What I miss from M9 in my M10

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Video and stills are utterly different.

[Jeff S]

And 'fine' prints are another thing altogether, film based or digital. Refinements are the norm; only the tools and procedures have changed

 

Jeff

[Ko.Fe.]

Both and stills are viewed on the same screens. And both are taken by same cameras for sometime now. Like Canon DSLRs.

 

But I admit, I have more privilege here to judge. I know how uncompressed, SOOC  video looks at professional broadcast monitor well before it gets compressed and reaches the end user on the last mile of setup box. 

 

Again, it is different school, rather than standards. I came from broadcast to photography. In broadcast if camera is not set right, it is not professional. To me SOOC is right exposure and color balance on the spot, taken by camera and on the import to LR here is nothing to do. Just resize for the screen or print. And I'm not saying I'm always perfect on this. Far from it.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Ko.Fe.

[Jeff S]

Whatever works for you. But you might benefit from reading up on the history of photography, including the reasons for darkroom techniques and why there are more skilled photographers than skilled printers, And maybe go to more galleries, museums and exhibits to see fine prints done extraordinarily well.

 

Technology may soon replace humans... but I haven't seen evidence of that yet.

 

Jeff

[pico]

Technology may soon replace humans... but I haven't seen evidence of that yet.

 

First will be created AI critics, then AI brokers, bribers, marketers, and finally human suckers will enable via automated trading. Then real photographers will be truly liberated.

[pico]

But I admit, I have more privilege here to judge. I know how uncompressed, SOOC  video looks at professional broadcast monitor well before it gets compressed and reaches the end user on the last mile of setup box.

 

Video is entirely digital, and in a separate display paradigm. All I see of the outcomes is just crap. If crap rings your bell life must be easy. I suspect you have a long and successful career with video visual standards. Blinders are not privileges, they are handicaps.

Edited September 25, 2017 by pico

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Your quality standards talk now? Snobbery is well detected.

My computer graphics went on national TV for programms watched by audience of tens of millions. I run as producer few commercial production. And still working in the broadcast industry. For professionals like me SOOC is the norm. And if it looks like half-product it is not professional. Sorry, different standards, but cameras are almost or exactly the same by now. But resolution might be different. Like 4K live stream vs 640x480 internet picture.

The M10 does not even do video - this is utterly irrelevant.  SOOC ( if I interpret this turbo-talk correctly) may be the norm in TV productions. It is not in photography.

[Ko.Fe.]

Video is entirely digital, and in a separate display paradigm. All I see of the outcomes is just crap. If crap rings your bell life must be easy. I suspect you have a long and successful career with video visual standards. Blinders are not privileges, they are handicaps.

 

It is hard to talk with people who has altitude like yours. 

[pico]

My computer graphics went on national TV for programms watched by audience of tens of millions.

 

Computer graphics - what's that? Vector or other still graphics such as charts, titles, weather maps? We would like to know.

 

It is hard to talk with people who has altitude like yours.

 

It is hard to talk to people who obscure or misrepresent pertinent experience.

Edited September 26, 2017 by pico

[Ko.Fe.]

The M10 does not even do video - this is utterly irrelevant.  SOOC ( if I interpret this turbo-talk correctly) may be the norm in TV productions. It is not in photography.

 

It is the norm, with mobile phones and digital PS. Those camera are most prevalent way of photography. SOOC is the norm with Polaroids. 

 

This image is SOOC from M8.

 

 

 

Guys, I'm leaving you here. Hard to have conversion with those who are not listening.

[jaapv]

Sometimes we have to open up our minds to people outside our narrow specialisation...

BTW, if I have to be honest, that M8 image sucks. The contrast is flat, the colours look like an old slide taken with a 1950ies Canon lens and it lacks crispness. Not surprising given the rather ho-hum jpg output of the M8. A proper M8 image looks totally different.

 

And, in case you didn't notice, the M10 is not  cell phone...

[jmahto]

Very interesting discussion... Still trying to find out why SOOC is important (or where it is important) to a photographer, not casual shooter (like iPhone user). Even for iPhone users there are many photo apps used for final output (look at instagram).

[BerndReini]

Sometimes we have to open up our minds to people outside our narrow specialisation...

BTW, if I have to be honest, that M8 image sucks. The contrast is flat, the colours look like an old slide taken with a 1950ies Canon lens and it lacks crispness. Not surprising given the rather ho-hum jpg output of the M8. A proper M8 image looks totally different.

 

And, in case you didn't notice, the M10 is not  cell phone...

 

Agree to disagree. This photo has nice tonality and looks very filmic. Detail in the shadows and highlights is not a bad thing. 

[jaapv]

Very interesting discussion... Still trying to find out why SOOC is important (or where it is important) to a photographer, not casual shooter (like iPhone user). Even for iPhone users there are many photo apps used for final output (look at instagram).

I didn't even think of that. Every iPhone image I put on Facebook runs through Snapseed.

[jaapv]

Agree to disagree. This photo has nice tonality and looks very filmic. Detail in the shadows and highlights is not a bad thing. 

You may be partly right, but I still think it is not a good example of the technical output an M8 is capable of.

This is actually a good example: Only white point, black point, high-pass 0.8 --> soft light sharpening, nothing else. And on a minuscule JPG too...

 

Note the increased detail, expanded tonal values and general crispness.

 

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!

 

As a positive side remark, what about the persistent myth that a rangefinder cannot capture action?

[adan]

I'm really glad for Ko.Fe's contribution.

 

It struck me very early on in the "Why can't the M10 do video" discussions that there was quite possibly a video-industry standard for out-of-camera color that Leica had to, or wanted to, conform to with the M240 - and which produced the colors I found so unpleasant with the 240. It is important in video - unless one shoots raw video (which the M240 did not) - that one can cross-cut between any camera type without having to do a lot of color-timing (color correction per "take"). The .mpegs or .movs from a Panasonic and a Leica and a Red all need to come out of the camera basically the same, for convenient and consistent editing.

 

But I didn't have the inside knowledge of the details that he provided to back that up.

 

it would not surprise me at all if Leica eventually acknowledges that they left video out of the M10 simply to cut themselves loose from that harness, and output the color the way they darn well wanted, not the way the video industry desired it.

Edited September 26, 2017 by adan

[pgk]

To me SOOC is right exposure and color balance on the spot, taken by camera and on the import to LR here is nothing to do.

 

This can only ever work on a very small percentage of images. The in-camera settings are inherently limited. Software allows for vastly greater refinement when allied to a raw file. And how do you know what settings to use - my Canons and Leicas show very different colour temperatures for the same scene as a simple example? If you want P&S SOOC results every time then so be it, but its certainly a very limiting view of stills photography.

[jaapv]

I'm really glad for Ko.Fe's contribution.

 

It struck me very early on in the "Why can't the M10 do video" discussions that there was quite possibly a video-industry standard for out-of-camera color that Leica had to, or wanted to, conform to with the M240 - and which produced the colors I found so unpleasant with the 240. It is important in video - unless one shoots raw video (which the M240 did not) - that one can cross-cut between any camera type without having to do a lot of color-timing (color correction per "take"). The .mpegs or .movs from a Panasonic and a Leica and a Red all need to come out of the camera basically the same, for convenient and consistent editing.

 

But I didn't have the inside knowledge of the details that he provided to back that up.

 

it would not surprise me at all if Leica eventually acknowledges that they left video out of the M10 simply to cut themselves loose from that harness, and output the color the way they darn well wanted, not the way the video industry desired it.

This, Andy, is a very interesting thought. I don't think it would have been the prime consideration, I still think heat management was the  basic reason, but this aspect may well have been on the table as well.primary

[wattsy]

Guys, I'm leaving you here. Hard to have conversion with those who are not listening.

 

I'm afraid you've opened up a can of worms and put forward an argument that won't gain much traction in a "camera club" orientated forum like this one. There are certain mantras that have to be unquestionably followed and one of these is that all digital images must be originally shot in raw format and post processed before being printed (the print being the only acceptable final medium for a "Leica image"). Any deviation from this orthodoxy is met with scorn.

 

Sometimes we have to open up our minds 

 

Good piece of irony from Jaap.

 

You may be partly right, but I still think it is not a good example of the technical output an M8 is capable of.

This is actually a good example: Only white point, black point, high-pass 0.8 --> soft light sharpening, nothing else. And on a minuscule JPG too...

 

 

Blah blah. white point. blah high-pass blah blah. Like I say, a camera club type mentality.

Edited September 26, 2017 by wattsy

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pgk]

I'm afraid you've opened up a can of worms and put forward an argument that won't gain much traction in a "camera club" orientated forum like this one ...... Like I say, a camera club type mentality.

 

Actually, I don't know any professional photographer who doesn't shoot raw (other than, I suppose, news photographers but then I no longer know any and they seem to be a disappearing breed) - I suppose that pros are simply all 'camera club types' making a living from utilising their 'camera club mentality'. Come on Ian you can do better than this  .