Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Epson R-D1 Leica M mount Digital Rangefinder

Epson R-D1 Leica M mount Digital Rangefinder A dedicated forum to the first Digital Leica M mount rangefinder camera.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

R-D1 film settings
Old 03-25-2008   #1
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,008
R-D1 film settings

I shoot JPG only, and am wondering what some favorite settings are? Anyone have film type settings that are close to the saturated color look of Portra400?
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 03-25-2008   #2
RML
Just live it.
 
RML's Avatar
 
RML is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Amsterdam, Holland or Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Age: 47
Posts: 4,795
I only shoot RAW, or hi res JPG when I'm doing an assignment (when I need more photos and have less time to change cards).

From the word go I set all the settings to 0 or neutral. I do all adjustments in PhotoRAW. I find that that works better for me, as I change the settings depending on the photo at hand.
__________________
My photo blog

Join the Rangefinder Blog/Site Ring.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-26-2008   #3
foto_fool
Registered User
 
foto_fool is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
I haven't done a systematic study, but I have found that I like some low-level processing. The settings I have come to are E=M+, S=M+, T=M, C=M+, N=M. I don't think this emulates any particular film. It would be cool to see some rigrous comparison.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-26-2008   #4
sonwolf
Registered User
 
sonwolf is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 111
Though I would recommend RAW shooting, I do sometimes shoot JPEGs for quick turn around.

My first recommendation is to customize the film settings to your needs and forget about the included presets. For me, the key setting control is Contrast. R-D1 JPEGs can be overly contrasty and harsh to my eyes. I usually lower the Contrast setting one level in environments with a full range of tones from light to dark. If the scene contrast is extremely high with dominating dark shadows, I lower the contrast setting two levels to the lowest setting.

If you are going to sharpen the photo in Photoshop or an equivalent program, the Edge Enhance setting needs to be reduced to its lowest level. This allows cleaner sharpening in Photoshop.

When shooting JPEGs, you also need to be very aware of the Color Space and White Balance settings. These settings are adjustable in a RAW converter but critical to JPEGs.

The sRGB color space is the most usable if the photos are receiving no post-processing. Adobe RGB possesses a wider range of colors and is best for scenes with saturated colors, though the JPEGs require a post-processing color space conversion before viewing on a computer (outside of Photoshop) or sent for printing to a standard photo lab.

The R-D1's Auto White Balance setting is not a paradigm of reliability; it is easily fooled by colorful scenes. Seriously consider using the white balance presets for more consistent color. In Tungsten lighting, the Tungsten preset is always more accurate than Auto White Balance.
__________________
R-D1
28mm Ultron 1.9
35mm Ultron 1.7
50mm Nokton 1.5
75mm Heliar 2.5
E-PL1
20mm Lumix 1.7
9-18mm M. Zuiko 4-5.6
14-42mm M. Zuiko 3.5-5.6

  Reply With Quote

Old 03-26-2008   #5
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,008
Thanks all, I will give these settings and suggestions a try and let you know what I find. I agree that the white balance on auto isn't reliable (but seldom is with any digital camera).

Indoors is where I'll chimp on the first couple of frames to ensure that tricky or mixed lighting gets handled OK.

Outdoors on auto, I've had good success and see little difference with the different settings of daylight (shade, etc.)
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 03-26-2008   #6
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
 
JNewell is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Near Boston, MA
Age: 58
Posts: 1,008
Honestly, I gave up shooting jpegs because it's so much easier to adjust things with raw files. I use Lightroom for 99% of my editing - it does a great job for an ordinary joe like me, and you can really do a *lot* with the raw images. FWIW...
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2008   #7
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 63
Posts: 3,214
ted, that's a tall assignment, emulating the portra films. NC has unparalled skin tones, while VC is sumptuous without being over the top, imho. there are some very skilled post-process wizards out there on boards like fredmiranda.com who know how to deal with the subtleties of tone curves and color management - i think many of them would struggle to emulate portra closely.

if your goal is to maximize use of the camera's jpg engine and minimize postprocessing, i'd set out a structured method to vary the WB and film settings on one subject during one shoot, examine the results on a decent monitor, and see what you like. that would yield a reasonable base for further tuning.
__________________
--Mike (confirmed midget imagist on stilts)

The photographer chances upon a scene that fascinates him. He longs to be a part of it ... recording the scene and including within it his vicarious representative, the participating observer. --- Geoff Dyer

Gear: more than enough, film and digital

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Good settings
Old 03-30-2008   #8
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,008
Good settings

I've tried these with N=L, and today am trying the same, with N=L, and T=M (tint = med.).

I like the E, S, and C at medium for JPGs and always having the option to put the card into a drugstore kiosk and get decent prints.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foto_fool View Post
I haven't done a systematic study, but I have found that I like some low-level processing. The settings I have come to are E=M+, S=M+, T=M, C=M+, N=M. I don't think this emulates any particular film. It would be cool to see some rigrous comparison.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Hi Mike
Old 03-30-2008   #9
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,008
Hi Mike

I think you're right. I'm definitely going to keep some film cameras around for Velvia like images. Digital has a long way to match these.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MCTuomey View Post
ted, that's a tall assignment, emulating the portra films. NC has unparalled skin tones, while VC is sumptuous without being over the top, imho. there are some very skilled post-process wizards out there on boards like fredmiranda.com who know how to deal with the subtleties of tone curves and color management - i think many of them would struggle to emulate portra closely.

if your goal is to maximize use of the camera's jpg engine and minimize postprocessing, i'd set out a structured method to vary the WB and film settings on one subject during one shoot, examine the results on a decent monitor, and see what you like. that would yield a reasonable base for further tuning.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2008   #10
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,008
This set was taken with a film profile with everything set to as low as possible, and in the monochrome mode of the rd1s settings.

Some contrast was applied to some images with Picasa's one touch, no sharpening or other pp added.

lens was 35/2 ASPH, ISO was 800.

http://matsumura.smugmug.com/gallery...Rd5h#274343620
__________________
My photo blog


Last edited by ampguy : 04-03-2008 at 12:44.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2008   #11
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 63
Posts: 3,214
ted, i just took a quick look at them - will try back when i have more time.

i think you've got a nice balance b/w shadow and highlights, meaning nothing blown on the high end nor blocked up on the low. (was the light as contrasty as it appears in some of the pics?) since i shoot raw that's about what i'd want ex camera. i'd say these are excellent digi "negatives."
__________________
--Mike (confirmed midget imagist on stilts)

The photographer chances upon a scene that fascinates him. He longs to be a part of it ... recording the scene and including within it his vicarious representative, the participating observer. --- Geoff Dyer

Gear: more than enough, film and digital

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Thanks Mike
Old 04-04-2008   #12
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,008
Thanks Mike

The contrast in these was upped in Picasa, and since uploading them, several of them benefit from further processing, especially sharpening.

The + 1/3 or so EV gives a nice balanced histogram, and the weather was mostly cloudy with some breaks of sunlight.

To me, these JPG's are a bit flat, even with the contrast upped, so I am going to slowly up the Edge enhancement, and contrast settings for my next outing, as well as try to figure out what "Standard" film is supposed to be.

Perhaps I should be shooting a brick wall with varying shades of light to try to understand the film types in monochrome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MCTuomey View Post
ted, i just took a quick look at them - will try back when i have more time.

i think you've got a nice balance b/w shadow and highlights, meaning nothing blown on the high end nor blocked up on the low. (was the light as contrasty as it appears in some of the pics?) since i shoot raw that's about what i'd want ex camera. i'd say these are excellent digi "negatives."
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2008   #13
Tuolumne
Registered User
 
Tuolumne's Avatar
 
Tuolumne is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Negev, Israel
Posts: 2,990
Red face

No I haven't experimented with them, but thanks to this post I checked my settings and discovered that I had accidentally left the "film" setting on "film 1" when I was fooling around. I set it back to "standard" and am much happier with my jpegs now, especially at iso 1600. I use Picasa for almost all post processing and it is just so easy to adjust the output that I have never felt a big motivation to play around with the R-D1's film type settings. It would be very nice if you could summarize your findings by giving us a film setting and an example photo of each. I am very interested in your results, although I don't have much time to play around with it myself.

/T
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2008   #14
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 63
Posts: 3,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by ampguy View Post
To me, these JPG's are a bit flat, even with the contrast upped, so I am going to slowly up the Edge enhancement, and contrast settings for my next outing, as well as try to figure out what "Standard" film is supposed to be.
Good plan except I'd stay away from upping edge enhancement - unless you prefer not to sharpen during post-processing. Me, I can do streets better in PS (and I'm far from skilled) than the in-camera jpg engines I've experience with.
__________________
--Mike (confirmed midget imagist on stilts)

The photographer chances upon a scene that fascinates him. He longs to be a part of it ... recording the scene and including within it his vicarious representative, the participating observer. --- Geoff Dyer

Gear: more than enough, film and digital

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2008   #15
Tuolumne
Registered User
 
Tuolumne's Avatar
 
Tuolumne is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Negev, Israel
Posts: 2,990
I don't know what "standard" actually means, but I did find that the camera processed the files much faster with the standard setting. I used to occasionally run out of buffer space when set on "Film 1". Never seems to happen on Standard.

/T
  Reply With Quote

R-D1 film settings
Old 07-22-2009   #16
Phantomas
Registered User
 
Phantomas's Avatar
 
Phantomas is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,085
R-D1 film settings

Although I'm sure this has been discussed on RFF, I can't seem to locate a thread dedicated to it, and google doesn't help either, so here it is.

This morning I have finally got my hands on a used R-D1 (that after a long time trying, numerous failed deals and one painful but luckily resolved scam). Shall I start a "Got my R-D1!" thread? Anyway, I'm about to hit the streets to shoot with this baby, but was wondering what might be nice "Film Settings" to use. I'm planning to shoot color mostly, leaving B&W work to film. But B&W setting suggestions would also not hurt.

I'd appreciate if you could share your settings and what film type they correspond to. Also, probably a stupid question, but I assume that shooting RAW will negate the film settings.

Thanks for your hints and I'll share the results later.
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2009   #17
aldobonnard
Registered User
 
aldobonnard is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 283
I mostly shoot RAW + B&W Jpeg, using either standard setting, or Film 1 (which is medium for everything and noise reduction to none), and change the settings according to the lens used (got only leica lenses but there is quite a difference between a Summarit and a modern Summicron in how they treat light and colours).
As a general rule, having the most neutral response suits me better, there's always enough time later to tweak things using raw files.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2009   #18
kuvvy
Registered User
 
kuvvy's Avatar
 
kuvvy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 60
Posts: 1,749
I'm also interested in what settings others find useful as I've admired some of the work here and while I don't want to particularly copy anyone else, I'd like to know why they use or tweak the settings they do.
I liked the shots I used to get from my Nikon D80 and this was set to give slightly more saturation and contrast and I was pleased with that. When I got the RD1 I set the saturation and contrast up one notch too. While these are the settings I've been using I'm starting to notice I'm not always pleased with the outcome of some of the shots.
I see some great colour work from other RD1 users and the quality of their shots reminds me of slide film, excellent colours and sharpness. Is it all done in PP afterwards?
__________________
Epson R-D1, Fuji XE2, Fuji X70, Fuji X100F, Fuji XQ1, Fuji F30, Olympus OM1n, Olympus E-PL1, Sigma DP2 & DP3 Merrill, Ricoh GR,

Ipernity Gallery

Flickr gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2009   #19
mabelsound
Registered User
 
mabelsound's Avatar
 
mabelsound is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Age: 47
Posts: 6,191
I really quite like B&W jpeg mode on the R-D1. Haven't tried anything else, though. Somehow, the B&W mode makes it seem even more like shooting with my M2.
__________________
flickr insta twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2009   #20
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,008
I pretty much use film setting 2. I don't think the film settings are made to emulate branded films, but each has a different value for sharpness, contrast, saturation, etc.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2009   #21
Phantomas
Registered User
 
Phantomas's Avatar
 
Phantomas is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,085
I've actually sen some people emulating film brands by adjusting the settings, some better than others. Trying to find where I've seen those...
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2009   #22
zetablues
Registered User
 
zetablues's Avatar
 
zetablues is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Erfurt, Thuringia
Posts: 66
Hi, Phantomas!

Under normal conditions this suits well IMO (JPG shooting):

WB auto (I think, R-D1 is very good here)
Edge Enhancement M-
Saturationg M-
Tint M (or M+)
Contrast M-
NR L (none)

HTH
Regards
__________________
Lutz
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2009   #23
Jeff Fillmore
Registered User
 
Jeff Fillmore's Avatar
 
Jeff Fillmore is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 32
Am I right in thinking the film modes only effect the jpg files and not the raw file?
__________________
Thanks!
Jeff

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2009   #24
Phantomas
Registered User
 
Phantomas's Avatar
 
Phantomas is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,085
Not sure Jeff, that's what I'm assuming, but wouldn't mind re-confirmation...

On that note, after a couple of days of shooting I noticed that my RAW files look quite muddy (color) when viewed in Bridge/Photoshop. Not unpleasant but slightly muddy. Then today I noticed something strange - I copied a few files from the SD card and proceeded to view them in Bridge (RAW files), clicked on one and the preview showed crispy beautiful photo...... for just a couple of seconds when BAM! preview refreshed and the photo assumed same ol' muddy colors. What the hell? Anyone have explanation for this?

Anyway, I haven't tried JPG yet, playing a "professional" shooting RAW only, but if that's the quality I get out of the camera... I'd rather go "amateur" JPG
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2009   #25
kuvvy
Registered User
 
kuvvy's Avatar
 
kuvvy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 60
Posts: 1,749
I've never shot RAW ever, with any camera. Mainly as I haven't a clue what to do with the files after. Just got Lightroom 2 and bought a book to follow but looks like hard going to me though I know you guys will say it's worth it. I spend to much time on the computer as it is andI don't expect shooting RAW will lessen the time.
However, another RFF-er and myself are off to do an early morning shoot in Manchester tomorrow so i may make the effort to try it out.
__________________
Epson R-D1, Fuji XE2, Fuji X70, Fuji X100F, Fuji XQ1, Fuji F30, Olympus OM1n, Olympus E-PL1, Sigma DP2 & DP3 Merrill, Ricoh GR,

Ipernity Gallery

Flickr gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2009   #26
mabelsound
Registered User
 
mabelsound's Avatar
 
mabelsound is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Age: 47
Posts: 6,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantomas View Post
Not sure Jeff, that's what I'm assuming, but wouldn't mind re-confirmation...

On that note, after a couple of days of shooting I noticed that my RAW files look quite muddy (color) when viewed in Bridge/Photoshop. Not unpleasant but slightly muddy. Then today I noticed something strange - I copied a few files from the SD card and proceeded to view them in Bridge (RAW files), clicked on one and the preview showed crispy beautiful photo...... for just a couple of seconds when BAM! preview refreshed and the photo assumed same ol' muddy colors. What the hell? Anyone have explanation for this?

Anyway, I haven't tried JPG yet, playing a "professional" shooting RAW only, but if that's the quality I get out of the camera... I'd rather go "amateur" JPG
That's Bridge first showing the jpeg thumbnail while it loads the RAW. Personally, I find ACR's R-D1 profile to be pretty crappy--this is what gives you the muddy pic. R-D1 RAW files are fairly bland, without adjustment.
__________________
flickr insta twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-25-2009   #27
nahlene
Registered User
 
nahlene's Avatar
 
nahlene is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 41
I tend to shoot all my photos in RAW because in case there is a good shot i would like to enlarge to 13MP 600 dpi, it would be easy through the Epson Photolier.

Besides, in some extreme dark or bright conditions, it is always a good idea to shoot RAW in order to be more flexible with the stops (RAW can recover about 2 stops from dark and nearly 1 stop from brightness in my experience)

There is another good thing about RAW, i use an 1GB Ultra II in R-D1s, shooting RAW will take about 70 ~75 photos to fill it, very close to 2 rolls of films, keeping my pace low and shooting more serious... but that's not the point, haha
  Reply With Quote

Film modes settings?
Old 06-12-2017   #28
matpar
Registered User
 
matpar is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 26
Film modes settings?

hi, try to "exhume" some words over this magnific RF family from Epson.

It seems as if this thread wasn't already open (I hope), but actually I do wonder:
1) which settings the "default" film selection mimic in respect of the parameters found on other settings (film1, film2, film3)? has it to be considered as if all values (i.e. saturation, contrast, etc.) are set to "0", or is there a precise setting there?
2) what are the parameters that works out best for you? (of course we get into the taste area here, but just to see ho it goes).

Cheers
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2017   #29
shadeofpale
Registered User
 
shadeofpale's Avatar
 
shadeofpale is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Krautland
Posts: 77
When i received mine, i reset it and got the following:

Film1:
E=M, S=M, T=M, C=M, N=L

Film2:
E=M+, S=M+, T=M, C=M+, N=L

Film3:
E=M, S=M, T=M, C=M, N=H

Always use these settings, unchanged.
__________________
Je suis Charlie too
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2017   #30
matpar
Registered User
 
matpar is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 26
Thank you for the reply!

shadeofpale, of course re-setting could help in getting original ratios (which I messed up so far), in any case a question remains unanswered: do we know whether the original "default" Film mode can be cloned in the other film settings? (this, in order to eventually make some slight modifications starting from the default setting).

Cheers
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-14-2017   #31
shadeofpale
Registered User
 
shadeofpale's Avatar
 
shadeofpale is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Krautland
Posts: 77
You might compare the output of the "Standard" setting with a modified film setting, all parameters set to zero ...
__________________
Je suis Charlie too
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2017   #32
matpar
Registered User
 
matpar is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 26
ok, this is what I thought too, but wasn't sure.

I'll play then starting from all parameters set to 0 and then move on!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2017   #33
shadeofpale
Registered User
 
shadeofpale's Avatar
 
shadeofpale is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Krautland
Posts: 77
Some report about the lessons you learnt?
__________________
Je suis Charlie too
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2017   #34
matpar
Registered User
 
matpar is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 26
Honestly not very much in the end, I fiddled a bit but mostly on contrast and tint, discovering the RAW is already Well managed by LR.

Plus, actual setting is JPG Always in B&W plus RAW. The best of two world imho.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:59.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.