Quick and dirty way to convert 3F files to DNG's

[bcroslin]

Is there a way to convert 3F files to DNG's without using Phocus or Flexcolor?

Thanks,

Bob

[Jeff-Grant]

Is there a way to convert 3F files to DNG's without using Phocus or Flexcolor?

Thanks,

Bob

Aperture can process 3f files. It shouldn't be much of a challenge to get to DNG from there.

Cheers,

Jeff

[jimgolden]

no I don't think so Bob, but if you find something out, let us all know! what rig are you running now? 503CW w/ a square back or "645"?

[Dustbak]

I would say the quick & dirty way is Flexcolor. The other option it to use the latest version of Phocus and tick the option of 'auto-process' while shooting tethered.  Every incoming 3F file will be exported automatically. If you want to that can also be DNG's.

[j.miller]

Bob,
    You don't have an option other than using the Export function of either FlexColor or Phocus. In either application, you need not open a single image, only make your selection, and export immediately as DNG.

You will find that the same simplicity holds true for exporting those files as TIFF's, or any other supported format. You gain quite a bit by processing as a TIFF, as Adobe's ACR plug-in lacks the support of all of Hasselblad's RAW metadata. The image quality obtained by using the processing / color engine in Phocus makes for a much improved, and more accurate image rendition. More accurate white balance, better noise reduction, Digital-APO correction (where applicable), greater color accuracy, anti-moire, etc, etc.

Regards,

Jordan Miller

Is there a way to convert 3F files to DNG's without using Phocus or Flexcolor?

Thanks,

Bob

[jjj]

You gain quite a bit by processing as a TIFF, as Adobe's ACR plug-in lacks the support of all of Hasselblad's RAW metadata. The image quality obtained by using the processing / color engine in Phocus makes for a much improved, and more accurate image rendition. More accurate white balance, better noise reduction, Digital-APO correction (where applicable), greater color accuracy, anti-moire, etc, etc.

Shame Phocus is such a clumsy tool to use and so lacking in RAW processing tools.
I was using it a few days back and found it so frustrating in use compared to say ACR/LR. I accept that shoting on a MFDB is slower than using a DSLR, but why does the post processing workflow have to be so much worse than when dealing with images out of my Canons?
Though it is better than the truely appaling Flexcolour.

[j.miller]

jjj,
  Do you mind sharing some details as to what you found frustrating? I do not hear quite this level of distaste for Phocus, and I am very curious to get your input.

Regards,

Jordan Miller

Shame Phocus is such a clumsy tool to use and so lacking in RAW processing tools.
I was using it a few days back and found it so frustrating in use compared to say ACR/LR. I accept that shoting on a MFDB is slower than using a DSLR, but why does the post processing workflow have to be so much worse than when dealing with images out of my Canons?
Though it is better than the truely appaling Flexcolour.

[jjj]

I will use Phocus again and write my thoughts whilst using it, rather trying to innacurately remember stuff.
That's what I usually do when Alpha/Beta testing products. I'm a bit busy with other stuff at present but will try and do this soon.
Probably better if I send you info directly, rather than post on forum.

Briefly -  a lot more pointless clicking and a lot less ability is main impression of Phocus.

As for lack of complaining - maybe as Phocus is that much better than Flexcolour, people are simply grateful.  

I did get some lovely shots out of a H3-39D camera a while back, but cannot remember now if I used ACR or Phocus for the RAW editing.

[j.miller]

jjj,
    I find most users are surprised (or confused) with exactly how straight forward and obvious most controls are within Phocus. Specifically batch (large and small) processing, multi-tool adjustments and batch application, camera control, and file export. These functions are laid out clearly, and are quite obvious. I will admit, Hasselblad's naming conventions for a few tools and functions can be confusing at times, but the operation should be clear and simple.

Feel free to contact me directly if I can provide additional insight into how you might maximize the use of Phocus, while minimizing your time and effort spent.

Regards,

Jordan E. Miller

I will use Phocus again and write my thoughts whilst using it, rather trying to innacurately remember stuff.
That's what I usually do when Alpha/Beta testing products. I'm a bit busy with other stuff at present but will try and do this soon.
Probably better if I send you info directly, rather than post on forum.

Briefly -  a lot more pointless clicking and a lot less ability is main impression of Phocus.

As for lack of complaining - maybe as Phocus is that much better than Flexcolour, people are simply grateful.  

I did get some lovely shots out of a H3-39D camera a while back, but cannot remember now if I used ACR or Phocus for the RAW editing.

[jimgolden]

bob see this thread...finally...http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=34921