First Leica Shots, Help Appreciated

[jlee]

I love my new Leica but was a bit dissappointed with my first results. These are the best of them and feel that the subjects had some potential. It certainly is a new way of seeing and will take some adjustment:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=131640

 

<p>

 

The fountain shots for example were my first attempt at using hyperfocal distance. How can they NOT be sharp? Of course I'm using a cheap flatbed for scanning and am just learning that whole process too. Would appreciate any comments that might speed up the learning curve. Thanks, JLee

[bobtodrick]

Yes, I too think the fountain shots have good potential, and there

were a number of photos that were quite good. A couple of

things though. Firstly, if you read through some of the threads on

this site you will find lots of comments to the affect "give your M

an extended period of use before deciding on whether it works

for you or not". It truly is a different way of seeing and requires

some adjustment, especially if you're coming from the world of

SLRs and zooms. Secondly, concerning hyperfocal use. The

general rule is that at whatever F stop your acceptable focus will

extend a certain distance. This distance runs approximately 1/3

in front of, and 2/3 in back of your true focus distance. The big

words here are ACCEPTABLE FOCUS. Don't assume that

throughout this range that everything will be tack sharp.

[jackflesher]

Decent photos! IMHO, you are dealing with two problems, and possibly

a thrid. 1) Hyperfocal rarely works as an end-all solution to focus;

you should have one part of the main subject at a point close to

prime focus. 2) In most of your shots you were using f16, which is

about the worst f-stop for sharpness on any Leica lens. IMO, the same

shots at f8 with the main subjects (the people) at or very near prime

focus would haver yielded the results you wre looking for. (However,

to make this work in sunny daylight, you'll need to switch to 100

speed film, and reserve the 400 speed emulsions for lower light.) 3)

You could indeed have scanner focus issues, especially with a flat-

bed. I say this because for some reason "sack race" looks better

sharpness-wise to me than the fountain shots.

[jvicinanza]

Hey don�t be so hard on yourself! Your photographs are pretty good. I

can�t see too much out of focus but as im viewing them on a notebook

screen its difficult to judge. It a shame you didnt make more of the

fountain oppotunity but hey... I think that about my photographs

every time I press the shutter!

When I use hyper focus I generally set the lens to f4-f8 (on my 50mm

Summicron) or so and the distance to an estimation that will be

relevant for my subject. So for example if im in the street I can

estimate that the subject will be within 8 feet.

Im pretty new to the Leica as well and I really am practising hard

with focusing at speed.. its hard! but worth it.

 

<p>

 

Jason

www.futurafish.com

[michael_darnton1]

I'm not seeing camera issues, I'm seeing digital processing problems--

your use of the program, not the scanner. I think that I'd be able to

tune them up to your liking pretty quickly in Photoshop--there's a

serious lack of local contrast in important areas. In the old days

I'd be telling you to leave the prints in the developer until they'd

had a chance to develop fully :-)

[jlee]

This truly is a great forum without all the negatives (no pun) I've

found on some others. Thanks for your help. I think I've learned a

few things today which makes any effort worthwhile. Bob: You

mentioned the 1/3-2/3 rule of focus. I'm familiar with the concept

and have used it in informal portraiture but thought that hyperfocal

would be the way to go for street work based on reading. But what

you and Jack has said brings some realization, I think, in that

hyperfocal is not an end all solution but more of a compromise for

somewhat acceptable results in fast paced situations. Jack, on the

Sack race I remember specifically focusing on the zone I planned to

shoot before the action reached it instead of using hyperfocal

distance. Therefore the 1/3-2/3 rule probably was applied and

apparently worked here. Jason: Thanks for your comments and I am

quickly learning what it means to "see differently" with a RF

system. I do think I'm going to like it. I haven't had the urge to

pick up the Nikon since. I would like some specific recommendations

on how to make the most of the Fountain Op as I will probably have

the chance to try and try again at that location. Mike: Is there

somewhere on the net you could point me to give me some basics on

scanning and Photoshop manipulation for best results? I'm using

Photodeluxe Home Addition 3 and recognize the need for Photoshop but

thought I'd bundle it with a film scanner when and if it can be

afforded. I really have little/no knowledge of scanning for best

resolution image size vs.file size. These were scanned at 150dpi and

converted to JPEG was that my best option? Finally, since my Pro Lab

is 45min. away and I was anxious to get these back I used a drug

store 1hr. photo. Heresy I know and everytime I do it seems I'm

disappointed and wonder if it was the photographer or printer.

Thanks again for all your good feedback. Regards, JLee

[j._o.]

Camera shake can be an issue, even at high shutter speeds, so don't

rule it out. Plus, hyperfocal distances can be tricky: did you set

the lens so that infinity was covered for those shots? If so, why? I

usually work using hyperfocal calculations with the focus set at 3 or

4 feet (tho not with something as long as a 35).

 

<p>

 

My experiments with flatbeds convinced me not to bother for 35mm

negatives, so part of your problem might be that, too.

 

<p>

 

Otherwise I didn't see any huge problems with your folder that a

little dodging, burning, and contrast control couldn't deal with.

[jlee]

John,

Boy, I hate to think camera shake is an issue for me at these shutter

speeds since I rarely had a problem with my Nikon F4 or N90s down to

1/30 with a 35mm. Being able to push that limit when necessary was

one of my reasons for switching to a rangefinder. I won't rule out

anything though. Maybe I'm going to have to adjust my stance and

grip a bit with the smaller body.

I had the right f16 hash mark set at infinity and the left fell

somewhere around 4 ft. I think (I don't have my camera in front of me

to tell.) I'm about to agree with you on the flatbed scan. Have

some limited dark room experience and am debating a home set-up

though I like to shoot chromes as well so a film scanner may get the

vote.

[bobtodrick]

I have been using flatbed scanners for a couple of years now,

and find that with black and white it's the way to go. For some

reason not many of the 'inexpensive' neg scanners do really well

with B&W. If anyone noticed in the interview a few posts back on

Ralph Gibson - he said that to get the intense blacks he's so

well know for he uses a flatbed scanner, but scans the prints

wet, right out of the wash. Can't quite bring myself to do this,

though maybe in the future......

[wilhelm]

I usually cringe when reviewing "see what I done" pictures, but if

these are your first attempts, you have a great future in the medium

(IMHO). Until you are using the Leica comfortably, I suggest that

you don't try to use hyperfocal distance, and try to focus carefully

on the main subject. Keep it up!

[iván]

Many other opinions here are more knowledgeable than mine but as per

what you say about your experience and based on the images you shared

with us I think it is far too early for despair.

I was in despair with my first several rolls in my first M3. Though

years of previous experience with SLRs the results were far poorer

than yours. Not that I'm doing high level photography today but my

results have noticeably improved a lot.

I assume that there is no single cause for less than perfect results

but time will polish down most of them until only "structural" ones

will remain. Those are the really hard ones to improve, I have

noticed.

Some of us will never be able to get to the same heights than our

photo heroes but we all can still enjoy the process and keep trying,

can't we?

By the way: I read an advise somewhere in this same site I think,

stating something like "Always focus on what you think you should

unless it is not practically possible" and it has been of great help

for me. IMO even focusing just close in a hurry is better than zone

focusing. May be it could work for you too . . .

Have fun. Best regards.

 

<p>

 

Iván

[Rob F.]

Love the train station and the seated ladies. Keep it up. You are

using the Leica M appropriately.

[jlee]

Again, great forum. Thanks so much for your encouraging words. From

a group of excellent photographers such as this they mean a lot. I

will try to put all of your advice into practice. Good shooting,

JLee

[michael_darnton1]

I took the liberty of swiping one of your photos that seemed like it

had tonal promise and made some quick corrections on it so you could

see what I mean. I'm calibrated for my printer, not web work, so it

might be a tad dark on your screen.

 

<p>

 

http://home.mindspring.com/~mdarnton/image-display[1].jpg

 

<p>

 

I don't know websites that would help you. My favorite source is the

book "Professional Photoshop" by Dan Margulis. It's very advanced,

though, and you might find it tough sledding until you have more

digital experience under your belt. In terms of tonal and color

correction it's by far the best book I've seen, but it assumes you

already have a working familiarity with Photoshop.

[markwilkins]

How are you evaluating your focus? If you're using a good loupe

and a lightbox with your negatives then you're on the right track.

If you're evaluating your focus from your prints or from your scans

you may be either seeing softness that was introduced by the

printing or scanning process or missing focus problems.

 

<p>

 

I say this because machine prints or scans often look somewhat

soft compared against the negative. This can cover up

problems with the negative if you assume that a focus problem

is a printing problem and it can make you think you've screwed

up the focus when your negs are nice and sharp.

[Robin Smith]

My advice is always to keep shutter speeds higher rather than lower

(Leica lenses are designed for wider apertures) and for real sharpness

forget hyperfocal focussing - focus on what you want sharp and it will

be sharp. Hyperfocal often means little is really sharp.