The New Leica S Adoption-Rates Question

[dfarkas]

No disrespect to David Farkas and the others who have tweaked this image, but I vastly prefer the original version, with its warm, greenish tint. The palette meshes well with the period feel of the location. The color on her feels like it's simply a result of soft ambient tungsten combined with window light bouncing off tinted walls, the way it would be in real life. And the transitions between highlights and midtones on her face are much gentler and softer.  

No disrespect taken. My point in posting my edits was to address concerns that the S2's raw files were somehow tinted green.

[dfarkas]

Where I disagree is for such an image being used as an manufacturer's example shot.

Edmund

We more than agree on that point!

No manufacturer (including Leica) ever seems to pick ideal images as official samples.

Once again, get the camera, shoot it yourself and you'll know whats what.

And a resounding yes on this point as well.

One of the challenges can be that once you have the camera in hand for the first time, understanding how to work with it, what settings to use/avoid, etc. while shooting, then what settings to use for optimal image processing may not be obvious. Having guidance from someone who knows the ins and outs of the system and has actually shot with it extensively comes can be invaluable.

We (Leica Store Miami) offer a program where people interested in the S can take a quick trip to Miami and get a personalized test drive experience called Fly Me to the S.

[eronald]

The only way to is do it yourself, prove only to yourself if a camera is right or wrong for you.

yes!

Edmund

[bcooter]

We more than agree on that point!

No manufacturer (including Leica) ever seems to pick ideal images as official samples.

And a resounding yes on this point as well.

One of the challenges can be that once you have the camera in hand for the first time, understanding how to work with it, what settings to use/avoid, etc. while shooting, then what settings to use for optimal image processing may not be obvious. Having guidance from someone who knows the ins and outs of the system and has actually shot with it extensively comes can be invaluable.

We (Leica Store Miami) offer a program where people interested in the S can take a quick trip to Miami and get a personalized test drive experience called Fly Me to the S.

In the manufacturer's defense it is difficult to get any photographer to toss over a raw file.  Just too many variables and you will never please anyone and of course your name is on it, so if the web picks it up and doesn't like it, they'll burn you on google for years.

Dave has the right attitude, in that he invests in his profession, offers the best ways possible to let someone get their hands on the actual product and as much as people complain about the margins, the margins are what allow a professional dealer to operate.

If you've ever worked with a bad dealer, you'lll realize how important a good dealer is.

You get what you pay for.

IMO

BC

[eronald]

One has to applaud Dave's attitude.

Edmund

In the manufacturer's defense it is difficult to get any photographer to toss over a raw file.  Just too many variables and you will never please anyone and of course your name is on it, so if the web picks it up and doesn't like it, they'll burn you on google for years.

Dave has the right attitude, in that he invests in his profession, offers the best ways possible to let someone get their hands on the actual product and as much as people complain about the margins, the margins are what allow a professional dealer to operate.

If you've ever worked with a bad dealer, you'lll realize how important a good dealer is.

You get what you pay for.

IMO

BC

[eronald]

When a manufacturer takes the decision to produce and sell a camera, they don't *exactly* know themselves what the imagery is going to look like.
Leica at PK, on announcing the S2, I had a conversation with them about the UV sensitivity they had discovered in the sensor which had been made for them. I confirmed that attempting to deal with this in software was not viable, and they indicated that rather than rework the sensor cover glass, they were going to incorporate UV filtration in every Leica S lens to deal with this issue. Filtration as we all know is a contentious issue because it changes the way the sensor sees visible light that is close to the cutoff color (blue), and this is dependent on the angle of incidence.

Interestingly, a friend of mine with whom I was working on a project this year was also designing a camera and hit similar issues, and ended up buying UV absorbing glass from Schott that had been designed ... for Leica

I have no way of knowing whether the S has the same (weak-filtering) cover glass on the sensor as the S2; but I would expect color to be markedly different between an S2 used with a Contax lens and an S2 used with a Leica lens ...

This type of issue explains why there are so few images available at launch: Until production really starts, and the firmware and hardware is frozen, nobody can be completely sure of the results from the camera.

Edmund

In the manufacturer's defense it is difficult to get any photographer to toss over a raw file.  Just too many variables and you will never please anyone and of course your name is on it, so if the web picks it up and doesn't like it, they'll burn you on google for years.

Dave has the right attitude, in that he invests in his profession, offers the best ways possible to let someone get their hands on the actual product and as much as people complain about the margins, the margins are what allow a professional dealer to operate.

If you've ever worked with a bad dealer, you'lll realize how important a good dealer is.

You get what you pay for.

IMO

BC

[Rob C]

Wasn't the world a sweeter place in back and white!

;-)

Rob C

[Theodoros]

Dear Mr. Dascalos,

 Here is a composite with the original preview from Leica, and a slightly better color balanced version. I don't like my over-red version too much, it looks like an old Playboy, but at least it doesn't look like the greenish Leica preview which turns the model into a fashionable cross between a vampire and an alien. Which is by the way what you get if you render "as shot".  

 I ran this image past another color consultant to the industry, as you indicated my perception was bad, and we ran the image through a couple of converters and agreed about the color issues. The causes are interesting to us, but I don't think they are relevant to you as your taste differs from our perception of color.

Edmund

I would give Leica the vote instead of MRs Piggy… but still, I don't think that adverts have anything to do with Camera's IQ… If I was to use that particular shot to promote the camera, (which I wouldn't) I would "treat" it different…

[eronald]

I would give Leica the vote instead of MRs Piggy… but still, I don't think that adverts have anything to do with Camera's IQ… If I was to use that particular shot to promote the camera, (which I wouldn't) I would "treat" it different…

Actually you don't get to treat it different if it's a sample because the green cast is the camera's WB decision - its adopted white.
The Jpeg which comes out of the camera by default - or out of ACR and LR will be bright green.
The miracle of the modern Canons and Nikons is that they can often get the WB right. And in fact it's so hard to get right that Nikon at one point was encrypting the WB information to hamper Adobe.


Edmund

[Theodoros]

Actually you don't get to treat it different if it's a sample because the green cast is the camera's WB decision - its adopted white.
The Jpeg which comes out of the camera by default - or out of ACR and LR will be bright green.
The miracle of the modern Canons and Nikons is that they can often get the WB right.

Edmund

Well… my D800E can't, neither my D4 (but to a lesser extend and better than all other DSLRs), both far worst than my MFDB, which in single shot is worst than my older MFDB (Dalsa 22mp sensor) which was slightly worst than the "king of WB" (MO) the Dalsa 33mp sensor…

EDIT: It was (obviously) WB not …MB!

[synn]

Well… my D800E can't, neither my D4 (but to a lesser extend and better than all other DSLRs), both far worst than my MFDB, which in single shot is worst than my older MFDB (Dalsa 22mp sensor) which was slightly worst than the "king of MB" (MO) the Dalsa 33mp sensor…

+1

[dfarkas]

Actually you don't get to treat it different if it's a sample because the green cast is the camera's WB decision - its adopted white.
The Jpeg which comes out of the camera by default - or out of ACR and LR will be bright green.
The miracle of the modern Canons and Nikons is that they can often get the WB right. And in fact it's so hard to get right that Nikon at one point was encrypting the WB information to hamper Adobe.


Edmund

Edmund,

It is unclear whether the WB was indeed set to Auto WB in camera. It could be that the photographer set either a custom Kelvin balance or metered off a color patch to achieve this color. I shoot in AWB most of the time myself and find the S2 and S to be quite accurate the vast majority of the time.

And, even if this was the result of a tricked WB.... why should we not be able to change it? That is one of the beauties of shooting RAW, is it not? In fact, isn't the reason that manufacturers post RAW files for download is so that photographers can process to their own tastes and in their own workflows, rather than just see a finished JPG with all those decisions and processes hidden?

Like BC, I'm reluctant to post RAW files in my reviews because I personally feel that the final result is what tells the ultimate story. For me, I usually dismiss any review that shows me comparisons of unprocessed/unsharpened/untouched files. These results are meaningless to me without context. Ansel Adams would never have shown a negative or straight contact print. So much of his work happened in the printing process after the image was captured. Why do we need to look at digital images any differently?

[rgmoore]

Really RG… it's not a matter of colour accuracy, it's more a matter of having to work with interpolated colour, you see, a painter, when he works with a colour, he does so with respect to lighting... this is very different than judging the colour accuracy on a colour chart that you only have one tone of it…. In other words, with interpolated colour, you may achieve accuracy in the mid tones, but the same colour may "crack" as the painter paints it lighter and darker with respect to the paint's lighting.

@ T.Dascalos (Others, please, excuse a very brief diversion from regular programing.)

You put your finger on it.  The mid tones are almost always on the mark, but the lighter areas fall apart, or as you said "crack".  My 5D used to blow the highlights without a possibility of successful recovery;  D800 does better at preserving or recovering light areas, but slightly warm highlights shift into neon yellow/orange, e.g.  When these color shifts are globally corrected, the rest if the image suffers.  And correcting color locally is doable, but labor intensive.  If post processing of repro work takes longer than to complete the actual painting in the first place, one is encouraged to consider other options.  Much can be said about the difficulty portraying some colors in nature with artists' pigments or photographic media,  the challenges of painting, capturing light, how light is reflected from paintings vs prints, etc., etc.

I have rented a H4D-40 when it was first released and on the calibrated monitor the images were clearly closer to the original than the files take with 5DII. However, those differences were minimized in the final product - the print.  Yes, even when that print was made by a high end art repro outfit.  Fast forward three years later, I am revisiting the issue in view of technological advances and .... more affordable pre-owned
MFDB possibilities.

Back to regularly scheduled programing.   

     

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

May guess is that for reproduction we would need sceene referred raw conversion, and that is not what we have with most raw converters, which essentially give an output preferred rendition.

Best regards
Erik

@ T.Dascalos (Others, please, excuse a very brief diversion from regular programing.)

You put your finger on it.  The mid tones are almost always on the mark, but the lighter areas fall apart, or as you said "crack".  My 5D used to blow the highlights without a possibility of successful recovery;  D800 does better at preserving or recovering light areas, but slightly warm highlights shift into neon yellow/orange, e.g.  When these color shifts are globally corrected, the rest if the image suffers.  And correcting color locally is doable, but labor intensive.  If post processing of repro work takes longer than to complete the actual painting in the first place, one is encouraged to consider other options.  Much can be said about the difficulty portraying some colors in nature with artists' pigments or photographic media,  the challenges of painting, capturing light, how light is reflected from paintings vs prints, etc., etc.

I have rented a H4D-40 when it was first released and on the calibrated monitor the images were clearly closer to the original than the files take with 5DII. However, those differences were minimized in the final product - the print.  Yes, even when that print was made by a high end art repro outfit.  Fast forward three years later, I am revisiting the issue in view of technological advances and .... more affordable pre-owned
MFDB possibilities.

Back to regularly scheduled programing.   

     

[synn]

Leaf has a profile specifically oriented towards reproduction.

[Rob C]

Leaf has a profile specifically oriented towards reproduction.

You really will have to get into calendars... you obviously have the right ideas.

;-)

Rob C

[Theodoros]

@ T.Dascalos (Others, please, excuse a very brief diversion from regular programing.)

You put your finger on it.  The mid tones are almost always on the mark, but the lighter areas fall apart, or as you said "crack".  My 5D used to blow the highlights without a possibility of successful recovery;  D800 does better at preserving or recovering light areas, but slightly warm highlights shift into neon yellow/orange, e.g.  When these color shifts are globally corrected, the rest if the image suffers.  And correcting color locally is doable, but labor intensive.  If post processing of repro work takes longer than to complete the actual painting in the first place, one is encouraged to consider other options.  Much can be said about the difficulty portraying some colors in nature with artists' pigments or photographic media,  the challenges of painting, capturing light, how light is reflected from paintings vs prints, etc., etc.

I have rented a H4D-40 when it was first released and on the calibrated monitor the images were clearly closer to the original than the files take with 5DII. However, those differences were minimized in the final product - the print.  Yes, even when that print was made by a high end art repro outfit.  Fast forward three years later, I am revisiting the issue in view of technological advances and .... more affordable pre-owned
MFDB possibilities.

Back to regularly scheduled programing.   

     

You are right on all your observations… If I only can help you out, I would say that: To do painting reproduction (reproduction, not taking pictures of paintings) is the ultimate photography, simply because you have to move beyond theory… You have to remember that a painter's colour is not 10 or 12 or 14 or 16 bits... thus, you have to move beyond common knowledge in photography (i.e. to do what Ansel Adams did and challenge theory) it's not that theory isn't valid, it's that you have to find ways to do scientific photography which means that you have to eliminate the errors that the equipment produces within theory. That's why only very few people do real painting reproduction… Remember what I said before? "You have to build your own profiles !", this means that no automatic calibration is good enough for paintings, you have to correct the (inevitable) errors that are involved in the process... There are perhaps half a hundred of parameters to control, the first one is to record the painting in "true colour"… this is the start, you need an MS MFDB! …then there is to do the capture right (about five parameters), then there is to have the capture profiles right, then…..

[Ken R]

Is this thread about the Leica S? Im confused.

[TMARK]

Yes Indeed.  I use AWB on my M9 in mixed lighting.  It isn't accurate but boy is it pretty.

I really like S files, like larger M9 files. 

No disrespect to David Farkas and the others who have tweaked this image, but I vastly prefer the original version, with its warm, greenish tint. The palette meshes well with the period feel of the location. The color on her feels like it's simply a result of soft ambient tungsten combined with window light bouncing off tinted walls, the way it would be in real life. And the transitions between highlights and midtones on her face are much gentler and softer.  

[Theodoros]

Is this thread about the Leica S? Im confused.

No… the "real" thread was some weeks ago… http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=85784.0 , but "some" insist to undervalue the fact that the Leica group can now compete and beat everybody, in all categories of pro, passion and creative photography… from B&W "street" masterpieces, to "studio" and up to pro "painting reproduction". It seems that there is lots of some "makers domination" in this forum and Leica has "disturbed and threatened" the "dominators" of photography….