sean_reid Posted November 8, 2006 Share #81 Posted November 8, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Pascal- This is closer to my understanding. A severe IR related pushing of black to purple is unlikely to be fixed by a profile, at least one that would work for any other even similar subject with only slight differences in IR in the light. My guess is that they'll have to put a stronger IR blocker on the sensor. If they do, early adopters may want to keep there original one as an IR camera!.....Peter Rex's experience suggests that it may be possible. I have a question for anyone out there who has been testing the magenta color cast appearance in different lighting conditions. I will be testing this myself as soon as time allows but here's my question: Has anyone yet seen a correlation between lighting temperature and the appearance of this magenta cast? I fully expect various replies from people who will misunderstand why I am asking this question but I want to focus on the replies from people who understand this question at face value. Once I get those replies, I'll move on to the next step of my idea. Naturally, a stronger IR filter in front of the sensor is the logical answer to this but I'm interested in looking at solutions for people who want to work with this camera right now and/or in the near future. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 8, 2006 Posted November 8, 2006 Hi sean_reid, Take a look here purple RD1 shot with M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jrgeoffrion Posted November 8, 2006 Share #82 Posted November 8, 2006 Like I mentioned previously, IR can't be eliminated with a profile. HOWEVER, THERE IS A SIMPLE SOLUTION FOR Leica. I've suggested this before... Make a M8bw, a B&W camera without a Bayer pattern. This would increase sensitivity by a least one-stop and will allow the use of B&W filters. Yes, you won't be able to take color pictures but a large proportion of M users are B&W fans. I'm still amazed that no manufacturer has done this yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted November 8, 2006 Share #83 Posted November 8, 2006 Like I mentioned previously, IR can't be eliminated with a profile. HOWEVER, THERE IS A SIMPLE SOLUTION FOR Leica. I've suggested this before... Make a M8bw, a B&W camera without a Bayer pattern. This would increase sensitivity by a least one-stop and will allow the use of B&W filters. Yes, you won't be able to take color pictures but a large proportion of M users are B&W fans. I'm still amazed that no manufacturer has done this yet. Kodak did. Not a huge success commercially. There is a report on luminous-landscape. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgeoffrion Posted November 8, 2006 Share #84 Posted November 8, 2006 Has anyone yet seen a correlation between lighting temperature and the appearance of this magenta cast? Sean I know where you are going... but unfortunately, fotografr reproduced the cast with his ProPhoto strobes... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgeoffrion Posted November 8, 2006 Share #85 Posted November 8, 2006 Kodak did. Not a huge success commercially. There is a report on luminous-landscape. That was years ago and just south of $20k... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 8, 2006 Share #86 Posted November 8, 2006 Has anyone yet seen a correlation between lighting temperature and the appearance of this magenta cast? I fully expect various replies from people who will misunderstand why I am asking this question but I want to focus on the replies from people who understand this question at face value. Once I get those replies, I'll move on to the next step of my idea. I really haven't done enough testing to draw any conclusions but the magenta cast problem seems most apparent to me under non-daylight sources. I'm sorry this is very vague but I simply haven't had the time in the last few days to use the M8 much at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
innerimager Posted November 8, 2006 Share #87 Posted November 8, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Has anyone yet seen a correlation between lighting temperature and the appearance of this magenta cast? Cheers, Sean Sean- The M8 arrives today. There's a small chance I'll return it unopened and wait for the solutions, and a big chance I'll open it and enjoy, among other things, testing it out! If so I'll use my colormeter and pursue this question. best...Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted November 8, 2006 Share #88 Posted November 8, 2006 Has anyone yet seen a correlation between lighting temperature and the appearance of this magenta cast? Yes, I did. The lowest the color temperature, the bigger the cast. I have been able to test only at 2350, 2450, 2800 and 6100k but it we obvious. You can see it there. http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/8514-m8-vs-dmr-very-different-colors-2.html#post83235 I cannot test anymore because I lent my M8 to a friend who wants to test it with the DxO tools. I'll have it back on Saturday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 8, 2006 Share #89 Posted November 8, 2006 Like I mentioned previously, IR can't be eliminated with a profile. HOWEVER, THERE IS A SIMPLE SOLUTION FOR Leica. I've suggested this before... Make a M8bw, a B&W camera without a Bayer pattern. This would increase sensitivity by a least one-stop and will allow the use of B&W filters. Yes, you won't be able to take color pictures but a large proportion of M users are B&W fans. There have been rumours circulating (I think the source was the LHSA) that Leica will bring such a camera to market next Spring. Some might argue that they already have (albeit one that uses Bayer interpolation). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samir Jahjah Posted November 8, 2006 Share #90 Posted November 8, 2006 Leica must stop delivery now. This is no joke and someone like yours truly who is ordered this product to use for work and not for fun CANNOT spend his-her mornings converting black coats which have turned magenta back into black, whilst desaturating t'shirts and changing color of scarves...just to get a decent image which THEN will requre the normal post processing. I read the statement by Leica and never felt so insulted. WB works great on my D2 and on most 200$ digicams. I expect it to work in a 5000$ M8. if it does not, bring your cameras back to Germany, Leica, and come back to us when you can sell a product that works. I find it a disgrace that a manufacturer would "use" its very best customers (ie those like us who put down money in advance) as paying (not paid!) beta testers. Leica did not know about the problem? Well if so the conclusions area) their engineers-quality control people are not worth their salaries they bloody well should know about it now so instead of giving us that pathetic statement they should recall all cameras and work on them till they fix it, and fix it good. Hey, this is a 5000$ (supposedly professional) product. Its release in current form is just unacceptable. I concur with Alexr. If Leica does not come up with a fix in the next week, I will cancel my order, get back my downpayment, and, to my chagrin, wait till a fully functional M8 is on the market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted November 8, 2006 Share #91 Posted November 8, 2006 Well, although I don't have a M8, I do have a camera that has almost no IR filter at all, the special astro version of the Canon 20D, AKA the 20Da. I also have a "hot" sharp cut infra-red filter. I also have a custom profile I developed to eliminate the IR effect. However, I must admit I have never seen the black velvet effect I have seen on the other thread. I do have some black velvet and will do some test to see if I get the purple cast that others have been getting. Granted its a different camera, but if the IR filter is the culpurt I should see it in spades with the 20Da Later tonight Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted November 8, 2006 Share #92 Posted November 8, 2006 While it's clear many expectations have not been met by some initial M8 owner reports and samples, labeling the camera a disaster after less than a week of it being in public hands is short-sighted hyperbole. A vast history of new product introductions, perhaps particularly in cutting edge electronics have proven that no amount of testing is enough, that users will undoubtedly find more problems in the field than manufacturers can in a lab, and that a 1.0 release is just a pretext for a 1.1 release. Those who purchase 1.0 releases should know this by now (I certainly do). By no means am I a corporate apologist, but I trust Leica will get this right, and if it requires me to send my M8 in, so be it. I had to bring in my car the week after I bought it for a faulty switch to be replaced, and a week after that to fix a problem with a seat belt. I had to send in a PowerBook after getting it because of a bad screen. And on and on. For better or worse, this is reality for consumers these days. No one's business (except for Leica's and perhaps Leica retailers) hinges on the M8 working perfectly right out of the gate...professionals have the equipment they had before receiving the M8, and any amateurs who have the M8 (myself included) are mostly just spoiled enthusiasts who can (literally) afford to wait for a fix. Someone famous once said "All companies make mistakes. Good companies fix them." After many, many years of excellent service most of you have had from Leica, I'd encourage you to have some faith. I'm off to take some photos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
newyorkone Posted November 8, 2006 Share #93 Posted November 8, 2006 I agree Rex...I'm not convinced yet that it's the IR filter or lack thereof. However, the problem does appear to be real but I have no doubts that Leica will sort this out. Rooting for the underdog, steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
llc Posted November 8, 2006 Share #94 Posted November 8, 2006 2nd with the M8 set to the correct Kelvin but no adjustment in C1: Looks very similar to the infrared problems I had with my Nikon D2H a few years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted November 8, 2006 Share #95 Posted November 8, 2006 What was Nikon solution to the D2H problem ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 8, 2006 Share #96 Posted November 8, 2006 Yes, I did. The lowest the color temperature, the bigger the cast. I have been able to test only at 2350, 2450, 2800 and 6100k but it we obvious. You can see it there. http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/8514-m8-vs-dmr-very-different-colors-2.html#post83235 I cannot test anymore because I lent my M8 to a friend who wants to test it with the DxO tools. I'll have it back on Saturday. Hi Pascal, Obviously it's on Leica, not us, to fix this but here's my thinking. Those of us who actually want to work with these cameras may want to work towards solutions on our own, just in case we might hit something that works. Again, I expect to be widely misunderstood with the following but I know that some, such as yourself, will follow what I'm saying. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that we know at X degrees Kelvin, the magenta cast seen in an M8 file affects various colors/tones in a known way. If that IR behavior is fairly consistent and predictable (it does such and such to black and such and such to other colors, etc.) at a given color temperature (or temperature range), it can be profiled. Naturally, that profile would not affect all colors in the picture in the same way. In order to apply the correct profile (which corrects for IR casts) either the camera or the RAW processing program must know the WB temperature of the file. Fortunately, both the camera and the RAW software do have that information available to them. *Again, I'm not talking about correcting WB per se, but rather using the WB temp. info. to trigger a specific IR correction profile.* So let's say that the profiling acts in the following way, just theoretically (I'm choosing the color temp ranges arbitrarily): 800 - 2500 degrees Kelvin - trigger profile correction "A" for the IR cast 2500 - 5000 degrees Kelvin - trigger profile correction "B" for the IR cast 5000- 7500 degrees Kelvin - trigger profile correction "B" for the IR cast 7500- 10,000 degrees Kelvin - trigger profile correction "B" for the IR cast etc. This could all, I believe, be done automatically by the camera or C1. Needless to say, there could of course be more than four levels of correction. I welcome responses from people who truly understand what I'm saying and would like to think this through with me. Why wasn't this figured out better before the production camera was released? I don't know. But I'm interested in seeing what we might be able to do ourselves, for those who are game. We can't do anything with the firmware but we could start to see what's possible in RAW conversion. If this idea actually worked, the next step would be for C1 to look at implementing it in a new release. But first let's see if there might be something to it. Rex, you following me on this? What do you think? Otherwise, the only answer I know of would be a stronger IR filter in camera or using IR blocking filters on the lenses. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 8, 2006 Share #97 Posted November 8, 2006 Like I mentioned previously, IR can't be eliminated with a profile. Hi JR, You may not understand what I'm suggesting. Rex's experience suggests otherwise. If you're interested, see the more detailed post below. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted November 8, 2006 Share #98 Posted November 8, 2006 Yes, I agree with you and as you know, C1 does this already by offering several profiles for the same camera but nothing automatic as far as I know. My quick tests with custom profiles leads me to believe this would work fine. However, I do not see how this can fix the problem fotografr had. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 8, 2006 Share #99 Posted November 8, 2006 I really haven't done enough testing to draw any conclusions but the magenta cast problem seems most apparent to me under non-daylight sources. I'm sorry this is very vague but I simply haven't had the time in the last few days to use the M8 much at all. Thanks. That's been my impression as well. I'm still intrigued that my vegetable pictures didn't show a detectable cast even under incandescent light. If they had, I would have seen this problem right away. New thought just occurred to my crazy mind...do certain lenses block IR more than others? The veg. pics were made with a Zeiss. Just for the heck of it, I'll try to find out if this is a factor (when time allows). Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 8, 2006 Share #100 Posted November 8, 2006 Sean- The M8 arrives today. There's a small chance I'll return it unopened and wait for the solutions, and a big chance I'll open it and enjoy, among other things, testing it out! If so I'll use my colormeter and pursue this question. best...Peter Excellent, thank you. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.