jaapv Posted August 30, 2019 Share #21 Posted August 30, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) You are entitled to your opinion, but In all honesty it doesn’t mesh with reality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 30, 2019 Posted August 30, 2019 Hi jaapv, Take a look here M10, the new M9?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Viv Posted August 30, 2019 Share #22 Posted August 30, 2019 Post-processing was being done from the earliest days of film. Burning, dodging, cropping. Nothing to do with fish, although digital cameras certainly have chips. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted August 30, 2019 Share #23 Posted August 30, 2019 (edited) 45 minutes ago, nejad_b said: These two images are taken using APO 75 f2. not an extreme condition (hazy with some clouds masking the sun). Unfortunately file size limit in here make the images grainy. Yes the firmware is the latest, after all Leica had it for 3 months 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! Hello Nejad, Quite different indeed. Are these JPEG generated from each camera ? How about DNG files ? Edited August 30, 2019 by a.noctilux Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted August 30, 2019 Share #24 Posted August 30, 2019 3 hours ago, dkmoore said: Can you post a daytime image this is an example, especially the foreground is typical for what we’re talking about. It is a color profile that is IMO very close to Kodak’s Elite Chrome slide film. Which was not a disaster in itself, but it is a bit of a pain in the ass if you can’t change the color palette because your sensor(readings) are unchangeable. You can’t just choose another film here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 30, 2019 Share #25 Posted August 30, 2019 With digital you complete the work In Lightroom I fail to see any philosophical difference. The tools may vary, the process remains the same. Cook in ACR or boil in developer. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted August 30, 2019 Share #26 Posted August 30, 2019 30 minutes ago, jaapv said: reality is a very difficult concept/argument when it comes to people judging colors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted August 30, 2019 Share #27 Posted August 30, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1 hour ago, nejad_b said: These two images Actually I find the 240 version much more credible than the M10 version here, but maybe I’m trained in recognizing yellow fever now 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 30, 2019 Share #28 Posted August 30, 2019 Personally I always found the M 240 one of the most difficult cameras to get the colours right. Still, I have no problems with the 240 reds, nor with yellows on the M10 DNGs I tried out. Maybe because I trained in Photoshop. These unfinished snaps tell me absolutely zero. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkmoore Posted August 31, 2019 Share #29 Posted August 31, 2019 well, shots in daylight and shots with cloud cover are different but I don't see anything "wrong" other than environmental haze, which can be cleaned up in Lightroom in no more than 1-2 seconds. Not sure what you are expecting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 31, 2019 Share #30 Posted August 31, 2019 (edited) On the original topic. Yes, Leica tweaked the color profile of the M10 over the M(240) to bring up greens and blues a bit and suppress an overall red tint the 240 had (compared to M9). You have to use the "Embedded M10" profile to see that, however (Leica's idea of good colors) - using the "Adobe Standard" profile (Adobe's idea of good colors - see below) is not as pleasant and M9-ish. Conversely, as the linked article says, the M10 reds are a tad more orange - good for some skin tones, otherwise a matter of taste and situation. I shot an orange MG sports car with both M9 and M10 back in 2017 - M10 was more true-to-life, M9 added a lot of magenta to the orange. And Leica did impose a much stronger default contrast curve, which also enhances saturation (but suppresses dynamic range). Fortunately one can remove the contrast and lighten the shadows when max DR is desired, or stick with the M9/Kodachromy default. Best of both worlds. As to the M10 yellow cast. Possibly - but if one is shooting raw/DNG, white balance is ultimately a function of the processing, not the camera. I set my own default WB for the M10 at 4950°K by testing a gray card in midday sunlight - now I have no yellow cast. (Well, I say "now" - but actually I had that figured out in April 2017, a week after the camera arrived.) Newbie mistakes like using As Shot WB or Auto WB (Adobe's opinion of correct WB) may reintroduce the yellow cast. Thus I avoid them like the plague. Adobe may write a nice software interface overall (I like Camera Raw) - but my experience is their engineers have the artistic color sense of the average gerbil. I never let Adobe tell me what correct WB or color is. Edited August 31, 2019 by adan 5 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 31, 2019 Share #31 Posted August 31, 2019 10 hours ago, adan said: As to the M10 yellow cast. Possibly - but if one is shooting raw/DNG, white balance is ultimately a function of the processing, not the camera. Yes, Andy, of course, but the poster seems to think that post-processing is some kind of foul-smelling black magic.🙄 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedaes Posted August 31, 2019 Share #32 Posted August 31, 2019 (edited) 21 hours ago, nejad_b said: There is a big difference between then (film) and now. With film you complete the work in the darkroom. You only guessed the result at the time of taking the picture but with digital if you use an electronic viewfinder then aperture and EV setting combination are the tools you have. I am not saying using Lightroom is wrong, its just the question of one camera producing better result than the other. Let say if the fish & chips you get is cooked enough, you eat it and you don’t think of cooking it again Sorry to tell you,nejad_b, but unless you embrace and learn post processing you will never get the best out of any digital camera of any make, and frankly you are wasting money trying to use a Leica in the way you are. Yes, get as much as possible 'right' in camera, but to see the full potential you MUST use RAW capture and post-process. Edited August 31, 2019 by pedaes 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 31, 2019 Share #33 Posted August 31, 2019 It is like using film Leicas for Walmart prints exclusively. It is hard to believe that there are still people around today who seem to think that postprocessing is some kind of cheating. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
low325 Posted August 31, 2019 Share #34 Posted August 31, 2019 Two generations of camera later and the M9 still talked about. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 31, 2019 Share #35 Posted August 31, 2019 Still plenty of users of the M8 (2006) around - and the Digilux2 (2004) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 31, 2019 Share #36 Posted August 31, 2019 23 hours ago, jdlaing said: 3/4 of the image only when you can’t get it right when capturing the image. I disagree. The captured image is the raw canvas, and you are right, it pays to have an optimal starting point. But after that the real work starts. If you have to work to salvage an image you are better off dumping it in the wastebasket. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted August 31, 2019 Share #37 Posted August 31, 2019 7 minutes ago, jaapv said: If you have to work to salvage an image you are better off dumping it in the wastebasket. Exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted August 31, 2019 Author Share #38 Posted August 31, 2019 17 minutes ago, low325 said: Two generations of camera later and the M9 still talked about. 60 years later the M3 is also still talked about...Its a real tribute to Leica and a testament to their love of photography 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 31, 2019 Share #39 Posted August 31, 2019 6 minutes ago, jdlaing said: Exactly. My point. Postprocessing is not to rescue images (although one might need to from time to time) but to optimize them - and that is where the 3/4 comes in. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted August 31, 2019 Share #40 Posted August 31, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, adan said: On the original topic. Yes, Leica tweaked the color profile of the M10 over the M(240) to bring up greens and blues a bit and suppress an overall red tint the 240 had (compared to M9). You have to use the "Embedded M10" profile to see that, however (Leica's idea of good colors) - using the "Adobe Standard" profile (Adobe's idea of good colors - see below) is not as pleasant and M9-ish. Conversely, as the linked article says, the M10 reds are a tad more orange - good for some skin tones, otherwise a matter of taste and situation. I shot an orange MG sports car with both M9 and M10 back in 2017 - M10 was more true-to-life, M9 added a lot of magenta to the orange. And Leica did impose a much stronger default contrast curve, which also enhances saturation (but suppresses dynamic range). Fortunately one can remove the contrast and lighten the shadows when max DR is desired, or stick with the M9/Kodachromy default. Best of both worlds. snip HI There Andy Good post - couple of points. first of all Leica had a really good experimental web page before the release of the M10 (done by a university postgrad they later employed). Basically it had a number of images and each was taken with the M9, M240 and M10 - you had to a) say which you liked best and b) say which was which camera. (perhaps you saw it?) Interestingly people were quite bad at telling which was which, but there was quite a significant majority who preferred the M9 files. The M10 was a reasonably close second, but there was some more work done after this - notably making reds a bit more orange (better for old people skin). . . . and having a stronger default curve (so that the M10 files looked snappier - more like the M9 files which had less dynamic range). I quite agree about the "Embedded M10" profile vs "Adobe Standard" as well - I like to think that this was no accident (or a reflection of different colour values between Leica and Adobe), but was done on purpose so that for those who like to start with 'flatter' files with more dynamic range, they could use the Adobe Standard, and for those lusting after the M9 they could use the Embedded M10 . . . I think I can remember a discussion to that effect, but memory is fickle (especially mine!) All the best Edited August 31, 2019 by jonoslack 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now