Leica M11 - weird cartoonish look around light source

[nxko]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

40 minutes ago, LikameLeica said:

I have similar issues and normally use Lightroom for all my editing and RAW conversion.  I have tried the exact same RAW file conversion in Capture One (trial version) and it completely goes away.  I personally think that the LR Raw editing still needs tweaks for the M11.  Picture on this reply is RAW conversion with Lightroom (sharpen only adjustment).  Zoom into shoulder of singer in white t-shirt.  Also purple stage light top left of file.  I will post Capture One version same edit of only sharpen in separate post.

 

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!

Interesting. So much better conversion from Capture One. Thank you for sharing!

[nxko]

@LikameLeica: My photo looks good in Capture One. That ugly smear is gone. Fantastic!

@Adam Bonn: It looks better with adobe profiles, but not as good as in Capture One.

[Advertisement]

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

[LikameLeica]

4 hours ago, nxko said:

@LikameLeica: My photo looks good in Capture One. That ugly smear is gone. Fantastic!

@Adam Bonn: It looks better with adobe profiles, but not as good as in Capture One.

Hoping that the LR profiles improve over time, as I am so many years into Lightroom and do not want to have two different editing applications.  I agree that the Adobe profiles in Lightroom are better than the M11 Profile, but still not as good as Capture One for now.  

[nxko]

6 hours ago, LikameLeica said:

Hoping that the LR profiles improve over time, as I am so many years into Lightroom and do not want to have two different editing applications.  I agree that the Adobe profiles in Lightroom are better than the M11 Profile, but still not as good as Capture One for now.  

Hope so. I have other pictures I will have to bring into COne. If they all look that much better with COne I will make the switch. Just backup the LR cloud to local storage and I’m able to make the switch. The COne iPad pro app looks good!

[Adam Bonn]

Over time adobe will certainly get better under the hood with file processing and it's conceivable that they'll add to their adobe color, adobe landscape etc .xmp profiles (they are 4+ years old now)

However, AFAIK adobe has never made a 'version 2' (and if I'm wrong very rarely) of their standard profile, so effectively as far as adobe are concerned the way adobe choses to render M9/M240/M10/etc colours from DNG under each illuminant of their standard profiles is as valid to them today as it was when those cameras were released.

There's been a persistent oh but adobe will make a proper M11 profile soon buzz since the M11 was released.. but I highly doubt it (after all it's been nearly a year for one thing) 

Adobe might well add to their .xmp profile range, but these aren't camera specific.. the adobe color profile you select when editing files on your Leica is exactly the same profile as any camera/phone for which you select adobe color

(these xmp profiles piggy back off of the adobe standard dcp files)

The reason that the adobe profiles are better behaved than the embedded Leica ones under certain conditions is that the adobe ones contain a ton of information to control what happens to the colours under various situations. By contrast the profiles that Leica embeds into their DNGs are really basic (and often more pleasing to the eye as they generally arrive with higher saturation and more colour pop!!)

[250swb]

8 hours ago, LikameLeica said:

Hoping that the LR profiles improve over time, as I am so many years into Lightroom and do not want to have two different editing applications.  I agree that the Adobe profiles in Lightroom are better than the M11 Profile, but still not as good as Capture One for now.  

Isn't the answer not to rely on other peoples profiles? A bit of work pays off, the profile isn't applying anything that isn't possible in Lightroom by doing it manually, get the hang of that and corrections take a matter of seconds or you can make your own profiles.

[Adam Bonn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The vast majority of the adobe dcp profile content concerns converting un-white-balanced RAW data into the XYZ_D50 color space

In order to achieve this adobe deploys several mechanisms (within the profile) to control this process

There are three mechanisms per illuminant, making six in total (each profile has two illuminants)

By comparison the Leica embedded profiles (that are typically named as per the camera model eg Leica M11) contain one mechanism per illuminant for a total of two (again two illuminants)

The colour issues with the Leica profiles occur because adobe basically guesses the XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation when this information is not contained within the profile, and Leica does not include this information within their profiles.

We can make our own profiles using (say) a CC24 or even an SG chart and then use X-Rite's freeware to create a profile with one or two illuminants, but the resultant profiles are as basic as the embedded Leica ones (but at least are made using one's own camera sensor and WB)

The lack of XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation information within these profiles can be edited on the fly using the calibration sliders with ACR/LR (in fact that's exactly what they do. You can of course use these sliders to edit images using profiles that do have the XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation info!)

One could of course create a single illuminant profile using a D50 light source which should work well (no need chromatically adapt StdA and D65 to D50 if you're using D50 all along!!) as an editing starting point for most things

In order to create ones own profiles that have all the mechanisms that the adobe profiles employ and have the tools to specify how one wishes each mechanism* of the profile to function, then software far more function filled than X-Rite is required. There's at least one command line based app (that's free) that can do this, but once you want to start working with a GUI you're going to need to spend some money.

 

(*for example do you wish that the XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation matrix provides strong saturated colours and risk having to edit away the occasional gamut problem, or is it better that the XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation matrix is somewhat anaemic and the HueSatMap tables do all the heavy lifting? Incidentally back in the era of the M9 adobe went with the former, but these days they go with the latter)

[Adam Bonn]

here's an example of the embedded Leica profile (right hand side) vs the adobe standard profile under challenging conditions (M10R - I don't have an M11, but the same principles will be in effect)

each file has the same edits

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!

 

So let's apply the following edits to the Leica profile'd photo

and compare again

 

With this edit (and similar edits with other photos exhibiting similar issues)  the problem is basically* gone, yet the Leica profile retains the colour punch (over the adobe profile) for which Leica profiles are renowned for

*I didn't spend a great deal of time here, nor did I use the HSL tool. Both of which would further improve the result

[Photoworks]

I have see this "clipping" on in camera Jpg using a concert with blue lights.

That is unfortunate because focusing in camera was real difficult in the EVF already.

[nxko]

3 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

The vast majority of the adobe dcp profile content concerns converting un-white-balanced RAW data into the XYZ_D50 color space

In order to achieve this adobe deploys several mechanisms (within the profile) to control this process

There are three mechanisms per illuminant, making six in total (each profile has two illuminants)

By comparison the Leica embedded profiles (that are typically named as per the camera model eg Leica M11) contain one mechanism per illuminant for a total of two (again two illuminants)

The colour issues with the Leica profiles occur because adobe basically guesses the XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation when this information is not contained within the profile, and Leica does not include this information within their profiles.

We can make our own profiles using (say) a CC24 or even an SG chart and then use X-Rite's freeware to create a profile with one or two illuminants, but the resultant profiles are as basic as the embedded Leica ones (but at least are made using one's own camera sensor and WB)

The lack of XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation information within these profiles can be edited on the fly using the calibration sliders with ACR/LR (in fact that's exactly what they do. You can of course use these sliders to edit images using profiles that do have the XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation info!)

One could of course create a single illuminant profile using a D50 light source which should work well (no need chromatically adapt StdA and D65 to D50 if you're using D50 all along!!) as an editing starting point for most things

In order to create ones own profiles that have all the mechanisms that the adobe profiles employ and have the tools to specify how one wishes each mechanism* of the profile to function, then software far more function filled than X-Rite is required. There's at least one command line based app (that's free) that can do this, but once you want to start working with a GUI you're going to need to spend some money.

 

(*for example do you wish that the XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation matrix provides strong saturated colours and risk having to edit away the occasional gamut problem, or is it better that the XYZ_D50 chromatic adaptation matrix is somewhat anaemic and the HueSatMap tables do all the heavy lifting? Incidentally back in the era of the M9 adobe went with the former, but these days they go with the latter)

I zoomed in on the picture on the M11 LCD, and the same smear is visible there. 

 

3 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

here's an example of the embedded Leica profile (right hand side) vs the adobe standard profile under challenging conditions (M10R - I don't have an M11, but the same principles will be in effect)

each file has the same edits

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!

 

So let's apply the following edits to the Leica profile'd photo

and compare again

 

With this edit (and similar edits with other photos exhibiting similar issues)  the problem is basically* gone, yet the Leica profile retains the colour punch (over the adobe profile) for which Leica profiles are renowned for

*I didn't spend a great deal of time here, nor did I use the HSL tool. Both of which would further improve the result

I thought you meant the HSL-sliders in your earlier post, sorry. When adjusting with these sliders I was able to make the image look good. And adding some blue color with HSL.

[Adam Bonn]

2 hours ago, nxko said:

I thought you meant the HSL-sliders in your earlier post, sorry. When adjusting with these sliders I was able to make the image look good. And adding some blue color with HSL.

It's easier to see with a screenshot!

If one is (and I don't think you are) a dyed in the wool 'Leica embedded profile' user and one faces this problem, personally I'd fix it with the camera calibration sliders, then (if needed) bring the colour back with the HSL tool

In a not really true, but demonstrates the principle nicely sorta way - that's basically the difference between a linear matrix dcp profile (such as Leica use) and one with hue sat maps (aka a LUT) that adobe use

A linear profile will carry the colours until it can't (so to speak) but a profile with LUTs will allow the colours a degree of stretch and bend to carry them further