Post by: Master Technika on January 03, 2019, 12:15:47 am
Hasselblad Phocus is either over-sharpening or adding too much detail or something like imposing too much of a "crunchy and digital" feel on my files. They look so much smoother and more natural using Adobe Camera Raw, but I actually need to use the Phocus software for a few of the features and those will be negated if I export from Phocus as a DNG. I need to figure what it is that I am missing in the Hasselblad Phocus software that is making the files too "crunchy and digital". I ahve un-clicked every box that I could imagine would be causing this, such as "sharpening" and even have gone so far as to remove "clarity" and detail" in Phocus and still isn't doing what I need, which is to give me that nice and natural feel. I am in the last phases of a time-sensitive project. Thank you all for your time and experience. If ANYONE can help me solve this I will print and mount or frame something of theirs for them at my shop, on the house! Thank you in advance.
Post by: BobShaw on January 03, 2019, 07:07:05 am
Export as a TIFF.
Post by: delfalex on January 03, 2019, 09:20:29 am
.. export from Phocus as a DNG.
Am I presuming correctly that in exporting as a DNG you trying to process Multishot files within ACR (otherwise not just process the .FFF files directly)?
Why would you export out of Phocus as a DNG?
Export as a TIFF.
Then the file would be fully demosaic-ed & the modifications made by Phocus "baked in"/finalised; it would negate the purpose of processing the image in another Raw file convertor.
Post by: BobShaw on January 03, 2019, 04:04:42 pm
Then the file would be fully demosaic-ed & the modifications made by Phocus "baked in"/finalised; it would negate the purpose of processing the image in another Raw file convertor.Hopefully so. Why would you go from one raw file with all camera features like FFF and Phocus to another pseudo raw file with less features like DNG?
Photoshop is probably the premium image editor so start with an image format. ACR and DNG to me are Jacks of all trades, master of none.
Post by: delfalex on January 03, 2019, 04:52:13 pm
Hopefully so. Why would you go from one raw file with all camera features like FFF and Phocus to another pseudo raw file with less features like DNG?
Well as the OP is saying; if it's falling down in the area of aggressive pre-sharpening (which one can't turn off) and a better result can be achieved by going through the 'pseudo' route, then it ain't really so super duper after all.
In terms of Phocus's handling of their Multishot files, I have found that it pretty much runs at a legacy level often doing more damage to the image (especially with the auto over-sharpening) than is to be gained from shooting at Multishot level, which begs question as to why they keep making the hardware.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Post by: Master Technika on January 03, 2019, 06:54:21 pm
INFO:
Hasselblad H5D 200ms, HC Macro II, f11, 6shot multishot- thus making the 200mp version.
-I've posted both images as close to each other in size as I patiently could at the moment- I'm on a deadline for some large prints (my own work) These are test portions and are both critically focused through tethering and all that other good stuff that you're doing when you're not messing around . BOTH Images are increased to 200% to show the artifacts in ACR.
-It seems as though "Phocus" is putting too much detail in on their own which additionally is removing a lot of smoothness and causing a lot trouble for the specular highlights.
-Phocus settings for this example:
Everything that I can tell would matter is UNCHECKED. No sharpening, noise adjustments, etc.
-Adobe Camera Raw seems to handle the gradation better, looks soft but accepts sharpening very nicely, BUT doesn't have "color cast correction" which is would helpful to these prints in one spot AND it leaves these little artifacts in small bright details. I've seen this with another 200ms when using Adobe Camera Raw.
-Adobe Camera Raw settings for this example:
Everything that would matter is UNCHECKED. No sharpening, noise adjustments, etc>
-This test has nothing to do with color, ONLY resolution.
-I'm liking the adjustments I'm getting out of Phocus, with the exception of this "hyper" something that it's doing- I'm really hoping I'm just missing something and the files can come out a lot smoother.
Does anyone have any idea what I might be missing??? Big prize for whoever can help me solve this! I mean it!
Thank you for any and all suggestions. I hope I've explained enough for someone to just know what the hell it is I'm missing :P
Post by: BobShaw on January 03, 2019, 07:43:43 pm
Is it untethered, producing a .3FR file or tethered, producing a .FFF file?
In what module are the settings unchecked - Capture, Browse, Adjust or Export?
What preset are you using for Export? Presumably DNG in which you are using a setting with no parameters that Hasselblad abandoned 10 years ago.
Export as a Full Size TIFF and try that.
Post by: Master Technika on January 03, 2019, 08:28:50 pm
The multishot cameras only allow for multishot capabilities while tethered, so these are tethered.
They are "fff" files.
All the boxes are unchecked in Catpure, Browse, Adjust. Export doesn't appear to have anything in it to uncheck.
I have exported as a full sized "Tiff-16". That is the only way to retain the changes you make in Phocus. The problem here is that Phocus seems to automatically put some extra stuff on them that causing highlight and over-sharpening problems I am having.
When I export from Phocus as a DNG I can then use Adobe Camera Raw which seems to be handling the highlights and fine detail more elegantly.
Post by: BobShaw on January 03, 2019, 09:17:34 pm
Last idea. Are you using V3.4 of Phocus? If so do you have the Exposure set to V1 or V2? See the Read Me.
Post by: elliot_n on January 04, 2019, 06:29:09 am
Post by: Doug Peterson on January 04, 2019, 07:39:12 am
Post by: faberryman on January 04, 2019, 07:42:54 am
Post by: Master Technika on January 04, 2019, 12:41:53 pm
I don't have a dealer. Would be awesome, but it's just not the case in my current situation.
Post by: BobShaw on January 04, 2019, 04:06:46 pm
I don't have a dealer. Would be awesome, but it's just not the case in my current situation.Everyone has a dealer.
[email protected]
Post by: Frans Rutten on January 04, 2019, 05:14:35 pm
You can see the adjustments you made in your editing steps, and also the settings used for export.
Post by: DiamondsDr on January 04, 2019, 10:12:03 pm
Post by: delfalex on January 05, 2019, 10:07:06 am
it seems somehow you exporting with previous settings,
.. when you import the files phocus can apply previous settings as well, based on open image.
Unlike the H4D60 and other single shot format cameras, the Multishot process is a tethered process and cannot be done in camera.
The settings one selects in Phocus will be embedded in the resulting file after the multishot exposure process has been completed; as the OP has confirmed that all of the settings were zeroed or off we can take it that the multishot file retains those settings once the exposure process had completed.
Post by: BobShaw on January 05, 2019, 05:19:38 pm
The settings one selects in Phocus will be embedded in the resulting file after the multishot exposure process has been completedThere are two steps here. The OP needs to establish where the problem is.
One step is the conversion to the .FFF raw file. That has to be done.
The second step is converting the .FFF file to something else and that is completely optional. 95% of the time I just import the FFF file in my catalogue programme and edit and export from there to whatever format I need. However I am using Aperture on a Mac. ACR supports the FFF files directly so I am unsure why anything is being exported. Exporting as a DNG to ACR is just asking for trouble.
If I want to go directly from Phocus to Photoshop then that is the the only time I export as a 16 bit TIF.
Having said that there are still unanswered questions like what version of Phocus, is the switch set on V1 or V2 and how the JPG shown were produced.
If you are on a Mac then just for fun open a FFF file using the Preview app and then export as a TIF. Does it look the same as the export of TIF from Phocus?
Post by: DiamondsDr on January 05, 2019, 05:27:18 pm
Unlike the H4D60 and other single shot format cameras, the Multishot process is a tethered process and cannot be done in camera... when you import the files phocus can apply previous settings as well, based on open image. I mean tethered(i do 90% of the time) and in my experience i have to click in image browser outside the image in order to avoid it or set the settings to default and then play.
The settings one selects in Phocus will be embedded in the resulting file after the multishot exposure process has been completed; as the OP has confirmed that all of the settings were zeroed or off we can take it that the multishot file retains those settings once the exposure process had completed.
Post by: DiamondsDr on January 05, 2019, 05:41:37 pm
Post by: delfalex on January 05, 2019, 08:03:05 pm
Sometimes restarting computer help to solve some issues. :)If only it were that simple to fix the problem
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Post by: delfalex on January 05, 2019, 08:17:14 pm
One step is the conversion to the .FFF raw file. That has to be done.
ACR supports the FFF files directly so I am unsure why anything is being exported. Exporting as a DNG to ACR is just asking for trouble.
If you are on a Mac then just for fun open a FFF file using the Preview app and then export as a TIF. Does it look the same as the export of TIF from Phocus?
The conversion from RAW data stream to FFF is done by Phocus after it has received all 4 / 6 data packages (multishot files don't exist in the 3FR format).
The only software that currently supports Hasselblad's Multishot FFF files is Phocus, all other convertors require that the file be demosiced beforehand & fed as a linear DNG (hence the exporting in such a manner).
FWIW I've tested every version of Phocus with 6S files and in each case that harsh shadow/ highlight that the OP has alluded to manifests itself in the same way.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Post by: BobShaw on January 06, 2019, 10:36:17 pm
The only software that currently supports Hasselblad's Multishot FFF files is Phocus, all other convertors require that the file be demosiced beforehand & fed as a linear DNG (hence the exporting in such a manner).Can you put a Multishot FFF file somewhere to download?
You can't see anything in a JPG.
I assume the camera, viewfinder and back are at the latest firmware?
Post by: Master Technika on January 19, 2019, 11:56:57 am
The conversion from RAW data stream to FFF is done by Phocus after it has received all 4 / 6 data packages (multishot files don't exist in the 3FR format).
The only software that currently supports Hasselblad's Multishot FFF files is Phocus, all other convertors require that the file be demosiced beforehand & fed as a linear DNG (hence the exporting in such a manner).
FWIW I've tested every version of Phocus with 6S files and in each case that harsh shadow/ highlight that the OP has alluded to manifests itself in the same way.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Thank you Deleflex-
I’m just getting back to this now that the work is done.
I had no choice but to use Phocus with the 6shot files, but honestly those files are not what they could be if Hasselblad would just give the user a little more control. Their formula that is embedded in these files when processed through Phocus could be so much smoother, detail-wise, while still containing all that extra detail. I wish they would listen to their users more. We do have some reasonable experience and expectations.
Post by: BobShaw on January 19, 2019, 09:19:47 pm
I wish they would listen to their users more.So you actually contacted Hasselblad support?
I ask that because although I haven't seen your images I downloaded a Multishot FFF file and the resulting TIF from the sample images site and the FFF is definitely fuzzy but the TIF is very sharp.
(I would say that some parts of the image are overexposed but not "crunchy".)
https://www.hasselblad.com/learn/sample-images/
Post by: delfalex on January 20, 2019, 02:58:57 pm
(I would say that some parts of the image are overexposed but not "crunchy".)
https://www.hasselblad.com/learn/sample-images/
Unfortunately, after forgetting about the camera shake (hence fringing), I'd say that the halos in these 100% crops are crunchy - definitely some kind of OTT Unsharp Mask being applied:
(0115 images are from the Tif & 0116 are from from the FFF)
BTW with that lens (HC120II) on these 100MP backs, one starts seeing the beginings of diffraction kicking in from F9, so if you think this file is sharp F16, you'll be amazing when reviewing F8 images - incredible (ahem except for the nasty halos!)
Post by: Master Technika on January 20, 2019, 04:11:35 pm
Delfalex, thank you for posting examples and your experience! Also, I agree with your assesments about where diffraction starts setting in. I also use that lens and previously with the regular 100c camera. When you get it just right- it does create a very sharp point of focus.