Adobe + Hasselblad Cooperation

[David Grover / Capture One]

I think that Hasselblad overstepped with their discussion of Adobe/Hasselblad "cooperation". Adobe works with many camera companies and tends to keep their mouths shut about what work is done with what companies. (you'll note the original posted PDF has now been removed–that says something).

Why the aggression Jeff?

See post above about the missing PDF.  My error but no big mystery.

Lighten up, eh?

David

[Schewe]

Why the aggression Jeff?

See post above about the missing PDF.  My error but no big mystery.

Lighten up, eh?

David

Because I think both you and Hasselblad made an error...Hasselblad for the content of the PDF and you for touting the Adobe/Hasselblad "cooperation" which as I said, Adobe does with a lot of the camera companies, quietly...

[bcooter]

I know I'll regret this, but it's not unusual for corporations that enter into agreements with each other, to make mention and advertise those agreements.

Phase one at one time briefly mentioned they would offer Leica Lenses for their Phase camera and that they would support the S2 with C-1.  I guess that fell through because it was dropped rather quickly, but at the time, it was mentioned by both parties.

Jeff, you mention your cooperation with a number of photographic corporations and since consulting and instruction is part of your business model, I assume it adds credibility. 

Nothing wrong with that.

I also am sure many of the companies you have associations with also communicate and consult with other photographers and  a lot of that is kept quiet or not worth the mention as both parties see no marketing value, or have other marketing plans.

Still, if Hasselblad offered their information to adobe for Lightroom to hit the exact look of Phocus then I see that as a plus, not a negative and well worth the mention.

I use C-1, lightroom and Raw developer for processing out Phase files.  I see all of this as a positive, not a negative and even more of a positive if the companies are cooperating with each other.

IMO

BC

[Schewe]

Jeff, you mention your cooperation with a number of photographic corporations and since consulting and instruction is part of your business model, I assume it adds credibility.  

Nothing wrong with that

To be honest I knew well before the OP's initial post that Phase One and Adobe had "cooperated" together on a lot of stuff...but I was in no position due to NDA's to say anything.

I think Hasselblad (and the OP) overstepped...pure and simple. They (Hasselblad) tried to take undue advantage...that's what I personally didn't like (nor appreciate).

I known for a fact (since I was involved in the discussions) that the working relationship between Phase One & Adobe was healthy and ongoing, but could not say anything...that's the nature of NDA's.

I think the OP made a strategic mistake in posting what was termed an internal document in public.

I think Hasselblad was wrong in their assessment in the motives (I think it was a major mistake to state a strategic position and speculate on Phase One and Adobe's "motives") and thats why I got "aggressive" when describing what was really going on.

I know EXACTLY what's going on...and I'm trying real hard not to fully disclose (and thus break) my NDA's.

Adobe has worked really hard with a variety of camera companies on a whole host of issues...believe me when I say nothing about Hasselblad is particularly unique, ok?

[David Grover / Capture One]

To be honest I knew well before the OP's initial post that Phase One and Adobe had "cooperated" together on a lot of stuff...but I was in no position due to NDA's to say anything.

I think Hasselblad (and the OP) overstepped...pure and simple. They (Hasselblad) tried to take undue advantage...that's what I personally didn't like (nor appreciate).

I known for a fact (since I was involved in the discussions) that the working relationship between Phase One & Adobe was healthy and ongoing, but could not say anything...that's the nature of NDA's.

I think the OP made a strategic mistake in posting what was termed an internal document in public.

I think Hasselblad was wrong in their assessment in the motives (I think it was a major mistake to state a strategic position and speculate on Phase One and Adobe's "motives") and thats why I got "aggressive" when describing what was really going on.

I know EXACTLY what's going on...and I'm trying real hard not to fully disclose (and thus break) my NDA's.

Adobe has worked really hard with a variety of camera companies on a whole host of issues...believe me when I say nothing about Hasselblad is particularly unique, ok?

I do have a name Jeff?

It was not a mistake to post the document as it contains useful information to customers about the differences between using Lightroom and Phocus, thats all?

I don't understand why you are getting so het up about it?  I am sure if it was a Phase One Adobe title you would be very excited about it?

Relax OK?  Ill repost the PDF shortly.

David

[David Grover / Capture One]

I am still having attachment issues!  Even though it is less MB's than permitted by the forum it still gets rejected?

Anyway, I have uploaded it to my dropbox.  So if anybody would like a copy, please PM and I'll forward the download link.  Even you Jeff! 

David

[yaya]

I am still having attachment issues!
David

David you may want to rephrase that

[David Grover / Capture One]

David you may want to rephrase that

I might eh!

[Schewe]

I don't understand why you are getting so het up about it?  I am sure if it was a Phase One Adobe title you would be very excited about it?

Uh huh...I'm not a particularly strident Phase One "fan boy" David...yes, I use a Phase One but I also use Canon and more recently a Panasonic GH2. I don't make a particularly big thing about what I use...

Look, with regards to the PDF, I have no problem with the vast majority of the document...I do note however that the odds of Hasselbad running the document by Adobe before its release is pretty slim. If they did, the odds are Adobe would have told Hasselblad the official name of the product in discussion; Adobe Photoshop Lightroom® (note the ® which Adobe requires for the first reference to a product in a document–I know, I've had to go through Adobe legal many times). If Hasselblad unilaterally released this document to the public before getting Adobe's blessing, I'm wondering to what extent there's actually a lot of cooperation with Adobe going on.

But the real problem I have is the following:

"A few words about one competitor
Adobe Lightroom or Camera Raw does not offer profile generated Lens Corrections for Phase One raw
files - only manual adjustments can be applied. Neither can you say that the image quality in Capture
One and Lightroom is compareable. Reasons are most probably related to that Adobe and Phase One
compete for the same customers and therefore probably do not cooperate closely."

That is horseshit...

Hasselblad has no friggin' clue how much cooperation Adobe has or doesn't have with Phase One...Adobe tends to keep their cooperation with various camera companies quiet. Some companies have cooperated to the extent they actually use DNG as a capture file format (Hasselbald did at one point and killed it in a firmware update claiming DNG wasn't up to the task of carrying the needed capture data–which was bogus).

I happen to know how much cooperation there is going on between Phase One and Adobe...and considering the fact that Adobe HAS released 16 lens profiles for various lenses in the LR 3.6 & ACR 6.6 RC's (more than for Hasselblad BTW) and Adobe supports all of the Phase One camera backs, the statement above is simply not true.

If you do post the PDF, you might want to edit out the above statement by Hasselblad from the document–oh, & maybe call Adobe's products by their official names?

:~)

[SeanBK]

WOW!!!  Some peeps here sure r full of themselves &/or anytime any postings happen that is @ Hasselblad, they just go ballistic. Last time I opened my Photoshop or my Camera Raw, it did not give credit to HRH.
   Please, no need to rip someone's head-off just because you have a hatred toward other brand, ease up!! Last I checked this has been a very civilized & informative forum. We can make our own decisions. Most of all we are all highly intellectual professionals & some of us are also with advanced degree, I with Masters in Engineering.

[Schewe]

Please, no need to rip someone's head-off just because you have a hatred toward other brand, ease up!!

David asked why I was upset, so I told him...no head ripping involved. And I don't hate Hasselblad...I used to love Hasselblad and used one for years and made a ton of money with it. But if I think somebody crosses a line, I feel duty bound to point that out. So, I did.

[EricWHiss]

duty bound

Did you use the word 'duty'  because of a business or financial relationship or rather some kind of deep sense of justice?  I've no horse in this game, just curious. 

I'm happy that there is some cooperation among the MFDB makers and software makers and would like to see a lot more.  What I'd really like to see is a way to have one big catalog of files be opened and read by any of the apps and not need to sync any of the others.   Imagine working in C1 or Phocus for some jobs because it made more sense, but being able to rank and keyword and then close and open LR3 and see all that because it makes better web galleries and prints or made more sense for whatever reason.   

[Schewe]

Did you use the word 'duty'  because of a business or financial relationship or rather some kind of deep sense of justice?  I've no horse in this game, just curious.

A sense of correctness...a lot of guys at Adobe are long term friends that I've worked with for a long time. I don't like it when somebody tries to take advantage (my term) of what is a normal attempt at advancing the industry–which is what I think Adobe (or at least the Camera Raw team) tries to do...yes, Adobe and Hasselblad worked together...so did Phase One, so did Leica, so did Pentax and Samsung...there was nothing particularly special about what Hasselblad and Adobe did together...Adobe does that all the time (and tends not to beat their chests about).

Yes, I'm somewhat protective of the impression people have of Adobe largely because "Adobe" is a company but the it's the people who do the work. I know how much Thomas Knoll does to help the industry...Eric Chan is cut from the same cloth. I think it's wrong for a company to try to take undue advantage...

Phase One gave Adobe the lens data needed to create lens profiles for LR 3.6/ACR 6.6. Eric Chan made the profiles from the supplied data.  Yes, it seems Hasselblad provided lens data before Phase One did–hence Hasselblad lenses being supported one version quicker than Phase One. Did Hasselblad's working with Adobe "inspire" Phase One to play ball with Adobe? Maybe...I personally think it's more a factor of timing...Hasselblad lenses got supported before Phase One. By a factor of 1 version...personally, I'm glad that both Hasselblad and Phase One are BOTH working with Adobe. It marks a good development. I had problems with the one specific paragraph in the PDF because I know it's horseshit...

Look, it boils down to a win/win proposition vs a win/lose proposition. Adobe working with both Hasselbald and Phase One is a win/win. It's good for the industry (the end users). So, Hasselblad didn't need to take the shot across the bow with that one paragraph they slipped in. It's clearly now wrong...so it's inappropriate for Hasselbald to say.

[BlasR]

Jeff,

Relax, life still beautiful, don't die before the year end.

After you dead, we (yes I said WE) going to miss you for a month or two, after that,

you gone, in someone else, WILL come to take your place,  I will be sad if you die before Xmas,
(yes I said me) if I come to the computer (only)

so relax.

[BrendanStewart]

Well sure enough, the lens profiles are there. Awesome!

Works very well. This was shot with my H3DII-31 and 35-90 lens. Distortion correction worked quite nicely...



(I shoot lots of couples... no fancy model stuff this time )

[David Watson]

Jeff

I was astonished to read the series of posts on this subject and particularly the vitriolic tone of your own posts.  I and many others have long held the view that there is a structural bias (some call it preference) for P1 products on this site.  I wonder whether you would have been any where near so vitriolic if it had been the other way around and it was P1 making such a statement? 

[Schewe]

I wonder whether you would have been any where near so vitriolic if it had been the other way around and it was P1 making such a statement? 

If Phase One had written the same offensive paragraph I quoted, yes, I would. Again, most of the document is fine and dandy...Hasselblad should have resisted the temptation to say "A few words about one competitor".

I actually think that releasing that document in the public was a mistake. It was marked internal and I suspect nobody really groomed the text.

[EricWHiss]

Everybody makes mistakes...   

Jeff, perhaps in the case of the document that offended you, a long chain of people were involved and somewhere the wording got altered by marketing types who were not aware the details. Deliberate intention to mislead? Probably not.  Stuff happens.  Think about it - who has come out looking the worst from all of this - you personally or HB?

[design_freak]

Everybody makes mistakes...   

Jeff, perhaps in the case of the document that offended you, a long chain of people were involved and somewhere the wording got altered by marketing types who were not aware the details. Deliberate intention to mislead? Probably not.  Stuff happens.  Think about it - who has come out looking the worst from all of this - you personally or HB?

 

[SeanBK]

You see Jeff, I do remember the days when Rob Galbraith Forum was in full swing, before it was shut down because of all 'Cyber bullying" took place. You had real strong words even then @ Hasselblad. Seems like you look between the lines, whenever anything @ Hasselblad is posted. So after many years of consistant arrogant tone of ALL your posts, I for one get real tired of it.
  If anyone has any doubt I am sure the history of your posts attests to that fact that you always put peeps down. Peeps are allowed to have their thoughts & opine @ it in this good old US of A.
   This IS all I have to say @ this matter, period..