Hasselblad 200MS back on tech camera - options?

[Theodoros]

Yes the difference layer mode is great in lining up the two layers. The difference layer mode also helps find movement pixel areas quickly but I like to go back to normal mode to better see the effects when brushing/blending the two layers together. It is a quick process.

It is important to make sure the 1 & 4 shot images to be mixed were shot at the same f-stop.

I worked out the exact layer shift amount using test shots of a lens chart set and have it noted down. I think the multi file is a couple pixels wider and a pixel higher. We talked to Hasselblad about doing something in the processing, or providing an exact script but it was not worth their time.  No idea why they could not make it match the 1 shot in the processing, besides the loss of a few pixels out of 200mpx.

I shot some auto parts still life images with a 5Dll a little while ago. I am so used to the non anti aliasing of multi-shot that all the multi coloured pixel/speckle like anti aliasing of the details freaked me out. Then it dawned on me that was just what 35mm digital looked like.

Theordoros. I would have to search hard drives for a good sample. PM and I will arrange to let you look at something. Putting a LR jpeg up on here shows nothing.

What is the "difference layer mode"? ...what are the two layers? ...layers of what? ...you don't have layers (and you don't have two) in MS... you have true colour capturing in each and every one of the pixels because all RGB colour emission of a space in the scene is captured at the same place! 

 If can't show us examples for MS done in the field you can't claim it can be done! ...pigs don't fly! 

[Quentin]

What focal lengths are you looking to use, and how much tilt/swing/shift are you looking to accomplish?  

Did you dig into what Silvestri offers, has their Flexicam may be what you're looking for...  http://www.silvestricamera.com/eng/prodotti_eng/Flexicam/Flexicam_eng.htm

Hi Joe

No I had not, thanks for the link, looks interesting.

Wide angle, but not extreme.  Reasonable degree of tilt/shift.

[Brent Daniels]

Clearly my mistake was to mention multi shot, as that subject has somewhat taken over this thread...

If anyone can read the Hassy PDF I linked to in my first message and comment on that and their experiences if any on the use of an H back with at tech cam light enough to use for location photography, that would be very helpful.  

Mutishot is fascinating, but its not the primary point of this thread.

Yes Quentin the discussion has gone off track.

To have the option to do multishot with a tech camera you seriously have to consider electronic shutters. Trying to hand cock a mechanical shutter again & again is crazy. The type of shutter you require may become a consideration in your choice of tech camera. I have yet to see a pic of a tech camera utilizing electronic shutters. Possible or not? You will most likely have to talk directly to the camera manufactures. I know that Martin (head guy) at Arca will talk directly to you.

With electronic shutters there are presently 2 choices. Rollei or Schneider. There are big differences between the two that could be important to you. The Schneider shutters only go to 1/125th. The Rollei goes to 1/500th, and the upcoming version to 1/100th. The Rollei shutter circumference is larger than the Schneider. Both controllers are about the same size. A big consideration was that the Rollei worked seamlessly through Phocus when tethered. I think both now do but best to check.

I hope that info is more useful to you.
 

[Quentin]

Hi Brent

Thanks.  The Hasselblad guide PDF is quite useful.  I have been working on the assumption that I will use Rollei digital lenses.  There is no way an old style mechanical shutter would make any sense.  Great in the days of film, but there are issues achieving acceptable synchronisation with Hasselblad backs, I am told.

I guess what I was hoping for when I started this thread was someone to come forward who was already using a system successfully and could set out the pros and cons from his or her direct experience.  Nothing beats hands on experience, particularly given the high value of the kit under discussion!

The flexcam option also looks interesting.

Will have a chat with a few dealers and with Hasselblad.

Cheers.

[Brent Daniels]

Sorry Quentin but I feel I should make a last reply to Theodoros to clear a few things up.

Theodoros. We were talking about blending final processed 1 and 4 shot files together in Photoshop (PS) to eliminate any movement pixel artifacts in the multishot file. The layers referred to are PS layers of a image in post production. Difference is a layer blending mode in PS.

I offered to have you private message me so I could arrange for you to see a PS file of how this works. Complete with separate 1 & 4 shot images set in layers. That is the only way for you to see it how it works. I am not going to publicly post my work in progress layered files here. I have nothing to prove here. If such an offer is not good enough for you so be it.

Cheers
Brent Daniels

[Brent Daniels]

Hi Brent

Thanks.  The Hasselblad guide PDF is quite useful.  I have been working on the assumption that I will use Rollei digital lenses.  There is no way an old style mechanical shutter would make any sense.  Great in the days of film, but there are issues achieving acceptable synchronisation with Hasselblad backs, I am told.

I guess what I was hoping for when I started this thread was someone to come forward who was already using a system successfully and could set out the pros and cons from his or her direct experience.  Nothing beats hands on experience, particularly given the high value of the kit under discussion!

The flexcam option also looks interesting.

Will have a chat with a few dealers and with Hasselblad.

Cheers.

I had hoped for the same thing when I when I was deciding the Arca M-line / Rollei kit.

Looking at the tech cameras on that PDF there are a few I have doubts  that an electronic shutter would fit. The donut / puck of an electronic shutter is much bigger than a copal 0 shutter and it may not fit with some focusing systems. It would work on that Linhof tech and maybe the Arca.

Check with Rollei or Eric on here as to the donut size of the new Rollei shutter. It may be smaller. Max speed of 1/1000th and controlled from an app sounds nice, but an app and a phone are another thing to go wrong.

Cheers
Brent

[Theodoros]

Sorry Quentin but I feel I should make a last reply to Theodoros to clear a few things up.

Theodoros. We were talking about blending final processed 1 and 4 shot files together in Photoshop (PS) to eliminate any movement pixel artifacts in the multishot file. The layers referred to are PS layers of a image in post production. Difference is a layer blending mode in PS.

I offered to have you private message me so I could arrange for you to see a PS file of how this works. Complete with separate 1 & 4 shot images set in layers. That is the only way for you to see it how it works. I am not going to publicly post my work in progress layered files here. I have nothing to prove here. If such an offer is not good enough for you so be it.

Cheers
Brent Daniels

Do you mean to use single shot images in "stitching" processing as to "replace" the MS image that was (IYO) creating blur? 
 

[Enda Cavanagh]

Sorry Quentin but I feel I should make a last reply to Theodoros to clear a few things up.

Theodoros. We were talking about blending final processed 1 and 4 shot files together in Photoshop (PS) to eliminate any movement pixel artifacts in the multishot file. The layers referred to are PS layers of a image in post production. Difference is a layer blending mode in PS.

I offered to have you private message me so I could arrange for you to see a PS file of how this works. Complete with separate 1 & 4 shot images set in layers. That is the only way for you to see it how it works. I am not going to publicly post my work in progress layered files here. I have nothing to prove here. If such an offer is not good enough for you so be it.

Cheers
Brent Daniels

+1
 

[Theodoros]

+1
 

+1 ... very well supported! 

[Enda Cavanagh]

+1 ... very well supported! 

Not really.

[Brent Daniels]

Theodoros. I think you are missing Enda's point. So to be clear. If you feel you have to insult people that are offering to provide you with some information I think it is best if you seek your answers from some other flying pig.

[Theodoros]

Theodoros. I think you are missing Enda's point. So to be clear. If you feel you have to insult people that are offering to provide you with some information I think it is best if you seek your answers from some other flying pig.

I don't know why you feel insulted, it was never my intention nor is my character to insult people. It's just that MS in the field for landscape, city scape, industrial and most of architecture can't be done. The problem is not your technique, it's physical problem that originates from the technology itself. After all it is not needed either, its purpose is different (here is where the expression "pigs can't fly" fits). OTOH, MO when a camera with moments is used is to use backs with larger pixels than 7μm, what one may do if higher resolution is needed is to use a longer lens with generous image circle and stitch multiple shots by moving his lens horizontally either side or both sides (or by moving the rear standard of his camera accordingly. Regards, Theodoros.

[torger]

can't be done.

Well, Brent has described a technique that works. It's up to others to decide if it's too cumbersome or not. Some people have even used scanning backs for landscape, which is even more cumbersome and limiting concerning required shooting conditions. Personally I even find stitching too cumbersome to be enjoyable but yet it's a popular technique among many.

In any case it's up to the reader to decide, you can't just present your own opinion as some sort of fact, which of course becomes insulting to people that is using this technique successfully.

[Enda Cavanagh]

Quentin
Personally I would go with an Arca Swiss system. I have used a Cambo system before and it was great but the Arca is in another league. I personally use the RL3D but if weight is an issue than you can select from one of the other R series cameras. I prefer the RL3D because I use a lot of shift. I get up to 40mm rise for example which I have used. Another poster mentioned that the 200MS doesn't have micro lenses so therefore you have a much wider elections of lenses to choose from. I use the Schneider 28mm, 35mm, and 47mm and the Rodenstock 90mm HR Digaron-SW on a Hasselblad H3D back/ Cambo RL3D system.
The 28mm should work fine on the 200 MS (BUT DOUBLE CHECK WITH DEALERS). It has a huge image circle allowing a lot of movement, is tack sharp and minimal distortion. It is expensive but still much cheaper than the Rodie 32mm. The Rodie 40mm is another great lens I would go for. Again tack sharp and large image circle. The Schneider 60mm is supposed to be great and the Rodie 90mm is a fantastic lens. One of the sharpest out there. I do love my Schneider 35mm. It SHOULD work fine on the 200MS. It's the equivalent of a 24mm in 35mm format and is just a nice focal length for landscape and architecture

The cambo focusing ring (EDIT: Oops. Typo. I meant the Arca Swiss Focus Ring.  ) is the most accurate on the market. Combined with the module you get ridiculous accuracy and is very quick and easy to use once it's calibrated. I love how I can remove the back to quickly change it to portrait or visa versa, without having to touch the tripod. I love how the lens is always fixed when shifting for easier stitching. I love how I have tilt built into the camera and not the lens (IE all lenses  therefore will have tilt. No extra premium to pay) I love how I can remove the front plate of the camera to get swing instead of tilt and I love the viewfinder with zoom. Really great at determining quickly what lens to use.

BTW I would invest in the Arca Swiss Cube (or similar) Head. It will make your compositioning and leveling a doddle.

I do think you will be using single shot mode for the vast majority of the time if you are based in the UK but than again I do shoot multiple exposures most of the time on a regular back with foliage and the blending does look natural as long as it's relatively still. You and Bret know I'm sure how the it looks on an MS back and if you can get it right the quality would look astounding I'm sure. Good luck with your new system.

[Theodoros]

Well, Brent has described a technique that works. It's up to others to decide if it's too cumbersome or not. Some people have even used scanning backs for landscape, which is even more cumbersome and limiting concerning required shooting conditions. Personally I even find stitching too cumbersome to be enjoyable but yet it's a popular technique among many.

In any case it's up to the reader to decide, you can't just present your own opinion as some sort of fact, which of course becomes insulting to people that is using this technique successfully.

1. It doesn't work! ...It can't work right. If the process result is worst than "just shooting" with a traditional method, it doesn't mean that there are ways around what causes the worst result, it simply means that "pigs can't fly"!  
For one to decide if it's cumbershot or not he first has to see if he is interested or not to invest in trying it... Those kind of info are the ones that one expects to read in forums... As a result, if one trusts a forum and reads that "pigs may fly", he may as well ride his pig and try to to see the world above the clouds riding it... That's not the purpose which those that share their passion for photography should be after!   Otherwise one shouldn't be taught things under lecturer supervision in universities, he should be left to "decide for himself" and just be given the degree!   After all, we are all told here without one presenting a result of the method.... (which I believe it doesn't exist)  

Scanning backs are different to multishot! Scanning backs don't fail if there is movement in the scene or the set up... They present it as distortion which in small volumes may be used as an effect... but again, that's a totally different subject than the topic here!  

[Brent Daniels]

Okay let us end this "It Does Not Work" blah blah from Theodoros. Below is a link to a blog page where Les Walkling explains it better than I could. Complete with pics. Shooting 200 ms multishot images on location in the great outdoors. Les and I discussed this process and the miss matching file sizes after being put in touch by the then Australia Blad rep Colin Johnston.

I started doing this process in 2007 with a 528C when on a road trip. Just one of those try a "what would happen if" pie in the sky idea. Amazing stuff gets discovered that way. Take a chance beyond the excepted norm sometime. You might discover something brave, new and exciting. Like the world being round.

Hey Les. I hope you not mind me linking to your blog post in the interest of education.

http://www.leswalkling.com/tethering-the-h4d-200ms-in-the-field/

Theodoros. Please note that I post under my full real name. You can easily check if I am just a forum info spouter. I hope you enjoy Wes's blog post.

Cheers
Brent Daniels

[Quentin]

Thanks, Enda, for your detailed and helpful reply. I had checked out MR's Arca Swiss Rm3D review on LuLa and it is a candidate.  Lots more research and thinking to do!

cheers

Quentin
Personally I would go with an Arca Swiss system. I have used a Cambo system before and it was great but the Arca is in another league. I personally use the RL3D but if weight is an issue than you can select from one of the other R series cameras. I prefer the RL3D because I use a lot of shift. I get up to 40mm rise for example which I have used. Another poster mentioned that the 200MS doesn't have micro lenses so therefore you have a much wider elections of lenses to choose from. I use the Schneider 28mm, 35mm, and 47mm and the Rodenstock 90mm HR Digaron-SW on a Hasselblad H3D back/ Cambo RL3D system.
The 28mm should work fine on the 200 MS (BUT DOUBLE CHECK WITH DEALERS). It has a huge image circle allowing a lot of movement, is tack sharp and minimal distortion. It is expensive but still much cheaper than the Rodie 32mm. The Rodie 40mm is another great lens I would go for. Again tack sharp and large image circle. The Schneider 60mm is supposed to be great and the Rodie 90mm is a fantastic lens. One of the sharpest out there. I do love my Schneider 35mm. It SHOULD work fine on the 200MS. It's the equivalent of a 24mm in 35mm format and is just a nice focal length for landscape and architecture

The cambo focusing ring (EDIT: Oops. Typo. I meant the Arca Swiss Focus Ring.  ) is the most accurate on the market. Combined with the module you get ridiculous accuracy and is very quick and easy to use once it's calibrated. I love how I can remove the back to quickly change it to portrait or visa versa, without having to touch the tripod. I love how the lens is always fixed when shifting for easier stitching. I love how I have tilt built into the camera and not the lens (IE all lenses  therefore will have tilt. No extra premium to pay) I love how I can remove the front plate of the camera to get swing instead of tilt and I love the viewfinder with zoom. Really great at determining quickly what lens to use.

BTW I would invest in the Arca Swiss Cube (or similar) Head. It will make your compositioning and leveling a doddle.

I do think you will be using single shot mode for the vast majority of the time if you are based in the UK but than again I do shoot multiple exposures most of the time on a regular back with foliage and the blending does look natural as long as it's relatively still. You and Bret know I'm sure how the it looks on an MS back and if you can get it right the quality would look astounding I'm sure. Good luck with your new system.

[Theodoros]

Okay let us end this "It Does Not Work" blah blah from Theodoros. Below is a link to a blog page where Les Walkling explains it better than I could. Complete with pics. Shooting 200 ms multishot images on location in the great outdoors. Les and I discussed this process and the miss matching file sizes after being put in touch by the then Australia Blad rep Colin Johnston.

I started doing this process in 2007 with a 528C when on a road trip. Just one of those try a "what would happen if" pie in the sky idea. Amazing stuff gets discovered that way. Take a chance beyond the excepted norm sometime. You might discover something brave, new and exciting. Like the world being round.

Hey Les. I hope you not mind me linking to your blog post in the interest of education.

http://www.leswalkling.com/tethering-the-h4d-200ms-in-the-field/

Theodoros. Please note that I post under my full real name. You can easily check if I am just a forum info spouter. I hope you enjoy Wes's blog post.

Cheers
Brent Daniels

Brent, as a previous 528c owner (which is what I also use on a daily basis) you should know that 528c files are better than 200MS for the following reasons: A. 4X in 200MS is real colour but it is done with considerably smaller (about 45% area) pixels than with 528c. B. 528C is real colour/real resolution in 16x mode without any interpolation involved, while 200ms is real colour only if used as a 50ms (4x) and the rest up to 200ms is interpolating the 50ms result. Now given the fact that one stitches images, it would only require one or two more to be stitched for 528c to match the printing resolution with 528c, while the resolving power would be (a little) better with 528c due to no interpolation involved and much larger pixels. Anyway, the problem here is not whether one may have an image but rather if the image will be better if single shot +stiching would have been used instead.
I've done thousands of shots in 16x mode and I've come to the following conclusions: A. If there is a "motion detected" message from software the image may be still usable but analysis maybe worst that the same print done in the same size with single shot. B. There is a good margin of tolerance in the software where there is no message for "motion detection" but this doesn't mean that the process was done to its optimum.

The conclusion from the above is simply that when there is motion present, there may be cases that one may still end up with an image (either with or without "motion detection" message from software), but this doesn't mean that the image will be better than stitching single shot where one can be certain that he freezes things while with MS he can be certain for the opposite!  Now if one adds to the equation the fact that there is no contribution  to the image quality if colours are far more faithful with MS or not since post processing is done for the likes of the photographer, he may easily came in the conclusion "that neither pigs fly, nor they should be forced to try and fly!". 

After all, if one is to experiment with such a process, why not use a scanning back as it was mentioned earlier? ...what the advantage of using an MS back would be? ...there isn't any! ...is there? 

[eronald]

1. It doesn't work! ...It can't work right. If the process result is worst than "just shooting" with a traditional method, it doesn't mean that there are ways around what causes the worst result, it simply means that "pigs can't fly"!  

Pig did fly.

Edmund

[Theodoros]

Pig did fly.

Edmund

Well, I was under the impression that planes used as a media don't count!