Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Calling All Digital Techs  (Read 36810 times)

Guy Mancuso

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1133
    • http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/index.php
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #80 on: April 29, 2010, 08:52:17 am »

Not sure Jonathan never even tried that stuff. I just shoot and look at product work after the shot. Seriously when shooting product or interiors that does not matter to me i use tethered as a Polariod and keep moving lights and stuff around to get what I want. So functionally for me I use tethered in a different way pretty much and maybe shoot 25 shots or whatever than the last 2 frames I know are my finals. I really use a floating focus window at 100 percent and use maybe 4 of them for corners and middle to check myself if anything. The live view stuff is not really my cup of tea but I'm sure someone can answer that for you. It's a area I don't pay attention too. And again I am not versed in Phocus at all so I never comment on it so I can't compare functions of each program. In all honesty both systems are very very good and just need to find the system that works in your style and needs. I'm pretty happy but always welcome improvements from both companies. Bottom line for me if I was not shooting Phase i would be shooting Hassy. To me these are the most complete systems out there in rentals, sales, products and maybe more important maturity. I don't want to exclude a leaf back in that either which I do like there backs as well.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 08:58:36 am by Guy Mancuso »
Logged
[url=http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showt

bcooter

  • Guest
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #81 on: May 01, 2010, 11:34:39 am »

Yesterday shot a lingerie campaign in studio with many multiple strobe lights, and three sessions with window light and continuous fill.

It is a project I'm proud of and was given a lot of creative freedom.

I started with the p30+ on a contax shooting to c-1 v5.   I thought like usual I would start with the contax, but due to time restraints do the usual thing and just put it up and go to the Canons, but for 99.9% just continued on with the Contax, as for once this was a vertical priority shoot and we even shot video with the 5d2 in vertical.

A few observations.  Last week we learned C-1 V5.  It's OK, actually functional, but a very heavy program. You can really feel it get sluggish with a lot of images.  For the most part it was stable, but when it goes, it goes and it takes camera and computer restarts to get it back synced (and yes we keep a clear capture machine), with a lot of drive space.

Had two crashes in the day out of 983 frames which isn't that big a deal except it is a big crash not a restart the program crash.

The p30+ files with a lot of light at 100 iso are amazingly detailed, though C-1 really over sharpens in default.  For any people subjects all the luminance sliders need some tuning and sharpening we set to zero, because at default even beautiful young models there is just way, way too much sharpening.

Color is good though I've always felt the p30+ is very susceptible to ambient color.  The main part of this campaign was on a soft peach color styled background and you can see the color influence of the background in the model's skin and clothes.  It can/will be fixed in post, but it is very apparent that either the back or the software is influenced by ambient color whether in front, side or behind the subject.

In the environmental sets using window light and continuous fill the Phase is OK, but if you go past 200 iso, the 5d2 just roasts it.  I mean to the point you'd think the Canon is the $20,000 camera, not the phase.  I shot a few still frames with the 5d2 once I finished the video then shot the majority of the stills with the p30+ and you have to be very careful to keep it at 200 iso or it's just a waste of bandwidth.

A few things I'd like to suggest to Phase.  In C-1 why not single color adjustments, like Lightroom.  Just something as simple as moving the yellow or orange with a quick slider would be so much easier than going into the color editor or those strange straight curves in C-1.   Also why not a sync/reset buttons like on lightroom?  I mean what's with the arrows, that use to be boxes on V4/5?   Secondly  why not every adjustment on one single column that you can use a scroll wheel to go up an down on, once again like lightroom.   Batching out 983 files with slight adjustments in C-1 takes a long time in comparison to the functionality of lightroom.  Yes, on the plus side, even with Canon files, C-1 does produce an out of the can prettier image, but when you get to minute adjustments it is a much more time consuming process than lightroom.

I find c-1 v5 to be a unique but very complicated program and kind of wish phase had a simple dumbed down version for tethering, (think c-1 V3) and a slightly more streamlined v5 for processing.

Now, all that said, I truly love shooting the contax, somewhat like shooting the phase, but since it's been a while since I shot my phase backs under a lot of pressure I forgot how truly awful that lcd is with any kind of intricate lighting.  God never let a client see that little lcd on the back cause they'll have a heart attack. Anything that gets close to a highlight just blows out, anything that looks like midtone shadow gets muddy looking.  Yesterday I just put a piece of gaff tape over the lcd and told everyone to look at the computer.

This was exasperated by the fact that on the 5d2 we were using a 7" marshall monitor which is like watching vista vision.  It really is a beautiful monitor and so big that unless you have 20 people behind you, they can stand a few feet back and see enough of the image to be impressed (hopefully impressed).

Also in fairness I should say the 5d2 is/was not without it's problems.  Shooting stills it's bulletproof, but shooting vertical video, something just happens and locks up.  Strange thing is if you turn the camera horizontal it seems to go away , but in the vertical mode shooting video I had 3 lockups yesterday which is a buzz kill.  It will go to CPS on Monday to figure this one out.

In finish, I'm not trying to sway anyone to use any camera, but honestly there is very little difference between the 5d2 file and the p30+ file, even both cropped to 4:3.  Maybe 10% as far as detail but that's only at low iso.

The one thing the p30+ file has over the Canon file is you can move the hell out of it, from light to dark.  It doesn't seem to hold highlights any better, but man does the center section move as long as you stay at 200 iso or below.

Also just a note for anyone shooting stills and video in the same project.  The 5d2 file in video is a much different animal than the 5d2 file in stills.  In stills it's deep, rich and has a lot of stops of latitude, but  in video, especially at higher iso's it's crushed and looks like 4 stops of latitude just fly out the window.

Hair that was rich and detailed in the stills, was dead dark almost black in the video which requires a mindset of adding fill for every video session.    Had time permitted I would have loved to compare the 5d2 footage to a RED.  I will soon.

Regardless you can't help but be impressed how good the 5d2 is for the money and I can't help but think that if phase had a back that would go to higher iso, (at full rez) and had a real detailed lcd, how I might be tempted to upgrade, but instead I'll probably wait for the Epic.  See how that shakes out.

And maybe it's the traditionalist in me, but it's so nice to have used the Contax again with real f stops on the lens, real shutter dial.  It feels so much more like a camera instead of an electronic gizmo.

All IMO.

BC
Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #82 on: May 01, 2010, 01:16:39 pm »

Quote from: bcooter
Yesterday shot a lingerie campaign in studio with many multiple strobe lights, and three sessions with window light and continuous fill.

It is a project I'm proud of and was given a lot of creative freedom.

I started with the p30+ on a contax shooting to c-1 v5.   I thought like usual I would start with the contax, but due to time restraints do the usual thing and just put it up and go to the Canons, but for 99.9% just continued on with the Contax, as for once this was a vertical priority shoot and we even shot video with the 5d2 in vertical.

A few observations.  Last week we learned C-1 V5.  It's OK, actually functional, but a very heavy program. You can really feel it get sluggish with a lot of images.  For the most part it was stable, but when it goes, it goes and it takes camera and computer restarts to get it back synced (and yes we keep a clear capture machine), with a lot of drive space.

Had two crashes in the day out of 983 frames which isn't that big a deal except it is a big crash not a restart the program crash.

The p30+ files with a lot of light at 100 iso are amazingly detailed, though C-1 really over sharpens in default.  For any people subjects all the luminance sliders need some tuning and sharpening we set to zero, because at default even beautiful young models there is just way, way too much sharpening.

Color is good though I've always felt the p30+ is very susceptible to ambient color.  The main part of this campaign was on a soft peach color styled background and you can see the color influence of the background in the model's skin and clothes.  It can/will be fixed in post, but it is very apparent that either the back or the software is influenced by ambient color whether in front, side or behind the subject.

In the environmental sets using window light and continuous fill the Phase is OK, but if you go past 200 iso, the 5d2 just roasts it.  I mean to the point you'd think the Canon is the $20,000 camera, not the phase.  I shot a few still frames with the 5d2 once I finished the video then shot the majority of the stills with the p30+ and you have to be very careful to keep it at 200 iso or it's just a waste of bandwidth.

A few things I'd like to suggest to Phase.  In C-1 why not single color adjustments, like Lightroom.  Just something as simple as moving the yellow or orange with a quick slider would be so much easier than going into the color editor or those strange straight curves in C-1.   Also why not a sync/reset buttons like on lightroom?  I mean what's with the arrows, that use to be boxes on V4/5?   Secondly  why not every adjustment on one single column that you can use a scroll wheel to go up an down on, once again like lightroom.   Batching out 983 files with slight adjustments in C-1 takes a long time in comparison to the functionality of lightroom.  Yes, on the plus side, even with Canon files, C-1 does produce an out of the can prettier image, but when you get to minute adjustments it is a much more time consuming process than lightroom.

I find c-1 v5 to be a unique but very complicated program and kind of wish phase had a simple dumbed down version for tethering, (think c-1 V3) and a slightly more streamlined v5 for processing.

Now, all that said, I truly love shooting the contax, somewhat like shooting the phase, but since it's been a while since I shot my phase backs under a lot of pressure I forgot how truly awful that lcd is with any kind of intricate lighting.  God never let a client see that little lcd on the back cause they'll have a heart attack. Anything that gets close to a highlight just blows out, anything that looks like midtone shadow gets muddy looking.  Yesterday I just put a piece of gaff tape over the lcd and told everyone to look at the computer.

This was exasperated by the fact that on the 5d2 we were using a 7" marshall monitor which is like watching vista vision.  It really is a beautiful monitor and so big that unless you have 20 people behind you, they can stand a few feet back and see enough of the image to be impressed (hopefully impressed).

Also in fairness I should say the 5d2 is/was not without it's problems.  Shooting stills it's bulletproof, but shooting vertical video, something just happens and locks up.  Strange thing is if you turn the camera horizontal it seems to go away , but in the vertical mode shooting video I had 3 lockups yesterday which is a buzz kill.  It will go to CPS on Monday to figure this one out.

In finish, I'm not trying to sway anyone to use any camera, but honestly there is very little difference between the 5d2 file and the p30+ file, even both cropped to 4:3.  Maybe 10% as far as detail but that's only at low iso.

The one thing the p30+ file has over the Canon file is you can move the hell out of it, from light to dark.  It doesn't seem to hold highlights any better, but man does the center section move as long as you stay at 200 iso or below.

Also just a note for anyone shooting stills and video in the same project.  The 5d2 file in video is a much different animal than the 5d2 file in stills.  In stills it's deep, rich and has a lot of stops of latitude, but  in video, especially at higher iso's it's crushed and looks like 4 stops of latitude just fly out the window.

Hair that was rich and detailed in the stills, was dead dark almost black in the video which requires a mindset of adding fill for every video session.    Had time permitted I would have loved to compare the 5d2 footage to a RED.  I will soon.

Regardless you can't help but be impressed how good the 5d2 is for the money and I can't help but think that if phase had a back that would go to higher iso, (at full rez) and had a real detailed lcd, how I might be tempted to upgrade, but instead I'll probably wait for the Epic.  See how that shakes out.

And maybe it's the traditionalist in me, but it's so nice to have used the Contax again with real f stops on the lens, real shutter dial.  It feels so much more like a camera instead of an electronic gizmo.

All IMO.

BC
Hi.

Agree,
C1 5 default sharpening is way too much. Have not found yet how to set it lower permanently. Strange that they choose this level. Also don't use DNG in C1, I had a bad experience some days ago. Despite, it's my favorite software. I curiously find it faster than previous versions.

About the Contax, well yes, I love this camera too. Want to thank you for your advices here when I was looking for MF gear. You and other Contax users have made me considered the Contax and indeed That's a camera.

Cheers.
Logged

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4210
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #83 on: May 01, 2010, 02:19:33 pm »

Quote from: bcooter
A few observations.  Last week we learned C-1 V5.  It's OK, actually functional, but a very heavy program. You can really feel it get sluggish with a lot of images.  For the most part it was stable, but when it goes, it goes and it takes camera and computer restarts to get it back synced (and yes we keep a clear capture machine), with a lot of drive space.

I very rarely see a P1-C1 connection require a computer restart on a Mac (where most of our testing/use/experience is). I guarantee you we could find out what was going on and fix it.

Quote from: bcooter
The p30+ files with a lot of light at 100 iso are amazingly detailed, though C-1 really over sharpens in default.  For any people subjects all the luminance sliders need some tuning and sharpening we set to zero, because at default even beautiful young models there is just way, way too much sharpening.

"over sharpens" is relative of course to your taste and application. In the sharpening tool change the sharpening to whatever you want and set the default to that setting. (down triangle in the title bar for "sharpening" - see attachment).


Quote from: bcooter
Color is good though I've always felt the p30+ is very susceptible to ambient color.

The downside of accurate color and the ability to distinguish subtle color variations.

Quote from: bcooter
A few things I'd like to suggest to Phase.  In C-1 why not single color adjustments, like Lightroom.  Just something as simple as moving the yellow or orange with a quick slider...

That's exactly what the "basic" section of the color editor is: highlight a color and slide it's hue left or right (or saturation or luminance). It does require two clicks (one to highlight the color, a second to slide the hue) so from that point of view I could see the use for a even more basic color manipulation tool.

However, once you become an expert in the advanced tab of the color editor and start to use the "uniformity" tool in the color editor it sure is hard to use anything less powerful.

Quote from: bcooter
Also why not a sync/reset buttons like on lightroom?

There is a reset button. One at the top of the screen for reset all adjustments. One in each individual tool to reset that tool.

There is a sync all button though it's not put into the toolbar by default - go to View>Customize Toolbar and drag the "Copy and Apply" arrow into the toolbar at the location of your choice.

Quote from: bcooter
Secondly  why not every adjustment on one single column that you can use a scroll wheel to go up an down on, once again like lightroom.

On a large monitor you can fit a LOT of the adjustments in one column. I'd personally rather have two or three columns which you can switch to instantly with keyboard shortcut than a column that is larger than the visible screen which requires you to scroll. Regardless, both systems make sense and have advantages and disadvantages.

Quote from: bcooter
Batching out 983 files with slight adjustments in C-1 takes a long time in comparison to the functionality of lightroom. Yes, on the plus side, even with Canon files, C-1 does produce an out of the can prettier image.

Wanna race sometime? How many total hours have you used C1 version 4/5 compared to the number of total hours you've used Adobe products? Give it another few days of use and/or take a class on C1 and I think you'd even up that equation a LOT.


Quote from: bcooter
I find c-1 v5 to be a unique but very complicated program and kind of wish phase had a simple dumbed down version for tethering, (think c-1 V3) and a slightly more streamlined v5 for processing.

[Window > Workspace > Simplified Tethering] will give you a "simple dumbed down version for tethering".

If desired you can further customize. In fact you could customize the program down to the point where there is nothing on the screen but the incoming image or up to the point where every tool in the program is on the screen at the same time.

Quote from: bcooter
In finish, I'm not trying to sway anyone to use any camera, but honestly there is very little difference between the 5d2 file and the p30+ file, even both cropped to 4:3.  Maybe 10% as far as detail but that's only at low iso.

The one thing the p30+ file has over the Canon file is you can move the hell out of it, from light to dark.  It doesn't seem to hold highlights any better, but man does the center section move as long as you stay at 200 iso or below.

Try not to generalize. Comparisons of file quality out of cameras is always extremely dependent on your usage. Sounds like for what you're doing the level of absolute details doesn't show a huge difference (I'm guessing shutter speed and DOF play into this a good deal with your shooting style) but the dynamic range and color and tonal fidelity are quite different. Highlight detail holding is of course a function both of the dynamic range as well as the default placement of tones within the curves. If desired you could always set the phase to underexpose but come up on the screen with a half stop push - no one on set would know except you. But I'm still a bit surprised by this as my last test showed a significantly higher ability to pull highlight detail in a P30+ vs 5DII file.

In other uses (anything with flash, anything with higher levels of continuous light, landscape, architecture, still life, etc) level of detail is significantly different between the two.

Quote from: bcooter
Also just a note for anyone shooting stills and video in the same project.  The 5d2 file in video is a much different animal than the 5d2 file in stills.  In stills it's deep, rich and has a lot of stops of latitude, but  in video, especially at higher iso's it's crushed and looks like 4 stops of latitude just fly out the window.

RAW still capture compared to compressed video.

Doug Peterson
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up
RSS Feed: Subscribe
Buy Capture One at 10% off
Personal Work
« Last Edit: May 01, 2010, 02:21:58 pm by dougpetersonci »
Logged

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4210
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #84 on: May 01, 2010, 02:23:38 pm »

Quote from: fredjeang
C1 5 default sharpening is way too much. Have not found yet how to set it lower permanently. Strange that they choose this level. Also don't use DNG in C1, I had a bad experience some days ago. Despite, it's my favorite software. I curiously find it faster than previous versions.

Your experience with DNG was with a raw file from a camera where the supported-camera list in C1's release notes state "Only PEF supported" (e.g. NOT the DNGs from that camera).

See the attachment to my previous post for how to set the defaults for sharpening.

tho_mas

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1799
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #85 on: May 01, 2010, 03:01:14 pm »

Quote from: bcooter
very heavy program. You can really feel it get sluggish with a lot of images.
In my experience it's much better (i.e. noticably faster) if you don't create several folders in one session (in V5).
The reason: C1 caches all the captures (previews) of a session - even those located in another folder within the same session.
Consequently it's better to create a new session for a new motif... idealy one session for each motif/theme to keep the number of captures in one session low.

Quote from: bcooter
C-1 really over sharpens in default
agreed. Even with the setting "Version 3 Soft Look" (which I use for preview) highlights look oversharpened. C1 is missing a masking mode to surpress halos in highlights and blacks.

Quote from: bcooter
why not every adjustment on one single column that you can use a scroll wheel to go up an down on
I much prefer the different tool tabs (especially as you can customize the order of the tabs). I am swichting the tool tabs with a keyboard shortcut. When you are used to that kind of workflow you need remarkably less mouse operations... it's much faster this way.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2010, 03:01:50 pm by tho_mas »
Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #86 on: May 01, 2010, 03:08:32 pm »

Quote from: dougpetersonci
Your experience with DNG was with a raw file from a camera where the supported-camera list in C1's release notes state "Only PEF supported" (e.g. NOT the DNGs from that camera).

See the attachment to my previous post for how to set the defaults for sharpening.
As always Doug, thank you very much for your fast and constant support. Default sharpening setted now perfectly.

About DNG, I've been learning things with that experience. One point I'm not sure I understand ( in fact I'm sure I don't understand it ), if somebody has the clew: Doug in his repply seems to point that in the case of DNG, it was stipulated that they where not supported for that camera.
I thought DNG was an Adobe standard, whatever brand involved. So in my mind, DNG file was exactly the same if Leica, Pentax etc...
But it seems that it is not the case. I mean, if C1 does not support DNG from Pentax, it should not support them either for Leica. Confuse!!!
If there are different types of DNG, then yes I'd join Doug's opinion : I don't see the point of DNG format.

Cheers.
Logged

David Watson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 480
    • David Watson
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #87 on: May 02, 2010, 04:46:53 am »

I would like to take up Fred and Doug's points about the so-called "DNG standard"

Earlier in this thread Doug suggested that I could use C1 Pro (which I have and really like) to process my Hasselblad files by exporting them as a DNG and then importing them to C1.  Great idea but it doesn't work.  It seems that this so-called standard is only standard when it is an Adobe produced standard and not a camera manufacturers' software produced standard.  I don't have a problem with Hasselblad's software not being as good (arguably) as C! because I use it is free and I can put as many copies as I like on as many computers as I like.  I do have a problem with a piece of software - which is not cheap or free unless you own a Phase One product - that won't recognise DNG files produced by camera manufacturers' software.  

Doug is the problem here that Phase One are excluding Hasselblad wherever possible or that Phocus does not produce the required "industry standard" DNG files.  I will pose this question on the Hasselblad forum as well and it will be interesting to get both Phase One's and Hasselblad's responses.

Logged
David Watson ARPS

John R Smith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1357
  • Still crazy, after all these years
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #88 on: May 02, 2010, 05:13:34 am »

David

That is very curious because both ACR and LR will read DNG files exported by Phocus from Hasselblad 3FR raws just fine. So why C1 has a problem I can't imagine.

John
Logged
Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
an

David Watson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 480
    • David Watson
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #89 on: May 02, 2010, 05:17:41 am »

Quote from: John R Smith
David

That is very curious because both ACR and LR will read DNG files exported by Phocus from Hasselblad 3FR raws just fine. So why C1 has a problem I can't imagine.

John


Hi John

You are quite correct - PS and LR seem to be more Catholic about which DNG files they accept which leads me to believe that C1 could easily read Phocus DNG files if they really wanted to.  They just don't want to do anything which helps Hasselbald.
Logged
David Watson ARPS

Dustbak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2442
    • Pepperanddust
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #90 on: May 02, 2010, 06:11:45 am »

Not sure if it is still really the case that Hasselblad and Phase are actually trying to block out each other with competition in mind but it would be extremely foolish. Both should be helping each other as much as possible since today the choice for most people isn't between Phase or Hasselblad but much more between DSLR and MF. Hurting/obstructing or blocking each other and thus limiting options for MF is truly insane, IMHO naturally.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2010, 06:13:02 am by Dustbak »
Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #91 on: May 02, 2010, 07:25:24 am »

What we should know for sure is the real nature of DNG.
Out of the competition between brands and the consequences, the question remains that DNG if a standard, should be exactly the same for any brand.
Let's say like JPG.
But for a reason that remains oscur, it just appears that there are different types of DNG, wich does not make any sense IMO.

You pointed Hassy as a competitor to Phase but I can't see that's what is involved here, because what about Pentax DNG then? Pentax is not a direct competitor to Phase. Well yes, the 645D will be soon but I'm talking about aps format in this case.

Strangely, if you use native formats, no problem with any brand. So I guess it is a Phase position about DNG, regardless of the competition.
But why is that position? Why do they consider DNG is not worth? Mystery.
Logged

David Watson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 480
    • David Watson
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #92 on: May 02, 2010, 07:48:27 am »

Quote from: Dustbak
Not sure if it is still really the case that Hasselblad and Phase are actually trying to block out each other with competition in mind but it would be extremely foolish. Both should be helping each other as much as possible since today the choice for most people isn't between Phase or Hasselblad but much more between DSLR and MF. Hurting/obstructing or blocking each other and thus limiting options for MF is truly insane, IMHO naturally.


Totally agree with you!  If anything they should be cooperating more fully in order to build up barriers to entry to protect their market from Canon and Nikon.  They both still have a serious edge over their 35mm competitors notwithstanding the substantial cost of MFD.  I guess it all started with Hasselblad "closing" their system or rather introducing a closed product range - they still supply the H2 which is Phase One friendly after all.

Roll on Lightroom 3 and ACR 6.1 and perhaps none of us may want to use either C1 or Phocus.

David
Logged
David Watson ARPS

Steve Hendrix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1662
    • http://www.captureintegration.com/
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #93 on: May 02, 2010, 09:45:07 am »

Quote from: David Watson
Totally agree with you!  If anything they should be cooperating more fully in order to build up barriers to entry to protect their market from Canon and Nikon.  They both still have a serious edge over their 35mm competitors notwithstanding the substantial cost of MFD.  I guess it all started with Hasselblad "closing" their system or rather introducing a closed product range - they still supply the H2 which is Phase One friendly after all.

Roll on Lightroom 3 and ACR 6.1 and perhaps none of us may want to use either C1 or Phocus.

David


David:

The H2 was discontinued several years ago and replaced by the H2F. The H2F only recognizes Hasselblad digital backs. Hasselblad made the decision not to support Phase One (or Leaf or Sinar) digital backs with their cameras.


Steve Hendrix
Logged
Steve Hendrix • 404-543-8475 www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Alpa | Cambo | Sinar | Arca Swiss

David Watson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 480
    • David Watson
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #94 on: May 02, 2010, 10:00:39 am »

Quote from: Steve Hendrix
David:

The H2 was discontinued several years ago and replaced by the H2F. The H2F only recognizes Hasselblad digital backs. Hasselblad made the decision not to support Phase One (or Leaf or Sinar) digital backs with their cameras.


Steve Hendrix

Hi Steve

You are quite correct - thank you for pointing that out.  As I no longer use film I hadn't looked at the spec for the H2F.  Nevertheless Hasselblad still sell their V system which of course accepts your digital backs as do virtually all of the film Hasselblads still in use out there.  By the way I am a great admirer of your company's products but my investment in Hasselblad digital equipment and no migration path prevents me from changing.  Perhaps that is what it is all about.

I still do not seem to have an answer to the question as to why C1Pro does not recognise DNG's produced by Phocus.

Thanks again for the info.

David
Logged
David Watson ARPS

fredjeang

  • Guest
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #95 on: May 02, 2010, 10:00:56 am »

The thing is that coming from C1, I've been trying LR and really to me I've never been able to feel "at home with LR". I'm from the one who thing that C1 is a better software, at least its interface works naturaly for me.

But the fastest non-tethered workflow so far, I got it with combination of ACR+Bridge. Still prefer C1 to ACR anyway.
Logged

Steve Hendrix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1662
    • http://www.captureintegration.com/
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #96 on: May 02, 2010, 10:35:09 am »

Quote from: David Watson
Hi Steve

You are quite correct - thank you for pointing that out.  As I no longer use film I hadn't looked at the spec for the H2F.  Nevertheless Hasselblad still sell their V system which of course accepts your digital backs as do virtually all of the film Hasselblads still in use out there.  By the way I am a great admirer of your company's products but my investment in Hasselblad digital equipment and no migration path prevents me from changing.  Perhaps that is what it is all about.

I still do not seem to have an answer to the question as to why C1Pro does not recognise DNG's produced by Phocus.

Thanks again for the info.

David


Yes they still sell the V system, and it is a open platform still, though it is being phased out (no pun) slowly but surely. No lenses are being made anymore longer than 150mm, the only remaining available body is the 503CW. It would be difficult and expensive (if at all possible) to produce a closed 503CW and probably not worth their effort. As a result, it remains an open platform for digital backs  (though hobbled in terms of current and new product development).


Steve Hendrix
Logged
Steve Hendrix • 404-543-8475 www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Alpa | Cambo | Sinar | Arca Swiss

bcooter

  • Guest
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #97 on: May 02, 2010, 12:41:04 pm »

Quote from: dougpetersonci
The downside of accurate color and the ability to distinguish subtle color variations.


There really is no reason to have this conversation, but for the record I didn't paint c-1 or phase with a broad brush.

I made it clear about what I shot and what the results were.  I didn't mention shooting trees and landscapes cause that's not what I shoot.  

Do I like the images yes,  do they have great detail, yes, did C-1 crash and freeze, yes, did it require a complete restart, yes.    It could be the firewire cords were glitchy, I have one trusty set I use all the time, but switched to the other two backups and kept working.

Again, for the record one of our assistants works part time at a large digital department in NY that rents Phase exclusively, (most of the time on H series blads) and she says she hears of V5 crashing.  Maybe she's also doing it wrong, maybe the cameras have issues, I don't know.

Now one thing I've learned is don't shoot too many p30+ files to one folder, it seems to slow the system down, at least on a powerbook.  I personally will keep it around 100 to 200.  I think we shoot over 200 when the issues happened the most.

As far as the color response of the p30+ (or the software)  if it was possible I would post an image, but it's not released yet and it will be a few days until we go through selection and post production, but shooting on  a pink toned background, everything picks up that color, garments, hair, skin.

In C-1 I can make it pretty, but not accurate, in other words a yellow garment is pink toned or the color controls are so global in their process, that to get the garment close to correct the background goes yellow warm.   It's very difficult to be specific, at least in my use.  The only way to get there is to process out a few images with different colors and go into photoshop and blend them.

We do this anyway in post so it's not the end of the world, though something as simple as those little color squares in lightroom that you can adjust different colors in saturation, hue and luminance would be helpful.  Especially in the early viewing stage of web galleries, because it's not a lot of fun to tell a client, yes the bra will be yellow, the background will be pink, you'll just have to wait until we go to final.

Now for the record I find C-1 to make more pleasing processing of Canon files than any adobe product, but for p30+ files I find cs4 extended or lightroom more moveable.

As far as speed, are we gonna race?  Race for for what, a software license?  I'm not racing, I'm just giving a paying user's experience.

Other people feel different, other people use different cameras.

But if your going to bullet point everything, then make mention of the phase lcd, cause that's a fright for AD's, on set artists and the talent and that's something that really should be addressed, even when you tether, because when your shooting there is always someone standing behind you.

At this stage everyone is use to seeing a pristine lcd image, whether it be on their iphone, TV, tech station, or their kids point and shoot, so to keep people from gasping,  I just taped over it.

But also for the record, I really didn't use the Contax because of the digital back, I used the digital back because I wanted to use the Contax and the only reason on this project that any Canon came out of the case was to shoot motion in conjunction with the stills and the only reason we shot stills with the Canon was if I saw some look I liked we repeated it and shot a few still frames.  The by product was  the 5d2 files hold up really well and I think in ways are sharper than than the 1ds3.

All IMO.

BC

Logged

yaya

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1254
    • http://yayapro.com
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #98 on: May 02, 2010, 12:44:21 pm »

Quote from: David Watson
I still do not seem to have an answer to the question as to why C1Pro does not recognise DNG's produced by Phocus.

Thanks again for the info.

David

Capture One works quite similar to Aperture (Mac OS), meaning that it first needs to support the camera (or file) by which the DNG was produced.

Yair
Logged
Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One - Cultural Heritage
e: ysh@phaseone.com |

JonathanBenoit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 414
Calling All Digital Techs
« Reply #99 on: May 02, 2010, 01:00:50 pm »

Does C1 have  focus checking in live video mode with an instantly updated line graph similar to Phocus?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Up