[Leica] Comparing portraits with Noctilux Monochrom and film

[Lluis Ripoll]

Hi all,

Thank you very much for looking and for your interesting comments, I think firtsly we we have consider we are watching an image in a Monitor, not printed. The digital images looks clean and even generally better in a montor than a image from film. Right now I would like compare these images once printed, everyone according his own media, I think that for my preferences I would like more the darkroom image, these are simply different, and finally is a personal choose.  The Monochrom is able to give great images but actually I’m not printing any more inkjet, I work in the darkroom and I like better the rendition I obtain with wet prints than laserjet prints,  in my opinion the monitor don’t give an exact idea about how will be the image once printed, generally I do my copies with Ilford FB Variocontrast 11x14 paper, enlarging with the technique of  Split Grade,  it can give IMHO a larger tonality and manage better the contrast than with traditional filters. About the cost, this is a diffrent discussion. 

Cheers
Lluis


> El 25 febr 2020, a les 20:07, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> va escriure:
> 
> I agree with Howard and Tina and others on the superior Leica Monochrom so called results but I think if we shot film and printed it in our darkroom or had a custom print made we'd know what we were looking at.  A small machine print otherwise known as a snapshot we don’t.   A snapshot printed for pennies untouched by human hands tells you little or nothing about what the 6 thousand dollar lens you have on your 6 thousand dollar camera is capable of normally doing so lets not delve into the subtleties of output.
> Night shooting now is no wide open capturing a thin sliver wide open at squeeze and pray shutter speeds kind of deal.   
> We’re now both capturing action and getting plenty of depth of field; both. 
> A handheld digital shooter shoots the pants off of someone shooting film Noctilux or not it’s not even remotely close. We’ve left them many many stops behind. Many. Both f and shutter. 
> A reason to be suspicious of film to digital comparisons which talk about in nebulous terms how film has more je ne sais quoi smirk smirk is the fact that close to none of the serious shooters out there have not long ago sold their film cameras and never looked back.  The "big film resurgence" is a Fig Newton of someone's well-paid PR hack imagination.
> I’d shot film at night for decades but by mid 2001 started shooting bricks of Neopan 1600 with an f1 Noctilux M I had just bought which never came off my M6 and developing and printing the results in my darkroom mainly 11x14’s and a fair amount of 16x20’s. 
> Was really way better than Tri X with an f1.4 but by 2004 digital hit it big and was way, way, way, better. 
> I think the hair thin depth of field effect has limited use I shoot wide open once in a blue new moon. 
> It’s f  ISO12,500 and be there for me with my D750 Nikon a camera in low light which is feeling its age as I am. I’m sure ISO12,500 has been left far in the dust by the newer generation of cameras in the past few years I'd not mind shooting with..
> 
> -- 
> Mark William Rabiner
> 
> On 2/25/20, 8:19 AM, "LUG on behalf of Tina Manley via LUG" <lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of lug at leica-users.org> wrote:
> 
>    I agree with Howard.
> 
>    Tina
> 
>    On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 10:09 PM Howard L Ritter Jr via LUG <
>    lug at leica-users.org> wrote:
> 
>> Lluis, I have just the opposite reaction. I think the MM image is superior
>> in just about every way. To me, the film image looks like a flat image that
>> has been recorded on a flat surface, like I’m looking at a piece of film,
>> while the MM image has smoothness, richness of dynamic range, contrast, and
>> depth, like I’m looking through it into reality.
>> 
>> Of course, this impression has nothing to do with the fact that I love my
>> own MM…
>> 
>> —howard
>> 
>>> On Feb 24, 2020, at 7:44 PM, Lluis Ripoll via LUG <lug at leica-users.org>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> These ones are with Leica MP, Noctilux wide open, film Ilford HP5 rated
>> at nominal ISO 400, developed with D23  1:1
>>> 
>>> Diana (3)
>>> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/luisrq/Portraits/2020F020209.jpg.html>
>>> 
>>> Diana (4)
>>> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/luisrq/Portraits/2020F020211.jpg.html>
>>> 
>>> Please compare Diana (4) with this one Diana (1) with the Leica
>> Monochrom CCD, Noctilux f1 wide open, at ISO 1600
>>> 
>>> <
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/luisrq/Portraits/20200213_L1020137.jpg.html
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I think that film’s structure or texture gives despite a very small
>> grain, more relief to the portrait, it looks to me more alive…. What do you
>> think?
>>> 
>>> Thanks for looking, your c&c are welcome
>>> 
>>> Saludos cordiales
>>> Lluis
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
>    -- 
>    Tina Manley
>    www.tinamanley.com
>    http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley
>    <http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography/3B49552F-90A0-4D0A-A11D-2175C937AA91/Tina+Manley.html>
> 
>    _______________________________________________
>    Leica Users Group.
>    See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information