processing M10 images

[brickftl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've exclusively used top Sony and Nikon cams and also Leica Q cams, and my processing usually scrubbed noise out of my high ISO images and involved fairly heavy post process including layer masks and various filters to meet my desired aesthetic.

Then mid February I got my first manual focus cam since the mid 70's, a M10. And since then I've experienced a significant shift how I view and process images. I almost never call up Photoshop, and instead do minor adjustments via Camera Raw, often adjusting tonality/color to create a more film-like look. And in the process I'm starting to question my former preference in removing noise.

Here are three versions of one of my M10 images. First is straight out of camera, no adjustments at all. Second is converted to black/white, but no noise reduction nor face recovery. Third is the same black/white but with noise adjustment and face recovery.

Question: which of the black/white images do you prefer and why? Or maybe you would have preferred the black/white only with face recovery but not noise reduction? Look forward to your thoughts.

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 March 28 by brickftl

[evikne]

20 minutes ago, brickftl said:

Or maybe you would have preferred the black/white only with face recovery but not noise reduction?

Yes. I prefer the last one, not because that the noise bothers me in the second image, but the face looks cleaner and less harsh in the last one. What do you mean with "face recovery"? In situations like this, I sometimes brush in a mask with reduced contrast over the face, which makes a similar effect.

[Advertisement]

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

[thighslapper]

Being a bit of a purist ....... noise wasn't present in the scene you photographed so why accept it in the image if you can get rid of it.

No doubt the 'nostalgia' forum members will like the pseudo grain film look ..... but unless you deliberately want to make faux analogue images it's not for me. 

Edited March 28 by thighslapper

[brickftl]

40 minutes ago, evikne said:

Yes. I prefer the last one, not because that the noise bothers me in the second image, but the face looks cleaner and less harsh in the last one. What do you mean with "face recovery"? In situations like this, I sometimes brush in a mask with reduced contrast over the face, which makes a similar effect.

sorry I should have explained. Topaz AI has a "face recovery" feature that somehow, subtly, improves blurred faces.

[brickftl]

53 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

Being a bit of a purist ....... noise wasn't present in the scene you photographed so why accept it in the image if you can get rid of it.

No doubt the 'nostalgia' forum members will like the pseudo grain film look ..... but unless you deliberately want to make faux analogue images it's not for me. 

I don't understand your comment about pseudo grain. In the color image, lifting shadows revealed some noise in the dark color areas so I used AI noise reduction in camera raw to remove it. But I didn't add any pseudo grain to create a film look. The only processing I now and then (not always) do to achieve film look (none of which was done to any of the above images) is to make the colors look less saturated, more faded, with maybe a color shift. Here's an example.

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 March 28 by brickftl

[01maciel]

In the first photo, the faces are plunged into darkness. In the last one, the face of the woman on the right in particular looks very artificial. Either too much make-up or too much noise reduction.
I think the second one is OK, but I wouldn't let the AI decide on the noise reduction, would go for NI instead

[brickftl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, 01maciel said:

In the first photo, the faces are plunged into darkness. In the last one, the face of the woman on the right in particular looks very artificial. Either too much make-up or too much noise reduction.
I think the second one is OK, but I wouldn't let the AI decide on the noise reduction, would go for NI instead

I'm starting to think the same thing about Image 3 and AI noise reduction, hence the reason for this post. What is NI?

In my newfound love of Leica rangefinders, I'm starting to embrace and actually enjoy the noise, realizing that in some cases not only is it fine but lines up with the vintage/film look that appeals to me.

[costa43]

I'm not a fan of noise reduction at the expense of detail in any pic usually but can tolerate a little for night time shots. Personally I would work on the colour file with this one but for the B&W, I would crush the shadows a little on the 2nd pic and call it a day. It's a pool room shot so grit suits it well!  I do not find the skin tones on the 3rd picture very pleasing.

[brickftl]

1 minute ago, costa43 said:

I'm not a fan of noise reduction at the expense of detail in any pic usually but can tolerate a little for night time shots. Personally I would work on the colour file with this one but for the B&W, I would crush the shadows a little on the 2nd pic and call it a day. It's a pool room shot so grit suits it well!  I do not find the skin tones on the 3rd picture very pleasing.

agreed, me neither. 3rd one skin looks plastic

 

[Anakronox]

I say embrace the grain!  I honestly don’t care about noise unless I’m working with strobes.  For most of my output I wander around at night and let my ISO ride.  I genuinely dislike how heavy-handed AI noise reduction is, but I’ll sometimes cheat and use Adobe’s set to maybe 3.  Anything else looks artificial to me. 

[brickftl]

7 minutes ago, Anakronox said:

I say embrace the grain!  I honestly don’t care about noise unless I’m working with strobes.  For most of my output I wander around at night and let my ISO ride.  I genuinely dislike how heavy-handed AI noise reduction is, but I’ll sometimes cheat and use Adobe’s set to maybe 3.  Anything else looks artificial to me. 

I think going forward I'll skip noise reduction in ACR. And after finishing up any changes to the image I want in ACR, if I still feel there's some noise to be cleaned up, I'll bring it into photoshop where I can apply, and then mask out and reduce opacity as needed. And to your point, more and more I'll be embracing noise and perhaps leave it exactly as is for a more realistic image. It's taking me a minute to get over my bad post habits with Sony/Q3 images, but I'm getting there 😎

[01maciel]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb brickftl:

What is NI?

NI: Natural Intelligence

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, costa43 said:

I'm not a fan of noise reduction at the expense of detail in any pic usually but can tolerate a little for night time shots. Personally I would work on the colour file with this one but for the B&W, I would crush the shadows a little on the 2nd pic and call it a day. It's a pool room shot so grit suits it well!  I do not find the skin tones on the 3rd picture very pleasing.

That was true five years ago. Now noise reducing programs are AI driven not to lose detail whilst reducing noise and have far more user control.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, brickftl said:

agreed, me neither. 3rd one skin looks plastic

 

Better? One minute photoshop on the small jpg. A bit like Kodachrome 64, I'd say.

 

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!

[brickftl]

curious what you think about this processing. No noise reduction and less contrast, hopefully more natural black/white

 

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!

[costa43]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

That was true five years ago. Now noise reducing programs are AI driven not to lose detail whilst reducing noise and have far more user control.

I need to try a few myself.  I’ve always been averse to them. Maybe a better word is blinkered.

[rogxwhit]

Digital cameras get ever more capable in terms of the malleability of their output.  Overall, this is good.  But as far as the resultant images go, there are always balances to be struck.  Pixel count, colour rendering ...

In parallel, processing apps get ever more sophisticated.  And this is a pertinent thread because it's easy to get diverted down blind tunnels when processing. 

In processing, I try to hang on to a core reference for the result, which is emotional verity.  This can accommodate different versions of an image whilst still remaining as a benchmark.  

And the general drift of answers above accords with my thinking.   🙂

 

[brickftl]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

That was true five years ago. Now noise reducing programs are AI driven not to lose detail whilst reducing noise and have far more user control.

agreed they are better with detail, but as you can see from the first image I posted it rendered the face too smooth

[250swb]

Either the first (middle) B&W image or the last attempt are OK, the other B&W image is too artificial looking. But I think both need some dodging and burning to liven things up and stop various parts of anatomy like hair or tee shirt blending in with the background shadows. To demonstrate it to yourself you can try using Levels and drag the middle (mid-tone) slider to the left to lighten the mid tones, overall Shadow and Highlight points will remain the same. But as it is I think maybe you are using high contrast simply to disguise digital noise, or noise you've introduced along the way. If you are bothered by the noise I recommend the Enhance/Denoise function in ACR before any post processing.

Edited March 29 by 250swb

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[thighslapper]

22 hours ago, brickftl said:

I don't understand your comment about pseudo grain. In the color image, lifting shadows revealed some noise in the dark color areas so I used AI noise reduction in camera raw to remove it. But I didn't add any pseudo grain to create a film look. The only processing I now and then (not always) do to achieve film look (none of which was done to any of the above images) is to make the colors look less saturated, more faded, with maybe a color shift. Here's an example.

I think you misunderstood ..... there is no noise in the scene you saw so if you want a true representation of it then removing noise ... either inherent due to high ISO or through processing ..... gives you a more faithful image. Some like noise because it gives an old style 'film look', which is ok by me. I just prefer as little noise as possible. The current AI NR in LR comes with minimal processing penalty unless you are into highish ISO's or are very heavy handed. The one thing that is hard to avoid however in raising shadows is muddy colours as the colour data is lacking to start with and no amount of NR or AI trickery seems able to avoid that. 

You did pick a particularly problematic image where processing is going to involve a lot of compromises anyway .... it just depends what's most important in what you want to achieve and portray. 

Apart from some minor differences in Dynamic Range and basic colour balance the sensor output from most recent cameras is essentially the same so there should be no real need to change your processing ..... unless the camera has changed what you are actually taking photos of and how you do it, that is .....

Edited March 29 by thighslapper