M10 colors oversaturated? -Merged thread-

[coupdefoudre]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am not a color or optics scientist so I wonder if the M10 sensor reacts to colors in different ways at different latitudes, just as our eyes do?

 

In the 'old' film days I always used Fuji film for work in Africa and Latin America because it gave a far superior rendition for people of color. If you took Agfa and shot it in the jungles of Brazil it was, to my mind fairly hideous when used to photograph indigenous folks. It was my understanding that film companies tried to make their film so it reflected the reality of where people would likely be using it: Agfa, for example for use in Scandinavia. (Am I off-base here?)

 

I used the M10 extensively in the Himalayas recently and found the imports into LR10 not too bad. I thought the M10 Profile was somewhat better than the Adobe Standard but, ultimately, tweaked one that is close to the one put forward by "Elmars", above.

 

In any case I find the rendition of the M10 somewhat better than that of the M240.

Edited August 10, 2017 by coupdefoudre

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[adan]

As to latitudes - only to the extent that the lighting is different (more direct overhead sunlight, or under rain forest canopies). The M10 sensor doesn't "know" where it is in the world. Even with GPS enabled via the EVF, the sensor is just gonna be suckin' in photons and spitting out electrons the same way everywhere.

 

Of course, skin has its own oddities - it reflects "invisible" colors like UV or infrared, that we can't see, but can be recorded on film (and sensors - see Leica M8)  a bit, and introduce a "blue" or "red" cast to skin's browns (all skin is brown-orange - just lighter or darker brown-orange).

 

As to film "flavors" - I think that has (had) more to do with the visual preferences of the likely users, than the colors or peoples of the places they might photograph. I.E. Agfa films might produce colors that "German eyes" would find truthful and attractive, whether shot on the Baltic or in the tropics. By that, I mean cultural and "learned" preferences, not physical racial differences.

 

BUT - back in the early 70's when Fuji was trying to break into the U.S. market, they had an ad campaign in the Pop/Mod Photo magazines that was pretty blatant about national color perception differences.

 

Pictures of two (apparently identical) pearls... well, why describe it when I can show it! ----------- https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4136/4931293465_15dc7a22dc_b.jpg

 

"Japanese Color, because Japanese Eyes are more sensitive."

Edited August 10, 2017 by adan

[Neko]

 I find the M10 colors a bit over saturated. Any way it depends on the image and the effect or the impression I want to convey. In PP I treat every image individually in Lr. In some cases I find the M10 colors ok out of the box. In others over saturated and sometimes even under saturated. All in all I am very happy with the M10 color rendition and with today´s PP software I can achieve pretty much everything I want.

[Tomek]

What!? M9 colours close to Kodachrome colours? You're kidding, right? They're worlds apart.

 

In your opinion. I think Don Morley's experience and career as a professional photographer makes his view equally valid.

In my opinion they are close to Kodachrome too. Unfortunately, we are not able to make any tests - even I still have some amount of Kodachrome films in my refrigerator

[Eric1]

I think images from the M10 look like Provia Film...but i think this is mostly a fake debate because it depends on how you expose your images. Colors will pop more if you under-expose on a digital camera than if you over-expose. I also have never encountered any professional in the field of photography who thinks hard about the sensor color in a camera. Pro's talk about lenses and images. It's amusing that amateurs spend so much time worried about the right look for them because ultimately it doesn't matter. The subject you shoot and the lens perspective you use is all that matters. No client has ever asked me if the sensor on my camera was the right color.

[Overgaard]

I too like the colors of the Leica M10, and I find the Adobe Standard profile mostly better than the Leica M10 built-in. The Adobe Standard gets the blue/purple under control, mainly. 

 

I think one can get pretty neutral or accurate results with manual whitebalance. X-rite is also a way to do it, but lots of work for each shot in my opinion.  

 

Then next comes personal preference, of course. For some types of light and countries I prefer warmer than neutral, for other it's the other way. 

 

Color is not that easy to adjust right for one self. Then when you get others looking at it they have their opinion (and we all see colors different). 

[robert blu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting thread with many useful suggestion I'll try and evaluate on my calibrated Eizo and on prints.

 

Personally from my experience with the M10 I do not find a solution, a preset or a way to work  which is good for all the images. I find each image (or at least most of the interesting images) need its own treatment depending on light situation, light or shadows, more light or more shadow in the frame, portrait where skin color needs a special attention or landscape (mountain or sea or urban?) with no human presence in it...

 

I feel I'm not so picky as others are, most of times I do not look for the "perfect" reproduction of colours (I'm not photographing to make catalogs where it would be essential) but I look for a colours palette which renders the mood, the atmosphere, the feeling I have when I photograph.

 

Just my two cents, thanks to all contributors sharing their experiences, grazie 

 

robert 

Edited August 17, 2017 by robert blu

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Hi

I have just spent the last hour plus looking through the M10 picture thread. There are some amazing pictures in this thread especially the B&W conversions. Most of the color versions to my eye look over saturated and a few look borderline nuked............not sure if its user added saturation in post process............ or that's the new Leica norm for this new sensor. 

 

So my question to the posters is, is this the norm or just your own personnel preference.................like I said there are many fantastic shots, just too saturated for my own prefeance

 

Some of the B&W conversions look fantastic

 

Neil

[jaapv]

On what screen were you looking? Such things vary by monitor and settings.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

On what screen were you looking? Such things vary by monitor and settings.

Its a Lenovo Think Vision....................modern screen for windows

 

Neil

[elmars]

Recently there was a long thread about color saturation and the M10. I am on the way, so I cannot search it in tapatalk. If You dont find it, send me in three days a PM and I will give You the link with useful hints.

[mdemeyer]

Bump in response to the recent posted question on the topic.

[adan]

Here's that thread elmars mentioned: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/275413-m10-colors-oversaturated/page-3

 

Neil: you do B&W darkroom work. Is there such a thing as a camera or a film (excluding Kodalith ) that produces too much contrast for your taste? Or do you expect to control contrast with your developing and printing techniques?

 

These days, digital cameras do not produce any particular saturation (unless one is shooting jpegs) - there is no "norm". Saturation - along with every other characteristic of a raw or .dng picture - is entirely under the control of the photographer via their own software settings in LR, Photoshop, Capture One, etc. etc.

 

The base, default contrast curve applied to files from the M10 (by in-camera software) seems to be a bit higher than the default in the M240, and that will make pictures from the M10 look a bit punchier straight out of the box. Probably because many photographers coming from the M9 thought the M240 default color/contrast/saturation was too flat and dull by comparison, so Leica decided to make the M10 default look snappier and more "slide-like".

 

But that is just a setting - grab the saturation or contrast or shadow sliders in the basic developing panel of your software, and push them around, and you can get something different.

 

The only thing I see in the "M10 pictures" thread that drives me batty is the number of pictures with purplish/magenta white balance. Which I think is the result of people trusting to the "As Shot" or "Auto" WB choices in Adobe software. Which I avoid as though they were rattlesnakes (or in Malaysia, king cobras)!

 

I never let Adobe make decisions for me.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Here's that thread elmars mentioned: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/275413-m10-colors-oversaturated/page-3

 

Neil: you do B&W darkroom work. Is there such a thing as a camera or a film (excluding Kodalith ) that produces too much contrast for your taste? Or do you expect to control contrast with your developing and printing techniques?

 

These days, digital cameras do not produce any particular saturation (unless one is shooting jpegs) - there is no "norm". Saturation - along with every other characteristic of a raw or .dng picture - is entirely under the control of the photographer via their own software settings in LR, Photoshop, Capture One, etc. etc.

 

The base, default contrast curve applied to files from the M10 (by in-camera software) seems to be a bit higher than the default in the M240, and that will make pictures from the M10 look a bit punchier straight out of the box. Probably because many photographers coming from the M9 thought the M240 default color/contrast/saturation was too flat and dull by comparison, so Leica decided to make the M10 default look snappier and more "slide-like".

 

But that is just a setting - grab the saturation or contrast or shadow sliders in the basic developing panel of your software, and push them around, and you can get something different.

 

The only thing I see in the "M10 pictures" thread that drives me batty is the number of pictures with purplish/magenta white balance. Which I think is the result of people trusting to the "As Shot" or "Auto" WB choices in Adobe software. Which I avoid as though they were rattlesnakes (or in Malaysia, king cobras)!

 

I never let Adobe make decisions for me.

Andy

I hope that everyone who has posted in the M10 picture thread reads this thread and can find where the saturation slider is in there particular software................. and slide it about 10% to the LEFT (MINUS)

 

Neil

[adan]

Ennh - I slide my saturation control about 10 points PLUS with the Leica digitals (15-20 PLUS with Canon SLRs). Since my pix have won a few national awards (and they look and print just right to me), I'm happy with that.

 

But de gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum. In any event, it isn't a camera issue, just a taste issue. The M10 can suit any taste.

[Guest JMF]

Andy

I hope that everyone who has posted in the M10 picture thread reads this thread and can find where the saturation slider is in there particular software................. and slide it about 10% to the LEFT (MINUS)

 

Neil

 

 

Hi, I find the M10 Lightroom 6.10 Camera calbration preset  oversaturated and  have  it permanently switched to Adobe standard.

 

JM.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Hi, I find the M10 Lightroom 6.10 Camera calbration preset  oversaturated and  have  it permanently switched to Adobe standard.

 

JM.

There you go Andy

[pgh]

Most tend to oversaturate, including what I've seen here, and including the built in profile. It's all down to taste. As mentioned above, lots of judges like that sort of look too. (I don't see why this matters).

 

But the M10 shoots RAW - final versions are whatever you want - to an extent. I set at 0 to -10 generally - amongst a number of other settings that I'm still working out.

 

The Leica files do not hold up to the Sony sensor quite as well in terms of recovering smooth tonal range IMO.

They have a great look all their own, but if you're using a Nikon or a Sony and used to pushing files this way and that to get smooth transitions from deep shadows or near blown out highlights, you won't be able to push as much - and this includes if you're going for flatter, more neutral looking final image from a rather contrasty original. The M10 files you can push, but just not as much before things start looking, well, off. 

Edited September 9, 2017 by pgh

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[evikne]

After reading this thread I've capitulated and now realize that the colors from the M10 profile really aren't the best. There were many pictures I did not manage to look right, even by using the white balance and saturation/vibrance sliders. Now I have changed all the images to Adobe Standard Profile and the colors look much more natural.

 

But I still think that the most important factor to get natural colors is to make sure that the white balance is correct. Therefore I use my WhiBal white balance card, eventually an ExpoDisc, as often as I can.

 

Edit:

It is a bit important to point out that changing the color profile also requires a different white balance. When using the white balance pipette on a white balance card in a picture with the Adobe Standard profile, one get a different result than with the Leica M10 profile. So when I changed the color profile, I also had to set a new white balance on all the pictures (a bit more magenta and yellow).

Edited September 10, 2017 by evikne

[mdemeyer]

You might also try the modified Adobe profile (entry 18 in this thread, I think) if you are experimenting. I didn't create it, but have found it to be very satisfying to achieve what I feel (calibrated monitors and all that...) to be a very natural starting point.