Smogg Posted March 22 Share #161 Posted March 22 Advertisement (gone after registration) 40 minutes ago, Telemetric said: Hassel has the best color science by far. My colorist always says that if all photographers used Hassel, he wouldn't have any work. And, by the way, Leica has one of the worst color sciences. Also said by my colorist, who works with the best agencies and photographers in the world. I own Leica Ms because I love the shooting experience, but getting the so-called “Leica look” is incredibly easy in any camera. In fact, I apply the same color style to all my photos (my color style), regardless of the camera, and it’s actually with the Leicas where it takes the most work to get it right. By the way, here you have part of the curriculum of my colorist (and good friend): The Addretouch post-produced works have been published in international media as Stern, Paris Match, El País (EPS), Time, Newsweek, Newsweek Japan, Washington Post, Time, New York Times, C- Photo Magazine or British Journal of Photography. Its clients have obtained prestigious awards as World Press Photo (2007, 2009, 2013) Fotopress (2007) and entities such as Caixa Forum, La Virreina, Casa América or Niemeyer Center, that has worked for print works and exhibition producer. This isn't the first time I've heard a similar comment about Leica colors from professional colorists. A friend of mine works as a photographer in an art gallery. When he first started working there, he was asked to stop using Leica for work and switch to Canon because the local colorists were spending too much time processing the materials they prepared for printing. I've always been surprised by this, but I'm not a professional. At least our opinions about Hasselblad colors coincide 😉 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 22 Posted March 22 Hi Smogg, Take a look here Leica Q3 or Fujifilm GFX 100RF. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Chris W Posted March 22 Share #162 Posted March 22 47 minutes ago, Telemetric said: This is subjetive and if you like it, perfect but the truth is that Leica color science is not good. One minute you say subjective then claim the truth is 'not good'. It can't be both. I like the colours out of my M10 and I LOVED the Q files. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 22 Share #163 Posted March 22 17 minutes ago, Smogg said: This isn't the first time I've heard a similar comment about Leica colors from professional colorists. Too many variables. The M8, M240 and M10 have a vastly different look. I didn't like the M240 colours. M11 owners say it looks different to the M10. The Q series again looks very different and I loved it, it didn't need much editing. I know a photojournalist who almost exclusively uses the M11 and his images are stunning. I don't know how hard he works on them, but he usually has a fast turnaround time (in the hotel , late after a day of shooting on assignment). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #164 Posted March 22 27 minutes ago, Smogg said: This isn't the first time I've heard a similar comment about Leica colors from professional colorists. A friend of mine works as a photographer in an art gallery. When he first started working there, he was asked to stop using Leica for work and switch to Canon because the local colorists were spending too much time processing the materials they prepared for printing. I've always been surprised by this, but I'm not a professional. At least our opinions about Hasselblad colors coincide 😉 Well, I have difficulties too when I want to apply my color style in a Leica raw. Anything you touch, is a nightmare. Or you like the leica color or you are done… Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #165 Posted March 22 12 minutes ago, Chris W said: One minute you say subjective then claim the truth is 'not good'. It can't be both. I like the colours out of my M10 and I LOVED the Q files. Is subjebtive for him i meant. If he likes ir, perfect. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #166 Posted March 22 9 minutes ago, Chris W said: Too many variables. The M8, M240 and M10 have a vastly different look. I didn't like the M240 colours. M11 owners say it looks different to the M10. The Q series again looks very different and I loved it, it didn't need much editing. I know a photojournalist who almost exclusively uses the M11 and his images are stunning. I don't know how hard he works on them, but he usually has a fast turnaround time (in the hotel , late after a day of shooting on assignment). I have the M10 and M11 and both are different… and bad. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 22 Share #167 Posted March 22 Advertisement (gone after registration) 4 minutes ago, Telemetric said: Anything you touch, is a nightmare. Not for me. And again you are just saying 'Leica'. The Q look is completely different IMO. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzajl Posted March 22 Share #168 Posted March 22 1 hour ago, Telemetric said: Hassel has the best color science by far. My colorist always says that if all photographers used Hassel, he wouldn't have any work. Well, it would be daft to refute the word of a working pro. I will have to take another look and see if I actually still agree with myself ☺️ 1 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 22 Share #169 Posted March 22 34 minutes ago, Chris W said: Too many variables. The M8, M240 and M10 have a vastly different look. I didn't like the M240 colours. M11 owners say it looks different to the M10. The Q series again looks very different and I loved it, it didn't need much editing. I know a photojournalist who almost exclusively uses the M11 and his images are stunning. I don't know how hard he works on them, but he usually has a fast turnaround time (in the hotel , late after a day of shooting on assignment). In that case it was a Leica SL. This is the opinion of the colorists, not mine. I like Leica colors in most cameras, although unfortunately they vary from camera to camera. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 22 Share #170 Posted March 22 However, I never use the Leica camera profile in Lightroom. In my opinion, it is always terrible, so I choose Adobe Standard as a starting point. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted March 22 Share #171 Posted March 22 Thankfully I no longer have to be a slave to colour science. At best the raw files from any camera and software are merely a starting point to match my vision for a given image: which admittedly can vary wildly. 😉 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #172 Posted March 22 1 hour ago, Chris W said: Not for me. And again you are just saying 'Leica'. The Q look is completely different IMO. 🤷♂️ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #173 Posted March 22 40 minutes ago, keithlaban.co.uk said: Thankfully I no longer have to be a slave to colour science. At best the raw files from any camera and software are merely a starting point to match my vision for a given image: which admittedly can vary wildly. 😉 Exactly… if you leave the camera’s color… you will be one more. The point is to have your own color style because is part of your style. If you like Leica color is great, I like it too, but is not “my” color. And this is the problem with all leicas: if you want to work on it to have your own color, is a nightmare. Not just me says this, all professional colorist that I know says that and even more: some of them even charge more if have to work with a leica file. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RQ44 Posted March 22 Share #174 Posted March 22 If the new fuji was under 60mp, I bet this thread would not even exist. The fuji is f4 and no ibis. Just because it has a 100mp sensor, lemmings are jumping ship..............because it's better? These threads of comparisons are very pointless. People today seem to drop and look for the newest thing all the time. I was always taught to work hard for your possessions, learn to use them,use them well and enjoy them. This new generation of dumping when they can, and going for the new is poor. Possibly why there are so many less successful relationships today, they just can't learn to perfect what they already have out for not being satisfied. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 22 Share #175 Posted March 22 I'm puzzled by a statement that 'Leica colour science is bad'. I could understand it if it meant that Leica colours don't match what someone used to editing Canon/Nikon/Sony might want, and they would rather not have the faff of making Leica images match those of other brands. That would be irritating, but wouldn't make Leica colour science 'bad' - just different. What could be 'bad' about digital colour data recorded in a raw file that makes it more difficult to edit? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzajl Posted March 22 Share #176 Posted March 22 5 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said: I'm puzzled by a statement that 'Leica colour science is bad'. I could understand it if it meant that Leica colours don't match what someone used to editing Canon/Nikon/Sony might want, and they would rather not have the faff of making Leica images match those of other brands. That would be irritating, but wouldn't make Leica colour science 'bad' - just different. What could be 'bad' about digital colour data recorded in a raw file that makes it more difficult to edit? Poor might not be the most accurate choice of words, in the wider sense. The way Leica colours are engineered into the camera makes processing files to represent true to life colour more difficult. Because you can’t make global adjustments to colour temp, tint and hues. But on the flip side, if you’re not working commercially in colour critical environments, you get a camera that offers a gorgeous, artistic interpretation of the world that hopefully inspires great images. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 22 Share #177 Posted March 22 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Dazzajl said: The way Leica colours are engineered into the camera makes processing files to represent true to life colour more difficult. Because you can’t make global adjustments to colour temp, tint and hues. Still puzzled. You can make such global adjustments in post. Or do you mean you can't adjust temp/tint/hue in camera for JPGs? Otherwise we're still dealing with just raw files, so how are colours 'engineered into the camera'? Or rather: how are colours engineered into the camera in a way that makes the science bad - or the files more difficult to work with than others that might look similar? Is it something to do with the exact RGB colour hues in the Bayer array? Edited March 22 by LocalHero1953 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 22 Share #178 Posted March 22 If you don't like the colours, you can standardise them by using a Color Checker Passport colour swatch and then setting up a correction file in Lightroom to standard colours. I have Color Checker files for various lighting conditions and different lenses for my M10R and for the Q3/28. Wilson 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #179 Posted March 22 1 hour ago, wlaidlaw said: If you don't like the colours, you can standardise them by using a Color Checker Passport colour swatch and then setting up a correction file in Lightroom to standard colours. I have Color Checker files for various lighting conditions and different lenses for my M10R and for the Q3/28. Wilson In my personal case, more than the accuracy of the colors is how hard is it to apply another color style. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredInMA Posted March 22 Share #180 Posted March 22 As a Q2M owner (as well as A7cr), maybe I'm not fully qualified to comment on this. I disagree with another poster who said most people equate MP with IQ. I would rather buy a used Q3 over the 100RF for the same price any day of the week. I really question 100MP without any type of stabilization, especially with a 3.2 FF equivalent aperture. Maybe if you only shoot in well lit situations. I don't see the benefit of 100mp just for the sake of cropping down. No thanks. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.