Leica M Monochrom: best pics

L1020214_zps08d6251b.jpg


L1020183_zpsf96768bf.jpg


L1020267_zps7e299fff.jpg


L1020258_zpsa04db4ba.jpg


L1020178_zps428b2296.jpg
 
Vince, that last one has got something cinematic about it, I think it works because of the perspective and the guy (?) running (?), the out of focus foreground can give it a dreamy quality or detract from the general feeling of the image. I think it's quite a subjective call, and not that immediate.

Allen, really like the shot with the steps and the bike, the previous one (with the 'shard' of light) as well, and the silhouette against the metal grid from your older post.

Dave, excellent reportage on that church. All pretty nice shots as usual, the other one that stands out for me is the interior with the wrapped mannequins and the other photographer.


Here's a selection from my last gig, last night:


Rie Nakajima, David Toop & Rie Nakajima's Sculpture 3, Offering Rites @ Central Saint Martins, London, 31st March 2014 by fabiolug, on Flickr



Pierre Berthet, David Toop & Rie Nakajima's Sculpture 3, Offering Rites @ Central Saint Martins, London, 31st March 2014 by fabiolug, on Flickr



Charles Hayward, David Toop & Rie Nakajima's Sculpture 3, Offering Rites @ Central Saint Martins, London, 31st March 2014 by fabiolug, on Flickr



Rie Nakajima, David Toop & Rie Nakajima's Sculpture 3, Offering Rites @ Central Saint Martins, London, 31st March 2014 by fabiolug, on Flickr
 
killer series Fabio and thanks....

I really like both Vince...The last one has this New Mexico feel. Could be Grants or any small New Mexico town. Look like you had an amazing trip. You certainly made some fantastic photographs.

L1020402_zpsf1c9e9b7.jpg


L1020493_zpsf432a911.jpg
 
Super Sunday 2014, Uptown, New Orleans - Mardi Gras Indians:

1.


2.


3. "[They] ... will not bow down." (My Old Indian Red)


4.


5.


6.
 
For myself there is always some degree of post-production involved. The nice thing is that the files are fairly flat, so they have a lot of good shadow detail and (despite what many say) highlight rendering.

Like Ansel said, the negative is the score and the print the performance, so the Monochrom's files (the 'score', if you will) have a lot of room for interpretation in the 'performance'.
 
Vince Lupo said:
For myself there is always some degree of post-production involved. The nice thing is that the files are fairly flat, so they have a lot of good shadow detail and (despite what many say) highlight rendering.

Like Ansel said, the negative is the score and the print the performance, so the Monochrom's files (the 'score', if you will) have a lot of room for interpretation in the 'performance'.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, Vince. I had read recently about the Monochrom files being fairly flat but there wasn't enough detail to really know what the reviewer was saying. Your words bring some explanation to what I read.
 
Vince Lupo said:
I just had prints made yesterday at my friend Jeff Salava's place ( http://www.archivalarts.com ), and boy do they look nice. I had Jeff print them full-frame at 8"x12" and really, I can't see how anyone would want any better quality than what the Monochrom currently produces. For me (at 8"x12" size, anyways) they are completely indistinguishable from film, and the Ilford Gold Silk Fibre paper is really nice. I may possibly try the Hahnemuhle paper just for comparison, but so far the Ilford paper suits me just fine.

Jeff did download the profile for the paper from the Ilford site, and we initially found that the prints were coming out lighter than what was on his screen, and even after setting his printer to the darkest setting, they were just beginning to look close to the screen version. So he is going to manually tweak the profile and see if he can improve the final print. I can't remember the model of the Epson printer that he has, but it is one of those big Epson monsters. Jeff has a very keen eye, so I have total faith in his ability to nail it down.

So when you guys are printing on your Epson 3880's (or whatever printer you have), are you having to download and possibly tweak the profiles to match the printer to the paper? Any issues at all with the final print vs the screen version?
Click to expand...

I am still using an old Epson R2400 with Jon Cone's Piezography Neutral pigment inks with a CIS on Epson's Ultra Premium Presentation Paper that is a matte paper which is my preferred look. Along with the the pigment inks, I also use Quad Tone RIP gui which has the Epson paper profile. It has worked pretty well for me. The QTRgui does have other paper profiles that come with it. I am interested in other papers. Just haven't broke down and bought any.....
 
Last edited:
seagrove said:
To all MMonochrom users: how much post work does one usually do? Just wondering.......:bang:
Click to expand...

I find that the amount (and time) of post- depends on the subject, the light, and the result I'm aiming for. In the end it's a personal choice, also influenced by the workflow you find working for you. In the first few months with the MM, I spent considerably more time in Lightroom, getting familiar with its DNGs. That helped and now I have better clues on which parts of the workflow I should apply (and which I shouldn't) in each occasion. If you nail the exposure, then the post processing can be minimal and quite quick.

A recent 21mm shot:


Talking about a photograph, Church Street Market by fabiolug, on Flickr
 
I agree with Vince, of course. Sometimes, depending on the subject and the correct exposure, you don't need to do anything. Other times usually because of the subject, in Lightroom, you want to raise the shadows as you've tried avoiding blowing a prominent highlight, and with many subjects you want to add some contrast. In the flatter files I am raising highlights and deepening the blacks, and often deepen blacks if I have raised the shadows. I do not touch the clarity slider, except in this one where I reduced the clarity of the wall.


U28906I1393654448.SEQ.0.jpg
 
Agree with the above posts. There's much headroom in the shadow area, so I usually tend to underxpose my OOC shots... and always shoot in DNG. Amazingly, the DR of the Monochrom surprises me until now.
 
fabio_rf said:
I find that the amount (and time) of post- depends on the subject, the light, and the result I'm aiming for. In the end it's a personal choice, also influenced by the workflow you find working for you. In the first few months with the MM, I spent considerably more time in Lightroom, getting familiar with its DNGs. That helped and now I have better clues on which parts of the workflow I should apply (and which I shouldn't) in each occasion. If you nail the exposure, then the post processing can be minimal and quite quick.
Click to expand...

+1 I now have several presets that shorten post-processing, useful for batching a shoot taken under same or similar lighting.

Efra, Dave, Vince, Fabio, Richard - you guys are inspirational, great work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom