M240 colors - options for better "accuracy"?

[Jon Warwick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ok, ok, I know this has been a big topic with lots written already, and color accuracy is subjective to some degree, but I still don't really comprehend what I could potentially start doing to get more accurate colors out-of-camera from the M240. At the moment I use AWB and process raws in either PS or C1.

 

I've tried the S cameras, and was amazed at the relative accuracy of the S colors - and I want to get closer to this accuracy with the M240 if possible (I often find the M240's greens to be VERY green, and Caucasian skin to be a bit too red).

 

In layman's terms, what are the options to get more accurate out-of-camera colors off the M240? Is it the following?

 

1) use an IR filter? If so, please could someone tell me exactly what filter is suitable (I see UV/IR, IR only, cut IR??). What will this filter achieve in terms of color accuracy?

 

2) xrite style color checker - what is this used for? It seems you use it to build a color profile to add into PS or C1? Do you need to shoot the color checker each and every time you do an important shoot, as you would with a white balance card in manual, to then adjust via a dropper the colors in post? Or is it calibrating the camera and software as a one-time effort?

 

3) if I started to use Manual WB, would that give more accurate color?

 

4) do some lenses give more accurate colors, eg, something like the 50mm APO?

 

Many thanks for your help.

[lct]

You will get much better answers than mine but here's my take FWIW:

1. All filters cutting IRs are UV/IR filters AFAIK. My M240 needs them more than my Sony A7s for instance but less so than my M8.2, depends on camera sensors. 

2. I don't use a color checker. Building color profiles is very easy. I did use one when the M240 was launched but over red/magenta saturation has been fixed by a firmware update since then so i just use the "DNG file neutral" profile in C1 as i don't like the yellowish rendition of the Leica profile and i adjust colors in PS afterwards. When greens look too green, it may come from yellows BTW. You may wish to try the "DNG file neutral" profile or reduce yellow saturation in PS.

3. Yes but it is time consuming.

4. Some old Leica lenses have a different color rendition but as far as current lenses are concerned, i would say no, generally speaking, and the 50/2 apo looks neutral to me.

Happy snaps!

[Peter Branch]

I've had no problems with colour, as opposed to White Balance, since I bought a SpyderCheckr 24 and followed the instructions.

 

A bit tedious to derive the profiles initially which has to be done with care but is not difficult.

 

Also to have to apply them manually in Photoshop CS6 is a bit of a bind, but well worth the effort.

 

Although my current set of 5 lenses are all recent 6-bit etc. there are small but significant differences which the individual profiles sort out. 

 

I did not bother with the SpyderCheckr 48 version as I'm not into food photography or fashion - though obviously it would be even better in some circumstances.

[elmars]

The M240/262 has a known red weakness. I tried to fix it with a Lightroom preset for better red and skin tones. The values for the HSL-control You can find here:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/258338-farbprofil-für-m262-und-m240-2-teil-meines-m262-reviews/?p=3011051

 

Sorry it is in German!

 

Apart from this the white balance is very important. You should shoot RAW and play around first with the white balance control in post production, if You don´t like the colors.

 

Elmar

[bocaburger]

I shoot jpeg at the default settings and have no problems with greens, caucasian skin, or any other color (unless the lights are some bizarre mix of aging fluorescent tubes and I neglect to set a manual WB).    I find it better than whatever LR does with its built-in profle to a dng.

[elmars]

Color is in Your mind. If it is ok for You, it is ok. I never shoot jpg, it is too limited for post production; and I don´t like the colors in many cases.

 

Elmar

[Luke_Miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2) xrite style color checker - what is this used for? It seems you use it to build a color profile to add into PS or C1? Do you need to shoot the color checker each and every time you do an important shoot, as you would with a white balance card in manual, to then adjust via a dropper the colors in post? Or is it calibrating the camera and software as a one-time effort?

 

3) if I started to use Manual WB, would that give more accurate color?

 

I use both Lightroom and C1.  For Lightroom I photograph the ColorChecker card under daylight and tungsten illumination and then use the Adobe DNG Profile Editor (a free download) to create a camera profile from the ColorChecker shots.  Once I install the profile - I can then either manually apply it or set it as the camera default.  For me that corrects the ruddy skin issue I've experienced with the M8.2, M9, and now M240.  With C1, I use the Skin Tone Color Editor to correct an image for ruddy skin and then save the correction as an ICC profile which I can apply to future images.

 

While Auto White Balance generally produces OK results (and is my normal setting), I often find the need to make manual corrections.  In difficult mixed lighting I will photograph a WhiBal card as my first shot of a sequence and then white balance the sequence off that shot.  Mixed lighting can be a particularly difficult challenge as often there is no single white balance setting that produces pleasing color over the entire image.  Both C1 and Lightroom have tools that allow one to selectively apply different white balance settings to different parts of the image.

[don daniel]

Avoid JPG out of camera! Too much saturation, red turns magenta. Since Leica does not allow to adjust colors in the camera menu, there ist no chance to get the right colors in an JPG out of camera.

 

Shoot DNG. Set correct whitebalance afterwards.

 

In Lightroom: Use Adobe standard profile, not embedded profile in camera calibration. The only change in color settings I need is +5 in red hue. This brings the magenta cast back to red. I don't do further profiling.

 

In Capture One, which I prefer. I don't do any profiling. Colors are really good, I think. I only change single colors in special light conditions (artificial light).

[Schrödinger's cat]

I struggled with similar questions for a considerable period of time.  I finally had a rather lengthy conversation with Andrew Rodney, who actually properly understands this stuff, and had him straighten me out.  I researched everything and still came up short until speaking with Mr. Rodney and getting pointed in the right direction.  The stuff in this reply is not something I learned on my own, it's a result of his taking the time to properly educate me on the subject and is simply a feeble distillation of what he teaches.  I take no personal credit whatsoever, and any errors in the simplification below are solely my own.  If it looks like I got something wrong, contact him at digital dog and I suspect he will be pleased to correct my errors.

 

Ok, ok, I know this has been a big topic with lots written already, and color accuracy is subjective to some degree,

 

Color accuracy, when defined as how much a measurement of the qualities of a known standard on the output medium deviates from a measurement of the qualities of the same known standard in the original scene, is scientifically measurable and therefore not subjective.  However, this may not have any bearing on whether the resulting photographs look as you would have them look.

 

 

but I still don't really comprehend what I could potentially start doing to get more accurate colors out-of-camera from the M240. At the moment I use AWB and process raws in either PS or C1.

 

I've tried the S cameras, and was amazed at the relative accuracy of the S colors - and I want to get closer to this accuracy with the M240 if possible (I often find the M240's greens to be VERY green, and Caucasian skin to be a bit too red).

 

First off, watch this video on profiling.  It's not mine, it's from somebody who actually knows what he's talking about and worries about this stuff for a living.  http://www.digitaldog.net/files/DNG%20Camera%20profile%20video.mov

 

Then watch this one also, from the same guy.  http://digitaldog.net/files/Delta-E%20and%20Color%20Accuracy%20Video.mp4

 

 

In layman's terms, what are the options to get more accurate out-of-camera colors off the M240? Is it the following?

 

1) use an IR filter?

 

No.

 

What will this filter achieve in terms of color accuracy?

 

This is not necessary for your camera.

 

2) xrite style color checker - what is this used for?

 

The Colorchecker Passport and similar devices are used to profile your camera sensor for the type of illumination being used.  Like Sunlight or Tungsten or LED or some mix thereof.  Note that this is not the same as color temperature.

 

Do you need to shoot the color checker each and every time you do an important shoot, as you would with a white balance card in manual, to then adjust via a dropper the colors in post?

 

Not in the sense of building a new profile for every shoot unless you are changing types of illumination.  Like Sunlight or Tungsten or LED or some mix thereof.  Note that this is not the same as color temperature.  If you photograph the Colorchecker for every lighting change then you can use the WB squares to manually set the WB in post with the eyedropper tool.   Or the included WB card to set a manual WB in the camera for that matter.

 

Or is it calibrating the camera and software as a one-time effort?

 

Once per type of illumination.  Note that this is not the same as color temperature.  Like Sunlight or Tungsten or LED or some mix thereof.  (there, I've said it three times.  that means it's important  It took me personally quite a bit of research to realize this : )

 

3) if I started to use Manual WB, would that give more accurate color?

 

Shoot raw, in which case WB is not baked into the file and you can set WB after the fact in post.  As a practical matter I prefer to set manual WB at the time of the shooting with an ExpoDisk, a proper balance card, or a coffee filter.  However I also photograph a WB card or a blank frame through an ExpoDisk so I can use it to properly set the WB in post.

 

4) do some lenses give more accurate colors, eg, something like the 50mm APO?

 

Some lenses exhibit a distinct color cast, which can act like a colored filter.  Follow no. 3 above and don't worry about it.

 

If you wish to bring the color of your images, when printed, viewed on your computer, or published to the internet, into agreement with some known standard you should research a completely color managed workflow and resign yourself to some color correction in post.  You cannot accomplish your goals solely in the camera.

 

​Having said that, color accuracy, as defined earlier in this post, is probably less important to you than pleasing color which you may define however you chose.  If you need to make products of fabrics or paint color or stuff like that, you have a different set or requirements.

 

 

[Schrödinger's cat]

by the way Jon, I liked your website.

[jaapv]

 

I struggled with similar questions for a considerable period of time.  I finally had a rather lengthy conversation with Andrew Rodney, who actually properly understands this stuff, and had him straighten me out.  I researched everything and still came up short until speaking with Mr. Rodney and getting pointed in the right direction.  The stuff in this reply is not something I learned on my own, it's a result of his taking the time to properly educate me on the subject and is simply a feeble distillation of what he teaches.  I take no personal credit whatsoever, and any errors in the simplification below are solely my own.  If it looks like I got something wrong, contact him at digital dog and I suspect he will be pleased to correct my errors.

 

Ok, ok, I know this has been a big topic with lots written already, and color accuracy is subjective to some degree,

 

Color accuracy, when defined as how much a measurement of the qualities of a known standard on the output medium deviates from a measurement of the qualities of the same known standard in the original scene, is scientifically measurable and therefore not subjective.  However, this may not have any bearing on whether the resulting photographs look as you would have them look.

 

 

but I still don't really comprehend what I could potentially start doing to get more accurate colors out-of-camera from the M240. At the moment I use AWB and process raws in either PS or C1.

 

I've tried the S cameras, and was amazed at the relative accuracy of the S colors - and I want to get closer to this accuracy with the M240 if possible (I often find the M240's greens to be VERY green, and Caucasian skin to be a bit too red).

 

First off, watch this video on profiling.  It's not mine, it's from somebody who actually knows what he's talking about and worries about this stuff for a living.  http://www.digitaldog.net/files/DNG%20Camera%20profile%20video.mov

 

Then watch this one also, from the same guy.  http://digitaldog.net/files/Delta-E%20and%20Color%20Accuracy%20Video.mp4

 

 

In layman's terms, what are the options to get more accurate out-of-camera colors off the M240? Is it the following?

 

1) use an IR filter?

 

No.

 

What will this filter achieve in terms of color accuracy?

 

This is not necessary for your camera.

 

2) xrite style color checker - what is this used for?

 

The Colorchecker Passport and similar devices are used to profile your camera sensor for the type of illumination being used.  Like Sunlight or Tungsten or LED or some mix thereof.  Note that this is not the same as color temperature.

 

Do you need to shoot the color checker each and every time you do an important shoot, as you would with a white balance card in manual, to then adjust via a dropper the colors in post?

 

Not in the sense of building a new profile for every shoot unless you are changing types of illumination.  Like Sunlight or Tungsten or LED or some mix thereof.  Note that this is not the same as color temperature.  If you photograph the Colorchecker for every lighting change then you can use the WB squares to manually set the WB in post with the eyedropper tool.   Or the included WB card to set a manual WB in the camera for that matter.

 

Or is it calibrating the camera and software as a one-time effort?

 

Once per type of illumination.  Note that this is not the same as color temperature.  Like Sunlight or Tungsten or LED or some mix thereof.  (there, I've said it three times.  that means it's important  It took me personally quite a bit of research to realize this : )

 

3) if I started to use Manual WB, would that give more accurate color?

 

Shoot raw, in which case WB is not baked into the file and you can set WB after the fact in post.  As a practical matter I prefer to set manual WB at the time of the shooting with an ExpoDisk, a proper balance card, or a coffee filter.  However I also photograph a WB card or a blank frame through an ExpoDisk so I can use it to properly set the WB in post.

 

4) do some lenses give more accurate colors, eg, something like the 50mm APO?

 

Some lenses exhibit a distinct color cast, which can act like a colored filter.  Follow no. 3 above and don't worry about it.

 

If you wish to bring the color of your images, when printed, viewed on your computer, or published to the internet, into agreement with some known standard you should research a completely color managed workflow and resign yourself to some color correction in post.  You cannot accomplish your goals solely in the camera.

 

​Having said that, color accuracy, as defined earlier in this post, is probably less important to you than pleasing color which you may define however you chose.  If you need to make products of fabrics or paint color or stuff like that, you have a different set or requirements.

 

 

 

Disagree 100% with the IR filter answer. All digital cameras are IR sensitive to a certain degree, and Leicas more than most due to a thin filter stack (desirable for other reasons) For accurate colours an IR cut filter is indispensable, one can run into insoluble colour problems otherwise, especially on skin tones.

 

As an aside, the Color Checker Passport is extremely useful to synchronize colours between different cameras in one shoot.

[Jon Warwick]

Disagree 100% with the IR filter answer. All digital cameras are IR sensitive to a certain degree, and Leicas more than most due to a thin filter stack (desirable for other reasons) For accurate colours an IR cut filter is indispensable, one can run into insoluble colour problems otherwise, especially on skin tones.

 

As an aside, the Color Checker Passport is extremely useful to synchronize colours between different cameras in one shoot.

 

if I decide to try an IR cut filter to see its effect, is this an example of the correct one ? ..... https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=557&IID=7192

 

Thanks again!

[bocaburger]

Avoid JPG out of camera! Too much saturation, red turns magenta. Since Leica does not allow to adjust colors in the camera menu, there ist no chance to get the right colors in an JPG out of camera.

Jpeg options allow for adjustment of saturation, I find the default setting fine.  But I'm a former Velvia shooter so maybe that's why.  I believe there is a lower-saturation setting but I have not felt the need for it.  I have not yet encountered reds shifting toward magenta.  The few rare color issues I have encountered were mostly my fault for not realizing I was shooting under old or mixed fluorescent lighting and failed to set a custom WB, and fortunately were acceptibly correctible in CS.   I completely understand and appreciate the degree of flexibility of shooting raw compared to jpeg, and have no problem doing so.  But so far I have been pleased with the jpg colors.  Not so the M9 and M8, those I could never trust jpg output.

 

I carry UV-IR filters (mine are Heliopan, which have better and more durable AR coating than the B+W or Leica ones) as I have them leftover from the M8, and in instances of shooting green vegetation in areas of high UV penetration, find them quite useful.  With black synthetics I haven't used them, mostly because I don't realize they were in the shot until after I get home.  So far it's been passable.  

 

And remember, the M240 is full-frame unlike the M8 and does not have firmware correction for cyan corners, so with lenses 35mm and wider you could end up with some added PP.  

[Schrödinger's cat]

Disagree 100% with the IR filter answer. 

 

So do I. (do we have an Emoticon for an embarrassed magenta facial tone )  I ran out and tested for myself.  Now if I can get the blasted uploader to work I'll demonstrate the results.

 

Ah.  There it goes.

 

Should anyone care, this was an M240 M-P handheld (but not very steadily, I was holding my camera with one hand as there wasn't anyplace to set down my beer ) at f8 and 1/125 and ISO 200 with an uncoded Tele - Elmar 135mm f4 and a genuine Leica UV/IR filter.

 

Light was cloudy daylight and the manual white balance was set with an ExpoDisk and the exposure on "A".  I don't generally use "A", but it looked like a good idea at the time.

 

Shot some foliage and other stuff at the same time but observed no difference.  'Course I also believed the Leica literature that said the IR filters were not necessary, so what do I know

 

Crud, now I gotta buy more filters in different sizes.  Never know when I might want to photograph my camera bags again.

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!

[FlashGordonPhotography]

While I generally agree that UVIR filters can be a good thing they are not a good thing on wide lenses. When used on lenses wider than 35mm the filter can introduce some unwanted effects themselves. I do use one on my 28mm cron but definitely not on my 24mm or WATE.

 

Remembering that colour ICC profiles have nothing to do with accuracy, I make a standard dual profile for all my cameras and in some cases lenses, using a colorchecker passport and the XRite software. What profiles actually do is give you CONSISTENCY, if properly created. That means all my camers have, within the limits of their own capabilities, a similar starting point from which to begin editing. Combined with a white balance shot of the colorchecker in each setting where I would want a white balance reference, I can get reasonable colours reasonably easily. I use the side of the Colorchecker Passport with the white balance patches, which allows fast, incremental changes to white balance.

 

Gordon

[jaapv]

if I decide to try an IR cut filter to see its effect, is this an example of the correct one ? ..... https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=557&IID=7192

 

Thanks again!

yes, B&W 486 is ( one of) the correct filter(s).

[jaapv]

While I generally agree that UVIR filters can be a good thing they are not a good thing on wide lenses. When used on lenses wider than 35mm the filter can introduce some unwanted effects themselves. I do use one on my 28mm cron but definitely not on my 24mm or WATE.

 

Remembering that colour ICC profiles have nothing to do with accuracy, I make a standard dual profile for all my cameras and in some cases lenses, using a colorchecker passport and the XRite software. What profiles actually do is give you CONSISTENCY, if properly created. That means all my camers have, within the limits of their own capabilities, a similar starting point from which to begin editing. Combined with a white balance shot of the colorchecker in each setting where I would want a white balance reference, I can get reasonable colours reasonably easily. I use the side of the Colorchecker Passport with the white balance patches, which allows fast, incremental changes to white balance.

 

Gordon

the only side effect of IR cut filters on wide angle lenses ( and not all of them, it depends on telecentricity) is cyan shift in the corners, which is easily corrected by any of the flat field correction tools available in post processing.

[jaapv]

So do I. (do we have an Emoticon for an embarrassed magenta facial tone )  I ran out and tested for myself.  Now if I can get the blasted uploader to work I'll demonstrate the results.

 

Ah.  There it goes.

 

Should anyone care, this was an M240 M-P handheld (but not very steadily, I was holding my camera with one hand as there wasn't anyplace to set down my beer ) at f8 and 1/125 and ISO 200 with an uncoded Tele - Elmar 135mm f4 and a genuine Leica UV/IR filter.

 

Light was cloudy daylight and the manual white balance was set with an ExpoDisk and the exposure on "A".  I don't generally use "A", but it looked like a good idea at the time.

 

Shot some foliage and other stuff at the same time but observed no difference.  'Course I also believed the Leica literature that said the IR filtewrs were not necessary, so what do I know

 

Crud, now I gotta buy more filters in different sizes.  Never know when I might want to photograph my camera bags again.

foliage is not too bad, it shifts to olive/yellow which can look OK. Try a Finnish face in Florida at noon. The only thing to get rid of the magenta and yellow blotches is an 486 filter.

[Schrödinger's cat]

Try a Finnish face in Florida at noon.

 

Why would the Finns go all the way to Florida to race ?

 

EDIT

Wow, I should have Googled first.  Look at all the string bikinis.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[STB]

What's striking about this discussion is the number of posts that make sense only if other participants in this discussion, when it comes to evaluating colour, are flat out incompetent.