Leica M11 -purplish tint ???

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A sympathetic idea were it not that an average colour perception is even more elusive than an average human being.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352154619300464

An added complication is that colour perception has a strong cultural component. Should Leica correct for European, Japanese or USA colour vision?

https://www.sapiens.org/language/color-perception/

40 minutes ago, Blues Bird said:

Well, I think Don Daniel is right when he believes that we can expect a good camera with its photographs to reproduce the reality surrounding us as it is seen by (average) eyes and depicted in the (average) brain.  After all, the hobby is called photography and not image editing for a reason.

Whether someone subsequently enjoys changing or distorting this reality for their photos is another matter and should not be confused with actual photography.

 

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

56 minutes ago, Blues Bird said:

After all, the hobby is called photography and not image editing for a reason.

What reason?  γράψτε με φως = write with light. How are you going to write without both pen and paper?

A digital file without translating by editing is not a photograph, nor is a negative without print.

[Photoworks]

51 minutes ago, Blues Bird said:

Well, I think Don Daniel is right when he believes that we can expect a good camera with its photographs to reproduce the reality surrounding us as it is seen by (average) eyes and depicted in the (average) brain.  After all, the hobby is called photography and not image editing for a reason.

Whether someone subsequently enjoys changing or distorting this reality for their photos is another matter and should not be confused with actual photography.

1st is understanding light. LOL

Leica I said before I use AWB most of the time and I am very happy with what Leica does. I am happier about the Leica than the other systems I have from Sony, Nikon (that is Pink), and Canon. Hasselblad does a good job too.

But I am not here to change anybody's mind, just be open to experimenting with what works best.

Don Daniel's image sample was of a sunrise, not sure if setting the camera to "Sunny" or Daylight is correct, to me, it looked at a time where it probably was not 5500K.
In any case, the light can change in minutes, and only a colorimeter can tell you what to set the camera, or do it in post.

For anyone interested I use Kenko/Minolta Colormeeter and Lumu on the iPhone. I find myself using it to balance continuous light with flash, and different flashes in the studio as umbrellas and banks can reflect different colors.

[lct]

Am i alone to see that the dpreview pic above shows magenta ad/or red cast with some Adobe raw converters (PS Elements in the 1st crop below) and none or less so with some non-Adobe ones (Silkypix in the 2nd crop)?

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!

 

Edited December 6, 2023 by lct

[jaapv]

Of course it does. Every raw converter will use its own algorithms resulting in its own result. That is why blaming the camera is silly. Sure, the maker can aim for a certain basic result, but it will be interpreted in dozens of ways. And when the users are finished with it, millions of different results.  The whole base line with  this thread is whether the initial result with certain raw converters is to everybody’s taste. In this thread clearly not.

That is where some minor postprocessing skill comes in. 

The only reality that exists in photography is in the mind of the photographer. Postprocessing is nothing more than bringing out that reality - or attempting to do so.

[Cattoo]

My guess is that Leica views the color cast (such as it is) as a feature, not a flaw.  I don't know if it's true but some reviewers claim Leica told them that it was intended to evoke Kodachrome 64 colors; I've read some say it was to reproduce the look of the M9.  In any case, every camera is going have its unique signature.  I have five different cameras, and each produces a slightly different image out of camera of the same scene.  And none of them are really "accurate".  One produces images that are flatter with less contrast.  One produces image that are more highly saturated with more contrast. But with a few tweaks in post you would be hard pressed to tell them apart.  Personally, I happen to like the M11's AWB SOOC color cast in some situations.  If I want highly accurate colors I'll either set the white balance in camera or tweak the colors in post.  It's a simple process.   

I don't mean to sound sarcastic, but I don't understand how anyone who apparently is a serious enough photographer to pay $9,000 for a camera would not want to take total control of the post processing part.  

Generally speaking, pro grade cameras are going to be more complicated all around.  If you're looking for easy, then use an iPhone.  You don't need to worry about ISO, shutter speed or aperture.  Or even lenses for that matter.  And the colors are generally acceptable.  Step into the pro grade arena and you'll have a lot more latitude but will it will require more expertise and effort.  We all know this. 

 

 

[Cattoo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Blues Bird said:

the hobby is called photography and not image editing for a reason

I'd say argue image editing is a necessary step in the photographic process.

I'll also point out that when this practice/hobby became a thing, when the term "photography" was first coined, photographers spent far more time editing/processing images in "post" than we do today.    

[lct]

3 hours ago, Cattoo said:

photographers spent far more time editing/processing images in "post" than we do today.

Not sure i would generalize this way. Photographers did often use slides in the past and for some of them (e.g. Kodachrome) the post processing was made almost exclusively by Kodak and/or print labs. Also all B&W photographers had not a darkroom by far. Not only amateurs but also some pro ones like HCB used to appoint such labs extensively. A guy like me never did post processing in the film days be it for amateur or pro photos and digital has been a real novelty from this view.point. YMMV.

[elmars]

vor 10 Stunden schrieb jaapv:

You are arguing against the school of thought that the camera must take and produce the photograph without any input from the photographer bar pressing the shutter button.

I want to try again.

You are happy with the white balance because you edit each image individually. We have understood that. We also understand that Don Daniel is unhappy because he doesn't want to correct the same "error" in every image. I'm mostly happy with the white balance for my own photos, but I still think it should be changed in relation to the magenta cast. Because it's not about the three of us, it's about the majority.

In Japan (and elsewhere in the world since cameras have been in phones), many people have been working for decades to produce the most pleasing images possible with a camera. Colours and therefore white balance are an important part of this. Not only the vast majority of "snapshooters" expect pleasing results, but also professional photographers (reportage, wedding) because they have to deliver quickly. Sharing images quickly is extremely important nowadays.

Leica has also realised this in the meantime. That's why the M11 has multi-segment metering, that's why there's the Leica Photos app, that's why Leica attaches much more importance to good JPG than before.

That's why the magenta cast needs to be toned down. It's a decision of taste by Leica, which I (different to others like Don Daniel) don't find extreme, but still on the edge of what can be described as good or generally acceptable. It shouldn't depend on the RAW converter whether the white balance bothers you or not. The JPG shouldn't be on the edge of acceptability either. And an M11 should not deliver very different colours to other Leica cameras.

A good test would be to take photos in sunlight (three to four hours before or after midday) with an iPhone, a Nikon/Canon, a Q3 and an M11 and then place them next to each other. Then you can see that the magenta cast of the M11 is too extreme.

[anbucco]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb Blues Bird:

Well, I think Don Daniel is right when he believes that we can expect a good camera with its photographs to reproduce the reality surrounding us as it is seen by (average) eyes and depicted in the (average) brain.  After all, the hobby is called photography and not image editing for a reason.

Whether someone subsequently enjoys changing or distorting this reality for their photos is another matter and should not be confused with actual photography.

Anyone who has been taking photos for a while knows that this is impossible. The eye is a perfect computer that assembles what it sees into an image that can practically never be reproduced in exactly the same way. It has no problem automatically finding a different white balance for different light sources. For example, if you take a photo in an artificially lit interior and daylight is shining through the windows outside - no problem for the eye, but no camera can correct this. And so every shot is an interpretation of what the respective manufacturer considers most attractive.
In addition, the eye automatically brightens dark areas and reduces highlights - built-in HDR! 
With RAW files, everyone has the opportunity to find their own personal favorite setting.

[anbucco]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb Blues Bird:

Well, I think Don Daniel is right when he believes that we can expect a good camera with its photographs to reproduce the reality surrounding us as it is seen by (average) eyes and depicted in the (average) brain.  After all, the hobby is called photography and not image editing for a reason.

Whether someone subsequently enjoys changing or distorting this reality for their photos is another matter and should not be confused with actual photography.

What do you think happened in the days of analog photography? The images were automatically corrected during development. There were films for daylight, artificial light, slide films, films for portraits (Kodak Velvia!) etc.

Digital photography is the freedom to decide how you like the photo best. LR, On1, DxO, Capture One and others (Radiant!) already have excellent presets that usually require little or no correction. But here, too, there are different interpretations of what is "right". They all render RAW files in a slightly different way.

[jaapv]

33 minutes ago, elmars said:

I want to try again.

You are happy with the white balance because you edit each image individually. We have understood that. We also understand that Don Daniel is unhappy because he doesn't want to correct the same "error" in every image. I'm mostly happy with the white balance for my own photos, but I still think it should be changed in relation to the magenta cast. Because it's not about the three of us, it's about the majority.

In Japan (and elsewhere in the world since cameras have been in phones), many people have been working for decades to produce the most pleasing images possible with a camera. Colours and therefore white balance are an important part of this. Not only the vast majority of "snapshooters" expect pleasing results, but also professional photographers (reportage, wedding) because they have to deliver quickly. Sharing images quickly is extremely important nowadays.

Leica has also realised this in the meantime. That's why the M11 has multi-segment metering, that's why there's the Leica Photos app, that's why Leica attaches much more importance to good JPG than before.

That's why the magenta cast needs to be toned down. It's a decision of taste by Leica, which I (different to others like Don Daniel) don't find extreme, but still on the edge of what can be described as good or generally acceptable. It shouldn't depend on the RAW converter whether the white balance bothers you or not. The JPG shouldn't be on the edge of acceptability either. And an M11 should not deliver very different colours to other Leica cameras.

A good test would be to take photos in sunlight (three to four hours before or after midday) with an iPhone, a Nikon/Canon, a Q3 and an M11 and then place them next to each other. Then you can see that the magenta cast of the M11 is too extreme.

Don Daniel is unhappy because he does not want to create his individual default camera profiles which is a basic action for any camera unless you are happy with the ones provided by the software maker. 

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, elmars said:

Because it's not about the three of us, it's about the majority.

An assertion that needs a bit of evidence. 

[jaapv]

Usually these complaints threads attract dozens of reactions, even from new members. I see nothing here.

[lct]

5 hours ago, elmars said:

[...]That's why the magenta cast needs to be toned down [...]

Thanks no thanks, my raw converter doesn't show any significant magenta cast so far, and the slight red oversaturation of the M11 colour profile is not always unpleasant and can be fixed easily in PP. BTW, unless i missed their posts, which i apologize, it would be interesting if C1's, DxO's and other non-Adobe users would be kind enough to confirm if they see significant magenta cast out of their own raw converters.

Edited December 7, 2023 by lct

[Cattoo]

9 hours ago, lct said:

Not sure i would generalize this way. Photographers did often use slides in the past and for some of them (e.g. Kodachrome) the post processing was made almost exclusively by Kodak and/or print labs.

Photography as a discipline long predated the era of slides and print labs, or even film for that matter. The earliest practical photography--daguerreotype--was a very labor intensive process.  In any case, even if we're restricting our definition of "photography" to the mid 20th century 35mm film variant, there was still a post-processing phase for every photo taken.  Photographers who didn't want to bother with that part of the process would outsource the work to Kodak or some other film lab...and those who used Kodachrome had no choice.   But someone did it.  You couldn't produce a photo without it.  

 

[Photoworks]

7 hours ago, jaapv said:

Don Daniel is unhappy because he does not want to create his individual default camera profiles which is a basic action for any camera unless you are happy with the ones provided by the software maker. 

@don daniel is seeing Magenta casts in the original JPG too.  And he is looking for a solution that will give him the best results in capture.
That is always a good starting point.

[jaapv]

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[charlesphoto99]

16 hours ago, Blues Bird said:

Well, I think Don Daniel is right when he believes that we can expect a good camera with its photographs to reproduce the reality surrounding us as it is seen by (average) eyes and depicted in the (average) brain.  After all, the hobby is called photography and not image editing for a reason.

Whether someone subsequently enjoys changing or distorting this reality for their photos is another matter and should not be confused with actual photography.

Somebody obviously never had the 'pleasure' (read sarcastically) of printing Type C (or even more hair pulling Cibabchrome) in the darkroom. Nothing like waiting ten minutes for a print to go through the machine, just to be ripped up in order to add a couple of points of yellow or magenta to the color head. And then do it all over again because those few points changed the exposure, etc etc. Rinse and repeat. Digital photographers, esp those who don't print (which sadly ime is most) have no clue how easy they have it, beyond their laziness to move a slider or two (or click a preset) when needed. 

[jaapv]

Actually, I loved Cibachrome printing, for satisfaction of the fantastic results. Meopta enlarger, Kaiser dichroitic colourhead, Philips colorimeter, exposure meter and timer, Kodak time clock, large  water tank with thermostat for the chemicals, electric drum roller, (and a huge extractor fan for the chemical vapours) I spent evenings there for just a few prints.  However, printing from colour negatives was a PITA.