cl: no luck with sooc jpgs so far

[lykaman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, gteague said:

granted, this shot from my s1 is in more contrasty lighting, but this is a sooc jpg from the s1 using the barely tweaked /standard/ style or profile and the 16-35/4 lens. 16mm f6.3 1/320. i think anyone would agree that this one hardly needs any post-processing, at least not for sharpness. this is what i'd like out the cl, but i'm not yet seeing it even with examples of post processing. i've tried to duplicate this shot on the cl in similar lighting, but no luck so far. 

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!

Hi, maybe you need to Reset everything on the CL! wishy washy images could be the result of maybe a corrupt setting! I had similar issues with my M-P240, after a complete Reset and clean setup all was good...    L

[Advertisement]

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

[gteague]

Just now, lykaman said:

Hi, maybe you need to Reset everything on the CL! wishy washy images could be the result of maybe a corrupt setting! I had similar issues with my M-P240, after a complete Reset and clean setup all was good...    L

i will indeed try that. that's one thing the cl has going for it, unlike the hundreds of settings i'd have to redo on the panasonic models, the cl is trivially easy to set up again since i have all my functions in a list. sometimes you can get away with doing the reset, then importing your user profile off the sd card instead of redoing all the settings manually. 

[lykaman]

Just now, gteague said:

i will indeed try that. that's one thing the cl has going for it, unlike the hundreds of settings i'd have to redo on the panasonic models, the cl is trivially easy to set up again since i have all my functions in a list. sometimes you can get away with doing the reset, then importing your user profile off the sd card instead of redoing all the settings manually. 

Personally I would not import (you may get a corrupt setting) Start afresh....     L

[lykaman]

Of course, just to ensure test results, you could always ship me your CL and a couple of Lenses, I will be happy to use my own SD card and charge the battery!! ~~ 

[jaapv]

27 minutes ago, lykaman said:

Personally I would not import (you may get a corrupt setting) Start afresh....     L

Actually, that is unheard of when exporting/importing user profiles.

[lykaman]

Just now, jaapv said:

Actually, that is unheard of when exporting/importing user profiles.

I'm obliged..    L

[gteague]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 minutes ago, lykaman said:

Of course, just to ensure test results, you could always ship me your CL and a couple of Lenses, I will be happy to use my own SD card and charge the battery!! ~~ 

lmao! nice try mate. my leica will only leave my cold dead hands, to misquote a famous actor.  

[lykaman]

3 minutes ago, gteague said:

lmao! nice try mate. my leica will only leave my cold dead hands, to misquote a famous actor.  

~~ 👍🏾

[gteague]

i tried a couple tips from you guys and used the evf for confirming focus and indeed i can see the green box much more easily using it. but i also can't see the entire frame and i'm all about not cropping. i also shot in /b&w hc/ mode with all the settings maxed out. and this is indeed how sharp i want all my images, so perhaps if i use this one and the /vivid/ style at max sharpness, i can avoid editing.

 

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!

[jaapv]

23 hours ago, gteague said:

on my gh5 and s1, i use focus peaking pretty regularly,  but those cameras don't make me half-press and hold the shutter button--an operation i find very difficult. but i often, when i'm concerned about the focus plane, shift to peaking to confirm it.

i put the cl on scene mode full auto and went out to shoot the same things i'd been shooting on my iphone. used /std/ style with no tweaks. these shots aren't razor sharp, but hopefully if i tweak the style they'll improve. perhaps i'm my own worst enemy trying to out think the camera.

i've tweaked the /viv/ and /b&w hc/ modes to maximum levels and i'll got out again with field focus, confirm the focus plane is where i think it is using peaking, and shoot again to see how much i can improve on things with style tweaks.

[i've hit the limit on uploading again. i downsized to 2480 and the forum is telling me the image is too big. the tool at bottom says max total size is 1.17mb and my 2480 image is 1.3mb which is why i was downsizing so much. resized to 1920]

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!

1000 kB, 2480 pixels. ~Usually jpg quality 10

[gteague]

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

1000 kB, 2480 pixels. ~Usually jpg quality 10

my applescript uses highest quality and sizes on the desktop are different depending on your os and storage method. i could go into an editor and reduce the quality until i got below 1.17mb, but that would seem to defeat the purpose.

i'm not criticizing you guys for not supporting full quality images, that would  be stupid. amazon owns aws and google and microsoft have virtually unlimited storage and server bandwidth. even flickr finally ran everyone off with price hikes to use their full quality upload options.

i guess i don't understand why you scrape off the exif though, but i'm not a web programmer. /guy

[jaapv]

It is completely impossible to see the difference on a screen between quality 9 and 12. Sponsoring members get 2000 kB. 
This is an international forum 
Not everybody has high speed Internet so we have to limit size. We do so without significant quality loss. We don’t remove EXIF. That is probably caused by your posting procedure. Lightroom wil give you simple export options, as do virtually all postprocessing programs. 
I would advise you to go more mainstream instead of making exotic scripts. 
BTW. 1.17 is quite small for a well-processed CL image. I find that 2480 pixels often exceeds 2000 kB at jpg12. 

[gteague]

the exif remains after resizing and these are jpgs directly off the sd card on the cl, so i don't understand how i have any control over my image when my only option is to drop it into a window on my post. ah! the exif is still there, but how do you view it without using an external tool such as an online web metadata viewer? so change my question to why can't we see it here?

nevermind, i found a google chrome extension which lets me see very basic exif by clicking on the image to bring it into a new window. then i found one which works in place with a right click. so i'm glad i brought this up because these are very useful tools to have. /guy
 

Edited March 13, 2020 by gteague

[dau]

21 hours ago, gteague said:

i tried a couple tips from you guys and used the evf for confirming focus and indeed i can see the green box much more easily using it. but i also can't see the entire frame and i'm all about not cropping. i also shot in /b&w hc/ mode with all the settings maxed out. and this is indeed how sharp i want all my images, so perhaps if i use this one and the /vivid/ style at max sharpness, i can avoid editing.

 

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!

Notwithstanding the resolution and file size allowed by the forum, I can clearly see that the sign in the foreground is tack sharp while the house is not, and neither are the guys on the roof. You use a lens with a focal length of 23mm at f/3.5 and focus on the closest part in the image which is, unfortunately, not the part you want to be in focus.

I'd advice using a smaller aperture (larger number) and focusing on a spot halfway between the sign and the building, if you want both of them reasonably sharp. If you want the building to be sharp, focus on the closest corner of the building.

It's perfectly explainable why the pictures taken with your phone seem to be sharper: the phone has a much shorter focal length which produces a much larger depth of field at the same distance.

BTW, on my screen the width of the image is about 35cm. The sensor is about 23mm wide. The image is, therefore, shown at a magnification factor of about 15. The old DOF rules don't quite apply here, anymore, I think.

[gteague]

no, that's right. i only wanted the sign to be in focus so i could judge sharpness at the point of focus as the same image taken with my s1 and the same focal length and fstop were razor sharp and the cl images were coming out softer. and with the style settings maxed out, it is indeed sharp enough without further processing. i didn't care about dof for this test but to make the comparison more fair i need to use the 23/2 lens on the s1 although i realize the crop factor won't make it a true test except that if the 23/2 is soft on the s1 it's time to examine whether there's a problem with my sample of this lens.

/guy

[jaapv]

56 minutes ago, gteague said:

the exif remains after resizing and these are jpgs directly off the sd card on the cl, so i don't understand how i have any control over my image when my only option is to drop it into a window on my post. ah! the exif is still there, but how do you view it without using an external tool such as an online web metadata viewer? so change my question to why can't we see it here?

nevermind, i found a google chrome extension which lets me see very basic exif by clicking on the image to bring it into a new window. then i found one which works in place with a right click. so i'm glad i brought this up because these are very useful tools to have. /guy
 

For resizing and compressing there are plenty of tools in Mac, for instance:

https://www.macworld.co.uk/how-to/mac-software/resize-images-mac-3689216/

For viewing EXIF you could use:

https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/13951/exif-viewer

[gteague]

so i've casually searched for the easiest way to show exif from the mac finder before and never found anything. but i've put another hour or two into it and still come up empty. what i'm trying to avoid is loading an app or editor just to show exif or to rotate or resize. and while there are quick actions (services, contextual right click) for the latter two, there's nothing to show exif which really really surprises me. i thought it would be as easy as typing a few search terms such as exif iptc mac automator quick action service into google, but there's virtually nothing. there are two actions concerning iptc, but these seem to involve writing to a file, not viewing.

what you can do is select an image file in the finder and do a show info (cmd+i) which will show about a dozen exif items, but, depending on the camera, vital  fields might be missing. for example, the iso doesn't show up for cl images. so i had a bright idea to load the image into the browser and use the exif viewer and exif quick view extensions on it, but this doesn't work. evidently they need a url which doesn't start with /file//:.

i do my absolute best to avoid editors and apps and it frustrates me and distracts me to have to open other tools while sorting and evaluating my image files. and a mac os service accessed with a right click in the finder  is the most efficient way to do resizing and rotating, but is not useful if you need options and tweaks. if i do need to do some basic editing, i start with preview since it's a native mac app. and it works great if all you need is cropping or resizing or some basic exposure/contrast/sharpening/saturation tweaks, but the settings aren't near as granular or fine as you can get with dedicated editors although much much easier to access.

[jaapv]

Have it your own way by all means, but I do not think that you will ever get an optimal result by these methods. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[lykaman]

53 minutes ago, gteague said:

so i've casually searched for the easiest way to show exif from the mac finder before and never found anything. but i've put another hour or two into it and still come up empty. what i'm trying to avoid is loading an app or editor just to show exif or to rotate or resize. and while there are quick actions (services, contextual right click) for the latter two, there's nothing to show exif which really really surprises me. i thought it would be as easy as typing a few search terms such as exif iptc mac automator quick action service into google, but there's virtually nothing. there are two actions concerning iptc, but these seem to involve writing to a file, not viewing.

what you can do is select an image file in the finder and do a show info (cmd+i) which will show about a dozen exif items, but, depending on the camera, vital  fields might be missing. for example, the iso doesn't show up for cl images. so i had a bright idea to load the image into the browser and use the exif viewer and exif quick view extensions on it, but this doesn't work. evidently they need a url which doesn't start with /file//:.

i do my absolute best to avoid editors and apps and it frustrates me and distracts me to have to open other tools while sorting and evaluating my image files. and a mac os service accessed with a right click in the finder  is the most efficient way to do resizing and rotating, but is not useful if you need options and tweaks. if i do need to do some basic editing, i start with preview since it's a native mac app. and it works great if all you need is cropping or resizing or some basic exposure/contrast/sharpening/saturation tweaks, but the settings aren't near as granular or fine as you can get with dedicated editors although much much easier to access.

For Posting images from a Mac, I use Preview (not perfect but allows basic PP and resizing) - surely Posting in/on the Forum is just a guide to the real image,, There are too many variables to ensure a perfect reproduction of an image..   L

[gteague]

i'm still searching and found that about a half page (2 dozen or so fields) of exif data are shown in preview mode in the finder. i knew some items were shown in that view, but i discovered that if you expanded the window downwards, more fields would come into view. and iso for cl files is one of the fields. i still wish you could show it via a right click, but this is a workaround although you do have to go into finder view to use it.

in quickview mode (hitting space bar when an image is selected) there's an icon off to the top right which will open up a horizontal menu at top left of modifiers to use on the image. no exif view of course, but you can rotate to name just one item.

Edited March 13, 2020 by gteague