Better lens = better image

[JerryReed]

I use the SINAR 54 H in the 4-shot mode, to photograph oil paintings, and today I learned why I had been unable to capture a satisfactory image in the 16 shot mode.  I had been using a Mamiya 645 with the 80 mm lens, while waiting for the Hy6 to become available.  Most recently, I learned that the Hy6 is not scheduled to support the Sinar 54 H.  Casting about for a way forward, it was suggested to me by my dealer and confirmed by a frequent contributor to this board that it may well be that the unsatisfactory 16 shot images that I was creating were the result of a lens not designed for the purpose for which I was using it, and that I might find a SINARCAM 2 and using it with the 54 H and a better lens, I would be able to make better 16 shot files.  I was NOT able to make better files, I was able to made MUCH BETTER files.

Thanks to my dealer Ulsaker Studio and friends from this board, I just might not miss the Hy6 at all.

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions,

Jerry Reed

[rainer_v]

I use the SINAR 54 H in the 4-shot mode, to photograph oil paintings, and today I learned why I had been unable to capture a satisfactory image in the 16 shot mode.  I had been using a Mamiya 645 with the 80 mm lens, while waiting for the Hy6 to become available.  Most recently, I learned that the Hy6 is not scheduled to support the Sinar 54 H.  Casting about for a way forward, it was suggested to me by my dealer and confirmed by a frequent contributor to this board that it may well be that the unsatisfactory 16 shot images that I was creating were the result of a lens not designed for the purpose for which I was using it, and that I might find a SINARCAM 2 and using it with the 54 H and a better lens, I would be able to make better 16 shot files.  I was NOT able to make better files, I was able to made MUCH BETTER files.

Thanks to my dealer Ulsaker Studio and friends from this board, I just might not miss the Hy6 at all.

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions,

Jerry Reed
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140282\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

which problem appeared in 15shot mode?

[rainer_v]

I use the SINAR 54 H in the 4-shot mode, to photograph oil paintings, and today I learned why I had been unable to capture a satisfactory image in the 16 shot mode.  I had been using a Mamiya 645 with the 80 mm lens, while waiting for the Hy6 to become available.  Most recently, I learned that the Hy6 is not scheduled to support the Sinar 54 H.  Casting about for a way forward, it was suggested to me by my dealer and confirmed by a frequent contributor to this board that it may well be that the unsatisfactory 16 shot images that I was creating were the result of a lens not designed for the purpose for which I was using it, and that I might find a SINARCAM 2 and using it with the 54 H and a better lens, I would be able to make better 16 shot files.  I was NOT able to make better files, I was able to made MUCH BETTER files.

Thanks to my dealer Ulsaker Studio and friends from this board, I just might not miss the Hy6 at all.

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions,

Jerry Reed
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140282\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

which problem appeared in 16-shot mode?

[JerryReed]

The problem was that the image was not so sharp.  

Jerry Reed

[BJNY]

Standard lenses from any camera manufacturer tend to be among their best in terms of resolution.

I'd look at other factors such as how solid/locked-down the camera was to combat vibration/movement.

It has also been reported how sharper (due to software processing) Hasselblad/Imacon multi-shot results are compared to Sinar's.

[thsinar]

hi Billy,

Jerry's "unsharpness" problem was due to a lack of resolution power with the lens(es) he used. In 16-shot mode the resolution to resolve is > 88 MPx's. In this case only HR lenses can give the best out of it.

As for Hasselblad 39 MPx giving sharper results: this is simply BS (pardon me and no offense to you)! If H has some internal "twicking" like e.g. USM applied automatically, tonal curve twicked (most probably in this case, if what you say is true), etc ..., this does not allow to say "how sharper a H multishot is ....".

FYI: Sinar CS DOES NOT and NEVER apply internally (in the software) any sharpening, nor is the software twicking the tonal curve to give the better impression of sharpness (linear curve used for the Raw 16 bit).

Best regards,
Thierry

Standard lenses from any camera manufacturer tend to be among their best in terms of resolution.

I'd look at other factors such as how solid/locked-down the camera was to combat vibration/movement.

It has also been reported how sharper (due to software processing) Hasselblad/Imacon multi-shot results are compared to Sinar's.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140299\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[JerryReed]

You may surely have a point about "being locked down."  I do not lock the mirror up, but the 4-shot and the 16-shot setting is 6 seconds between shots so unlikely that the preceeding shot might be affecting the image quality, while certainly the mirror movements during each shot could be a factor, as you say.  The camera is on a FOBA camera stand, pretty good there.  If I continue to get the quality that I got today, I could be satisfied.  I do not have experience with Imacon software and cannot make any comparisons, but if you would cite your references, I would like to read what articles you were referring to.  Thanks for your insights.

Jerry Reed

Standard lenses from any camera manufacturer tend to be among their best in terms of resolution.

I'd look at other factors such as how solid/locked-down the camera was to combat vibration/movement.

It has also been reported how sharper (due to software processing) Hasselblad/Imacon multi-shot results are compared to Sinar's.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140299\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[JerryReed]

I was originally unaware of the SINARCAM 2, so some readers may be as well.  In reference to camera movement, perhaps another aspect, beyond my previous ones concerning the use of a lens better suited to the purpose, is that the SC 2 has no mirror and utilizes Live View to focus.  Thus, without the mirror's movements, the illimination of what Billy mentioned about camera movement may be a favorable factor, which I had neglected to consider in my earlier comments.

Thanks again for all the good ideas,

Jerry Reed

[mmurph]

Glad to hear it worked out so well Jerry!

What lens do you have on the Sinarcam?  Thierry mentioons the HR, is that a Rodenstock?

Best,
Michael

[thsinar]

Yes, the Cam 2 is certainly the solution as per opposition to a MF body where the mirror vibration can cause problems, in case of multishot. So is the Sinar m, vibration free.

Still, the use of a HR lens with its high resolving power will make a difference in quality when shooting multishot, in comparison with a standard "film" lens, especially with 16-shot.

Thierry

I was originally unaware of the SINARCAM 2, so some readers may be as well.  In reference to camera movement, perhaps another aspect, beyond my previous ones concerning the use of a lens better suited to the purpose, is that the SC 2 has no mirror and utilizes Live View to focus.  Thus, without the mirror's movements, the illimination of what Billy mentioned about camera movement may be a favorable factor, which I had neglected to consider in my earlier comments.

Thanks again for all the good ideas,

Jerry Reed
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140303\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[BJNY]

Thanks Thierry for your clarification.  Are you coming to NY for Photo East at the Javits Center?

Sorry, Jerry.  I can not cite/reference the post....I don't remember where I read it.

[RobertJ]

So, you still haven't told us what lens you're using now.  I'm guessing a Rodenstock HR?

[thsinar]

No, I won't come to NY for Photo East. Not really my region. I am also busy with some events in Australia at that time.

Kind regards,
Thierry

Thanks Thierry for your clarification.  Are you coming to NY for Photo East at the Javits Center?

Sorry, Jerry.  I can not cite/reference the post....I don't remember where I read it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140306\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[BobDavid]

I use an Imacon 384c and frequently shoot fine art reproductions using 16-shot mode. The trick to using a helical focus lens, especially an auto-focus lens, is to tape the lens barrel once you establish focus so that it doesn't creep, especially if your shooting on a copy stand. Also, once you've established focus with an autofocus lens, be sure to set it to manual focus for obvious reasons. I've used the Mamiya AFD and both auto focus and manual lenses for multi-shot work. However, the best results are obtained with a lens such as a Rodenstock digital or Schneider Digitar. I'm using a Rodenstock 70mm Sironar Digital and it is far superior to any Mamiya lens (Mamiya glass is excellent for single shot work). The contrast, lack of distortion and edge-to-edge sharpness are impressive. I now shoot all of my copy work using a 4X5 cam, Imacon back, and Rodenstock digital lens.

Ulsaker Studio is an excellent resource. I purchase most of my high-end equipment from them.

[TechTalk]

FYI: Sinar CS DOES NOT and NEVER apply internally (in the software) any sharpening, nor is the software twicking the tonal curve to give the better impression of sharpness (linear curve used for the Raw 16 bit).
Best regards,
Thierry
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The "linear curve" is really the "default curve" as there is a gamma correction curve being applied in order for the image to make some visual sense to our nonlinear vision. [a href=\"http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/linear_gamma.pdf]Adobe Linear Gamma PDF[/url]

It is surprising that "Sinar CS DOES NOT and NEVER apply internally (in the software) any sharpening" as RAW conversion programs generaly apply a small amount of sharpening so that the initial image generated is not excessively soft.

By the way, thanks for your postings here Thierry. They are among the ones most worthy of reading.

[thsinar]

No, we don't apply any sharpening to "our" raw images captured, never. That has never been our idea to simply make look images better for users (or potential users, speak for "commercial" reasons).

Your Adobe document is very interesting and explains well what happens in the shadows and highlights areas. I can only insist on the "exposure to the right": it is absolutely the right way to avoid or lessen problems in the shadows and that is what Sinar is doing. But there is no S-shape curve applied here.

Yes, you are right: the Sinar .STI files do also have a "curve applied". But the curve which is applied is only applied when you open the document (or then in the preview/thumbnails, for obvious reasons). The RAWs on your HD are absolutely untouched.
And the curve applied is the one from the used "Working Space".  But there is no "twicking" of the shadows or highlights like it happens with some other digital cameras by applying a tonal curve.

However, the Sinar eMotion files (which are made of a ".IA" = Image Archive and a ".BR" = Black Reference) coming out of the back are absolutely raw files. Those absolute raws are used when taking the "Brumbaer eMotion DNG Converter" from Stefan Hess: during this conversion you might then apply some "Colour Matrices", "Highlights Recovery", "White Shadings", "De-Noise" of the shadings, etc ..., but this DNG conversion uses absolute raws.

Thanks for your compliment.

Best regards,
Thierry

The "linear curve" is really the "default curve" as there is a gamma correction curve being applied in order for the image to make some visual sense to our nonlinear vision. Adobe Linear Gamma PDF

It is surprising that "Sinar CS DOES NOT and NEVER apply internally (in the software) any sharpening" as RAW conversion programs generaly apply a small amount of sharpening so that the initial image generated is not excessively soft.

By the way, thanks for your postings here Thierry. They are among the ones most worthy of reading.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140342\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[rainer_v]

i used with the 54H in 16 shot mode a contax 645 where i glued the mirror with tape in its upper positon so he can remain there. the camera does not hinder that to fire. live view works fine with it.
i used the contax 80mm ( at f8 ) and hasselblad macro 3,5/100 ad 120 ( with adapters ).
results have been excellent.

[LA30]

Mr Ulsaker is a great guy!  His studio has helped many a photographer from the Massachusetts area.

Ken

[JerryReed]

Glad to hear it worked out so well Jerry!

What lens do you have on the Sinarcam?  Thierry mentioons the HR, is that a Rodenstock?

Best,
Michael

Michael:

Michael Ulsaker employed a specialist in Rhode Island to make up a lens board and a focusing mount that will allow the lens (we have not finalized the lens choice) a Schneider HM enlarging lens to be focused.  I am working with two lenses, a 60 mm and 90 mm lens, which have been modified in the manner described.  The nice part about these lens choices is that obviously they were designed for flat field work, and my stand off distance from the art piece allows for quite large paintings to be photographed with the 60 mm lens focal length.

To satisfy myself that this was a useful means to move forward in quality, given the current camera choices available for the 54 H, I took a painting that I had previously shot in 4-shot and 16-shot modes with the Mamiya 645 and 80 mm lens.  It was impressive to see the detail present in the highlights (histogram 235-245) where the artist had represented the specular highlights on a ceramic vase with titanium white applied with heavy impasto, where the detail in the paint daub was coming from the shadows in the brush work.

All the best,

Jerry Reed