M11 adopts the Japanese~American look to color science

[Adam Bonn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 minutes ago, elmars said:

Try this test and report Your result:

http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/02/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-1/

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!

 

M9 and 240, wait or is it 240 and M9?

We can't tell because the preset makes the M240 exactly the same as the m9.... 😇

Still can't tell the difference because of the CCD preset? Ok I'll make it easier...

 

Ok this time it's really easy because I used adobe colour for each and just dropped the WB a bit on the 240 shot..

Jokes aside... 

I have a lot of respect for Farkas, I enjoy his reviews and it's great that he gives away presets.

But when I had the 240 I personally didn't find that his M9 Emulation preset really worked out for me... obviously OMWV.

If I wanted to make an M9-a-like-doppelgänger profile (and I don't, I have an M9) I'd personally start building a ground up profile, and the first step would be to start making colours with blue in them... like this

 

But ultimately you can't really make one camera the same as another... sure you can make two pictures look quite like each other (which is what the Farkas article is ultimately presenting)

 

 

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[Adam Bonn]

4 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Accounts cannot be bought (albeit stolen) and such actions will be self-defeating soon enough.

so is m10r user / gritty photo / key of g / jim b all the same person?

[jaapv]

8 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

so is m10r user / gritty photo / key of g / jim b all the same person?

We cannot reveal the details of individual (ex) members but rest assured that we do have tools to check the provenance of posts and reliability status of servers/IP addresses. Yes, banned members do try and reregister, and even if they manage to slip through the net on rare occasions their content and style will soon expose them. After all, they did get banned for their posts, so repeating the content is easily spotted by our eagle-eyed members. This particular ex-member happened to get kicked off again last night (and no, not all the handles you mention originated from him).

[pgk]

8 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

But ultimately you can't really make one camera the same as another... sure you can make two pictures look quite like each other.....

My empirical findings entirely (and I have a little experince having started off using Photoshop 4). Sometimes close but not exactly the same. I have used a lot of digital cameras over the last two decades and whenever I use an older file I can often recognise the camera from the file charcteristics. Some I like better than others and find easier to adjust to my liking. The M9 remains a favourite for many reasons and still yields great malleable files shot at low ISO.

[lct]

•

Edited June 6, 2022 by lct

[Adam Bonn]

2 minutes ago, pgk said:

My empirical findings entirely (and I have a little experince having started off using Photoshop 4). Sometimes close but not exactly the same.

This.

In my rather simile driven way of looking at things, I think of it like I can go and see a decent covers band (The Gimme Hendrix Experience or The Bootleg Beatles) and have a great night out, but ask those guys to start writing new material like they're John or Paul or Jimi etc etc and it's just not going to work out well

So sure I can get two pictures of the same thing from 2 different cameras, and make them close enough the same in post.. but if I'm looking at pictures without a reference pic from the other camera - then thinking 'Hmmm I wonder what the other camera would look like here' doesn't get me very far.

As you say, sure cameras have a tell in their base characteristics, but that doesn't make them easy to mimic

That Farkas article is good fun (and no I didn't get 100% when I tried it back in the day, and yes many folks claim they did) but when using the provided preset with my own 240/M9 files taken where I shoot, of things I like to shoot, in the light that exists where I live, using the lenses that I have, my experiences with the Farkas preset was that it didn't really work out for me

Still a thought provoking article and the preset was lovely gift to the community. I'm not trying to be rude about it.

In the end, for better or worse... I just learnt how my make these type of things for myself that do what I want them to do... well more or less (as I'm sure many of you do)

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here is a visual example to underscore the theoretical findings we are talking about here. Perhaps we are having the wrong discussion as general impression of color is malleable through software. I would be much more interested in discussing the effective color gamut, e.g. how much deep blue/purple can be captured physically by the camera? That of course runs into the limitations of our displays, i.e. a bigger capture gamut would mostly be useful in 'dragging' tonal differences selectively back into SRGB/Adobe RGB/D3 or whatever working space.

Below is the same image rendered with Auto white balance and Auto tonal adjustments in C1 and Adobe Lightroom Classic, with different profiles.

C1 v22, Leica M11 ProStandard:

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!

LR, PROFILE M11:

LR, Adobe Standard:

LR, Adobe Color:

LR, Adobe Landscape:

LR, Cobalt Leica M9:

LR, Cobalt Leica M8:

 

 

Edited June 6, 2022 by Guest

[Guest]

Example of an innovation to improve the actual color capture via hardware (RGB+Cyan sensor) was the Sony F828 (I had one!), summary of the approach here.

Some semi-reliable summary to conceptualize what may be actually be going on in our subjective preference of how different camera handle color (beyond post processing) here. I am calling the article semi-reliable because the author had previously claimed 'cameras have no gamut' and this is him back-tracking that statement ... To give him credit, he appears to be willing to learn.

[jaapv]

One thing ignored here is that one can gain complete control of colour by editing in LAB.

[Jim B]

4 hours ago, jaapv said:

We cannot reveal the details of individual (ex) members but rest assured that we do have tools to check the provenance of posts and reliability status of servers/IP addresses. Yes, banned members do try and reregister, and even if they manage to slip through the net on rare occasions their content and style will soon expose them. After all, they did get banned for their posts, so repeating the content is easily spotted by our eagle-eyed members. This particular ex-member happened to get kicked off again last night (and no, not all the handles you mention originated from him).

Hi Jaap,

As you know I've been on here for years, and now I realize why I don't participate that much.... a lot of the people are just rude, and isn't there enough hate in the world already?

I voice my own opinions. I think it is a good discussion. Clearly, many people are interested commenting how they think color science is applied, as well as editing software. One contributor listed his experiences by the year! 

Also about the man that was banned, I haven't read any of his posts except the one where he showed a dropbox link with files from a Sony and the Leica, and well if you saw them, you would have reached the same conclusion that they looked very similar.  

I prefer the ccd sensor S2 type 006. That sensor has a unique look and color. So much so, that in NYC  it coined it's own genre, call Hyper Realism.

 

For the people that want to drag me.....I have a joke for you! " How do you get your A7r4 to look like an M11?"  "Turn off your image stabilization"  ha ha ha, man I crack myself up!

 

 

 

 

 

[setuporg]

I’m not interested in running blind tests to teach me my M9 is no different from M10.  I know when I use one or other Ms what character I get from the scenes I know.  Similarly I don’t care for sitting in Lr forever tweaking LAB.  I use Ms as films, with different character OOC, and basic corrections.  That pleases me, and I am content with it.:). BTW this is my standard answer to alarmed residents of a neighborhood where I happen to walk and shoot,

— What are you shooting?

— Anything I like.

— Why?

— Because it pleases me!

[jaapv]

I didn't know that LR could do LAB...

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

I didn't know that LR could do LAB...

With LR Classic, the histogram in the Develop module can be displayed using either RGB or LAB numbers.

Jeff

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 6/6/2022 at 5:14 AM, pgk said:

Explain to me how print materials have changed to show higher dynamic range. They haven't have they? So however much dynamic range you capture, it still has to be compressed in order to print. This means that decisions have to be made as to how to compress a higher tonal range into a print and it is this which is the problem that we have to learn how to deal with.

Modern printers have a vast dynamic range and massive colour gamuts. It's not 1990 anymore. When I began printing photography commercially we were squeezing 6 stops from Velvia into 4 stops of Cibachrome using contrast negs. (Velvia actually has more than 6 stops of DR but we didn't have the tools to extract it).Now we use colour spaces to LIMIT the gamut of a modern commercial inkjet printer. Even modern consumer photo printers are capable of wide gamut and high DR printing with the right software. Print DR is more a limitation of the paper than the ink.

Once printers became capable of 1440 dpi our ability to mix tiny droplets allowed gamut and DR to explode. Adding more ink colours has also improved the sublty that colour can be laid upon a page. Papaers have new materials and brightners that allow higher usable print gamuts. Printers are an organic output. Ink is mixed not laid out in dots like a screen. Sensors and screen are behind printers in both gamut and DR. 

Gordon

[Guest]

7 hours ago, jaapv said:

One thing ignored here is that one can gain complete control of colour by editing in LAB.

To the extent that the red/green/blue bayer filters and sensor DR fully capture the real world colors? LAB is always derived from de-bayered RGB ... You are right that once in LAB, some manipulations are easier. Margolis wrote several good books on color manipulation, 'abusing' LAB and CYMK to achieve specific post processing techniques.

To capture the full underlying info (e.g. usual case of red flowers blowing the red channel unless underexposing rest of image), Canon and Sony have been experimenting with 20-21 stop DR sensors ... until then hardware (including signal processing) decisions will only give us a part of the full picture (color-wise), reflecting implementation decisions and trade-offs regarding the parts of spectrum and luminosity to be discarded (not encoded/captured in the RAW file)?

Edited June 7, 2022 by Guest

[pgk]

5 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Modern printers have a vast dynamic range and massive colour gamuts

But are entirely limited by their ability to produce blacks and whites. The highest 'dynamic range' print I have is an underwater photo printed on a glossy metalised plastic film and bonded onto acrylic. IF LIT CORRECTLY it can look somewhat similar to a computer screen but cannot reproduce the illuminated whites available from screens. Paper lags far behind such materials and display options. So again, I repeat, that you have to compress tonality and colour when printing and to do so requires choices to be made.

Despite all the recent progress in sensors and technology I see very little of it filtering though into geneuinely 'better' photographs. The emphasis today is all too often on perfect technicalities which whilst they can be important, rarely elevate mediocre images beyond being mediocre.

Edited June 7, 2022 by pgk

[tom0511]

deleted I think it was off topic

Edited June 7, 2022 by tom0511

[jaapv]

6 hours ago, Jeff S said:

With LR Classic, the histogram in the Develop module can be displayed using either RGB or LAB numbers.

Jeff

Yes, but can you edit the channels separately? 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, mzbe said:

To the extent that the red/green/blue bayer filters and sensor DR fully capture the real world colors? LAB is always derived from de-bayered RGB ... You are right that once in LAB, some manipulations are easier. Margolis wrote several good books on color manipulation, 'abusing' LAB and CYMK to achieve specific post processing techniques.

To capture the full underlying info (e.g. usual case of red flowers blowing the red channel unless underexposing rest of image), Canon and Sony have been experimenting with 20-21 stop DR sensors ... until then hardware (including signal processing) decisions will only give us a part of the full picture (color-wise), reflecting implementation decisions and trade-offs regarding the parts of spectrum and luminosity to be discarded (not encoded/captured in the RAW file)?

The essence of LAB is the ability to edit the colour channels separately from the luminosity channel. The linking of luminosity and colour is the limiting factor of editing in RGB. It is one of the main reasons why I always edit in Photoshop. Apart from other advantages I regularly switch to LAB for colour tweaking. CMYK is not suitable for editing a photographic process and will reduce your gamut dramatically. It is of course the space that your printer will use in the end.  

[hdmesa]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

The essence of LAB is the ability to edit the colour channels separately from the luminosity channel. The linking of luminosity and colour is the limiting factor of editing in RGB. It is one of the main reasons why I always edit in Photoshop. Apart from other advantages I regularly switch to LAB for colour tweaking. CMYK is not suitable for editing a photographic process and will reduce your gamut dramatically. It is of course the space that your printer will use in the end.  

I thought no one uses CMYK unless it’s actually printed on a printing press (hundreds or thousands of copies). Aren’t most photographic prints done straight from RGB?