The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Leica M Monochromatic Processing Insights

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc

Have you investigated whether the electronic monochrome filters in LR4 will work with M Monochrome RAW files? There's a full set from yellow to deep red and infra-red in this software and they could be extremely useful if they can be made to work as if the files were monochrome film.
I'm not familiar with these. Where are they? How do you access them?

Maybe a Duh! question ... but ..

Thanks,

Marc
 

Tim Gray

Member
so they do work? I'm confused now.
I haven't looked at the MM raw files yet.
They affect the image some because there are a couple of 'Basic' panel changes in the filters. For example, the 'Blue filter' sets the Contrast to +25, Highlights to -50 and the Blacks to -7. What they don't do at all is set mimic a blue filter in the HSL/Color/B&W panel, where you actually filter a color image as if it were shot through a blue filter. Which they can't do because there are no colors in the file to mix down to monochrome. It's monochrome already.

Since what a 'Blue filter' setting does first and foremost is to filter out non-blue colors, I'd say it effectively doesn't do anything if you skip that part of the filter.

So yes, they technically work, but not as planned.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
They affect the image some because there are a couple of 'Basic' panel changes in the filters. For example, the 'Blue filter' sets the Contrast to +25, Highlights to -50 and the Blacks to -7. What they don't do at all is set mimic a blue filter in the HSL/Color/B&W panel, where you actually filter a color image as if it were shot through a blue filter. Which they can't do because there are no colors in the file to mix down to monochrome. It's monochrome already.

Since what a 'Blue filter' setting does first and foremost is to filter out non-blue colors, I'd say it effectively doesn't do anything if you skip that part of the filter.

So yes, they technically work, but not as planned.
Thanks Tim.

Had a few moments to look at Jono's sample DNGs this morning. As you say, they can't do any color channel manipulation so while they do affect the image, it's not the same as bashing on a regular M9 raw file.

They do, however, produce a surprising range of interesting effects ... all through the manipulation of brightness, tonal curve, etc. The MM DNG files are delightfully crisp and show a good DR. The additional speed will likely be offset by the need for optical filtering at some levels.

How much better than standard M9 raw files ... I don't know without doing my own testing.

All very interesting stuff. As I said before, I'll hate you all for piquing my curiosity at some point, I bet.
:) Seriously, it is a fascinating and specialized camera to consider working with, but one does have to be a pretty dedicated B&W user to invest in it. I do hope they come out with an X2-M, it would likely suit my needs just fine.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I've only had a little time to play with Jono's graciously provided MM DNGs, but one of them I saw was captured at ISO 10,000. Hmm, I thought, let's see how it compares to the M9 at max ISO.

So I set up a similar still life and shot it at ISO 2500. Brought both into Lr4.1RC2, tweaked the M9 shot with a trivial B&W treatment (just the defaults), and applied luminance noise reduction to both at about 35 on LR's scale.

The results are identical in almost every way: same noise rendering, same detailing, virtually the same tonal curve, etc. That's darn good: a two stop gain for the MM.

That can be useful. It's still a bit specialist for me at the price but I can understand the appeal. I don't need such elevated ISO settings very often, it would be a bit of a leap to think I needed the MM. But it could spur new work in a different direction on the basis of its new capability.
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Wow... I'm just now looking at the MM files. I can't believe how much detail is captured in these files. Controversial camera or not, I think it's a beautiful tool for BW. Thanks Marc for showing your processing methods.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Here is an interesting review of the MM but more than that, the pictures are far from the flat renditions seen in most reviews, I thought of this thread when viewing them. Would love to know what his reciepes are..

May 10, Part 1: The Leica M-Monochrom review
Hi Ben
It's a fine review, but Ming makes it clear that he applies his PP to files whatever the camera he's testing.

The MM files are absolutely possible to manipulate (as you can see with the DNG files I've processed).

But I think you should cut the other reviewers some Slack (including me please), because they've been trying to represent the images that come out of the camera . . . not trying to process them to their own taste (at least, that was my intent).

Black and white files with big dynamic range do tend to look flat - but they are the perfect subject for further development

all the best
Jono
 

D&A

Well-known member
Black and white files with big dynamic range do tend to look flat - but they are the perfect subject for further development

all the best
Jono
For me personally, this statement by Jono is the essence of why I find the M9M so valuable an asset for advancing B&W digital photography. It provides a RAW image that has tremendous latitude for a wide range of post processing interpretations that can be applied.

One question I posed a while ago but haven't seen a response on, is whether the Nik Silver Efx supplied with the M9M will work on the gray scale DNG's right out of the camera, or do they have to be converted to a color space to work? In other words is this a specially written Silver EFX for M9M DNG gray scale files, or basically an off the shelf Silver Efx?

Dave (D&A)
 

chrism

Well-known member
Dave,
Off the shelf - I recently bought SFXPro v2 and it works fine on the MM DNGs.

Chris
 
+1 for SFXPro with these files.

Turn all of LR's nasty destructive properties off and get out into SFXPro 2 as quickly as possible. An 8 bit Tiff is fine.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Dave,
Off the shelf - I recently bought SFXPro v2 and it works fine on the MM DNGs.

Chris
Chris, are you saying the current off the shelf Silver EFX v.2 works directly on MM gray scale images without having to 1st convert them to sRGB or Adobe 98 etc. color images (files) first? I thought all versions of Silver Efx (both v. 1 and v. 2) only worked on color files, not not gray scale images?

Dave (D&A)
 

kalex

Member
Here is an interesting review of the MM but more than that, the pictures are far from the flat renditions seen in most reviews, I thought of this thread when viewing them. Would love to know what his reciepes are..

May 10, Part 1: The Leica M-Monochrom review
Read his review where he talks about seeing and shooting in black and white. Its totally different from shooting in color then converting. When I was shooting film I spent a lot of time learning and seeing in black and white.
 

chrism

Well-known member
Chris, are you saying the current off the shelf Silver EFX v.2 works directly on MM gray scale images without having to 1st convert them to sRGB or Adobe 98 etc. color images (files) first? I thought all versions of Silver Efx (both v. 1 and v. 2) only worked on color files, not not gray scale images?

Dave (D&A)
I can take Jono's files and drag them into LR4 then edit them with SFXPro. I don't do anything else to them first.

Chris
 

proenca

Member
I have placed my order for this camera after some concern about the relatively flat looking files being posted which I've now resolved ... as the Beatles song goes ... "With a little help from my friends" :)

Thanks to Jono for supplying native MM DNGs of various subjects at a full range of ISOs in different lighting conditions. :thumbs:

Jono was also kind enough to supply a still life shot with the M9 and the MM at ISO400/320 respectively which allowed conversion to B&W and a direct comparison to the MM file with no variables except sensor type.

My good friend Irakly came by and we sat down to figure out how to process the MM files to achieve that "Leica Snap" (for lack of a better word) with B&W images ... the immediate observation was that true blacks were missing, which is what contributes to the over-all flat look. Our initial investagative process was not dissimilar to the approach needed when we went from B&W conversions of M8 files to the initially flatter looking converted M9 DNG files ... only this time the propritary MM processing technique was even more aggressive.

We began our effort by playing with the various B&W presets in the left dialog column, selecting the appropriate starting point for any given lighting scenario and/or ISO file.

Then we dealt with further assuring True Black, and fine tuning the other tonal areas.

Fortunately, LR4 has vastly improved the exposure controls to deal with it. By increasing the density with the black slider, then relieving the shadows (done to taste), plus increasing clarity and often contrast to different degrees, we were both satisfied relatively fast. Note, the adjustment of the "True Black" slider in LR4 was usually pretty aggressive, and to our surprise and delight, lifting of shadows did NOT result in increased noise ... such seems the nature of these MM files. True Black is far less affected by shadow adjustments in terms of degree, and remains true black even when shadows were restored. That is why they are separate controls I guess :rolleyes:

I then processed the M9 color file, and the MM file of the same static subject ... Jono's famous "shelf pic".

Using best practices for M9 B&W developed over a couple of years use, I set about trying to match the over-all tonal spread and "snap" I expect from a Leica B&W image ... which was now easy to achieve with the MM file.

Interesting observation was how much sharper the MM file was when pixel peeping @ 100% and 200% ... the noise pattern on the MM file is much tighter and actually allowed some sharpening by increasing amount a lot and keeping the radius small (depending on ISO). The MM easily out resolves the M9 in these conditions. What percentage I'll leave to others to debate endlessly, but it is visibly sharper looking and cleaner by a good factor even without any additional sharpening.

I have a meeting in a few minutes, and when I get some more free time I'll post some results (thanks to Jono), in a SmugMug file and provide a link.

In the meantime, anyone with a DNG file, try playing around using some of the insights we discovered.

Hope this helps a little. :)

-Marc
I have to say , I hate you.

Trully do. I saw a few samples and I said to myself "dont like the look of the MM files, thank god, I can keep my M9 at ease"

Now you just amazed me how with a few tweakings those marvellous look can be achieved.

Hate you mate. Really do.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
Once again, I find myself poking my nose in where it doesn't belong. In spite of what appears to be a very high degree of sharpness and maybe even an extended tonal range, I find the MM files to be lifeless.

That statement reflects my own fascination with and desire for the ability of a camera (or camera/film combination) to reproduce the subtle magical qualities of natural light. Maybe it is simply my own mistaken perception, but I find myself drawn to the extra measure of reality that some photographs allow by hinting at or exactly duplicating a sense of "real" light. When it all comes together, the subtlety of light and shadow can illicit a feeling of something familiar, almost like a memory.

I encounter that "magic" most often in images captured with film. Digital conversions to B&W (in general) and the MM sample images never quite seem to live up to the tonal realism that film allowed.

The alternatives Marc provided are indeed an improvement in terms of a "real black". But to my eye, that benefit comes at a cost. The resulting images have a look and feel that seems artificial, at times reminding me of the darkroom days when I was forced to print a thin negative on a paper grade higher in contrast than I would have liked.

In an era where photographers like John Paul Caponigro are posting pictures taken with an iPhone and run through Hipstamatic on their Facebook pages, maybe the processed effect of the MM files and other B&W conversions are perfectly acceptable. But I can't help thinking that if what you really want is stunning B&W, film is still the king.
 
Top