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!
Actually, the standards for determining ISO for a digital camera are published. And there is more than one method. But Puts should be able to figure it out.I am a bit reluctant to refer to ISO values because the method of establishing the true ISO value for digital capture media is not as transparent as the comparable method for silver-halide materials.
I shoot with monochrome sensors. Without filters, there is no control over spectral response--the file is simply luminance data of all frequencies. The MM does have a very different response to color than the human visual system, which definitely gives it its look. Whether you like the look will be up to you. This will also probably make the MM image unique from the M9 and other Bayer sensors. Which is "better" is going to be personal choice again. The MM images are rich, but I also the like the ability to mix channels during conversion.....can you shoot without filters and get the tones you need ?
Well, I'm not sure that it's so much of a challenge. I think it's very like dealing with black and white film: you get what you get (I don't mean that it looks like film). I rather like the output, and although I began by using filters I ended up accepting it for what it was and working with that.I would say the M9 is closer to the visual response than the MM. Color is our response to light--color does not really exist. A monochrome camera does not see color, it only sees luminance. Because its spectral response does not match our perception of color, the luminance distribution of the color patches look different--blue seems brighter in the MM, for example. It looks strange/different because it is probably more linear than human perception. I think this is what make processing MM images a bit of a challenge.
Whether film and a CCD have the same response, I am unsure. Certainly film can have a different response--film is naturally responsive to blue light and need different chemicals to make it sensitive to green and red. My understanding is sensors have a broader response and they are certainly stronger in near IR. Although I went back to the link and it seems film and the MM are close.Let me preface this question to say that I don't know much...
I assume the BW film react similarly, meaning only see luminance? So in a way, shouldn't the MM result look much more like how a BW film will react? I also assume that different film will react differently because of chemistry. So is there a BW film that have unbiased response to color where it would mimic the MM exactly?
Edit: another question... if our eyes gives different color different weight, then there should exist an inverse weight/ratio to bring the result back into a unbiased state?
Most of my B&W work was unfiltered. I did carry a red for skies, but as time went on, I used it less and less. I am sure the MM will be the same.A few days ago I realised something very odd. I have been thinking about the need for filters (yellow, orange, red, green) in all the sizes of my lenses. Then it hit me: I use film cameras with B&W film all the time and rarely wish I had used a filter. Why would I consider the MM any different? - only because the forums tell me I should! When the courier delivers my MM tomorrow I shall refrain from filter use until I deem it necessary. After all, my photos only need to satisfy me.
Chris
I quite agree - black and white is already an abstraction, and so 'correct' is a bit of a non-concept. Mind you, colour in mixed lighting on a sunny day might be argued along the same lines!I really don't think of it as a problem, I just find this interesting (B&W s an abstraction and to say it is "correct" or "realistic" in any degree is a little absurd). Folks with MMs have said it took awhile to get used to processing. How much is that to the spectral response, I do not know. But it is fascinating. All my monochrome cameras are attached to microscopes and so I have not photographed more ordinary subjects--everything looks strange (or normal) under a scope.