It still always blows my mind to go from winter straight to summer. I just got off the plane this morning in my always life changing Rio de Janeiro. I have very good friends here. All I had to do today was nothing. Chill. Have a caipirinha under an umbrella. Don’t move. So caipirinha in one hand and testing a Leica Monochrome in the other. So I sat in a chair and I didn’t move. Would you?
Oh boy….did people get all bent out of shape about this one on instagram….
Good on you for not taking it down!
I hope this isn’t affecting your shooting…..seems like you were more in the zone last year.
They guy doing the pull up…the parkour superman and more! there was something about the tones as well…..something very unique about the whites….perhaps the monochrome is not the right camera?!?!?
Carlo…
Smiling…with all due respect remember David has only just set foot in Rio. So lets give him some time to adjust to the summer heat. He’s got to remember or feel the local “ballet” of street shooting or in this case beach shooting..
Paul,
I meant no disrespect to DAH….I think that’s pretty clear but just in case!
I’m just looking at the monochrome files that he is been posting and they look pretty dark compared to the ones even from Korea…..they do not have the same feeling to them. That’s what I am trying to say….
Carlo…
I know you mean no respect, I hope you didn’t misinterpret my words either :)!
The monochrom files are always flat, hardly any contrast out of the camera. That’s the beauty of the machine, by starting with a richer, smoother greyscale, there’s more opportunity to adjust an image’s tonal balance to your liking in post-processing. But with David this could be a disadvantage as he’s well known for getting the image right in the camera and not fiddling with Photoshop.
And once again I’m sorry about the misunderstanding.
Paul,
good…just making sure we are on the same page :)
You are right…I have read those files need tweaking….I forgot about that.
Let’s see what David says about his experience with it.
That’s a great shot, both compositionally and technically. It needs no additional processing and it would more likely detract from the quality if it were done.
What are people getting bent out of shape about on Instagram? And why should anyone care?
I’m not much into tech, falling more into the “camera is just a camera” crowd, but that strikes me as extraordinary black and white. I’m curious to see more.
There are various ways of shooting with the M-Monochrom, and having great results “straight out of the camera” is not necessarily a virtue — the way that, with B&W film, one could choose to make flat negatives that could be printed according to the look one wanted. I am sure that DAH can make the M-Monochrom sing, whether he wants Traviata or Heavy Metal.
My own processing for the M-Monochrom uses Silver Efex under Lightroom and is based on the ideas of this short video clip:
The clip shows the method this photographer uses for XT-1 files and for producing a high-contrast look, but it can of course be tuned for the M-Monochrom and for a lower contrast look. For example, I use the Tri-X preset rather than the TMax 400 used in the clip — and I reduce the Silver Efex grain setting somewhat.
Cheers, Mitch
MW,
I posted under this one mainly because of the “controversy” in instagram (with 147 comments and counting) and then I wrote a comment about the tones from the monochrome coming out really different from what I have seen from last year.
This one as you say looks great out of the camera….If you look at the one displaying right now as the thumbnail for road trips (the one with man in outdoor shower) the tones seem strange for lack of a better word….
The thing that was bending people out of shape in instagram was the “cliche” of brazil….beautiful women on the beach and butts…. ;-))))
why shouldn’t people care in instagram or here or anywhere? what is the difference?
I mean do not spend precious time dwelling on it but a certain (healthy) amount of time and care is needed me thinks….
Nah. that’s a textbook composition, classically beautiful, and an impressive example of black and white photography. I think it’s okay to not care about 146 Instagram commenters who look at that and see only T&A and/or cliché.
I do see what you’re talking about with the tones in the pic of the guy at the outdoor shower. Judging by the angle of the shadows, the lighting doesn’t look like it should have been all that bad. The camera seems to be exposing for optimum white people in that, and the current shot of the white girl hugging the dark guy.
Mitch Alland…
well I’m inclined to think these images are straight out of the camera…David is (or should I say “was” with digital these days?) a transparency film shooter by trade…he is used to getting it right in the camera…click and that’s it….So I’m really curious to see how he works with the monochrom. BTW thanks for posting that video link I’ll be watching that later on.
I’m very interested to see how David gets on with the monochrom.
PAUL
You can get good results with the M-Monochrom straight out of the camera (I’m talking about shooting DNGs, not JPGs) by exposing for the highlights, as you would with transparency film — but that means limiting yourself to fairly limited lighting situations.
Shooting at midday at the beach, for example, or shooting into the light, when you’re willing to let the shadows go to black, you can still use the transparency film approach — but the M-Monochrom files are so robust that you can increase Exposure in Lightroom so much that you gain a huge range in the type of look that you can have…I don’t think you’d would want to limit yourself and throw all these possibilities away just to have something “acceptable” straight out of the camera — particularly considering that the Monochrom can render beautiful, film-like highlight gradation by shooting in this way.
It will be interesting to read what David says on this.
I am not moving ,I am in BURNLAND and I am going nowhere…!!!
ok, back to tech talk …
There’s been a debate going on since the Monochrom’s introduction regarding image quality, with the M’s owners waxing eloquent over the malleability of the files, and the rest of us just scratching our heads wondering what the hell they’re talking about!
I’ve come to the conclusion that it is in the conversion to web-ready images that the picture-file degrades. I’ve noticed when I use Silver EFex, and really work over my colour files, that on web conversion many of the EFex processes become evident in the web image which were hitherto invisible prior to the final conversion.
This results in the Monochrom images I see on the internet being either too dark in the shadows, or showing an inability to allow the sunny highlights to grace the picture. Perhaps it has something to do with converting only the single layer of the Monochrom, versus the RGB layers in a regular sensor?
I don’t know if anyone has looked into post-post-processing files for Web conversions, or if there is a quick way to do so. I also wonder if there is another step needed for print-to-book.
It’s something web editors should look into.
My experience is the out of camera DNG are flat.
I’ve got as automated with the post processing as I can because I find it extremely dull (unless printing, which I get quite excited about). On being imported to Lightroom, a preset (Replichrome Tri-x 400) gets automatically applied. Then when I work through the images, of the ones I like, I will balance exposures.
An example of that:
http://www.peterdavidgrant.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Oxford-Violins-8-of-18.jpg
That said, with the series of images here: http://www.peterdavidgrant.com/oxford-violins/ I can’t even remember what was shot on the Mono, or a Sony, so maybe it just doesn’t matter.
JEFF
I don’t feel that Monochrom prepared for the WEB are either too dark or don’t have gradation in the highlights — granted, though, that I like high contrast and am often shooting in blazing tropical light.
PETER
My M-Monochrom starts in a similar way to yours, in that (using Lightroom), I first press AUTO in the Basic Panel, but adjust the exposure and then apply a Replichrome or VSCO preset. The one I choose depends on the lighting in the frame — mostly it’s VSCO TRi-X 400- or Neopan 1600- (without the grain) and then judge the shots.
The ones I care about, I process with Silver EFex. SEFEX adds an element of “randomness” — maybe “contingency” is a better word for this — in the way processing and printing film does and, therefore, yields more interesting results. However, SEFEX can be a nightmare when you first start using it and search through the myriad of presets and sliders to get the combination that you want.
My own processing with SEFEX is based on the procedure shown in the clip I linked above, in which the basic idea of flattening the original file that you put into SEFEX is very good. I generally use the No 11 preset plus the Tri-X simulation, and I reduce the GRAIN setting from 330 to 460.
The following M-Monochrom picture could have been used straight out the camera with just a slight curve to increase contrast, or just with the VSCO Tr-X preset, but SEFEX gives it more depth and texture. I think how you apply the FINE STRUCTURE and MID-TONE STRUCTURE in SEFEX has a lot to do with this.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/malland/16184249717/in/photostream/lightbox/
Although my description of the workflow above is rather long-winded and may sounds complex, it can be very quick and almost mechanical, as shown in the video clip.
Cheers, Mitch/Bangkok
Mitch:
It’s the sunny daylight shots I have the biggest problem with when viewing Monochrom images on the web. They just seem somehow choked or truncated; the daylight, or the heat of the sun, doesn’t come through. However, looking at your Flickr page, and the Hua Hin image in particular, I easily see and feel the daylight. It appears your approach of flattening the image in Lightroom and then massaging it in Efex, does the job. More Monochrom users should view the video you referenced.
Peter:
Both the images Mitch and you have presented immediately above aren’t the types of Monochrom images I have problems with. I should have been more specific that my complaint was with the Monochrom’s high dynamic range picture.
A digression, though: I really appreciate your essay on the makers in their studio. In my late thirties/early forties, I made seven violins and one viola. Building stringed instruments is a wondrous blend of Art and Science in the way creative expression can be made under the technical restrictions required for the instrument’s construction. Maybe it’s not that much of a digression, as Photography also has its own technical limitations under which artistic expression can flourish.
Cheers to you both.
Mitch:
Funny how we both do similar things.
The Auto does wonders to setting the black/white point.
I tried out SEFEX again, after your comments, but just couldn’t easily get it to match the results from Replichrome, which I was surprised about. That said, it is interesting to see the difference – SEFEX definitely feels more like film then Replichrome. Still, the ease with a Lightroom preset wins everyday, and I guess I am just too lazy.
I’ve got an exhibition of the violin pictures in the summer, so will have to compare SEFEX and Replichrome when printing.
Note – I’ve not had a chance to catch the video you’ve linked to yet.
Jeff:
I am glad you appreciated the essay.
Yes, the combination of Art and Science is wonderful, and rightly, photography falls in the same bracket. Just the Science because second nature, before the Art side can flourish. I am a design engineer by trade, which has a surprising mix between Art and Science (just more Science then the luthiers).
Given your insider knowledge, I’ve got a few questions if you’ve got time. No worries if not though! How did you feel about the essay? Did it portray their work well? Was it to long?
It is my first finished essay that is documentary photography.
PETER
>>>Note – I’ve not had a chance to catch the video you’ve linked to yet.<<<
Try to see it when you have some time: the methodology in the video can transform your view on SEFEX — and can speed up the process so that it can be as easy to use as Replichrome. The key step is the flattening of the file before feeding it into SEFEX.
I just had a look at your essay and like the indoor tonalities. My own tendency is to go for somewhat more contrast, so I would try to bring out some richer blacks in the violins and put more lighter tones outside the windows, although I don't know how the actual light was outdoors.
—Mitch/Bangkok
Peter:
No one who builds or repairs violins would find your essay too long, so I might not be the right person to ask. It shows a good set of repair procedures and types and none of them are belaboured, so it succeeds as a documentary. The last shot is interesting; I like the inclusion of the pot of hide-glue kept warm on the stove…right beside the tea kettle. How many of Oxford Violins’ customers would know that their tea was simmered alongside a double-boiler of horse glue? :)
Doing an essay on the making of a violin is a great idea. To the uninitiated, there are plenty of mysteries in its construction that upon revealing, should appeal to the inquisitive nature of fans of the photo-documentary. The image of the plank of curly maple leaning against the wall would make a great opening shot; I can see it as the transferring of the Pygmalion Myth to stringed instruments.
Like David said once, enter the making of the essay as if you’re the smartest person in the room. Learn first how the instrument is made before you go in to photograph the stages of construction. The makers might provide you with enough information beforehand, but they might not realize how interesting a procedure would be photographed, and may gloss over that. The construction of the ribs, the carving of the back and belly, the scroll-work and fluting on the head, the purfling, the varnishing, even the continual sharpening of the chisels and planes, should all make interesting photographs.
Good luck!
I see…all of us here in the northeastern United States hate you now. You know that, don’t you?
And I assume that all of the commenters above are at least forty years of age or older. I assume this because the commenters here are looking at the photo above and talking about the technical aspects of the Leica Monochrom as opposed to hoping that DAH has somehow gotten a hold on the young ladies’ phone numbers and is willing to share them with us. Decrepitude is a terrible thing, I think.
Nah, the commenters are so young that they take a non-sexist view — and, then, what does the shape of a violin remind you of? … And, then, they take the view, driven by the solidarity of youth, that the person that will post-process David’s M-Monochrom shots will get the absolutely best translation of the captured pixels onto the printed page.
Mitch/Bangkok – The old man from the Age of Hypo and Before Hype
[Note: In my signature I am paraphrasing Lars Bergquist who, on the Leica Users Forum, used to sign his posts with the device, “The old man from the Age of …”]
Akaky:
Hahaha!
Sorry to sound too clinically analytical, but isn’t the common thread here the documentation of bodies?
Mitch:
I just checked out the video you linked too. Interesting idea flattening the images. I need to give it ago on some fresh photographs, as I tended to just attempt to copy the Replichrome preset I use as standard, that I’d got used too.
Thank you for looking at the essay. I must remember to adjust the blacks more, as I like some more richness too!
Jeff:
Thank you for your words. I found the whole place fascinating, and that is god, because that is the point after all! I am very fortunate that they are willing to put time in, and explain what all the processes are about. I love the idea of being the smartest person in the room.
I am going to go visit them again, when they do more making, rather than restoration work.
Thanks again!
Akaky:
I am 27. I guess sometimes words distract me from bodies.
Mitch, the only people that young are toddlers.
Jeff, this is true, but if the documentation as such is the first thing one thinks of when seeing the above, then clearly one needs to get out more often.
Peter, I see how that could happen. although it seems to me that things have clearly changed since I was 27.