Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Paul Claesson Hasselblad USA  (Read 11989 times)
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5791



WWW
« Reply #20 on: October 16, 2008, 11:39:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Paul, and welcome to the list!  'Official' voices are most welcome as they provide expertise and reduce the amount of speculation (that can run rampant, especially with new products).

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
glennedens
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #21 on: October 16, 2008, 12:42:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Welcome Paul and David!

I have five questions and a rant (hopefully not too many):

1.  Apple support just informed me that the H3DII-39 is NOT supported in Aperture?  Is this true?  It will work most of the time but we are seeing white screens, black screens, images with magenta cast on the left and cyan on the right split down the middle and after a hour or so of work all of the images stop rendering and display unsupported image format.  If we shut down Aperture and start up again it works for a while.  I posted in the Aperture Q&A forum about this.

2.  This one is probably a dumb question but i want to be sure I am not missing something - I am assuming that once I finish processing in Phocus and export the image as a DNG that all of the APO, DAC, etc. processing will be applied in the resulting DNG file?  I know this happens in TIFF and JPEG but I am getting conflicting information from reliable sources about DNGs.

3.  Is there a way in Phocus after "saving" adjustments to get back to the original without re-importing the image?  Why do we have to save anyway, the use model should be just like in Aperture or LightRoom.  I am not sure i understand the use model, is it non-destructive (modern) or destructive (traditional)?

4.  When using Phocus in two monitor mode I lose the Apple screen magnify function.  If I go back to single screen mode then it returns, why on Earth would Phocus disable system-wide zooming?

5.  What is with all the weird key combinations for simple functions, why can't they just be a letter like in Aperture and LightRoom?  In the old days all of the control keys were needed in things like text editors so the the text could easily be differentiated from commands or format tags.  However, in a photo editor you do not have that problem.  Maybe I am just getting old but I find I cannot remember all of those silly key combinations in Phocus, yet I can remember them in Aperture and LightRoom with no problem.  Please simplify the keyboard shortcut mappings

I am not sure if the following is a suggestion or a rant

My preferred workflow would be to have a Phocus plug-in for import to Aperture to get all of the advantages of the proprietary processing.  I use other cameras and having to leave Aperture to use Phocus is a pain for me, my staff and my clients.  My stop gap solution was to use Phocus, export to DNG and then get back to Aperture to use all of the tools there such as web galleries, light tables, recovery, highlight and shadow, definition, spot, patch, dodge & burn, sepia, black and white conversion, etc., etc., etc.  Do you imagine that Phocus would get to the level of functionality of these other programs and if so, what about other camera support?  Budgets are tight and anything that adds time, even for far better results, is getting hard to justify to clients these days  

Why do the 3FR files (the RAW files) have to be converted to FFF files, is the FFF still a traditional RAW file with bayer encoded pixels?  What processing is taking place when the 3FR is converted to FFF and then what kind of file are the adjustments being performed on?  The Phocus process sure uses up a lot of disk space   Is the FFF conversion some kind of performance hack for Flexcolor and Phocus?  With other tools I know what is going on, here I am still confused, what am i missing?

The added step of first using Phocus and then Aperture is costing unnecessary time and dollars when the functionality could be implemented as a plug-in into a host database raw converter.  Any commercial, serious semi-pro or rabid enthusiast photographer who is using LightRoom or Aperture is going to have to wrestle with the Phocus workflow (or Capture One, etc.).  Diversity and competition is good and I know first hand that Hasselblad is providing some excellent results with Phocus.  

We are seeing MUCH better IQ out of Phocus but the workflow is killing us.

Thank you,

Glenn

Logged
Nick-T
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 462


« Reply #22 on: October 16, 2008, 01:36:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: glennedens
Welcome Paul and David!

I have five questions and a rant (hopefully not too many):

Well David's probably down the pub so I'll fill in with what I know. I'm only going to quote the bits I feel able to answer.
Quote
1.  Apple support just informed me that the H3DII-39 is NOT supported in Aperture?  Is this true?  It will work most of the time but we are seeing white screens, black screens, images with magenta cast on the left and cyan on the right split down the middle and after a hour or so of work all of the images stop rendering and display unsupported image format.  If we shut down Aperture and start up again it works for a while.  I posted in the Aperture Q&A forum about this.
I'm pretty sure the H3D39II IS supported. What you are seeing sounds like video card issues especially as they happen "after an hour or so"
Quote
2.  This one is probably a dumb question but i want to be sure I am not missing something - I am assuming that once I finish processing in Phocus and export the image as a DNG that all of the APO, DAC, etc. processing will be applied in the resulting DNG file?  I know this happens in TIFF and JPEG but I am getting conflicting information from reliable sources about DNGs.

Nope. The DNG container does not currently support the DAC corrections. Also Hasselblad's own colour engine will do a much better job than ACR.
Quote
3.  Is there a way in Phocus after "saving" adjustments to get back to the original without re-importing the image?
Yes there is. In the Main window above "Adjustments" there is a pop up with preset adjustments and "captured" so you can shuffle back in time (hope that makes sense)
Quote
Why do we have to save anyway, the use model should be just like in Aperture or LightRoom.  I am not sure i understand the use model, is it non-destructive (modern) or destructive (traditional)?

You don't! Check your preferences and choose "Always save"

SNIP
Quote
My preferred workflow would be to have a Phocus plug-in for import to Aperture to get all of the advantages of the proprietary processing.  I use other cameras and having to leave Aperture to use Phocus is a pain for me, my staff and my clients.  My stop gap solution was to use Phocus, export to DNG and then get back to Aperture to use all of the tools there such as web galleries, light tables, recovery, highlight and shadow, definition, spot, patch, dodge & burn, sepia, black and white conversion, etc., etc., etc.  Do you imagine that Phocus would get to the level of functionality of these other programs and if so, what about other camera support?  Budgets are tight and anything that adds time, even for far better results, is getting hard to justify to clients these days  

I don't think Phocus would ever become a retouching program.. Why not export Tiffs to Aperture? (works for me anyway but I'm no power aperture user). I do like the pug in idea as you suggest.


That's all for now, hope I've answered some of your questions.
Nick-T
Logged

jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #23 on: October 16, 2008, 03:22:15 PM »
ReplyReply

I'll also add (Nick will correct me if I'm wrong) that the 3FR is a compressed version of the FFF file and that is why Phocus/FlexColor converts the 3FR to FFF.

Also, you can save different versions of your edited file in the FFF and revert back to them in Phocus (and even in FlexColor).

From my limited understanding, I suspect ACR is not going to get DAC specific for every camera/lens manufacturer so Phocus fills that gap with DAC. If you don't want DAC controls, you can always simply convert to DNG and go directly to ACR, but as Nick said, "Hasselblad's own colour engine will do a much better job than ACR."

It is an extra step, but you will not be seeing DAC for Hasselblad files anytime soon in ACR (in my opinion). So it's only an extra step if you need it, then it's a "necessary" step.

Kind regards,
Derek
Logged

glennedens
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #24 on: October 16, 2008, 03:36:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Nick,

Thanks for the help.  I am still looking into the H3DII39 Aperture issue since Hasselblad says it is supported and Apple says no, sigh.

Yes i have noticed that the IQ coming out of Phocus is a lot better than ACR or Aperture, but the workflow impact is time consuming and it is easier to lose or misplace customer assets.   We use Photoshop less and less since we moved to Aperture.   The TIFF files become huge so that works but takes processing time and storage way beyond what the RAW files do.  A lot of our work is fine art & reproductions and those need to be kept around for many years so the Aperture and Lightroom style of only saving the RAW file and a script was a real advantage.

The plug-in would solve lots of workflow issues and might be less work for Hasselblad software engineering, although they would need an Aperture and a Lightroom plug in since the plug-in architectures and APIs are different.

Duh, I missed the "captured" command, thanks.

Thank you!

Glenn


Quote from: Nick-T
Well David's probably down the pub so I'll fill in with what I know. I'm only going to quote the bits I feel able to answer.

I'm pretty sure the H3D39II IS supported. What you are seeing sounds like video card issues especially as they happen "after an hour or so"


Nope. The DNG container does not currently support the DAC corrections. Also Hasselblad's own colour engine will do a much better job than ACR.

Yes there is. In the Main window above "Adjustments" there is a pop up with preset adjustments and "captured" so you can shuffle back in time (hope that makes sense)


You don't! Check your preferences and choose "Always save"

SNIP


I don't think Phocus would ever become a retouching program.. Why not export Tiffs to Aperture? (works for me anyway but I'm no power aperture user). I do like the pug in idea as you suggest.


That's all for now, hope I've answered some of your questions.
Nick-T
Logged
glennedens
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #25 on: October 16, 2008, 06:53:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Derek,

Thank you for the help,

Glenn
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003



WWW
« Reply #26 on: October 17, 2008, 01:26:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: glennedens
Welcome Paul and David!

I have five questions and a rant (hopefully not too many):

1.  Apple support just informed me that the H3DII-39 is NOT supported in Aperture?  Is this true?  It will work most of the time but we are seeing white screens, black screens, images with magenta cast on the left and cyan on the right split down the middle and after a hour or so of work all of the images stop rendering and display unsupported image format.  If we shut down Aperture and start up again it works for a while.  I posted in the Aperture Q&A forum about this.

2.  This one is probably a dumb question but i want to be sure I am not missing something - I am assuming that once I finish processing in Phocus and export the image as a DNG that all of the APO, DAC, etc. processing will be applied in the resulting DNG file?  I know this happens in TIFF and JPEG but I am getting conflicting information from reliable sources about DNGs.

3.  Is there a way in Phocus after "saving" adjustments to get back to the original without re-importing the image?  Why do we have to save anyway, the use model should be just like in Aperture or LightRoom.  I am not sure i understand the use model, is it non-destructive (modern) or destructive (traditional)?

4.  When using Phocus in two monitor mode I lose the Apple screen magnify function.  If I go back to single screen mode then it returns, why on Earth would Phocus disable system-wide zooming?

5.  What is with all the weird key combinations for simple functions, why can't they just be a letter like in Aperture and LightRoom?  In the old days all of the control keys were needed in things like text editors so the the text could easily be differentiated from commands or format tags.  However, in a photo editor you do not have that problem.  Maybe I am just getting old but I find I cannot remember all of those silly key combinations in Phocus, yet I can remember them in Aperture and LightRoom with no problem.  Please simplify the keyboard shortcut mappings

I am not sure if the following is a suggestion or a rant

My preferred workflow would be to have a Phocus plug-in for import to Aperture to get all of the advantages of the proprietary processing.  I use other cameras and having to leave Aperture to use Phocus is a pain for me, my staff and my clients.  My stop gap solution was to use Phocus, export to DNG and then get back to Aperture to use all of the tools there such as web galleries, light tables, recovery, highlight and shadow, definition, spot, patch, dodge & burn, sepia, black and white conversion, etc., etc., etc.  Do you imagine that Phocus would get to the level of functionality of these other programs and if so, what about other camera support?  Budgets are tight and anything that adds time, even for far better results, is getting hard to justify to clients these days  

Why do the 3FR files (the RAW files) have to be converted to FFF files, is the FFF still a traditional RAW file with bayer encoded pixels?  What processing is taking place when the 3FR is converted to FFF and then what kind of file are the adjustments being performed on?  The Phocus process sure uses up a lot of disk space   Is the FFF conversion some kind of performance hack for Flexcolor and Phocus?  With other tools I know what is going on, here I am still confused, what am i missing?

The added step of first using Phocus and then Aperture is costing unnecessary time and dollars when the functionality could be implemented as a plug-in into a host database raw converter.  Any commercial, serious semi-pro or rabid enthusiast photographer who is using LightRoom or Aperture is going to have to wrestle with the Phocus workflow (or Capture One, etc.).  Diversity and competition is good and I know first hand that Hasselblad is providing some excellent results with Phocus.  

We are seeing MUCH better IQ out of Phocus but the workflow is killing us.

Thank you,

Glenn


Hi Glen,

I think Nick did a good job while I was 'out'.  (Thanks Nick.       )

I just tried (4) on my system at home and magnify still works on two monitor mode.  Maybe its worth playing around in Universal Access system prefs to see if something is effecting it there?  What do you use the magnify for by the way?  Just interested!

The DNG file format is not sophisticated enough to carry the correction data, and or a corrected image so this is why it is eliminated from the DNG export.  Exporting to DNG does just that - there is no point in applying any corrections in Phocus before doing so as they cannot be carried across.

We do have letters for the tools - Z for zoom, C for crop, H for Hand tool etc etc.  It could be they are different in Phocus 1.1 which I have been using for a few months.  Oh, and thats due for release next week sometime.  If you are having trouble remembering there is a cut-out-and-keep list in the back of the Phocus manual which you can stick to the side of your monitor.

Phocus has lots of additional functionality to come, especially some of the things you mention.  So I hope as you become more comfortable with the software you will feel your needs will be met.

Getting a plug in into Aperture is a much harder task.  Not impossible of course but relies a lot on Apple in the implementation, and of course if they would be willing to spend the R&D in doing so.  

The 3FR to 3F process is there to a) uncompress the file a little and  create a LARGE thumbnail for use in Phocus.  (You can set the size of this thumbnail in the prefs)  This is a great way to produce JPEGS for web galleries by using the 'Jpeg Fast Preview' in the export dialogue.  You can do this simultaneously while exporting TIF files.  It only takes seconds to produce 100's of Jpegs.

The thumbnail in the 3FR file is just big enough to display on the LCD so of course needs to be larger.

Also in the 3FR-3F process there is a few things about DAC corrections happening and probably some maths I don't understand.  

Don't forget that in the import dialogue it allows you to apply any presaved adjustment and adding that all important Meta Data (copyright, keywords etc etc)  It does of course comply to the IPTC standard. (see attached)

[attachment=8990:Picture_3.png]

As Nick says it sounds like you are having video card issues?  Like Aperture, Phocus uses parts of Core Image for real time image rendering.  As the RAW files are larger then maybe your video card is over heating or has an issue?  The fact that problems occur after an hour is indicative.

David








Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
glennedens
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #27 on: October 17, 2008, 02:59:25 AM »
ReplyReply

David,

Thanks for the reply.  

The video issue is not a hardware problem, it might be a memory leak in Aperture or a GPU API problem.  I can replicate the problem on a iMac 24" Intel, a MacBook Pro 17 Intel and a MacPro Quad Intel, all with different GPUs.  The card in the MacPro is a GeoForce Quadro FX4500 and it has a lot of built in temperature and air flow sensors so no overlimits are happening to the hardware, it runs for days on all the other applications, but since i see the problem on multiple Mac's it appears to be software in either raw component, core image or Aperture.  If i am just keywording or tagging and not image editing i can work for hours without the dreaded unsupported image purple screen.  It may be a problem with core image's raw processor for the Hasselblad since when i see the problem in Aperture I also now notice that Quick View can no longer provide previews of H3 or even older H2 files.  It is only when i start making adjustments in Aperture that it goes to the black screen, the white screen or the unsupported image screen and not always right away.  If i quit Aperture and restart the problem goes away and we can work again for a while.  I have not seen this problem in Phocus or LightRoom.

I am also seeing another odd problem, importing 3FRs into Aperture i sometimes (about 10%) of the time get a magenta cast on the left or top of the image and a cyan cast on the left or bottom of the image, split right down the middle of the image (left or top depending on portrait or landscape).  Sometimes re-importing the image will fix this and sometimes not.  I am not seeing this problem in Phocus or Flexcolor.  But it can also happen when i convert to DNG and then import into Aperture.  We replicated this issue at my dealer with a brand new H3DII-39 with their system, their CF card, reader, etc.  It started happening with the 2.1 release of Aperture and Mac OS X Raw component (the one before the latest version).

I am working closely with Apple tech support and they escalated the call.  Today they told me that the H3DII-39 is NOT supported by Apple, and that only the CF39 is supported.  What do you think, i was quite surprised?  Can we get an official word on support for the H3DII-39?

Writing a Phocus-like plug in for Aperture would not be that hard (I have already written several Aperture Plug-ins).  This would allow Hasselblad to not share any proprietary algorithms with Apple and Hasselblad could control the release of updated lens maps, etc. outside of any Apple release schedule (other than dealing with API changes that might happen as Aperture moves from V2 to V3).  Hasselblad could still use the basic processing in Core Image but you might want to have a different pipeline to do the Hasselblad magic (DAC, etc.).  The algorithms should not change and most of that code could be reused from Phocus in the Aperture plug-in.  There is a lot of math, i have written some raw converters for astronomical CCD image acquisition and it can get complex fast.  With the work you are doing in Phocus you clearly would not need much help from Apple for a plug-in, but it is time and money and effort.  I guess i want the best of all worlds

Don't get me wrong, i like Phocus and it is a great advance from Flexcolor.  But it is killing our rather fine tuned workflow, time = money   I can't wait to try 1.1 however!  If we were only using Hasselblad cameras we could dump Aperture or Lightroom but the reality is we use multiple vendors, sigh....

I did not understand how the DNG wrapper could possibly carry the advanced adjustments but my (usually excellent) dealer insisted that they did, thank you for clarifying.  My understanding of the Universe has been restored

I tried the magnify (both the Universal Access and the one now built-into Leopard using the wheel mouse while holding down Control) and when in full screen mode on two 30 inch Cinema displays something is not letting the Zoom keystrokes get to the OS.  In single window mode it does.  If i move the mouse to the third screen then i get system-wide zoom back but then the full screen Phocus window on the second 30 inch display closes.  This is very repeatable.  The third display is a Wacom Cintiq 12WX graphics tablet / LCD screen.  There is also a fourth display which is a broadcast quality 16:9 reference monitor for video work but we usually have that display turned off so maybe Phocus is getting confused by the four displays.  Our setup works fine with other two screen applications (like Aperture, Logic and FCP) with the third and fourth displays.  

While we are on the subject of the extra displays it would be soooooooo cool to have a quick way of moving all of the adjustment tools to snap to the graphics tablet LCD third display and get bigger to allow for more precise adjustments.  Trying to unhook all the adjustment windows and moving them does not seem to work very well, they keep snapping back.  

What do I use system-wide magnify for?  Well for all of us over 50 the magnify tool is "critical" for seeing those tiny menus and adjustment tools - I do not use it for image viewing since the software scaling is not acceptable for critical image examination, just for menus, tools and the little tiny RGB read out for example.  I have now processed about 1,500 images in Phocus and the quality is stellar, it rarely crashes but it is slow compared to Aperture.  Scrolling can be difficult since it is easy to get ahead of Phocus and then it takes forever to get back to where you want to be, hopefully this gets better in 1.1.

Having to export a TIFF to Photoshop for dust spotting is killing our workflow, that is where Aperture and Lightroom really shine and save real dollars in labor.  Any chance this feature will make it into Phocus?

The keyboard shortcuts in the current version 1.0.1 are mostly three key combinations which is awful, i feel like i am back to my UNIX VI text editor days .  I see very few single letter commands, just the few you mention.  I humbly suggest this could be a lot simpler and more elegant.

We already use the IPTC meta-data on import but i have not found a situation yet where a set preset can be used on a whole range of images during an import.  Most of our work is outdoors or under varying lighting conditions and at multiple locations so each image is usually fine tuned individually if it is selected, although we like to make a quick pass for color correction for every image other than the pure throw away shots.  Our fine-art reproduction work for a major artist could use a preset i guess since they are all shot under the same carefully controlled lighting but that is a small part of the work.

Hopefully all of this input will be useful.  I am still working with Apple and will post anything I learn.

Thanks again for the suggestions and pointers,

Glenn
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003



WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 17, 2008, 03:16:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Glen,

Thanks for the really interesting reply.

Its a little puzzling that Apple say the H3D is not supported and the CF is as they are using exactly the same file structure.  But Ill pass that onto the relevant department to see if they can shed some light.

The issue mention about the split down the middle is due to the 'stitch' process in assembling the raw file.  This is something that Aperture (and lightroom) seem to vary on quality.  I have heard of the odd Phase One file having this issue in light room for example.  I couldn't comment on Leaf.

Essentially the CCD has two readouts with the sensor being split down the middle.  When reading the data you need to make sure that both sides are equal.  We can do this with 100% accuracy but Apple and Adobe appear to be behind in this respect.  This is one of the stumbling blocks for them to overcome.  I guess it is not an issue with 35mm CMOS sensors as the raw data is quite different.

I am glad you are enjoying using Phocus and you will find 1.1 certainly a faster experience.

As for the zoom-screen function I don't think any of us have tested it on more than twin setup so thats a first for me!  I can get Opt-Scroll magnify and also Opt-Cmd Magnify on both screens regardless of cursor position.

The spot dust option is 'on the list'.  But there are any things on this list so it will be a matter for prioritising for each release, so please don't take that as a 'it will happen' comment.  I don't want to give false hopes.

Anwyay Ill forward on your whole email - its very helpful.  Which Apple support dept are you talking too?

Best,


David







Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
glennedens
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #29 on: October 17, 2008, 03:20:10 AM »
ReplyReply

David,

While i am in a typing mood i have some feature requests for the H3DII body and back.  It would be really really extremely useful to be able to see all the shooting parameters for the current shot, before the shot, on the back LCD (f-stop, shutter speed, EV comp, ISO, meter mode and drive mode) as an additional screen that the <i> button would move through.  This, for me at least, would completely solve the problem that the rotating grip and display is trying to solve on some other brand's body.  You know just like the displays of settings on the 1DsIII and D3 and 400D and D90, .....

Of course it would be nice if it would re-orient the display for vertical shooting but i could even live with twisting my neck a bit if that was too hard with the current display setup, but you should be able to do anything with a bit mapped display.  I am assuming that most of this data passes over the I2C bus between the back, body and viewfinder to record the EXIF data so can the back see the data before the shot?  I have certainly seen lots of bits going by on the side connector as i make adjustments, so it looks like the data is live before the shot?

We do not shoot tethered BTW so that is not a viable solution for me.

It would nice to have a menu option to force the viewfinder display to NOT auto-dim.  When that thing goes into dim mode it is impossible to see and i often want to make an EV adjustment and keep the mirror locked-up and looking through the eyepiece of the viewfinder is easier than getting to the grip LCD when the camera is mounted high on the tripod.  Of course the rear live shooting information display would also solve this problem.

And finally i have a dumb question, or maybe it is operator error, during shooting i am often frustrated when i turn on EV compensation, make a change with the wheel and get ready to take the shot i find i cannot engage mirror lock up, until i get out of the EV compensation menu, the EV mode seems to lock out the Mirror Lock Up function?  What am i doing wrong?

Thanks again,

Glenn



Logged
glennedens
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #30 on: October 17, 2008, 03:31:34 AM »
ReplyReply

David,

I started with the 800 Apple Care number as we have a support contract.  They then moved the case to Pro Applications Support and then escalated to an Aperture support specialist (tier 2 I guess).  His name is Jason and he is working hard to help but he hit a wall when he could not find the H3DII-39 on their supported RAW list.  I left a message earlier today suggesting that the data format was probably identical to the CF39 but have not heard back yet.

On the magenta / cyan readout issue is there any chance that my digital back could be out of spec?

I knew there were dual read out arrays on the Kodak CCD but i never thought that could show up as a problem in the raw file.  Why magenta / cyan versus just a light and dark difference between the two halves?  Is it happening when they do the bayer pattern interpolation and they are not equalizing the ADU gain between the two chip halves so that is resulting in an artificial color shift?

It is going to get real interesting when Kodak starts shipping the quad read-out chips

Thanks again,

Glenn


Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003



WWW
« Reply #31 on: October 17, 2008, 05:08:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Glen,

Further research at my end...

Apple has reported a bug in RawCamera 2.2 which causes the issues you mention.  This will be fixed in an upcoming RawCamera 2.3 release.  Perhaps you can pass that onto Jason @ Apple.  

As for your reasoning on the stitch issue your guess is as good as... well put it this way... better than mine.  For whatever reason, we do not have the issue but the way RawCamera is handling it is flawed right now.

As for the plug in architecture in Aperture this is only primarily designed for postprocessing - if we use it to run our full raw conversion we will need to implement an alternative GUI for EV and white balance plus of course for any of our custom corrections. The result of running the plugin will be a new TIFF image, any connections to the original raw image will be lost and adjustments like EV and white balance can no longer be performed. Also any corrections the user might have performed before running the plugin will be lost

David
« Last Edit: October 17, 2008, 05:11:08 AM by David Grover / Hasselblad » Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
Paul_Claesson_HasselbladUS
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 128



WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 17, 2008, 08:22:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: vandevanterSH
What, if any, repairs can be done in the US vs sending to Sweden?  Does Hasselblad USA have the expertise to do CLA or repairs for legacy cameras?

Steve

Hasselblad USA service dept. can repair all H, V and X equipment in our Parsipanny, New Jersey facility. HxD or CF digital service is handled through our Redmond, WA headquarters.
Yes, we are able to service legacy equipment dating back to the 500C (1957 -1970) and C type lenses (1957-1981), though parts many parts are scarce.

If you can be more specific regarding what needs servicing or evaluation that would help.


Logged

Paul Claesson
Technical Support Manager
Hasselblad Hasselblad Bron Inc.
support@hasselbladbron.com or
pclaesson@hasselbladbron.com
800-367-6434 x303

The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Hasselblad.
Paul_Claesson_HasselbladUS
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 128



WWW
« Reply #33 on: October 17, 2008, 10:04:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: glennedens
Welcome Paul and David!

I have five questions and a rant (hopefully not too many):

Quote
1.  Apple support just informed me that the H3DII-39 is NOT supported in Aperture?  Is this true?  It will work most of the time but we are seeing white screens, black screens, images with magenta cast on the left and cyan on the right split down the middle and after a hour or so of work all of the images stop rendering and display unsupported image format.  If we shut down Aperture and start up again it works for a while.  I posted in the Aperture Q&A forum about this.

I am using Aperture 2.1.1/10.5.5 and it reads the H3DII39 files fine. Aperture and Phocus are video card dependant and it would be good to know what card is installed in your system.

Quote
2.  This one is probably a dumb question but i want to be sure I am not missing something - I am assuming that once I finish processing in Phocus and export the image as a DNG that all of the APO, DAC, etc. processing will be applied in the resulting DNG file?  I know this happens in TIFF and JPEG but I am getting conflicting information from reliable sources about DNGs.

When exporting a 3f file to DNG only DAC level 1 chromatic aberration correction is applied. Yes all three levels of DAC will be applied upon export to Tiff or Jpeg.
Level 1: Chromatic Aberration correction
Level 2 : Distortion Correction
Level 3: Vignetting Correction


Quote
3.  Is there a way in Phocus after "saving" adjustments to get back to the original without re-importing the image?  Why do we have to save anyway, the use model should be just like in Aperture or LightRoom.  I am not sure i understand the use model, is it non-destructive (modern) or destructive (traditional)?

Absolutely, if you click and hold the cursor over the Adjustment window in the tool window, it will show all Adjustments made to the file, click the first in the group to revert to original. Of course you can also go into each individual tool in the Adjust tab in Tools and click the flydown and select default and this will return that particular tool to original form/default with no settings applied.

I believe Nick covered this. Go to Tool bar at top and click preferences > save Adjustments, your choices are:

Manually
Ask before saving
Always save


Quote
4.  When using Phocus in two monitor mode I lose the Apple screen magnify function.  If I go back to single screen mode then it returns, why on Earth would Phocus disable system-wide zooming?

This is the first i have heard of an issue "lose the Apple screen magnify function" let's communicate via PM and i will need more info regarding your computer, ASP file will help.

Quote
5.  What is with all the weird key combinations for simple functions, why can't they just be a letter like in Aperture and LightRoom?  In the old days all of the control keys were needed in things like text editors so the the text could easily be differentiated from commands or format tags.  However, in a photo editor you do not have that problem.  Maybe I am just getting old but I find I cannot remember all of those silly key combinations in Phocus, yet I can remember them in Aperture and LightRoom with no problem.  Please simplify the keyboard shortcut mappings

I can say that i am not well versed in all the shortcuts available in Aperture and Lightroom. Many of the shortcuts in Phocus are very straight forward and make sense to me,
C=crop tool, N=Nuetralize, R=Straighten tool, Z=Zoom, Hand=Hand tool etc.

some we have carried over from Flexcolor.


Quote
Do you imagine that Phocus would get to the level of functionality of these other programs and if so, what about other camera support?

I do not see Phocus as a replacement for an application such as PS but one that is used in conjunction with ....

Quote
Why do the 3FR files (the RAW files) have to be converted to FFF files, is the FFF still a traditional RAW file with bayer encoded pixels?  What processing is taking place when the 3FR is converted to FFF and then what kind of file are the adjustments being performed on?  The Phocus process sure uses up a lot of disk space   Is the FFF conversion some kind of performance hack for Flexcolor and Phocus?  With other tools I know what is going on, here I am still confused, what am i missing?

3FR are a compressed file format allowing Hasselblad to achieve a faster capture rate when shooting to CF card and each file upon import needs to have our calibration, gain data etc. applied.

Quote
The added step of first using Phocus and then Aperture is costing unnecessary time and dollars when the functionality could be implemented as a plug-in into a host database raw converter.  Any commercial, serious semi-pro or rabid enthusiast photographer who is using LightRoom or Aperture is going to have to wrestle with the Phocus workflow (or Capture One, etc.).  Diversity and competition is good and I know first hand that Hasselblad is providing some excellent results with Phocus.  

We are seeing MUCH better IQ out of Phocus but the workflow is killing us.

I think a photographer needs many tools in his/her arsenal, this includes the manufactures software (Phocus), who would know better how to produce the best file possible, in addition to and not limited to PS, LR or Aperture.
Personally i think the workflow with Phocus is very straight forward.
If you have suggestions for improvements please direct you input to my Hasselblad e-mail: pclaesson@hasselbladusa.com and I will make sure it is directed to the appropriate individual in our company.
Keep in mind that the suggestions and requests to date is very extensive.


Glenn
Logged

Paul Claesson
Technical Support Manager
Hasselblad Hasselblad Bron Inc.
support@hasselbladbron.com or
pclaesson@hasselbladbron.com
800-367-6434 x303

The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Hasselblad.
Sean Reginald Knight
Awaiting Authorisation
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #34 on: October 17, 2008, 12:30:06 PM »
ReplyReply

David and Paul,

You are both a great compliment to Hasselblad. Just the straight dope, no bovine ordure. Just the way I like it. Kudos to you two gentlemen.

Logged
Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #35 on: October 19, 2008, 06:49:14 AM »
ReplyReply

“The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Hasselblad”


Well understood, Paul, and good to have you around.

However, I like to share a little complaint with you and ask YOU, not Has, a question.
Almost a year ago, November 17 2007, I wrote a letter to Hasselblad with a serious question. They never answered, and that is my complaint.
Content: I was a Hasselbad F-user for many years. With a 203FE and a spare 201F body, five desirable lenses, 50/2.8; 80/2.8; 110/2.0; 150/2.8 and 250/4 and different 120 and Polaroid backs, I could do whatever I liked. Then the digital era started and soon my 35mm digital was the only camera used. Every attempt to get a decent, usable digital back on my F-bodies failed. After some time Hasselblad came with a CFV digital back which could be used on my 203FE only, after a minor modification of the body. It is a 16 MP back, being 2/3 of the recent full frame 35 mm resolution. The sensor size is small, cropping factor is 1.5. Now there is the CFV-II back, but still 16 MP and the same sensor size.
My one and only question to Hasselblad was, and still is: When I still consider buying such a back, in spite of the drawbacks, can I expect continuation of this CFV line? Newer backs, more pixels, bigger sensors? I’m afraid that Hasselblad (the only supplier) might stop to continue it. I have not seen a third party supplier offer a back for the modified 203FE. So again: is it a long term investment or do I enter a dead-end road?

Bas.
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003



WWW
« Reply #36 on: October 19, 2008, 12:27:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Sean Reginald Knight
David and Paul,

You are both a great compliment to Hasselblad. Just the straight dope, no bovine ordure. Just the way I like it. Kudos to you two gentlemen.

Thankyou Sean.  Much appreciated.

David


Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
BlasR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 760



WWW
« Reply #37 on: October 20, 2008, 05:40:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: John Schweikert
You moonlight as a pediatric dentist? ;-)
Logged

Paul_Claesson_HasselbladUS
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 128



WWW
« Reply #38 on: October 20, 2008, 08:12:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: HasselBas
“The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Hasselblad”


Well understood, Paul, and good to have you around.

However, I like to share a little complaint with you and ask YOU, not Has, a question.
Almost a year ago, November 17 2007, I wrote a letter to Hasselblad with a serious question. They never answered, and that is my complaint.
Content: I was a Hasselbad F-user for many years. With a 203FE and a spare 201F body, five desirable lenses, 50/2.8; 80/2.8; 110/2.0; 150/2.8 and 250/4 and different 120 and Polaroid backs, I could do whatever I liked. Then the digital era started and soon my 35mm digital was the only camera used. Every attempt to get a decent, usable digital back on my F-bodies failed. After some time Hasselblad came with a CFV digital back which could be used on my 203FE only, after a minor modification of the body. It is a 16 MP back, being 2/3 of the recent full frame 35 mm resolution. The sensor size is small, cropping factor is 1.5. Now there is the CFV-II back, but still 16 MP and the same sensor size.
My one and only question to Hasselblad was, and still is: When I still consider buying such a back, in spite of the drawbacks, can I expect continuation of this CFV line? Newer backs, more pixels, bigger sensors? I’m afraid that Hasselblad (the only supplier) might stop to continue it. I have not seen a third party supplier offer a back for the modified 203FE. So again: is it a long term investment or do I enter a dead-end road?

Bas.

Hi Bas,

I am not certain to whom you sent your letter to, was it to the factory in Sweden?

I too have enjoyed shooting with the 203FE and the 205FCC for many years, it was for my personal work and i was shooting film at the time.  

can I expect continuation of this CFV line?
To my knowledge, Hasselblad has no intention of discontinuing the CFVII back, it is an excellent addition to our extensive product line and by having a square sensor it satisfies the needs of photographers shooting with our square format V system cameras (500, 200 and 900 Series).

Newer backs, more pixels, bigger sensors?
Currently the CFV/CFVII integrates nicely with a modified 200 series camera (202FA, 203FE, 205TCC, 205FCC) and there are no plans to offer a higher resolution sensor within the CFVII product. That said, Hasselblad will always utilize the most current sensor technology available to us in the CF product line.

You can use any CF product on your 203FE/FE lenses but must use a Kapture group single shot cable release, Cat # - HA-001

I have not seen a third party supplier offer a back for the modified 203FE. So again: is it a long term investment or do I enter a dead-end road?
This modification is offered by Hasselblad in the USA or in Sweden. We add an additional circuit board to the main PCB in the body which will allow communication between back and camera via the four databus contacts on the rear of the 200 body. I do not see the CFVII as a dead end road, far from it. I have visited many studios over the years and find many older model digital backs still in use today and still generating income and have long paid for themselves. The CFVII back will allow you to create amazing images today, three years from now or more.

Paul







Logged

Paul Claesson
Technical Support Manager
Hasselblad Hasselblad Bron Inc.
support@hasselbladbron.com or
pclaesson@hasselbladbron.com
800-367-6434 x303

The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Hasselblad.
Paul_Claesson_HasselbladUS
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 128



WWW
« Reply #39 on: October 20, 2008, 08:16:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
Thankyou Sean.  Much appreciated.

David

Sean, Thank you and i appreciate the warm welcome from the group.

I may be scarce over the course of this week, with Photo East in New York rapidly approaching.
Is there anyone in this group attending the show?

Paul
« Last Edit: October 20, 2008, 01:32:30 PM by Paul_Claesson_HasselbladUS » Logged

Paul Claesson
Technical Support Manager
Hasselblad Hasselblad Bron Inc.
support@hasselbladbron.com or
pclaesson@hasselbladbron.com
800-367-6434 x303

The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Hasselblad.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad