First digital Leica - Can I match M10 to Film?

[Objektivjäger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Guys,

I currently shoot Portra 160 & 400 on a Leica M7 with 35mm Summilux ASPH pre FLE and 50 cron. I love the look of film and the overall experience, but as I live in a small town I need to ship my film off to a decent lab, which makes it quite time consuming, as well as expensive. I am not interested in processing film myself or scanning negatives, so am considering getting an M10 to supplement my M7. Basically I would use both, M10 in lower light or when I didn't want to wait for images. I do not expect to ever sell the M7.

What I am wondering is if the M10 files can be easily tweaked to look similar to images shot on Portra 160/400. In the few direct comparisons I have seen the digital files look very different to film in terms of color etc. but these are always straight out of camera jpegs. I know I will need to tweak the raw files in lightroom to get a similar look, I was just wondering if:

1. Anyone here shoots Portra 160 and 400 beside the M10 and can comment on matching the colors of the digital files to a Noritsu scan.

2. If you use a preset, which one best achieves the look with minimal additional work?

3. Are there any specific exposure settings needed on the original M10 to be able to match the files?

I'd like to restrict my post-processing if possible - I shoot professionally and the reason I started shooting film again was because the last thing I wanted to do was shoot with my workday gear on weekends and have to edit my own raw files.  I know that an M10 purchase takes me back to editing but I'm hoping it can be a quick and relatively painless process if I get a suitable workflow and don't overshoot.

I'm only interested in the M10, not R version as I am happy with 24MP for this purpose and don't want my face rubbed in how shaky my images are with no IBIS.

Thanks!

 

[250swb]

I agree with Al that you can never fully get the effect of film. And ultimately it may depend on how you feel about trying to copy it with software. I think people tend to pull back from going all the way replicating film and maybe don't add as much grain or perhaps decrease the contrast, or tweak the colour less etc. When you start with digital it's alluring for it's simple high dynamic range super sharp look and while film can be very sharp and it can have a high DR, that isn't the look we associate with Portra which has 'balls' and to do that accurately with a digital file is a skilled and committed job in whatever editing software you have. The out of the box software based film emulation programmes you can buy rarely work consistently because the each of course relies on the input image being consistent which it won't be. So a Portra emulation based on a nice evenly lit M10 file may well look like Portra, but if your M10 file is contrasty (think a high contrast street scene) or of a flat subject (think 'fog') the software may not interpret it accurately as Portra. So it's not a free lunch and truly replicating Portra will take some work, and that is where many people give up and just enjoy their M10 files looking a bit like a fantasy version of Portra, or Kodachrome, or something by Fuji.

[3D-Kraft.com]

If you are looking for a "close to analog film" experience, I would consider buying a Leica M9 (with corrosion-free ID15 or ID16 replacement sensor) or even a M8.2.

The look from the Kodak CCD sensor and the in camera postprocessing gives your photos already right "out-of-cam" a look similar to Kodak film. The limitations (ISO should not exceed 640, no live view etc.) are similar as well, without the hazzle of film roll processing.

Over the years, there were many attempts to match the M9 look with newer, CMOS sensor based cameras and some came quite close. So it is possible, but usually not as easy as some claim when they try to sell you presets and that kind of stuff.

I went this path in May this year and shooting the M9 is definitely a "more-fun experience" than shooting with my almost perfect Sony A1. I only choose the A1, when I have to shoot in conditions, which are outside the limitations of the M9 or when I simply have to deliver...

Edited September 30, 2024 by 3D-Kraft.com

[Mute-on]

I can only compare my M262 to Portra 160 and 400, and Ektar. The RAW files from the M262 bear a vastly closer resemblance to Ektar than either of the much less saturated Portra versions.

Personally, I prefer the colour saturation of Ektar to the pastels of Portra 400, but both have their place depending on subject matter. Portra 160 is too pastel (unsaturated) even for me.

If the M10 colours even vaguely resemble those from the M262, getting a Portra look will be a fairly involved exercise, as @250swb indicated. I would suggest trying Extar before committing to digital, and moderating your expectations accordingly. I think of digital as an alternative, not a replacement for film, for which I shoot Ektar and Portra 400 exclusively. 

Edited September 30, 2024 by Mute-on

[jaapv]

Personally I feel that trying to match digital to film is rather kitschy. They are two different media. Why would you want to match the look of an oil painting to an aquarel? My mantra is: if you want your photograph to look like film… shoot film. And to be honest, I like both if they are true to their roots. I don’t like film photos overprocessed to mimic digital either. 

[irenedp]

If at all, with the ones that have the Kodak CCD sensors. 
 

definitely not -at least in my experience- with the Q 1-2, the M10r or the S3. Even matching color between these ones and an M9 or S2 is a pain. 
 

however, the basic color in Leica CMOS cameras is nice. 

[3D-Kraft.com]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think @Objektivjäger pretty clearly explained, why he wants to avoid shooting film and why he is looking to achieve a similar look based on a digital process. There is nothing wrong with that approach, so it seems pretty senseless to me to recommend him, to continue shooting film or try different film types.

vor 3 Minuten schrieb irenedp:

however, the basic color in Leica CMOS cameras is nice. 

Also this depends pretty much on the particular model or even sample. The M(240) had terrible colors in the beginning and after firmware update it became better but never really good. With the M11, Leica also still seems to struggle...

[frame-it]

7 hours ago, Objektivjäger said:

Hi Guys,

 

What I am wondering is if the M10 files can be easily tweaked to look similar to images shot on Portra 160/400.

I'd like to restrict my post-processing if possible

 

impossible to match 100%,

colors can be matched 100% after spending a lot of time [we do that for movies and commercials], but the look, rendering and highlight detail etc etc etc is impossible to match perfectly

 

https://userguides.dxo.com/nikcollection/en/analog-efex/

OR try these for a basic look, then adjust to your liking>

drop them in the develop preset folder, if you don't know the location, search the net and see how to find that folder on mac or windows

 

 

 

 

Kodak Portra 160 - print.lrtemplate Kodak Portra 400 - print.lrtemplate Kodak Portra 800 - print.lrtemplate

[Objektivjäger]

Thanks Guys for the feedback - I understand the difficulty of matching digital to film, hence why I'm seeking advice from M10 users as I figure they've possibly gone down this path. I'm very happy with the look of film, I just need something for when film is impracticable, as I explained. I had hoped that some of the users on here would be familiar with specific preset packages or lightroom settings that worked well with Leica DNG files to generate a similar result. It's no big deal, I can simply shoot film alongside the M10 to work out presets myself that are specifically tailored for the Leica DNGs

As far as why I want a film look not a digital look, well I'm going to print personal albums and display these images potentially side by side. If I wanted a digital look I wouldn't be shooting film in the first place I suppose. I shoot and edit enough digital images every single day for my job to want a different feel/look/experience for my personal photography. Otherwise I might as well just be working.

Thanks all!

[250swb]

You are luck @Objektivjäger in knowing what film looks like from using it, and that gives you a head start. There are many people buying film simulation software who have never used film are are ecstatic about the results simple because it makes their digital pictures look a bit different from normal. 

[Dazzajl]

Film is a very lo-fi medium and modern digital much more like hi-fi, so getting one to look like the other is never an entirely successful process but I’m sure you’ll be able to very quickly set up a Lightroom preset of your own that gets the raw files close to where you want. In terms of colour and contrast at least. 
 

I would let your eyes guide you here, take some shots on film and the M10 and tweak the raw files until you get ‘your’ look.

 I completely understand what you’re trying to achieve here. I shoot digital MF all week, producing those super crisp and vibrant files for clients. When it’s playtime, I have my M8 for the complete opposite experience. I’d be very happy processing my own film and do sometimes still shoot with my Bronny S2 but film is so very expensive and the M8 so devoid of digital benefits, it’s enough. I think your plan will work very well  

[FarbSpieler]

My two cents: if you love Portra, it’s doable, but not effortless. Unlike film, the M10’s (and any other) sensor has linear tonal response. But with the right tools and tweaks, you can get quite close.

1. If you’re used to Noritsu scans, you’ll need to dial back Contrast and use Highlights Recovery slightly.
    
2. I'd say not presets but film profiles, from specialist vendors. If you're working in Lightroom / Photoshop ACR, RNI All Films 5 could be your best bet. That said, keep in mind that even the same film stock can vary a lot depending on how it’s processed and scanned, so while RNI delivers the character, it won’t necessarily be an exact match to your specific lab’s results.
    
3. Exposure-wise, with the M10 and film profile in mind, you'll want to underexpose by up to -1 stop to preserve highlights, similar to how you’d meter Portra for scanning. Avoid clipping highlights, since digital rolloff is harsher than film.

That said, the M10 might not be the magic solution, but with a solid Lr workflow it could work quite well.

[Stevejack]

You can certainly get close, but no you won't be able to replicate it exactly. 

Cobalt uses base profiles which are specific to your camera, so that you're starting with a 'control' point over which you can then apply their film profiles. 

RNI has a set of really nice presets which I use from time to time, there is a large range and plenty to experiment with. I really like them.

And Mastin Labs have a series of presets which also contain additional filters you can apply which take advantage of masks in Lightroom to add additional controls, mostly to highlights and shadows. 

I have and use all of them from time to time, but all of them are really just quick and simple ways to bring in some of the aesthetic signatures that I like about film - I don't see any of them as a way to exactly replicate a particular film stock. I'd say if you're working on a project and trying to match a series of images shot on film with images shot on digital, you'll probably have a hard time and just be chasing your tail. If you're just looking to edit your digital files so that they look more 'film-like' than how they look straight out of camera, yes you can definitely do that and be quite happy.

[Chris W]

On 9/30/2024 at 2:46 AM, Objektivjäger said:

I love the look of film and the overall experience, but as I live in a small town I need to ship my film off to a decent lab, which makes it quite time consuming, as well as expensive. I am not interested in processing film myself or scanning negatives, so am considering getting an M10 to supplement my M7. Basically I would use both, M10 in lower light or when I didn't want to wait for images. I do not expect to ever sell the M7.

SNIP ---

I'd like to restrict my post-processing if possible - I shoot professionally and the reason I started shooting film again was because the last thing I wanted to do was shoot with my workday gear on weekends and have to edit my own raw files.

You've already had plenty of good advice.

I have an M10 and find it as close to the 'feel' of shooting film that I remember from my M6 30 years ago.

I can only say I 'tweak' my digital M files and it takes me five minutes to get something I'm very happy with. I'm NOT trying to emulate film, although I have some Capture One and Mastin Labs film presets.

What I wanted to say is that I went back to film a couple of years ago and found it expensive, but moreover a lot more hassle.

If I do the scanning myself it takes hours and is extremely boring. If I let the lab do the scanning they don't take as much care. They sort of do a blanket exposure for the whole roll, meaning some shots seem blown out, others too dark. They consistently left dust either on the negative or the scanning table, leading to hours of spot removal.

I understand the appeal of the film aesthetic, but as far as time saving workflows, I find digital to be far superior.

Edited February 26 by Chris W

[LPettigrew]

I use RNI film profiles with my M10. They’re built from the actual film scans and get close enough to the look I want without too much messing around. Portra 160 and 400 are in there, and while it’s never going to be a complete replacement to film (since film has a fundamentally different non-linear rolloff in highlights and lab scans vary so much), it definitely gives those lovely film colors. 

[Objektivjäger]

Just a quick thank you to all of the forum members who have generously given their time to reply to this topic. I appreciate all of the information you have provided. 
 

I am currently taking a selection of images on film and digital of the same subjects with the same lenses. I plan to convert these using the Martin labs presets, and then adjust the presets to match the look that my lab provides. I’m hoping that this will give me a consistent look from digital that is relatively close to my lab scans.

Thanks again for all of your support and time.

 

[Stevejack]

On 9/30/2024 at 5:50 PM, Objektivjäger said:

As far as why I want a film look not a digital look, well I'm going to print personal albums and display these images potentially side by side. If I wanted a digital look I wouldn't be shooting film in the first place I suppose. I shoot and edit enough digital images every single day for my job to want a different feel/look/experience for my personal photography. Otherwise I might as well just be working.

I get exactly what you mean. This is what attracted me to the M digital cameras in the first place - it feels different enough in use compared with other digital cameras that it still feels like I'm taking a break from digital devices.  

I really enjoy using film but it is a pain in the #ss so I rarely do it. I think I enjoy the experience of using film cameras more than using film itself. I'm quite happy with a digital output. If I were a darkroom printer it would be a different story, but when I'm just scanning my film into the computer and printing them anyway... well the look of film just isn't always enough of a motivator, as nice as it is. 

But back to your original question - Go with a used M10 and try the film presets mentioned in this thread, I don't think you'll be disappointed and if you are you can always sell the M10 for what you paid for it, there's not really much risk there. For your situation I think it's well worth giving it a go.

 

[costa43]

On 9/30/2024 at 11:50 AM, Objektivjäger said:

Thanks Guys for the feedback - I understand the difficulty of matching digital to film, hence why I'm seeking advice from M10 users as I figure they've possibly gone down this path. I'm very happy with the look of film, I just need something for when film is impracticable, as I explained. I had hoped that some of the users on here would be familiar with specific preset packages or lightroom settings that worked well with Leica DNG files to generate a similar result. It's no big deal, I can simply shoot film alongside the M10 to work out presets myself that are specifically tailored for the Leica DNGs

As far as why I want a film look not a digital look, well I'm going to print personal albums and display these images potentially side by side. If I wanted a digital look I wouldn't be shooting film in the first place I suppose. I shoot and edit enough digital images every single day for my job to want a different feel/look/experience for my personal photography. Otherwise I might as well just be working.

Thanks all!

Makes sense, the best I’ve used are from Cobalt images. They are not the cheapest but they deliver imo. 

[brickftl]

as a fairly new film shooter with my M6 classic and MP, I've shot a few rolls of Portra 400 (and also Ektar 100), and also as someone who's fairly adept with post process of digital images, yes you can get close to making your M10 images have a similar appearance to Portra 400, although (to me) the look of film is unique and not easily duplicated in digital post.

Moreover, I'm with a few others above - rather than try to duplicate the look of Portra with M10 images (and perhaps frustratingly miss the mark), you'll probably have a better experience with the M10 if you approach it with an appreciation for the unique look of its images as compared to film stock. 

In my case I appreciate the different feel/look of film vs digital, and chose which camera to take out to shoot based on how I'm feeling that particular day.

BTW, I think highly of the M10.

Edited March 9 by brickftl

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M