M11M Images Are Too Perfect

[thighslapper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/2/2024 at 5:45 PM, Tailwagger said:

But for traditionalists, I certainly can see where the current aesthetic fails to appeal. 

That basically sums up the whole of this thread. 🙂

[Ken Abrahams]

I am very happy with the M10M and establishing grain in my work. The M10M files can be exposed at 800 iso + and then crop into the image and finish in silver efex with contrast so the grain looks like grain. I am used to using Kodak RE 2475 1000 asa film and printing on Agfa TP6, now that is what I call grain. 

It's taken a while to get in touch with this camera {M10M} and I wouldn't like to change my system right now. 

best

Ken 

[Advertisement]

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

[homer667]

On 12/30/2023 at 8:59 AM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

To me it's not the ISO. It's the super sharp detail from the sensor combined with the modern lenses. I fixed it by using a MATE almost exclusively on my M11M.

Agree on the grain. Easy to add to tase in post.

Gordon

Hi you mentioned that you fixed the super sharp detail (sensor+modern lenses which I agree) with a MATE.what do you mean exactly??

Omiros

[DadDadDaddyo]

Not sure I'm necessarily looking for the "look" of 35mm film... 

The aesthetics of the natural grain that accompanies a 35mm film frame is a characteristic of the film format, that is, of the size of the film frame itself. It's not simply a characteristic of the frame itself, but of using film that's the size of the frame. 

One of the reasons folks have moved so often into larger film formats is to remove that grain as an element of the aesthetics of the final image. For these folks, the grain in a 35mm shot serves as a distraction, a bug, not a feature. Sure, there's a kind of gritty subtext to such an image, and if that's what the photographer is looking for, that is, injecting the format into the building of the image's "look", then for those folks, the grain is a feature, not a bug. 

At least with 35mm film, the source of that effect is natural. 

A sidetrack: in the firewall of my 2019 MX-5 Miata there is a tube,  the "sound tube", whose sole purpose is to transmit natural sound from the engine compartment into the passenger compartment. Mazda's idea was to provide a controlled degree of "punch-through" of sound to counteract the degree of insulation and isolation that's common in today's cars, to improve the sense of "connection" between the driver and the machine. 

Some drivers found this idea laughable, and there's a small but steady aftermarket for a rubber plug that folks insert into the hole in the firewall when they rip out the sound tube. 

Me, I don't mind it. I like how the engine sounds. 

And, Mazda's approach differs dramatically from that of some high-end "performance" cars that have taken a different approach entirely. Theirs is to pipe digital engine sounds into the passenger compartment via the car's stereo system. I'm pretty sure I'd be embarrassed to drive such a machine, unless I had a way to shut off such fakery.

So. If the photographer wants the effect, fine. There are two ways to achieve it. One can inject synthetic grain into the image to give it that gritty verisimilitude. Or, one can use 35mm film when the situation calls for it. 

All of this is why I still shoot film, in formats ranging from 35mm to 8x10 inch. The desired final image dictates the format. Would I add grain to a medium format, 4x5 or 8x10 inch film shot? Nope. 

In fact, one of the great attractions of the M10M and M11M is the extent to which they can produce images that "feel like" medium format or 4x5 film to me. 

If I wanted that gritty feel, like some 60's fashion shot or something out of "Blow Up", I'd pull out my M4, load it with 400 ISO film, and go to town. 

[marchyman]

8 hours ago, homer667 said:

Hi you mentioned that you fixed the super sharp detail (sensor+modern lenses which I agree) with a MATE.what do you mean exactly??

Omiros

MATE: Medium Angle Tri-Elmar, a Leica 28-35-50 mm f/ 4 lens.  Not to be confused with the WATE (Wide Angle Tri-Elmar) 16-18-21mm f/4.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

9 hours ago, homer667 said:

Hi you mentioned that you fixed the super sharp detail (sensor+modern lenses which I agree) with a MATE.what do you mean exactly??

Omiros

Not fixed. Calmed. Put a pre 2000's lens on the camera instead of some uber sharp modern design and you change the look. The MATE is one of my favourites for this and I do actually want a new modern version.

MATE: Medium angle tri-elmar. Described well on the post above this one. Designed by Mandler. Just lovely on the Monochrom's. Near impossible to repair with some parts and elements no longer available.

Gordon

[Jacobjuul]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Strangely Alan Schaller was part of the M11M promo, but still shoots his M10M