question of choosing h4d-60 or phase one iq180

[design_freak]

And one more thing :-)
 Doug is right. Capture One is better for these purposes (post-production) change colors, etc. This software is more appropriate tools for the more advanced processing

[Doug Peterson]

I guess we are just that good Doug.

What if your shot is a model holding a Coke Can?  Wouldn't the "Portrait" profile then screw up your product colours?

Yes, you could use your skin tone editor and colour editor, but I would prefer it to be correct out of the box, saving post production time. 

What if your shot is a model holding a Coke Can?  Wouldn't the "Portrait" profile then screw up your product colours?

Yes, you could use your skin tone editor and colour editor, but I would prefer it to be correct out of the box, saving post production time.  Wouldn't you?

Coke cans are highly saturated. So the Portrait ICC profile would handle both very well.

David, in 2+ years we have very rarely disagreed about a fundamental truth. You know I have great respect for Hassy gear and am happy to agree on many of your stated advantages such as the availability of 11 leaf shutter lenses for those for whom high flash sync speed is a day-in day-out necessity on all lenses. As I'm sure you would be happy to acknowledge the myriad of advantages an IQ180 would have over an H4D-60. But I'm really shocked to see you argue this point about ICC profiles. You seem to be saying that more flexibility and a larger selection of image editing tools is a bad thing - a fundamental point I've never see you tend towards.

If you want to stick with "Hasselblad produces better color out of the box" as your main point then I of course cannot say you're "wrong" - only that I disagree. I personally think Leaf has generally produced the best skintones "out of the box" and Phase has produced the most overall-pleasing color "out of the box", but color is very subjective. Which was a "better" color pallette, Astia, Velvia, or EG100? Which color response is better Canon 5D2 or Nikon D3? These questions have only opinions not absolute answers. So every photographer will have to make up their own mind on that.

Now you could have said "what if she's modeling slightly purple light red shoes". THAT would be a tough case. Actually in that case no camera or software in the world could render BOTH pleasant skintones AND an accurate product color on the skin-like purplish light-red shoes.  However because of the extensive tools available in C1 I could quickly paint a mask on the shoes and tweak the shoes back to their proper slightly purple color. I could then copy-paste that to similar shots, tweaking the mask if/where needed. Maybe you could tell me what you'd do in Phocus where the tools for color editing are not as extensive, there is only one ICC profile provided, and there are no local adjustments possible.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

[Doug Peterson]

From a certain level, it does not matter anyway. Photographer takes pictures, retoucher (post-production) deals with such aspects as color, sharpen, etc.

In my experience that describes a minority of our current user base. Even at the higher-end many of our customers are doing more and more of their own post work, especially basics like delivering files with good exposure, skin tone, and local dodge/burns as needed.

Certainly there are many photographers who never touch the software and only ever shoot the camera. And there are photographers who do 100% of the work themselves. And most photographers fall somewhere between.

Even those that do heavily rely on a post-production person/team for their commercial work often do not have the budget or desire to offload processing/tweaking/retouching personal work.

So having a fully featured raw processor is clearly an advantage to almost all photographers.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

[David Grover / Capture One]

If you want to stick with "Hasselblad produces better color out of the box" as your main point then I of course cannot say you're "wrong" - only that I disagree.

Fine with me.

Actually you have pointed out the flaw of relying on using ICC profiles for managing the colour.  All I am saying is that we have found a better solution that avoids the needs for multiple profiles.

[Doug Peterson]

Fine with me.

Actually you have pointed out the flaw of relying on using ICC profiles for managing the colour.  All I am saying is that we have found a better solution that avoids the needs for multiple profiles.

O. Ok, so Hasselblad has developed magic? But no details on what it is or how it works. Just that it produces great color in all situations for all needs, all subject matter, and all priorities.

Perhaps you could elaborate.

How would Phocus handle a scene with skintone and a purplish-red shoe (assuming the color of the shoe was important for advertising/marketing/client-needs purposes).

[design_freak]

In my experience that describes a minority of our current user base. Even at the higher-end many of our customers are doing more and more of their own post work, especially basics like delivering files with good exposure, skin tone, and local dodge/burns as needed.

Certainly there are many photographers who never touch the software and only ever shoot the camera. And there are photographers who do 100% of the work themselves. And most photographers fall somewhere between.

Even those that do heavily rely on a post-production person/team for their commercial work often do not have the budget or desire to offload processing/tweaking/retouching personal work.

So having a fully featured raw processor is clearly an advantage to almost all photographers.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)

In that case, quite difficult and sad times have come. We can not be the best in several areas. To be a photographer and retoucher. You'll always be a better photographer or a better retoucher. For both, you have to work for years. So the best results are when you focus on that what you're best. I know, customers do not want to pay for it. Therefore, the photographer is forced to do everything. Anyway,
Capture One is a better tool for this type of fun with the files. Phocus is simple, but does not allow such editing capabilities. It is meant more for the amateur.

[Nick-T]

Hey Doug
I can't comment on the Phase colour rendering but I can say the way Hasselblad handles colour does actually work. When they first created 'Natural Colour" (it seems everything has to have a name these days) I spent a fair bit of time in Denmark testing how colours were rendered and was very impressed. I'm pretty colour critical and have good colour perception (I was a beta reader/tester for Dan Margulis' 'Professional Photoshop") so I'm pretty confident that I can tell good colour from bad, the Hasselblad solution works and works very well.

Nick-T

[Nick-T]

I agree with Doug. There is often retouching after I hand off files but I always want to hand off accurate colour/looks.

Nick-T

[fredjeang]

Phocus might be, and is, simpliest in its structure than C1 but Phocus is probably, at least for me, giving the exact amount of performance I need at that stage. We always end in PS with zillions of layers anyway, and more the software keeps simplicity on the raw stage more I'm happy. The only thing I ask a Raw dev is to take full advantage of the equipment involved and deliver the best neutral possible file without distractions of any means or fancy features that will be done better in a dedicated post-prod unit and wich only effect is more distracting than anything else.
I think Hasselblad understands perfectly the needs of their clients and what really matters in a raw dev. The tether task is seriously implemented, the software is able to give the full potential of the camera without hassles. Less is more.
 

[tho_mas]

... without distractions of any means or fancy features that will be done better in a dedicated post-prod unit and wich only effect is more distracting than anything else.

you can remove all the tools you find distracting and save this as "fred's workspace" in C1... no problem ;-)

[fredjeang]

Right on the money tho_mas, that is exactly what I did a long time ago!

As I run both, C1 is optimized like Phocus. And the workspace is truly call "fred".

But, one of the 2 softwares is free.

It comes from my assistance. You never really know if you gona end with a Phase or Hassy file. The surprise of the Chef. (ultimately I ended 99,99999999% with Canon's files anyway)
That way I have a similar workspace for both and don't have to mentally adapt. For the Canons I use ACR because they are never tethered.

[gazwas]

But, one of the 2 softwares is free.

Both are free if you own the correct equipment. 

[fredjeang]

Both are free if you own the correct equipment.  

Correct, but I don't so not free for me. Here 90% of the commercial photography is Hasselblad in the MF configuration. In the US it might be another story. If there is one camera you have to know in Europe (at least in my area) is the Blad system. I like C1 anyway, use it less than before but spended long time with it.

But the fact is that today, helping in a normal retouching day like yesterday...like the day before... and on one hand the phone with the couture...this part of the dress needs to be softened, call from client...could you get rid-off that lamp on background...too much wrinkles on the man's trouser that has to be corrected, this that and the other blablabla....

24 layers after and 2 gigabites you don't really care wich software has the best features, if C1 does the coffee and light your cigar. All you want is PS to work properlly.

Thank god I'm more and more away from that and turned step by step on motion. At least with the render's times I go to the bar or on the terrasse taking the sun.

[torchiam]

to dougpetersonci

first,thank you Doug for spending time to clarify all the issues there

and i guess the gentlemen here make this thread a good user guide for new buyers.since the topic goes so wide,would you please comment on the hasse lenses and the new phase one Schneider lenses.i know that hasse has a very mature line of about 11 lenes.and Schneider only puts out 3 so far,55mm,80mm,110mm.so let skip the question who has more lenes and just talk about the build quality and the glasses.

thanks!

[vindixon]

Hi Torchiam,

I have both a H3-50 and two P65+ backs and I am in the process of upgrading to the IQ-180's. As a commercial photographer the most important difference between both platforms for me is the software. Here C1 Pro wins hands down. In my experience (and in the experience of most digital techs I work with) Phocus is still a very unstable piece of software which crashes on pretty much every system that we have tried it on including the current Mac Pros, iMacs and Macbook pros. Capture One is really stable and because of this I switched at great expense from Hasselblad to Phase Backs about a 18 months ago. At the time I had three Hasselblad backs including a multishot back, the most recent back I had was less than one year old. I traded in one and kept the multishot and the H3-50 hoping that Phocus would eventually become stable and that I would be able to use the HTS 1.5 tilt shift  and various lens that I had bought. The H3-50/ Phocus combination crashed multiple times on every shoot that I used it on for almost a year. It was a completely untenable situation. Not only that but it would also crash during processing but it creates empty shell files so you have to go back into all the folders to see which files were processed and which were not !!! I have tested Phocus every six months since and it is still not stable enough for the way I shoot. Someone at Hasselblad told me that I shot too fast so this is probably my fault as I do shoot a lot !. I do not have these problems with my Phase backs and C1 Pro.


In terms of quality I would say that Hasselblad had a slight edge compared to C1 Pro 5 but with C1 Pro 6 that is gone. Finally C1 Pro processed to Tiff about three times faster than Hasselblad in my last test (also Phocus crashed during the processing of about 400 files and C1 pro did not !). This was on a brand new Mac Book Pro with a clean system.

Thanks, Vincent

vincentdixon.com

[torchiam]

to vindixon

it is great to hear from a professional who own backs from both sides!

the software has not come to my mind so far.one funny thing occurs to me is i heard people mention C1 pro 98% of the time.seems no one talks about phocus.

i guess this is going to be a big thing when my studio is ready to open.

and also,would you please comment on the lenses?

thank you for the heads up!

[EricWHiss]

Currently I have a hat trick of MF backs...  Phase, Leaf, and Hasselblad,   I prefer C1 software, but that's were it ends.   if you want to talk about service then there is only one company that has truly been excellent in my experience and that is Hasselblad.  This is a company that understands service and support.   Right now I wish I could say the same for Leaf but sadly can not.   You may wish to figure that into your purchase decisions, because your dealer can only do so much.  My dealer says he's put in calls to Leaf and Phase every day, but they don't get back to him.

[Steve Hendrix]

Currently I have a hat trick of MF backs...  Phase, Leaf, and Hasselblad,   I prefer C1 software, but that's were it ends.   if you want to talk about service then there is only one company that has truly been excellent in my experience and that is Hasselblad.  This is a company that understands service and support.   Right now I wish I could say the same for Leaf but sadly can not.   You may wish to figure that into your purchase decisions, because your dealer can only do so much.  My dealer says he's put in calls to Leaf and Phase every day, but they don't get back to him.

I agree that Hasselblad has provided good customer service, at least in my experience of selling many of their products. Not every support issue I put in front of Hasselblad was initially received with open arms. There were times I had to impose my will. Nothing wrong with that - none of these companies are perfect. They generally try and do their best.

But without making any judgement on your dealer Eric, I would have to say that if your dealer puts calls into Leaf and/or Phase One every day and does not get a return call, there is a lot more to this story.

I can guarantee you - guarantee you, this has never been the prevailing situation in my experience. From time to time every manufacturer (and dealer as well) can drop a ball. I have had experience with every medium format manufacturer in the industry - Phase One, Leaf, Hasselblad, Sinar, even Jenoptik. I have had good experiences with all and some bad as well. I won't post any dirty laundry so if someone wants a real world opinion of how each of these companies has handled hundreds of my clients, feel free to PM me and I'll tell you. I have high volume sample data on each of these companies, not just an individual here or there. And my own personal experience on what the process behind the scenes has been like as well with each of these companies.


Steve Hendrix

[HarperPhotos]

Hi Torchiam,

From what I have heard the Hasselblad lenses are made by Fuji and the Phase One/Mamiya lenses a made by Mamiya and Schneider.

Simon

[EricWHiss]

But without making any judgement on your dealer Eric, I would have to say that if your dealer puts calls into Leaf and/or Phase One every day and does not get a return call, there is a lot more to this story.

Steve Hendrix

Yes, Steve there could be more going on the Phase/Leaf side that I or my dealer hasn't heard, however considering the silence I can't imagine any of it could be motivated by good business decisions.