H3D-31 vs. Phase/H1 or H2 Sharpness

[mikemigs]

Thanks to all previous posters who commented on the H3D-31. My next question deals with sharpness between H3D-31 vs. Phase P30 captures.

I have been comparing files shot by an H3D-31 (not the II) vs. a P30+, and it seems to me that each app has it's own interpretation of sharpening. Flexcolor (v4.8.1) uses an amount slider ranging from 0 to 999, whereas C1 Pro ranges from 0 to 400.

I am trying to compare amount of capture detail between the 2 digital backs, so I processed files without any sharpening from both backs.

My observations tell me that the P30+ seems to yield a sharper image than the H3D-31. Not sure why, but does anyone feel their H3D not providing a sharp enough CAPTURE?

I realize any image-editor like Photoshop (including the many sharpening plug-ins for it), Lightroom, and Aperture can sharpen files, but my gut feeling tells me that H3D files should not undergo so much sharpening filter just to make it sharp (or to match Phase).

I experienced similar issues 3 years ago when comparing an Imacon 22MP back against a Phase H25 on my V series Hasselblad. The Imacon was soooo much softer that it made the H25 a clear winner, so I bought it. Now I am looking to upgrade and a I like the H3D-31 but this sharpness issue still seems to stick around.

Your comments much appreciated - thanks!

Mike.

[stewarthemley]

I'm interested in the comparison also but there are too many variables for a meaningful answer. Eg, It's not possible to use the same raw converters, with identical settings, because the Hassy files need flexcolor and the Phase can't be processed in flex. So, as you say, there is a huge difference at step one. And even ignoring that, were all sharpening controls actually at zero? And so on. A raw converter is a vital part of today's chain and can/does make more difference than some lenses. It really can't be ignored. And then we get on to camera settings. If the same body is used, fine, but if not... Too many variables.

[joern_kiel]

It is well known that phase files appear sharper at first look. Like you I was irrritated by this. I use the H3D 39 and must set the slider to about 350-400 with 0.9 -1.1 radius to get the look that i am used to because of long time using C1.
But i was told that this is normal for my H3D 39 in comparsion with Phase and i believe the rep said that you have to apply 200-300 with H3D 31 and 22.

The new Phocus software will compensate this because it is written only for digital cameras, he said.
My workflow has changed with flexcolor because i only apply a small amount of sharpening with flexcolor and then sharpen inside PS depending on output size. The files are so big that i downsize them most of the times...

But the soft look has some advantage because retouching skin and other `not-become-to-dominant-texture` with a softer layer works fine, at least for me.

jørn

[godtfred]

Thanks to all previous posters who commented on the H3D-31. My next question deals with sharpness between H3D-31 vs. Phase P30 captures.

I have been comparing files shot by an H3D-31 (not the II) vs. a P30+, and it seems to me that each app has it's own interpretation of sharpening. Flexcolor (v4.8.1) uses an amount slider ranging from 0 to 999, whereas C1 Pro ranges from 0 to 400.

I am trying to compare amount of capture detail between the 2 digital backs, so I processed files without any sharpening from both backs.

My observations tell me that the P30+ seems to yield a sharper image than the H3D-31. Not sure why, but does anyone feel their H3D not providing a sharp enough CAPTURE?

I realize any image-editor like Photoshop (including the many sharpening plug-ins for it), Lightroom, and Aperture can sharpen files, but my gut feeling tells me that H3D files should not undergo so much sharpening filter just to make it sharp (or to match Phase).

I experienced similar issues 3 years ago when comparing an Imacon 22MP back against a Phase H25 on my V series Hasselblad. The Imacon was soooo much softer that it made the H25 a clear winner, so I bought it. Now I am looking to upgrade and a I like the H3D-31 but this sharpness issue still seems to stick around.

Your comments much appreciated - thanks!

Mike.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=154613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I came from a H3D-39 to a P45+, Capture one sharpens the image a lot more as a default, than Flexcolor does. The chip is the same in both, and there is no anti-aliasing filter. So any differences in the two captures should come from either software or IR filter. (EDIT: or back-electronics...)

Also C1 pushes the midtones and highlights up a lot in the default tone-curve, flexcolor does not do this and is more "true" to the capture.

-axel

[hubell]

Thanks to all previous posters who commented on the H3D-31. My next question deals with sharpness between H3D-31 vs. Phase P30 captures.

I have been comparing files shot by an H3D-31 (not the II) vs. a P30+, and it seems to me that each app has it's own interpretation of sharpening. Flexcolor (v4.8.1) uses an amount slider ranging from 0 to 999, whereas C1 Pro ranges from 0 to 400.

I am trying to compare amount of capture detail between the 2 digital backs, so I processed files without any sharpening from both backs.

My observations tell me that the P30+ seems to yield a sharper image than the H3D-31. Not sure why, but does anyone feel their H3D not providing a sharp enough CAPTURE?

I realize any image-editor like Photoshop (including the many sharpening plug-ins for it), Lightroom, and Aperture can sharpen files, but my gut feeling tells me that H3D files should not undergo so much sharpening filter just to make it sharp (or to match Phase).

I experienced similar issues 3 years ago when comparing an Imacon 22MP back against a Phase H25 on my V series Hasselblad. The Imacon was soooo much softer that it made the H25 a clear Regardless of which winner, so I bought it. Now I am looking to upgrade and a I like the H3D-31 but this sharpness issue still seems to stick around.

Your comments much appreciated - thanks!

Mike.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=154613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In order to properly compare the files from the two backs, you should turn off the sharpening in both raw converters COMPLETELY and bring the files into Photoshop, sharpen there with your normal workflow, and then compare. Unless you have a particularly high volume workflow, you should not, IMO, be doing ANY sharpening in the raw converter anyway. The sharpening controls in Photoshop are much more extensive(use of plugins like Photokit Sharpener and Focus Magic, masks for selective sharpening, Smart Sharpen, full res files so that you can effectively evaluate the settings, etc.) and  refined and can be applied on an image specific basis, which is the way sharpening should be done. The high default level of sharpening in the Capture One software may wow at first, but first impressions are just that.

[mikemigs]

It is well known that phase files appear sharper at first look. Like you I was irrritated by this. I use the H3D 39 and must set the slider to about 350-400 with 0.9 -1.1 radius to get the look that i am used to because of long time using C1.
But i was told that this is normal for my H3D 39 in comparsion with Phase and i believe the rep said that you have to apply 200-300 with H3D 31 and 22.

Yes exactly - 250 is around what I need to set it for decent sharpening for the 31. Seems like so much.

The new Phocus software will compensate this because it is written only for digital cameras, he said.

I'm going to check with my rep about this. Hope it's not just sales talk or speculation.

My workflow has changed with flexcolor because i only apply a small amount of sharpening with flexcolor and then sharpen inside PS depending on output size. The files are so big that i downsize them most of the times...

What if you were shooting tethered to computer and you need to check critical focusing? It would really frustrate me if I cannot make judgment calls at this point if I adopt similar workflow and waited until Photoshop to sharpen, which is already to late in the stage in my book.

But the soft look has some advantage because retouching skin and other `not-become-to-dominant-texture` with a softer layer works fine, at least for me.

Ok I agree with this but I rarely shoot people. Then, can one summarize that Phase is better for products and landscapes and Hasselblad better for people/fashion based on their different interpretations of sharpening?

Mike
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=154638\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[pprdigital]

QUOTE(joern_kiel)
It is well known that phase files appear sharper at first look. Like you I was irrritated by this. I use the H3D 39 and must set the slider to about 350-400 with 0.9 -1.1 radius to get the look that i am used to because of long time using C1.
But i was told that this is normal for my H3D 39 in comparsion with Phase and i believe the rep said that you have to apply 200-300 with H3D 31 and 22.


Yes exactly - 250 is around what I need to set it for decent sharpening for the 31. Seems like so much.

QUOTE(joern_kiel @ Nov 21 2007, 06:03 AM)
The new Phocus software will compensate this because it is written only for digital cameras, he said.


I'm going to check with my rep about this. Hope it's not just sales talk or speculation.

QUOTE(joern_kiel @ Nov 21 2007, 06:03 AM)
My workflow has changed with flexcolor because i only apply a small amount of sharpening with flexcolor and then sharpen inside PS depending on output size. The files are so big that i downsize them most of the times...


What if you were shooting tethered to computer and you need to check critical focusing? It would really frustrate me if I cannot make judgment calls at this point if I adopt similar workflow and waited until Photoshop to sharpen, which is already to late in the stage in my book.


QUOTE(joern_kiel @ Nov 21 2007, 06:03 AM)
But the soft look has some advantage because retouching skin and other `not-become-to-dominant-texture` with a softer layer works fine, at least for me.



Ok I agree with this but I rarely shoot people. Then, can one summarize that Phase is better for products and landscapes and Hasselblad better for people/fashion based on their different interpretations of sharpening?

Mike

Mike:

Re - 250 USM setting, remember the settings in Flexcolor don't necessarily correspond to Photoshop USM settings. The unsharp mask tool in Flexcolor is actually quite good. You can adjust the sharpening by channel (apply different percentages per individual RGB channels) in the setup menu and it also has a dark limit (based on a 0 to 255 RGB scale) that will not sharpen the darker parts of the image (per your settings).

Shooting tethered, you can easily check sharpness by creating your own custom tethered sharpness shooting profile (in the setup menu) and then simply shoot to that profile instead of the default. In Flexcolor, you can create any look you want and then simply set that as the deafult look - then your tethered shots will all come in with those settings.

I would not agree with the assessment of Hasselblad for skin because it's softer, Phase for product because it's sharper. You can make Hasselblad images as soft or sharp as they need to be.

Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php

[DavidP]

There is a way to turn off Unsharp Masking in the Capture One program for  later Phase Backs as well.
It is under the Style menu. Any digital file will need some sharpening, Sometimes it seems like the Phase One default is a little too sharp depending on what you are shooting. I have never used the Hasselblad  Digital Back. It might be good to set up some kind of test situation with both so you can see what you get with the kind of work you do. These things are so expensive it seems little to ask for a demo.