24meg verses 40meg aesthetic

[Tom1234]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 minutes ago, Mikep996 said:

The beauty (?) of internet forums is that they allow people to make comments that, if made in person, could result in a black eye or missing teeth!  

 

 

 

So true! So true!

[Advertisement]

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

[Mikep996]

35 minutes ago, Steven said:

Haven’t gotten a black eye yet. And trust me, what I say on the internet, I say in person. I don’t hide behind a username. 

Well, it is difficult to imagine that such could arise over an argument over "what camera is better," but I admit I got into a fight at a bar over who was better, The Beatles or Bob Dylan!   In my defense, I was in college at the time and nobody expected (expects) common sense from college age males!  

On the plus side, it was back then that I had my first experience with Leica (school-supplied M2) so I had SOME sense!  

Edited October 28, 2020 by Mikep996

[Matlock]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

This is such a dumb comment, sorry to say mate, but statement like this are a real issue in this world. 

 

Sorry to offend you Steve but I stick by what I said. However no offence to you.

[Jeff S]

6 hours ago, Tom1234 said:

SUMMARY:  I started this mess so maybe I can finish it.  My apologies to all you life time Photoshop users that have heard it all before.

Hope you will post here what you learn about handling the M10-R increased resolution.  M10-R plus slider modifications may well meet and exceed M10 out of the camera box images.  One famous Leica photographer charges I think $600 USD for this information. 

To make sure we see the extra M10-R 40 meg resolution, the sharpness and contrast had to be adjusted by Leica to a certain high enough level, that obviously seems harsh to some of us, who prefer the 24meg file's aesthetic.  This may be a marketing tweak decision that causes unfair judgements about the camera's abilities compared to other cameras. 

If that sharpness and contrast is turned down a bit, that might make us love the M10-R above all others.  So the modern sensor aesthetic's come from some camera's files plus some set of slider modifications.  

Thus Leica has made a high resolution tool so great that we have yet to understand how best to use it. 

Yet cameras all get a reputation according to what file characteristics they initially put out.  We put a name on this initial reputation with the most convenient term, in this case 24 or 40 meg aesthetic.  Pardon me for patronizing my own Thread Title. 

BACKSTORY: Back in the film days when MTF charts were studied like pixels are now, I remember seeing pictures, the lightest-etchings, made by lenses pushed to their limits in the 40 line pairs segment (40 line pairs is of course 80 line).  These 80 lines had lower contrast that softened the extra resolution of the image in a beautiful way.  

Handling a lack of resolution- Back with 6 and 12 meg low resolution sensors, the approach might have been to INCREASE contrast-&-sharpness, and then, to be carful to NOT oversize the image to where you notice the jagged edges.  

Handling an excess of resolution- Now with the 40 meg plus resolution sensors, the better approach might be to LOWER the contrast-&-sharpness settings a bit to avoid too many high contrast edges that could irritate.  Here it is that M10-R sits proudly displaying its great resolving ability that needs for some of us only a slight softening to satisfy.

The higher resolving, high dynamic range cameras like the M10-R tend to have flatter, not higher, contrast curves out of camera, requiring the user to add, not lessen contrast. I find many of the M10-R (and M10 Monochrom) pics here too flat and greyish, lacking rich blacks, bright whites or lovely mid tones due to the linear, flat out of camera contrast. (Film, on the other hand, has characteristic contrast curves built in, not flat contrast like a modern, high dynamic range camera.) In any case, I only judge results by my own prints, which ALWAYS require post processing adjustments, film or digital. A camera phone is sufficient for low resolution online display.
 

Jeff

[Tailwagger]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

I'm not trolling and I'm not young...

@Tailwagger, you weren't offended by my comment, surely ? 

Well... assuming good intent,  you are naive enough not to recognize that if you want to piss some one off on a Leica forum, tell 'em their shit smells like a Sony. While its always nicer to get a pat on the head than a kick in the crap chute, in the end, I could give a deuce what anyone not named Renger-Patzsch, Watkins, etc. thinks of my efforts.  Sad for the world, but fortunate for my ego, they're all dead. Perhaps I'll get a truly meaningful tongue lashing on the other side. In the meantime, I may be a bad carpenter, but I rarely blame my tools. 

I recall sitting in theory/comp class one day when a young women, exasperated as her brain overloaded, blurted out  "Bach wrote too many notes!".   The professor, horrified, fell into an only slightly abbreviated performance of 4'33", the pain and confusion on his face gently oozing out a portrait of personal failure. I, for my part, instantly understood exactly what she meant, yet in the same moment knew she hadn't a clue and likely never would. I felt quite sorry for them both.

 

[Tom1234]

57 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Quote 1: BACKSTORY: Back in the film days when MTF charts were studied like pixels are now, I remember seeing pictures, the lightest-etchings, made by lenses pushed to their limits in the 40 line pairs segment (40 line pairs is of course 80 line).  These 80 lines had lower contrast that softened the extra resolution of the image in a beautiful way.  

Handling a lack of resolution- Back with 6 and 12 meg low resolution sensors, the approach might have been to INCREASE contrast-&-sharpness, and then, to be carful to NOT oversize the image to where you notice the jagged edges.  

Handling an excess of resolution- Now with the 40 meg plus resolution sensors, the better approach might be to LOWER the contrast-&-sharpness settings a bit to avoid too many high contrast edges that could irritate.  Here it is that M10-R sits proudly displaying its great resolving ability that needs for some of us only a slight softening to satisfy.

 

Quote 2: The higher resolving, high dynamic range cameras like the M10-R tend to have flatter, not higher, contrast curves out of camera, requiring the user to add, not lessen contrast. I find many of the M10-R (and M10 Monochrom) pics here too flat and greyish, lacking rich blacks, bright whites or lovely mid tones due to the linear, flat out of camera contrast. (Film, on the other hand, has characteristic contrast curves built in, not flat contrast like a modern, high dynamic range camera.) In any case, I only judge results by my own prints, which ALWAYS require post processing adjustments, film or digital. A camera phone is sufficient for low resolution online display.
 

Jeff

The overall contrast curve is flattened I know in some higher resolution cameras (maybe Nikon does least of this).   The decreased contrast is needed only at the 80 lines (40 line pairs) detail level to relieve edge harshness that I complain about. I mentioned it above but was not clear enough.  

And maybe this smoother edge effect is only possible during the taking of the picture using old world lenses and not in software. It seems mythical to think that software can recreate all the lens effects of the last 60 years of lens designs.  Indeed most computer software effects look a bit faked and mechanical to me so I strongly suspect that this is true.  That is the old lens effects can be approximated by but not exactly duplicated by software. 

The ability to selectively apply contrast-sharpening routines, is so complex, that I do not fully know how to write about it, so I probably will not say much more.  Probably anything I say will just be refuted by others that conceptually define picture elements differently, a dance of words.   

Example of Lens created softness (not software created softness):

http://send.l-camera-forum.com/ls/click?upn=84OPZBywYoH-2FHRvS1iE2PthvYtkjqxamzdinD-2BslnGdMR-2FTujyCtusJSeCd5HKekkWOQEsG29xD4tEgu7p-2FswfDhIpt2o06dcmHBUA3Ca3-2BDjTjFVMaIMRk9Wfy5lYZvVJyabDtcR9Do9dO8b7UN-2B6KXH9MDO5uwF0Nzd8x0YXA-3D5WGO_hUTpH3WN9A5-2B23-2FWCuxNG3zTnoMPk-2B00xZIiqssbfl73h0WcNEhVT8Huz-2F6dQ-2F7xhTo3kkgmPdtEb7cqml8kTbW8bkQoF9C3zL9Kn9eCsoqFYsdlB5ztk-2BvjxwRwfUo43YYcLGSlZNs9IrOH4nolNpTSUfUHeBgMMrdAfyqQw7FnoNFuznMj45BunJGQQtFxPLJ2o-2BNHrgGwURPxmLCJP2KGWmXIY3vibeBMc78O0UQ-3D

 

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Flat contrast and blur/diffusion; two different characteristics.  
 

As already noted, there are potentially dozens of variables involved in final renderings, including lenses.  The problem is limiting your thread to MP, which can’t even be shown to full effect on screen.

Jeff

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Steven said:

This is such a dumb comment, sorry to say mate, but statement like this are a real issue in this world. 

If you don't like it, don't read it, but to some of us its meaningful, and beyond your judgement, it helps us grow as photographer. 

Tonight, I am walking the red carpet at the Cannes film festival where the first feature film I produced will premiere on the world's biggest screen. 1000 people (instead of 2200 because of covid) will watch the film. Some will love it, some will not. And it's totally fine that they don't love it... But imagine if they came to me and said that because they didn't like the film we should not have made it, and that we wasted time, money and film roll ? How hurtful and unconsiderate would that be? People really need to make an effort to understand what they don't... 

 

I'll also add that this thread is particularly interesting IMO. It could have turned into a battle of the ones who bought the R trying to justify their purchase, against the ones who couldn't afford it and wanted to defend themselves and make it useless, but it didn't. There has been a real dialogue that personally thought me some stuff. 

Hate these modern films,much preferred the look of the older movies,even the colour ones were aesthetically much better in my view.

[Tom1234]

34 minutes ago, steve 1959 said:

Hate these modern films,much preferred the look of the older movies,even the colour ones were aesthetically much better in my view.

Technicolor, a three strip process had more saturated colors than any other system I know of.  Even transferred to video DVD looks better than regular color film or DVD, in the same way that scanned film normally looks better than digital camera originated.  

This list of quality:  Technicolor best, normal film second, digital third ·with less saturated color quality.  List of films here: https://filmcolors.org/timeline-entry/1301/ 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Tom1234 said:

Technicolor, a three strip process had more saturated colors than any other system I know of.  Even transferred to video DVD looks better than regular color film or DVD, in the same way that scanned film normally looks better than digital camera originated.  

This list of quality:  Technicolor best, normal film second, digital third ·with less saturated color quality.  List of films here: https://filmcolors.org/timeline-entry/1301/ 

Funnily enough one of the films i was thinking of was "gentlemen prefer blondes" because of its stunning colour.

Great link.

[Tom1234]

8 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Flat contrast and blur/diffusion; two different characteristics.  
 

As already noted, there are potentially dozens of variables involved in final renderings, including lenses.  The problem is limiting your thread to MP, which can’t even be shown to full effect on screen.

Jeff

Forum Limits: Yes this is interesting that a Thread can come to a halt since the valid comments (or complaints) bring on a complexity that requires the writing of a chapter or book and who has time for this to read or write it?  

As bad as a religious argument, that becomes so complex that no matter how right-or-wrong you think someone is, the discussion medium can not sustain the necessary activity to prove the answer.  

No wonder many of the people with the most posts give the shortest answers… they have been through it before and do not wish to write anything that starts a storm of comments.  I bow to and honor their skill even though their evasiveness may not answer me.    

Also, the effect of the high camera cost, hurts the owner's feelings so much if the camera is discounted in any way.  These highly invested users just break down and can not answer or becomes so upset they make a troll's statement though they normally are not a troll.    

Making Peace: Camera cost and visual science complexity are heavy loads on a conversation that swing it around in various directions.  

Under the effects of cost and complexity,  at times we are all Don Quixote's, swinging our verbal sword in the air, as these effects influence the conversation.  

[Jeff S]

5 minutes ago, Tom1234 said:

Forum Limits: Yes this is interesting that a Thread can come to a halt since the valid comments (or complaints) bring on a complexity that requires the writing of a chapter or book and who has time for this to read or write it?  

As bad as a religious argument, that becomes so complex that no matter how right-or-wrong you think someone is, the discussion medium can not sustain the necessary activity to prove the answer.  

No wonder many of the people with the most posts give the shortest answers… they have been through it before and do not wish to write anything that starts a storm of comments.  I bow to and honor their skill even though their evasiveness may not answer me.    

Also, the effect of the high camera cost, hurts the owner's feelings so much if the camera is discounted in any way.  These highly invested users just break down and can not answer or becomes so upset they make a troll's statement though they normally are not a troll.    

Making Peace: Camera cost and visual science complexity are heavy loads on a conversation that swing it around in various directions.  

Under the effects of cost and complexity,  at times we are all Don Quixote's, swinging our verbal sword in the air, as these effects influence the conversation.  

I own an 18MP M Monochrom, a 24 MP M10 and a 47 MP SL2.  The differences in my prints are created by me. My feelings and opinions have zero to do with cost, just practical experience.

Jeff

[Jeff S]

4 minutes ago, Steven said:

If you could only keep one of the three, which one would it be and why ? 

I own three because they complement each other well for different shooting circumstances and experiences, including weather conditions, focal lengths, locations and subject matter, workflow preferences, and more. IQ is superb with all. Otherwise I wouldn’t have bought them.  GAS not a factor.
 

Jeff
 

[Tom1234]

50 minutes ago, Steven said:

If you could only keep one of the three, which one would it be and why ? 

 

38 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

I own three because they complement each other well for different shooting circumstances and experiences, including weather conditions, focal lengths, locations and subject matter, workflow preferences, and more. IQ is superb with all. Otherwise I wouldn’t have bought them.  GAS not a factor.
 

Jeff
 

I detect 24 meg aesthetic love… as the m10 can not be abandoned to the used market. Not GAS (gear acquisition syndrome). 

The oldest camera a person can not let go of… is it not loved?  

I can not bring myself to sell my M7's so I must love film and this is true… actions reveal inner motives. 

[Jeff S]

3 minutes ago, Tom1234 said:

 

I detect 24 meg aesthetic love… as the m10 can not be abandoned to the used market. Not GAS (gear acquisition syndrome). 

The oldest camera a person can not let go of… is it not loved?  

I can not bring myself to sell my M7's so I must love film and this is true… actions reveal inner motives. 

Your problems.  Nothing at all to do with my decisions or opinions.  I have no sentimental attachment to gear, and have never had a problem buying or selling. Tools for a task. I gave up film after 40 years when I decided not to build a fifth darkroom after another house move. I gave up large format when I got too old to haul the gear.  Again, I create the aesthetic, regardless of MP.  The SL2 is fabulous at 47MP; the MM likewise at 18, and I chose the latter primarily for the unique b/w workflow experience. 
 

Please speak for yourself.  Your premise holds no water for me.

Jeff

[Tom1234]

7 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Your problems.  Nothing at all to do with my decisions or opinions.  I have no sentimental attachment to gear, and have never had a problem buying or selling. Tools for a task. I gave up film after 40 years when I decided not to build a fifth darkroom after another house move. I gave up large format when I got too old to haul the gear.  Again, I create the aesthetic, regardless of MP.  The SL2 is fabulous at 47MP; the MM likewise at 18, and I chose the latter primarily for the unique b/w workflow experience. 
 

Please speak for yourself.  Your premise holds no water for me.

Jeff

Sorry.  I am not trying to define you.  Go ahead define yourself.  Still you must at least like the m10 aesthetic to keep it.  And how you use that to create your own aesthetic is of course your own affair.  

[Jeff S]

4 minutes ago, Tom1234 said:

Sorry.  I am not trying to define you.  Go ahead define yourself.  Still you must at least like the m10 aesthetic to keep it.  And how you use that to create your own aesthetic is of course your own affair.  

I like all three digital bodies I own, each with a different MP count, which is one of the least important characteristics given my modest print sizes and cropping needs.  Viewers don’t know which gear was used to create my pics and prints, and rarely care (gear obsessed photographers excepted). 

Jeff

[Mikep996]

" Viewers don’t know which gear was used to create my pics and prints, and rarely care (gear obsessed photographers excepted). "

 

Excellent point.  It reminds me of what a grammy-nominated guitarist once said about guitars/performance/what brand of guitar someone should buy:  "Nobody comes up after a performance saying, 'wow that was great but it would have sounded better with a [whatever brand] guitar.'"  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[MarkP]

8 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I own an 18MP M Monochrom, a 24 MP M10 and a 47 MP SL2.  The differences in my prints are created by me. My feelings and opinions have zero to do with cost, just practical experience.

Jeff

I have the same 3 digital leicas 👍 (although I wish I had an M10P).

[MarkP]

18 minutes ago, Steven said:

If you could only keep one of the three ? 

Can I saw my arm off first? 🙂

M10