piero Posted October 12, 2009 Share #1 Posted October 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have tested the M9 and some wide lenses (WATE, 18 Super Elmar and 24 Elmar) in a filed not conventionally suited for the RF. Very critical lighting, nightmare color conflict of light sources, °Kelvin wise. The camera metering system is very good, the lenses also. The 24 is a marvel. The difference I have noticed comparing WATE to Super Elmar at same FL and ƒstop is a definite punchier contrast of the latter lens. Sharpness wise, vignetting wise and distortion wise, the lenses are very similar. you can see samples here: M9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 Hi piero, Take a look here Testing M9 in a "non conventional" situation.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
chris_tribble Posted October 12, 2009 Share #2 Posted October 12, 2009 Piero - really interesting to see this. Given your comments (which I agree with) on the capacity of the M9 (though I've not been using it so much with ultra wides yet) I'd be interested to hear from you on your techniques for White Balance in the settings you've shown in your link. What we've been talking about here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/101828-m9-learning-some-lessons.html ... is the M9's behaviour in seriously mixed lighting. From the look of things in your shots, you had the advantage of very carefully managed light -- given the prestigious clients, and the needs for clothes and models to look good, this shouldn't be a suprise - so a different situation. However, still very interested to hear what you did about WB on these shoots - and if you added your own lighting to control things during the shoot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted October 12, 2009 Hi Chris! I don't use additional light in shops, the reason is the original intirior lighting design mood must be preserved and portrayed. This makes things a nightmare, often. Or at least it was at the beginning, specially when I was shooting Chromes with the View Camera. After trying different approaches in determining the right WB, also with other cameras (the MKlll is the tool I use more frequently), I came to the conclusion that a cleaner file I can obtain by setting a fixed color temperature. Depending on Brands/Clients it varies between 2900 and 3100. I spent time, a long time, profiling via Macbeth Color Checker under each different light source, but aside from the curiosity of finding out what exact color temperature is the spot light or the more diffuse light, or the nightmare fluorescent light, it did not help much in solving the unsolvable. Mixed lighting require a compromise, or a dreadful post production work. Looking carefully at the subject sceene, with bare eyes, one can notice color drifting thus choosing - for a given view - what light source to favour. Trouble is when fluorescent is way too strong and tubes installed come from different production batches. Controlling that is impossible and A lot of PS work is required, the result often lousy. I can only adjust existing light, redirecting or turning away from subject. When the mix of light is fairly balanced, the auto WB in Lr/CR or C1Pro makes thing very close to what it was, only moderate further adjustment is needed. Your light table shot with the kid drawing on it is an example of the compromise I was talking before. The light is very bright and has a lot of green into it. To neutralize that without a selection, magenta will be scattered all over. I am not quite sure if I have answered your question effectively... Also, should I post the same comment in your other thread? (which I had been following, by the way) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share #4 Posted October 12, 2009 if you look at other portfolios in my website, you might notice that the M9 images have a much wider tonal range than the ones made with the DSLR. There are also some scans from 4x5" Chromes in the Emporio section, in those you can feel the same wide tonal range. That's why I say that looking at files from the M9 makes me think of when I was shooting 4x5"s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted October 12, 2009 Share #5 Posted October 12, 2009 In other threads in this forum there are discussions about the 3.8/18 and the WATE causing red shift on the edges - especially in underexposed situations: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/101424-cv-15mm-versus-leica-18mm.html#post1068674 I didn't see anything like this on your photos. Did you notice this on the original files and did you make corrections, or was this absent on your photos? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted October 12, 2009 I did not notice any red shift. No significant corrections were made on my pictures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 12, 2009 Share #7 Posted October 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Also, should I post the same comment in your other thread? (which I had been following, by the way) Piero - interesting and informative - thanks! I'll put a link into the other thread so that people can pick up on your comments. The forum continues to be a valuable resource! V Best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted October 12, 2009 Share #8 Posted October 12, 2009 Mixed lighting is difficult. However, with a bit of post processing in LAB, you can deal with some of the color casts and get a more neutral image if you desire. Sure, you can't just pound through a bunch of images with the same settings - it requires a minute or 2 per image in Photoshop, but the results can be worth it especially if you only have a handful of images to take care of. I fooled around with one of your images and it worked out alright - I can post if it if you want. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted October 12, 2009 Mixed lighting is difficult. However, with a bit of post processing in LAB, you can deal with some of the color casts and get a more neutral image if you desire. Sure, you can't just pound through a bunch of images with the same settings - it requires a minute or 2 per image in Photoshop, but the results can be worth it especially if you only have a handful of images to take care of. I fooled around with one of your images and it worked out alright - I can post if it if you want. tgray, thanks for your interest. Please note that those images should not be downloaded as warned on the page. Please don't post it. LAB works fine in certain occasions with certain subject. In the case of these images the client requires that the merchandise is recorded with accurate colors. LAB punches either one channel or the other way too much, usually. But it is an interesting technique I often use on some of the ouctures you can see on my Flick'r portfolio. Thanks again for your interest and advice. Cheers Piero Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted October 12, 2009 Share #10 Posted October 12, 2009 tgray,thanks for your interest. Please note that those images should not be downloaded as warned on the page. Please don't post it. LAB works fine in certain occasions with certain subject. In the case of these images the client requires that the merchandise is recorded with accurate colors. LAB punches either one channel or the other way too much, usually. That's why I didn't post it and asked first Anyway, if you switch to LAB, and add an adjustment layer (I used color balance, but curves or hue/saturation could work too), and you make your changes. The key though is to use either the A or B channel as a mask for the adjustment layer. I used A since it is magenta/green, which was the color casts of the lights in one of your photos. Boost the contrast up in the mask layer and add in a blur of 5-10 pixels, and invert if necessary. Then you should be able to adjust the color of just one set of lights. It works rather nicely because color casts from lights tend to be either magenta/purple (the A channel) or blue/yellow (B channel) AND the light that has a given cast is coming from one direction, so the A/B channels can function as the starting point for a good mask that needs minimal work. As far as accurate colors, the image I was talking about has a magenta cast coming from the left and green from the right. I'm sure you did your best to split the difference while white balancing, but I can't imagine it represents 'accurate' colors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share #11 Posted October 12, 2009 interesting approach. The Milano Shop had serious problems with the fluorescent light, too strong etc. I'll try the technique you have suggested. If you want you can send me an e-mail with the file attached. I am curious to see the result. On my website at the page "contac us" there is the stamp icon to send e-mail. Thanks P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.