Monochrom: First pics from Melbourne

Calzone said:
I just ordered a monochrome.

My guitar and amp collection will remain intact. In fact perhaps next year I will likely have a new 18 inch arch-top made by Cristian Mirabella that will feature "trap doors." Two trap doors will be adjustable side soundholes and the f-holes also are adjustable.

Check out the 17 inch guitar known as "Carmela" on his website that was developed as proof of principle and was built as a prototype. I first ordered this guitar in 2004 BTW.

Cal
Click to expand...

Wow! Cal, that is radical! Next you will have to buy a computer!
Though it is a lot, I think it will be money well spent. Think of it as being cheaper than a new master technika, but you get comparable quality without the weight and the wait.
I knew that camera was designed for you.
 
leicashot said:
Cal congrats on your order, you will absolutely love it. Here is a preview of what I'm doing at Fashion Week. I'm also pushing the camera to ISO 10,000 frequently and the files are magnificent. Summilux 50mm f/1.4 at f/5.6

Here's a super clean one that is billboard quality at ISO 320. The detail at 200% beats my old Hasselblad H4D-40.


L1000441 by Kristian Dowling, on Flickr
Click to expand...

STUNNING K...You've got it Under Your thumb :D
 
Fine examples for the potential of the MM leicashot. As I sit here and scan over 100 images from my recent trip to NYC, I'm drooling over the MM as a tool allowing for a much more efficient workflow. As much as I love Acros and TMY-2, film costs are rising and my time is valuable. Can you give us an idea of how much time is involved in post-processing an MM file so that it is suitable for print?
 
jplomley said:
Fine examples for the potential of the MM leicashot. As I sit here and scan over 100 images from my recent trip to NYC, I'm drooling over the MM as a tool allowing for a much more efficient workflow. As much as I love Acros and TMY-2, film costs are rising and my time is valuable. Can you give us an idea of how much time is involved in post-processing an MM file so that it is suitable for print?
Click to expand...

It can take only 30 seconds if you know what you want and how to achieve it. As there are no color sliders processing is very simple and information is reflected accurately. To be honest, unless you want contrasty images, the files come out looking very flat, meaning there is so much tonal range, dynamic range and flexibility to do whatever you want...and lets not forget being able to shoot from ISO 320 to 10,000 without worrying about image quality, all with the switch of a dial! BTW, ISO 320 is cleaner and sharper than the M9 at ISO 160 and any 35mm film ever made.
 
I've been having a little bit of the fingers down the blackboard sensations with these images myself. As has been mentioned in another thread, they just appear very clinical. However, I just took Kristian's latest image above and was amazed at the (positive) difference just adding the slightest grain using only the standard PS filter. Given its Kristian's image I won't post the comparison but these were the settings for the grain filter applied to the largest version Kristian has available on Flickr.

- Grain = 2
- Highlight Area = 1
- Intensity = 0
 
Great shots Kristian.
The camera is just the recording medium and it obviously is different from what people are used to. You describe it as more 3D, it just records more of the reality and this seems "too perfect" at the beginning. As always, when you start with more information, you result will be better. With all post processing tools available you can acheive what ever you feel the picture should look like to represent your impressions when you took the shot.

Anyone complaining about "too flat" out of the camera files, has not printed bw negatives with just a medium grad paper. You have to work on it too make it pop. Perferences are highly individual.

Your pictures show that the MM has a huge potential. Thanks for posting.
 
icebear said:
Great shots Kristian.
The camera is just the recording medium and it obviously is different from what people are used to. You describe it as more 3D, it just records more of the reality and this seems "too perfect" at the beginning. As always, when you start with more information, you result will be better. With all post processing tools available you can acheive what ever you feel the picture should look like to represent your impressions when you took the shot.

Anyone complaining about "too flat" out of the camera files, has not printed bw negatives with just a medium grad paper. You have to work on it too make it pop. Perferences are highly individual.

Your pictures show that the MM has a huge potential. Thanks for posting.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your comments Icebar, some good ones and very sensible! Cheers
 
Thanks for sharing. These are Great pictures and show what the camera can do... I really like the same picture that fireblade commented on the best.

Gary
 
CNNY said:
Wow! Cal, that is radical! Next you will have to buy a computer!
Though it is a lot, I think it will be money well spent. Think of it as being cheaper than a new master technika, but you get comparable quality without the weight and the wait.
I knew that camera was designed for you.
Click to expand...

Cristian,

It does seem like the Monochrome was especially designed for me.

This weekend I'll be hitting the Apple Store with the girlfriend. Anyways you guys have my obsessive personality profiled correctly. Jeff also pointed out that this is my dream camera. Perhaps it will be sometime in November that I might get my delivery. Of course I'll get that MD-Grip to annoy John. LOL.

Also know that I'm at the point that I can't keep up with developing all the film I shoot anymore. Sixty rolls a month is the new average and that means non stop processing over a two day period. Right now I have over 70 rolls in the fridge that need to get developed. This does not factor well with "woman factor." LOL.

Cal
 
leicashot said:

L1000430-Edit-Edit-Edit by Kristian Dowling, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I think you photographed this scene from the opposite direction of where the photograph was (lady looking at the flowers or something). I'm sure the lady in the picture won't be pleased to see her creased pants being the center of attention in this photo.

These little things in photography, which seem commonsensical, cannot be bought from Leica or anyone...
 
Don't get your panties in a bunch...

I think the theme here is happy floral coincidence, at least to me. I didn't even notice her pants until you mentioned it, even so, it's certainly not at the center of attention. I guess people see what they want to see.
 
Hosermage said:
Don't get your panties in a bunch...

I think the theme here is happy floral coincidence, at least to me. I didn't even notice her pants until you mentioned it, even so, it's certainly not at the center of attention. I guess people see what they want to see.
Click to expand...

I think you have got the meaning of panties in a knot backwards, but then speaking of pants and backwards in the same topic as the image in question overloads this topic with too many puns.

Anyway, the whole point of being a photographer is to see everything, not just one thing, because the camera sees everything, for example when I look at your avatar, I don't see a Leica only, I see a guy who needs a haircut and a his prized Leica.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom