the Sony looks better I had no intention to conclude that one render is better than the other for all audiences, so we need to be cautious in the use of such unqualifide and over-simplified adjectives that risk becoming a gross over-simplification and digression in the intention of the initial posting. My clientele comprised of my wife and daughter decided, independent of each other in a blind to manufacture test, that they perceive the Leica image to be a more realistic depiction of what I shot. That was my criteria for evaluating the two renderings and our conclusions according to that criteria was unanimous without privy to the decision of others, so my tests were sufficiently conclusive for my personal purposes to decide and return the Sony and return to using the Leica digital body. My approach to evaluating the rendering of the two pictures was not intended to be scientific. My approach to choosing qualities of one picture over the other lacks statistical meaning with no sample set, but for my intent and purposes the Leica rendering style/approach is the better choice for my photographic purposes. The raw files are shared because I hope someone can demonstrate how the Sony file can be tweaked to look more organic according to subjective viewpoint of my audience, in which case I would entertain jumping the Leica ship to use Sony. However, I will most likely always have an affinity for my Leica lenses for use on any body made by any manufacturer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.