Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: woof75 on May 20, 2013, 06:13:42 am
-
So I've just bought a second hand H3Dii 39. (currently using Leica M9's but want a little extra resolution for campaigns and also a better viewfinder for slightly longer lenses). Anyhow I use Capture one now, what's the best Raw converter for the Hasselblads? How's the Phocus software? I'm slightly nervous about it..
-
Hi,
C1 can't read hasselblad raws. Sorry to say but Phocus give you best possible IQ. (use 2.7.1) Anyway you can use Adobe LR with tether plug-in.
-
How is Phocus? Is it as bad as they say?
-
I think it is easy and simple but it is not perfect :)
-
A few of my assistants are a little sceptical about it, maybe they used an old version. Saying that, every time a new version of capture one comes out they hate that too!!
-
Also, I always hear the quality is great, how's image management? When shooting 1.5K files in a day that all need to be rated etc that becomes pretty important of course.
-
As Keith said, IMHO it provides for the best rendering of Hasselblad files. But, hey, it's free, so most all of your questions will be answered once you try it for yourself.
Regards,
Ed
-
Phocus, is the best raw converter for the files generated from an H camera.
How you sort the files is your choice, I prefer Bridge. Some like LR? Your call.
BTW, I have shot more than 1500 files with the H in a day and processed through Phocus just fine.
-
Mostly, Assistants are lazy assholes. They do not want to learn. They repeat somewhere heard opinions. If they want to work with you, they will learn ;D
-
Mostly, Assistants are lazy assholes. They do not want to learn. They repeat somewhere heard opinions. If they want to work with you, they will learn ;D
I can't believe you just said that.. I actually have a few that are incredible. A great assistant is worth more than any fancy camera.
-
Always funny the way opinions are formed and shaped by point of view.
I teach a lot of very good digital techs in our Capture One classes.
You should hear what they say about the average photographer they tech for. ;D
-
I can't believe you just said that.. I actually have a few that are incredible. A great assistant is worth more than any fancy camera.
Believe me, unfortunately assistants are as like photographers. Good occur very rarely.
But from what you write, you will not have this problem. They will learn it for breakfast.
-
Assistants, assholes? Wow.
This is a great attitude for a hiring manager to have; I am sure it helps you find the best of the best along with motivating your said "assholes" from giving you their undivided attention.
I plus one for having a few great assistants on my list. However, I will say that there is a learning curve that anyone needs to go through when working with some one new. Lets not forget that we have own style of lighting and staging that they need to learn first. This could take a few shoots and we need to give them that before making an assessment.
The biggest complaints I hear from my assistants is when they work for a photographer the first time and are expected to know exactly how they are going to light and stage the scene without being told. Second complaint, being blamed for the mistakes of the photographer. (IMHO, you should really know how to use your own damn camera, including troubleshooting, setting different modes, actually shooting the thing, how to properly tether the camera, knowing how to use your Raw or Viewing processors, etc.)
-
Hi,
My take is that you should be able to use the tools you are familiar with. I would not, repat not, buy any camera that would not let me use a parametric workflow. I do think that cameras should work with any raw converter.
What I have seen is that Hasselblad files work well with Lightroom. Getting a certain set of tools working your way may take a bit of effort.
In my view, proprietary software is simply stupid. Photographers should own they pictures and have freedom to choose any toolchain of their own. Locking in customers is EVIL.
Best regards
Erik
-
How is lightroom on skintones with the H series backs?
-
Just forget about anything else but Phocus when color/IQ is important to you. There is no other Raw converter that is as good as Phocus. Yes, the first versions of Phocus were tricky, buggy and not very stable but current versions are really stable. Phocus does put demands on your hardware.
Current instability is mostly due to bad firewire cables and/or connections to the back.
As far as using Phocus goes, I think it is pretty straightforward. Phocus is a pretty simple program with fairly limited functionality. It does what it should. I shoot plarge amounts of images pretty regularly and mostly without issues (the issue being the firewire connection in almost every case).
-
True
-
Phocus is extremely user friendly
Stanley
-
oh sounds promising, I'm quite excited to try this out.
-
I just saw some H4-40 files out of LR. They looked pretty good. Nice skin. I bet Phocus would be better. This was for an above the line ad campaign.
-
Love Phocus's conversions, skin tones, color, details, lens corrections, etc. My one gripe is that the Clarity slider, which I use sparingly, creates halos -- light areas around objects, especially against plain backgrounds and skies. I haven't seen this happen in C1. Haven't checked Lightroom.
-
Don't tell anyone about this trick..but.. I find a better way of doing the same thing as the clarity tool is to use unsharp mask with something like amount 10, radius 40, threshold 0. Works well. Just don't tell anyone..
-
Don't tell anyone about this trick..but.. I find a better way of doing the same thing as the clarity tool is to use unsharp mask with something like amount 10, radius 40, threshold 0. Works well. Just don't tell anyone..
Yup.
-
Hi,
That is a well known trick. Don't know about Phocus or C1, but clarity in Lightroom is much more sofisticated than large radius USM. Adobe has written special algorithms for clarity in ACR/Lightroom, and those cannot be replicated with Photoshop tools. I am pretty sure that Jeff and Eric Chan have discussed this on the forums.
Best regards
Erik
Yup.
-
Don't tell anyone about this trick..but.. I find a better way of doing the same thing as the clarity tool is to use unsharp mask with something like amount 10, radius 40, threshold 0. Works well. Just don't tell anyone..
This alters colors and will also push things towards clipping at times.
It can be useful. It can also help to do this in photoshop on a duplicate layer converted to black and white and
applied in luminance mode.
I also find that the using clarity before retouching can be detremental as it is destructive.
Sometimes saving the retouched file as a tif and going back into ACR for a final output specific pass can be a good thing.
-
In c1 both the v6 "classic" clarity and the v7 "punch" and "neutral" algorithms are more than simple large-radius USM. But a large-radius USM is in the same family of effects and can act as a rough facsimile.
Likewise the separate "structure" slider in C1v7 is similar in overall effect to a mid-radius USM, but based on more than just a simple implementation of a USM.
-
In c1 both the v6 "classic" clarity and the v7 "punch" and "neutral" algorithms are more than simple large-radius USM. But a large-radius USM is in the same family of effects and can act as a rough facsimile.
Likewise the separate "structure" slider in C1v7 is similar in overall effect to a mid-radius USM, but based on more than just a simple implementation of a USM.
I am very glad that it is also in C1. But what makes this conversation? Is OP can open raw file in C1? The answer is NO!
Thank you
-
Erik had posted earlier about how the math for clarity worked in adobe's suite an said he "didn't know about phocus or c1" (as regards clarity math). I was replying to the but from my phone so did not quote his entry to clarify to what I was replying.
-
Current instability is mostly due to bad firewire cables and/or connections to the back.
+1
It is definitely the best RAW converter for H files. Plus if you will use the back on a view camera you will need Phocus to do your custom white calibration shots.
-
Hi,
That is a well known trick. Don't know about Phocus or C1, but clarity in Lightroom is much more sofisticated than larg radius USM. Adobe has written special algorithms for clarity in ACR/Lightroom, and those cannot be replicated with Photoshop tools. I am pretty sure that Jeff and Eric Chan have discussed this on the forums.
Best regards
Erik
I'm glad there are advanced algorithms and such, and sometimes it works just great, others not so great, and to my eye for certain images large radius USM is better, especially when working with lawyers and blending the results or fading it out and in different channels etc.
-
This alters colors and will also push things towards clipping at times.
It can be useful. It can also help to do this in photoshop on a duplicate layer converted to black and white and
applied in luminance mode.
I also find that the using clarity before retouching can be detremental as it is destructive.
Sometimes saving the retouched file as a tif and going back into ACR for a final output specific pass can be a good thing.
I replied to Eric already, but yes, I find that I can do this in a layer and adjust, fade, blend, certain channels etc. Very flexible. Clarity can work, especially as part of a preset to show a client before real retouching is done in PS, and sometimes its fast and effective. Its just a tool in the shed.
-
Thanks, everyone, for the info on Clarity alternatives. Didn't mean to start an off-topic debate, but I've wondered about this.
Also -- I'll second the assertions that tethering to Phocus is great. Rock-solid, reliable and well thought out. The ability to focus in such minute increments is pretty amazing. In case anyone from Hasselblad is reading, like many others, I'd love true live view, or at least a faster refresh rate. And a clearer live display that didn't blow out so badly around bright areas.
thanks
ethan
-
It's great to be able to catalog these files with Lightroom, but I almost always render the RAW's in Phocus. Somehow, flexcolor seems even more powerful, but I haven't figured out how to use it to its full potential. Phocus is just simpler. I find that Phocus handles the areas of light to dark transition a lot better and just highlights in general and of course the LCC and DAC features. LR4 does better with sharpening so I'll often save that step for later.
-
...especially when working with lawyers and blending the results...
:)
-
:)
Stupid autocorrect!!!