When Lightroom will process Phase One IIQ raw file with black calibration?

[Assaf]

Hello my fellow photographers,

I am using Phase One IQ280 raw files with long exposure.
Capture one 8.3.3 produce much cleaner files after noise reduction and Lightroom CC 2015.1.1 produce unsatisfactory results, I have been using LR since version 1 and can not think to move to C1 but now after upgrading my digital back to the IQ280 I'm starting to think about it. I wish someone from adobe will do something to improve it, I have patience and I will be more then happy to send files for testing, but this issue is probably few years old as the IIQ files have been here for a while.

This image is for 2 minutes exposure + 2 minutes black calibration / dark current / etc , ISO 35, IIQ L
I have tried to move to C1 but it didn't work with my workflow at all.

below is a picture of Capture one 8.3.3 VS Lightroom CC 2015.1.1 you can see the setting selected on each of the software, lightroom full noise reduction + color noise reduction both 100% VS  C1 the default noise reduction.

anyone else with the same issue? that is using Lightroom with IIQ Files?
anyone knows if adobe are in the process of sorting it out?
any suggestions ideas or emotional support will be welcomed.

Thank you.

[Paul2660]

A couple of thoughts, first, that is a very clean file @ 2 minutes for a 280, congratulations.

I may have this wrong, but LR does not do a great job on stuck pixels, period.  I have never figured out why Adobe can't remove them from any camera.  C1's "single pixel noise reduction" slider is a real asset in long exposures as it can pull out all the stuck pixels at a very low loss in overall details.  However I believe it only works on the raw files, so an imported tif from LR it won't work, but I have never tried that.  Overall the two files are very clean except for the stuck pixels, at least to my eyes. 

All DSLR's offer the long exposure noise reduction, however the effects are seen on camera, i.e. you can see the effects after the dark frame is finished.  I have always assumed that the mapping was being done in the camera or digital back.  But your images proves this wrong, as if that was the case, LR should be able to open the file sans the stuck pixels.  So there must be some communication going on with C1 and the raw file.  I noticed you had the single pixel at 49 in C1 so C1 is working on the stuck pixels in your example.  It would be interesting to see what your C1 example looks like with the single pixel noise reduction set to 0.   

In other testing I have seen, with the IQ260, at even 6 seconds, to 20 seconds, there were still a lot of stuck pixels showing in the C1 until the single pixel noise reduction was enabled.  So I am not really sure what the dark frame does with C1 and raws.

However it's clear to me that LR cannot currently do anything with stuck pixels, as I have this same issue with all my cameras, Phase included in LR. 

I still always work with C1 for IQ260 images, but mainly due to the fact I am usually shooting with a tech camera and thus have LCC"s to process, C1's workflow is just better on this.  Many on this site seem to hold the opinion that LR can't handle the Phase raw files very well, which I disagree with.  I love the look that LR can render on both my P45+ and 160 and 260 files, non-tech camera.  But when it comes to long exposures with a Phase back, it's C1 for me always. 

Paul

[Assaf]

Hi Paul,

Thank you for your detailed answer, and for sharing your knowledge.

I have attached 3 screen shots,
the first,     C1 with only the single pixel is Zero the rest is on the default 50 - Lightroom with 100% noise reduction
the second  C1 with all the Noise reduction sliders on 0 - Lightroom with 100% noise reduction
the third     Both C1 & Lightroom with all the Noise reduction sliders on 0

You can clearly see that the single pixel noise in LR is much more bigger (the size of each noise particle) then a single pixels noise particles in C1, even when C1 has all the noise reduction turned down to zero (the last image). this might indicate that the black calibration / dark frame might have something to do with it.

I wish someone in adobe will take it on board and add the single pixel noise reduction to lightroom. also if they can start supporting the IIQ S that will be even better it is great to use it when you can control the light for studio work.
Assaf

[Paul2660]

The 3rd example with LR is very familiar, as LR begins to over do it and turn the stuck pixels to black. 

Phase C1, is definitely getting a better read of the raw from the start, as in the 1st example the C1 image is much cleaner. 

LR for now is really behind on this issue, and not sure why they won't address it.  The Single pixel noise slider has been in C1 for a while now.  What is also strange, is older versions of LR, with the 2010 process, sometimes do map out the stuck pixels, not always, but I have seen situations where it did.  With the A7rII showing so much noise on longer exposures and it's extreme popularity, maybe Adobe will look into this issue a bit more for a future release.

One other note, your example, obviously taken in daylight, it once again proof that there seems to be a very wide variety of CCD builds in Phase backs.  Or it might be that holding out for a later camera (not purchasing at announcement) may allow Phase to tweak the setup.  Personally I have not seen such a clean 2 minute file from any 80MP back from Phase. so you got a good one indeed.  2 minutes is beyond the recommended exposure range as I recall on the 280 or right at the limit and per your shots, you had some time left to go.  I am not really sure I could get as clean and smoothly rendered a shot with my 260, actually I am sure.

Paul

[buckshot]

Yes, those 2min IQ280 exposures do look clean.

I often wonder why there are so few firmware updates from P1 to support their DBs ... it seems that once they are out the door, they are so keen to move onto 'the next big thing' they tend to forget what they could do to improve 'the last big thing'. Need to take a leaf out of Fuji's book IMHO.

[Paul2660]

Yes, those 2min IQ280 exposures do look clean.

I often wonder why there are so few firmware updates from P1 to support their DBs ... it seems that once they are out the door, they are so keen to move onto 'the next big thing' they tend to forget what they could do to improve 'the last big thing'. Need to take a leaf out of Fuji's book IMHO.

I agree, but that was not always the case as with the P45+ and early IQ 1x backs there were several firmware updates, and more than one associated with image quality.  I had hoped to see a similar path with the IQ260, but that did not happen, Phase was done developing that back at time of ship.  Sadly, but it does seem that with the 280 they may have gotten things a bit better at ship. 

Paul

[Assaf]

The back I'm using is actually Second hand and I'm not sure how old it is, I think its one of the early ones. I had sent it to re-glue the WIFI plate and Phase one has upgraded the firmware to 6.3.03 from the 16/07/15.
The back itself is IQ280 Revision 3 Serial number: GN00101X and has only about 8,500 Shots, very low mileage but I'm not sure if it makes any difference to the noise.

the IQ 280 is supposed to be able to shoot up to 2 minutes and in low temperatures even longer I'v been told.

Assaf