ampguy
Veteran
you're probably right
you're probably right
if you're referring to my photo. I don't really notice it, and couldn't have taken these photos with any type of film camera, so I'm fine with it.
I've also been told that my b/w museum house set has banding in several of the underexposed photos, but again, even pushed 1600b/w, I would not have been able to get any decent resolution with film options, and again, I don't see the banding, but I'm not doubting it's there if other see it.
I do see over-sharpness, over-contrast, blown highlights, lack of shadow detail, weird crops, and photoshop fx all the time though ...
you're probably right
if you're referring to my photo. I don't really notice it, and couldn't have taken these photos with any type of film camera, so I'm fine with it.
I've also been told that my b/w museum house set has banding in several of the underexposed photos, but again, even pushed 1600b/w, I would not have been able to get any decent resolution with film options, and again, I don't see the banding, but I'm not doubting it's there if other see it.
I do see over-sharpness, over-contrast, blown highlights, lack of shadow detail, weird crops, and photoshop fx all the time though ...
noimmunity
scratch my niche
No, Ted, that would be Ivan's photos to which i was referring. They look a lot like the results I get.
ampguy
Veteran
Thanks Jon
Thanks Jon
Yes I do see it barely in a couple of Ivan's first and last photos, I probably have that too, maybe the M9 does too? It's nice to see the limits though. Still usable and photos IMHO - one could convert to b/w and bring up shadows at the expense of details.
BTW, Ivan's last image reminds me of Edith Shain, the famous woman being kissed in the WW2 photo. She was at my mom's assisted living place last week I believe supporting remembering the women of WW2.
Thanks Jon
Yes I do see it barely in a couple of Ivan's first and last photos, I probably have that too, maybe the M9 does too? It's nice to see the limits though. Still usable and photos IMHO - one could convert to b/w and bring up shadows at the expense of details.
BTW, Ivan's last image reminds me of Edith Shain, the famous woman being kissed in the WW2 photo. She was at my mom's assisted living place last week I believe supporting remembering the women of WW2.
Nikkor 8.5cm F2, wide-open, ~1/30th second
35/1.7 Ultron
35/1.7 Ultron
Last edited:
thinkfloyd
Flippy Nose
Alnitak
Established
Very cute Boston Terrier!
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Yeah, that's an iconic photo for sure.
But that banding bugs the #@#^ outta me. Here it rears its ugly head in the park...
ampguy
Veteran
That's not so bad
That's not so bad
Just bring up the shadows a bit. As long as you're not seeing any of those lines like at the bottom horizontal (not sure what those non-straight lines are on the hoody) at 1250 and below, your M8 is probably as good as they ever got.
That's not so bad
Just bring up the shadows a bit. As long as you're not seeing any of those lines like at the bottom horizontal (not sure what those non-straight lines are on the hoody) at 1250 and below, your M8 is probably as good as they ever got.
Yeah, that's an iconic photo for sure.
But that banding bugs the #@#^ outta me. Here it rears its ugly head in the park...
lemalk
Rebel Without Applause
Here's another shot at 2500 with the M8 reworked in Lightroom 3 Beta 2.
I like that it gives you much more control over the noise than before, but I don't know that I would say the new software turns your M8 into a D3.
This shot wasn't overexposed (which seems to be the M8's achilles heel) but I think the noise cleans up nicely.
What do you guys think?
I like that it gives you much more control over the noise than before, but I don't know that I would say the new software turns your M8 into a D3.
This shot wasn't overexposed (which seems to be the M8's achilles heel) but I think the noise cleans up nicely.
What do you guys think?
noimmunity
scratch my niche
That shot was taken at ISO 2500 around 1/11 sec at f/4. The pattern on the hoody is in the fabric, it's not moire.
Just tried playing a little in C15, and I can see how some improvement can be made esp by someone with greater pp skills that I have yet. But the banding that arises in some situations can't really be eliminated, can it?
Yeah, I do think my late model M8 classic is one of the better ones.
Just tried playing a little in C15, and I can see how some improvement can be made esp by someone with greater pp skills that I have yet. But the banding that arises in some situations can't really be eliminated, can it?
Yeah, I do think my late model M8 classic is one of the better ones.
popeye
Established
^^Horton Plaza? Looks good.
It's a statue here in San Diego across from the Midway.
And speaking of banding (I say more like crosshatching), I've noticed it in my 1250 and 2500 iso shots as well. LR3b2 has been a boon for me with regards to sorting out the noise and trash. I can't wait for the release!
It's a statue here in San Diego across from the Midway.
And speaking of banding (I say more like crosshatching), I've noticed it in my 1250 and 2500 iso shots as well. LR3b2 has been a boon for me with regards to sorting out the noise and trash. I can't wait for the release!
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Interesting to hear about people's experience with Lightroom. The shot above looks promising.
(I've always thought Capture One was better for the Leica. (plus I don't want to be locked in to a proprietary software for file management). Samewise, I had always thought that the trick with the M8 was not to underexpose more than anything).
By playing with the curves and adding grain in Silver Efex Pro I was able to 'take out' the banding. Wonder what people think of that? The contrast is a little too high for my taste.
(I've always thought Capture One was better for the Leica. (plus I don't want to be locked in to a proprietary software for file management). Samewise, I had always thought that the trick with the M8 was not to underexpose more than anything).
By playing with the curves and adding grain in Silver Efex Pro I was able to 'take out' the banding. Wonder what people think of that? The contrast is a little too high for my taste.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
and for the fun of it
and for the fun of it
Here is a color conversion that is much better than when I first converted this photo a year ago (admittedly that was just after getting an M8 and the beginning of my entry into digital pp). Perhaps the biggest difference, besides the learning curve, would be the addition this year of a computer that is up to speed!
The banding is still there but less obtrusive to my eyes.
So, my tentative conclusion (no surprise) is that PP skills may well be equal to or more important than photographic exposure skills. And I still have a lot to learn, hahaha!
and for the fun of it
Here is a color conversion that is much better than when I first converted this photo a year ago (admittedly that was just after getting an M8 and the beginning of my entry into digital pp). Perhaps the biggest difference, besides the learning curve, would be the addition this year of a computer that is up to speed!
The banding is still there but less obtrusive to my eyes.
So, my tentative conclusion (no surprise) is that PP skills may well be equal to or more important than photographic exposure skills. And I still have a lot to learn, hahaha!
Last edited:
noimmunity
scratch my niche
This is too much fun
This is too much fun
The banding on this shot (in the sky) was irreparable, so I darkened the shadows, which works well for this kind of subject, at least.
and here are a couple of other shots, all at ISO2500.
This is too much fun
The banding on this shot (in the sky) was irreparable, so I darkened the shadows, which works well for this kind of subject, at least.
and here are a couple of other shots, all at ISO2500.
lemalk
Rebel Without Applause
Jon,
I kinda *like* your Silver Efx attempt. I would bring in some of the highlights on the faces, but I think it gives the picture more "depth."
Sometimes clean but soft is too flat.
I like the picture of the guy in the 76 helmet - something tells me that one would really pop in a silver efx conversion with decent tones.....just sayin'...
I kinda *like* your Silver Efx attempt. I would bring in some of the highlights on the faces, but I think it gives the picture more "depth."
Sometimes clean but soft is too flat.
I like the picture of the guy in the 76 helmet - something tells me that one would really pop in a silver efx conversion with decent tones.....just sayin'...
lemalk
Rebel Without Applause
Thanks, yeah Horton Plaza is the place. Are you in SD as well?
Popeye - where can I find your pics? You should add some to this thread - it's always interesting to see the M8 being pushed to its limits!
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Yeah, I see what you mean about the highlights on the faces...
I played a bit with the 76 helmet photo conversion, finally settling on this version which is toned a bit blue in the silver and yellow on the paper (looks nice on the blown highlights).
Last edited:
popeye
Established
Yes sir I am!
Here's a 2500 iso shot of The Styletones' singer, PP in LR3:
M8/15mm Heliar
leicashot
Well-known
M8 overexposes?
M8 overexposes?
Camera's don't over expose, people do. You are in control of the camera, not the other way around, right?
M8 overexposes?
Here's another shot at 2500 with the M8 reworked in Lightroom 3 Beta 2.
I like that it gives you much more control over the noise than before, but I don't know that I would say the new software turns your M8 into a D3.
This shot wasn't overexposed (which seems to be the M8's achilles heel) but I think the noise cleans up nicely.
What do you guys think?
Camera's don't over expose, people do. You are in control of the camera, not the other way around, right?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
And it is the other way around. The camera does not take kindly to underexposure. The more you "over"expose, the less noise. (but watch your highlights!) The shot in question would probably be too noisy for me, but I would need to see it in print. The M8 can do better. You must aim for a full histogram, that way you have maximum image information i.e. minimum noise. Not have the histogram all bunched up against the side.
Last edited: