Leica M Monochrom: best pics

OMG, I am shocked by the responses, but not in a bad way and appreciate the comments, pro and against me, the monochrom or whatever. Either way, like it or not, people are entitled to voicing their opinion, regardless of the type. This is a forum and I should know better than to worry about comments not in favour of my style of processing.

Cheers to all, now lets please get back to the pictures, whether you love the Monochrom or not.
 
I think the "offense" was in the assertion that there was something "wrong" with the original versions, and that the 'revisions' were made by someone with a better qualification. The former is untrue, and i've not seen evidence of the latter.

"Post processing only?" As if that's not a critical component of a photograph. I don't think you can separate the two aspects. It's no different from standing behind him as he took the picture, and whining "no, no, mate — that's rubbish. Point it here, and wait until... NOW."

"to exhibit the Monochrome's capabilities better" — again... that sorta means shooting flat, lifeless pictures, for demonstration purposes. I'd much rather see real world work, done by people who are using the cameras, and not having the cameras use them, or shilling for Leica.

and the point is, an adult ought to understand there is no such thing as a universal "optimum" where subjective matters are concerned.
 
For many of us Kristian's two threads in RFF have been the first convincing showing anywhere of what the Monochrom can do, and that is more than just him being a very fine photogrpaher, but that fact has been necessary too. I'm glad he's sticking with the thread. Peter and Jeff's stuff is great too. I love that shot of the pages of the dead. I admired one of Jeff's shots with the M9 on another forum, wondering about the processing, only to learn it was a JPEG in black and white straight put of the camera. I tried this at a poorly lit function the other night with my M9 and one JPEG was so good I could not replicate it from the RAW file with any manipulation I tried in LR4.1.

What are the JPEGs like out of the Monochrom?
 
Richard G said:
For many of us Kristian's two threads in RFF have been the first convincing showing anywhere of what the Monochrom can do, and that is more than just him being a very fine photogrpaher, but that fact has been necessary too. I'm glad he's sticking with the thread. Peter and Jeff's stuff is great too. I love that shot of the pages of the dead. I admired one of Jeff's shots with the M9 on another forum, wondering about the processing, only to learn it was a JPEG in black and white straight put of the camera. I tried this at a poorly lit function the other night with my M9 and one JPEG was so good I could not replicate it from the RAW file with any manipulation I tried in LR4.1.

What are the JPEGs like out of the Monochrom?
Click to expand...

That is very interesting.
 
leicashot said:
For those interested. Here is a squeaky clean picture taken at base ISO and with no structure or Silver Efex Filtering. This is how it looks out of camera...
Click to expand...
Kristian, it may be squeky clean but the it has glorious high contrast. Congratulations on mastering the processing from this camera so well. The idea that you need to shoot in way to "live up the camera" is simply inane. Also, anyone interested can download M-Monochrom and try the processing — what is interesting is what talented people like yoursed can do with the files.

I got mine on Wednesday and have had time to shoot only about a hundred frames and, while the files are great in terms of what you can do with them, I haven't yet gotten to where I want to go, which — I am searching — seems to be to get away from the medium format look. One thing is that an 864x576 pixel JPG file simply doebn't show the detail of these files; and on one shot I find that the higher contrast/more clarity version looks better in the JPG while in LR4 the lower contrast/less clarity version looks better. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to make any prints yet.

Another thing I still working with is how to make sure not to blow highlights, i.e., in shots that I don't want to blow them — and still experimenting how much I can lift the shadows in higher ISO shots.

—Mitch/Paris
Bangkok Hysteria (download link for book project)
 
I haven't paid too much attention to this thread in the way of reading everyones responses, just staring at the photos and I have to say this camera produces wonderful results! Even straight out of camera. Beautiful shots all around! Keep up the awesome work all and post more!

- james
 
A possible compromise?

A possible compromise?

I hadn't intended getting involved again in this thread but since it's still "raging" can I suggest a solution? There are obviously some people who feel strongly about the PP done to some of these images. Why doesn't someone start a separate thread inviting criticism of the photographs in this thread? That way those who wish to make their points about the structure filter or whatever can do so unhindered or uncensored and those who just wish to look at the images without judging them (unless it's only praise, a form of criticism that strangely seems to be completely acceptable on this thread) can continue to just look and enjoy.
 
Richard G said:
What are the JPEGs like out of the Monochrom?
Click to expand...

I think the JPEGs out of the MM are very good - pretty much exactly what one would expect. But unlike the M9 - where, as you describe, Richard, oftentimes the M9 JPEG engine will produce an image very different from the DNG, and sometimes hard to replicate from that DNG; i.e. the M9 JPEG becomes an image that is worthwhile having on its own merits - I am finding the look of the MM JPEGs to be very easy to replicate from the DNG file. And always with more detail and strength. After three weeks of shooting JPEG "fine" images alongside DNG, and then examining them side-by-side in Lightroom, I've not used one. DNG all the way.

Unless shot in harsh or unusual light, most of my MM DNG images are flat out of the camera. Reminds me of when I first began processing well-exposed Tri-X in XTOL, when that developer came out, and I thought my negatives were thin. Just like I learned then, that thin can be good, it didn't take me thirty seconds in Lightroom to see that those "flat" MM images hold lots and lots of information.

For me PP on most MM shots is very simple: tweak the exposure slider, if needed; use the Clarity slider to give the image a bit of structure; bring up the blacks; and, sometimes, give it a little more contrast. Ten seconds and you're done. I'll pop into SEP if I want to explore an interesting image. And I'll drop into PS if I want to burn or dodge part of a scene. But, really, a few seconds in Lightroom is all you need to get a decent baseline.

I'll also note that the MM files are much more robust than can be seen on low-res internet JPEGs. I was struck by the hidden detail that emerged the first time I printed a 13x19" print. Even on a very good computer screen you don't see all that's there unless you zoom deep into the file.
 
light_in_the_darkness.jpg
 
I didn't mention it, but I too really like your perspectives Kristian - very inspiring!

@Peter - the shot with the rushing by cab is strong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom