Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: H4D40 800 ISO Shot  (Read 11001 times)
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 01, 2010, 04:14:23 PM »
ReplyReply

David, I have a feeling that this shot alone will have made that "10 hours on a cramped aeroplane" worthwhile.
Logged

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

Posts: 462


« Reply #21 on: March 01, 2010, 04:24:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Baxter
Does Phocus offer a way of controlling/recovering this? I use DxO for the Nikon and understood that Hasselblad have similar lens mapping to optimise performance.

The short answer is no. You are talking about perspective correction which Phocus does not do (although it's remarkably easy to do in Photoshop).
What Phocus does do (and very well) are lens corrections. The software automatically corrections for distortion (barrel/mustache) vignetting and CA (Chromatic aberration).
 It's actually a very clever system and IMO Hasselblad do not do a very good job of promoting it. Basically they have tens of thousands on lookup tables based on the computer designs for each lens at myriad combinations of aperture, subject to camera distance (focus distance) and focal length (very important with a zoom). I haven't used DxO but I cannot see how it's corrections would ever be as good/accurate as they simply do not have the data that Phocus uses.
Nick-T
Logged

Barry Goyette
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


« Reply #22 on: March 01, 2010, 04:28:25 PM »
ReplyReply

hey david...

as impressive as that file is...when I download it...it's not even the full sized image, is it? It's actually a pretty awkward resample

h4d-40 pixel dimensions  7304 x 5478   Jpeg uploaded: 5113 x 3835  (approx 70%) I think it would actuallly look a bit cleaner (given the sharpening and resampling) at full res.

(your crops appear to be made with the same resampling)

Barry
« Last Edit: March 01, 2010, 04:31:18 PM by Barry Goyette » Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 953



WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 01, 2010, 04:44:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Oooo good spot Barry!

My fault entirely.  I had a few shots of the image saved to the desktop and was messing with the wrong TIF.  You assume correct, it was a 70% down-sample I had made for someone.

Anyway, nothing to hide, so here is the original...

https://download.yousendit.com/VGljc2ZOQ1JENlJjR0E9PQ

Good night all,


David

Logged

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

Posts: 7902



WWW
« Reply #24 on: March 01, 2010, 06:24:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for posting.

Good detail and pretty low noise considering it is ISO800. I haven't checked the original size image yet.

How much USM did you apply if I may ask?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
vandevanterSH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 626


« Reply #25 on: March 01, 2010, 06:33:04 PM »
ReplyReply

How much of the improved ISO performance Phocus 2.x and how much the new back?  I had considered ISO 400 on my CFV unusable, however, recently I intentionally under exposed several shots at ISO 400 and then "pushed" the exposure and fill.  The results were surprisingly good considering how bad properly exposed ISO 400 files were with flexcolor and early Phocus.  Or is this my imagination and selective memory?

Steve
Logged
Barry Goyette
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


« Reply #26 on: March 01, 2010, 08:39:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: vandevanterSH
How much of the improved ISO performance Phocus 2.x and how much the new back?  I had considered ISO 400 on my CFV unusable, however, recently I intentionally under exposed several shots at ISO 400 and then "pushed" the exposure and fill.  The results were surprisingly good considering how bad properly exposed ISO 400 files were with flexcolor and early Phocus.  Or is this my imagination and selective memory?
There have previously been some improvements in Phocus to allow up to 1600 on the 31 (which was originally maxed out at 800)...so certainly some of the improvement is in the software. However, when I processed out some 800 and 1600 iso images from the 40 last week I was doing it along side some existing images from my 31, in the same version of Phocus, and the images from the 40 were noticeably (and surprisingly) cleaner and more detailed...at 100% the grain size is comparable, but with fewer artifacts, and a significantly smoother tonal range, better skintones, and the appearance of more detail (indicating that perhaps less noise reduction is taking place, not more). Looking at the kodak's specs for the two sensors, i think you'd have to conclude that the heavy lifting is being done by the new sensor.

Logged
gwhitf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 820


« Reply #27 on: March 01, 2010, 09:17:29 PM »
ReplyReply

.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2010, 05:59:49 AM by gwhitf » Logged
Baxter
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


WWW
« Reply #28 on: March 01, 2010, 11:36:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nick-T
The short answer is no. You are talking about perspective correction which Phocus does not do (although it's remarkably easy to do in Photoshop).
What Phocus does do (and very well) are lens corrections. The software automatically corrections for distortion (barrel/mustache) vignetting and CA (Chromatic aberration).
 It's actually a very clever system and IMO Hasselblad do not do a very good job of promoting it. Basically they have tens of thousands on lookup tables based on the computer designs for each lens at myriad combinations of aperture, subject to camera distance (focus distance) and focal length (very important with a zoom). I haven't used DxO but I cannot see how it's corrections would ever be as good/accurate as they simply do not have the data that Phocus uses.
Nick-T
Many thanks Nick.

Not sure about the fidelity levels which DxO uses, almost certainly not at same level as you quote. However it does work really well and offers auto corrections for spheres or cylinders. The corrections 'snap-in' and far less hassle than Photoshop!

I remember getting the low-down on Hasselblad lens correction system when first introduced from Matt at Robert White after he'd been on a training seminar and being impressed. I'll carry on my research and get off this thread!
Logged

bcooter
Guest
« Reply #29 on: March 02, 2010, 01:18:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: aaron
Bcooter, will you let Mr.Russell know, when your talking to him next, that the ballet image posted is simply beautiful.

Sometimes the camera is totally irrelevant.   (unless you need a D3 to focus on a moving target in that gorgeous ambient light  )


Aaron,

Thank you.  I'll tell him when I speak to him, it will be greatly appreciated.  

We try to talk at least once a day.

BC
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2364


« Reply #30 on: March 02, 2010, 02:40:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: gwhitf
With this high asa (800), and the larger nice tight LCD, and the fixed mirror slap, it's unarguably a nice combination, even with the cropped chip. Hasselblad is honing in on a magic combination for location shooters. The big question still for me is the usability of Phocus 2 on a MacbookPro with a less than stellar video card, and just the overall tethering usability. I wish there was a Phocus Mini-Me, if you needed to tether on a laptop, but didn't need to process on that machine. Just to make it quick and reliable to just see the frame, nice and big and tight on a 17" laptop. But to process later, back in the hotel, or back at home.

Still, to me, it's about seeing a photograph. Here, this camera's been hyped to death, and people obsessing about the numbers and the pixel dimensions, blah blah blah, but here's just a guy that takes the time to shoot a nice image, and BAM, that's all that needs to be said. One simple picture. And everybody shuts up, and takes notice. Makes you wonder why Hasselblad doesn't have that Nick guy go out and shoot some stuff in advance, nice and solid in a studio, with tungsten and strobe and whatever, and post 100% crops the very day it's announced. Let the pictures do the talking, and let the sensor design fans talk somewhere else.

I'd honestly love to see that new Hasselblad, in a studio, on a tripod, next to this upcoming 1ds4 and maybe the Nikon D3x, side by side, and let the pictures do the talking for a change. Why this does not happen more often, amazes me. If you got it, why not strut it?

I use Phocus on a  early 2008 MBP 15" which definitely has the weaker 8600M GT video card. I have no problems shooting to it tethered. I actually shoot tethered about 80% of my time. I can pull out the cable and reconnect without issues, this happens now and than because I sometimes step on the cable! I have done sessions on location varying from 50 to around 800 shots. Most of these were without problems, most problems derived from bad cables (always take several).

I need to stress out, if you are the machine gun type shooter, this is not your thing but shooting at a nice pace is certainly doable. I even use the 39 which is probably even the slowest one out there.

I only run into performance issues doing multishot sessions. It takes too long, especially for the people around me, before the final image is in. I am currently waiting for the new MBP to see if that final obstacle can be taken away.

Still... there is no such thing as perfect and I can think of a number of things that I would like to have improved and I am pretty certain they will.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2010, 02:42:37 AM by Dustbak » Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 953



WWW
« Reply #31 on: March 02, 2010, 07:13:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
Thanks for posting.

Good detail and pretty low noise considering it is ISO800. I haven't checked the original size image yet.

How much USM did you apply if I may ask?

Cheers,
Bernard


Only a little - 250 @ 0.7.  Thats in Phocus by the way, which has a much finer scale than PhotoShop.  0 -> 1000.

Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 953



WWW
« Reply #32 on: March 02, 2010, 07:21:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: gwhitf
David,

That's an awfully nice file. I didn't know you worked out. You sure that wasn't a Foba camera stand you were leaning against?

Quote from: teddillard
dude.  hand held?  you're a machine.  


I don't like to brag and all....
Logged

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

Posts: 820


« Reply #33 on: March 02, 2010, 07:33:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dustbak
I use Phocus on a  early 2008 MBP 15" which definitely has the weaker 8600M GT video card. I have no problems shooting to it tethered. I actually shoot tethered about 80% of my time. I can pull out the cable and reconnect without issues, this happens now and than because I sometimes step on the cable! I have done sessions on location varying from 50 to around 800 shots. Most of these were without problems, most problems derived from bad cables (always take several).

I need to stress out, if you are the machine gun type shooter, this is not your thing but shooting at a nice pace is certainly doable. I even use the 39 which is probably even the slowest one out there.

I only run into performance issues doing multishot sessions. It takes too long, especially for the people around me, before the final image is in. I am currently waiting for the new MBP to see if that final obstacle can be taken away.

Still... there is no such thing as perfect and I can think of a number of things that I would like to have improved and I am pretty certain they will.

Can I ask these questions of you, related to above? In your experience:

When you say "most were done without problems", what were those problems exactly?

Why is that camera not for "machine gun type shooter", ie, lifestyle/location? In your opinion.

When shooting fast, tethered, approximately how long does your camera take, after you shoot, before the fully-rezzed-in Preview flows into Phocus for client review?

Thanks. Just trying to get my head around this, for real-world use.

Separate from this, I also wonder the model number of the very best VideoCard to look for, that's commonly installed into a 17" MacBookPro laptop, to match up well with Phocus.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2010, 07:34:44 AM by gwhitf » Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2364


« Reply #34 on: March 02, 2010, 08:16:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: gwhitf
Can I ask these questions of you, related to above? In your experience:

When you say "most were done without problems", what were those problems exactly?

Why is that camera not for "machine gun type shooter", ie, lifestyle/location? In your opinion.

When shooting fast, tethered, approximately how long does your camera take, after you shoot, before the fully-rezzed-in Preview flows into Phocus for client review?

Thanks. Just trying to get my head around this, for real-world use.

Separate from this, I also wonder the model number of the very best VideoCard to look for, that's commonly installed into a 17" MacBookPro laptop, to match up well with Phocus.

I have experienced the following problems;

1) Phocus hanging or crashing. Occcassionally, once every day with 2.0. once every couple of days with the current version 2.01.
2) Firewire error. This error requires you to take out the cable, shut down the camera and start it up again. Happens once a day at the most. Probably due to a degrading cable, remember not to step on the cable too often while shooting and walking around.
3) Empty batteries.
4) Also a firewire error but one that is kind of nasty. After having done several shots that are still coming in, the preview is already on the screen but the files aren't there yet. Firewire error, the camera goes off-line and the previews disappear and you have lost the files you thought you had. Fortunately this only happened twice last year. Very humiliating to explain you have to reshoot items.

For the machine gun shooting.  You can shoot at a pace of at most 1fps, you can make a small series but I find after 10 shots or so you need to give it a bit of time to catch up. If you can take your pace down just a tad (say 1/2fps) you can virtually shoot continuously. Remember I shoot the 39 which apparently is the slowest of the bunch.

When shooting fast the previews come in after about 2 seconds, it than takes another couple of seconds before they are sharp. The 'fuzzy' fast previews are in most cases enough to satisfy most clients at that moment. When they want to examine more closely the full sharp version is in. This slows down after about 10 shots.

Naturally all of these numbers aren't fixed but ball park and can vary somewhat due to circumstances. They are also based on my setup and way of working. For the stuff that I do, which is shooting accessories for fashion magazines on location, garments and catalogue, it works. The only area that is currently giving me a bit of a problem is multishot sessions.

The video card that is in my MBP is known to be a total disaster. Many people have experienced problems with it. I am not sure whether you can choose your video card with the MBP's. My own preference would go to Ati cards instead of Nvidia. I have had my share of trouble with those over the years.

I am sure the new MBP will give me better performance. I would love to have it go fluid and do 1 or 2 fps continuously for hundreds of shot. With my setup that is not the case yet but I can work it and feel comfortable with it.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2010, 08:26:51 AM by Dustbak » Logged
gwhitf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 820


« Reply #35 on: March 02, 2010, 08:19:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for your candor. Real-world answers.
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 953



WWW
« Reply #36 on: March 02, 2010, 08:57:47 AM »
ReplyReply

If you want super fast tethered shooting then a lot of the time the hard drive is the limiting factor.

I don't know what you have in your MBP Dustbak, but certainly a 7200RPM would help.

Also the 50 and 40 tether faster as they can dump the data much quicker than the 39 or 31 can.

As you know I have a dual disk setup.  SSD for OSX and Applications, 500GB 7200RPM for data.  Certainly whips things along!

D

Logged

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

Posts: 2364


« Reply #37 on: March 02, 2010, 09:07:02 AM »
ReplyReply

I have 2.4ghz CPU, 6Gb of main memory and the 5400rpm 200gb disk. My next MBP (Geezz Apple please release it) will have at least 8Gb and at least 1 SSD drive. Just hoping they will get a good GPU.
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #38 on: March 02, 2010, 10:34:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dustbak
I have 2.4ghz CPU, 6Gb of main memory and the 5400rpm 200gb disk. My next MBP (Geezz Apple please release it) will have at least 8Gb and at least 1 SSD drive. Just hoping they will get a good GPU.


This is why I mention the video.

I know it sounds silly, but there is nothing that will send clients, photographers, crew and talent crazier than standing around waiting to get a computer up and running;

I have heard a lot of client stories where they say they will never use a photographer again because the camera/computer went down every so many frames and took 30 minutes each time to get running.

I started digital capture with Brand C shooting to cards and downloading every 50 frames or so and this went along well, actually bulletproof, until clients felt they had to see each frame as they were shot.

Moved to Brand L and V8 software good, Brand L and 10 software bad, Brand P and 3 software good, brand p and 4 software bad, now brand c and it's included software very good.

I'm not nervous about this business anymore, since I've done it all of my adult life, but like most live in fear of the dreaded blank screen. or "it's not connecting" words.  

Today, especially in today's economy, everybody on set is under a huge volume of pressure to produce quickly, cleanly and on budget and nothing is allowed to slow it down.

So with that in mind nothing tells me more than working real world, though nothing tells me more than clarity from a manufacturer.

if a camera and it's required software really needs a new powerbook with an SSD card a second drive installed and maxed on ram just say it (I think David did), but also show it.

Showing it in the real world covers a lot of territory.  Look at the positive response from Dave's real world un retouched, un tripodded, shot of smoggy/foggy Hong Kong at 800 iso.

Compare this response to the Leica release of the S-2 with those over retouched, cuban photographs in the boxing ring.  The Leica images told us nothing, Dave's 10 minutes leaning on a pillar in Hong Kong speaks volumes.

To put a positive spin on it, for the last few years professional photography is an industry in change, to put a negative spin on it some think it's a dying industry, I'm kind of in between those two thoughts because as
much as I'd like to think it's just about change, I know the realities of the monetary and creative challenges that are put in front of us daily and it's a much different world in 2009/2010 than it was in 2006.

Regardless of what you think of the future of this industry the very hard reality is nobody is going to buy anything anymore that is problematic and nothing speaks louder than real world use.

I know a lot of photographers that have had a lot of different relationships with various makers.  The makers seem happy as a bowl of punch as long as the photographer says brand whatever is the easiest, best in the world, glossing over the issues and God forbid a photographer says actually brand whatever is pretty good, but we did have 4 crashes a day with the system.  The relationship gets strained at that point which is kind of dumb because nobody believes the world is always rosy type of comments.  

Selling is all about believability.  Nobody believes the NASCAR driver after they've turned their car into a smoking ball of muck when they say the "Gatorjuice 500 special was just great today and I want to thank Gatorjuice and my great team for almost killing me".  

If I was in the camera selling business I'd show two sessions.  One . . . the standard shot on white studio session with the stanard 20 people standing around a monitor saying stuff like look at the eyelash detail (I just fell asleep) and the other, showing a very small crew walking through the streets of Paris at night, shooting a model with maybe one small continuous light and using a table and a pile of cloth napkins as a tripod.  Then I'd show those images from un retouched through the whole process of post production and finish out.

The first session I would show as all business, the second session I would show as fun, cause God knows we all gotta have a little fun when we've spend money.

I think Hasselblad is in a good position because their name has a bling factor, their cameras have been in the market for a long time and now it seems (I say the word seems with a cautious tiny voice) that their software and workflow is catching up to the rest of the world.

If all of this is true they are worth a look, but once again, it better be bulletproof and reliable and as far as waiting on apple to make a faster powerbook, well that's just not the case anymore, it's up to the camera and software to work off the shelf today, not hoping for it to work tomorrow.


IMO

BC

Logged
gwhitf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 820


« Reply #39 on: March 02, 2010, 12:23:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bcooter
Showing it in the real world covers a lot of territory.  Look at the positive response from Dave's real world un retouched, un tripodded, shot of smoggy/foggy Hong Kong at 800 iso. Compare this response to the Leica release of the S-2 with those over retouched, cuban photographs in the boxing ring.  The Leica images told us nothing, Dave's 10 minutes leaning on a pillar in Hong Kong speaks volumes.

I agree completely, Large Cooter.

These things have gotten so complicated, it's almost easy to forget that it's about how the photograph is rendered. Show a photograph (unretouched); not a Spec Sheet. I'm betting that the guys that really get hard over a Spec Sheet are rarely buyers of the camera. They might study, but they rarely write the big check. So why cater to them? Show photographs, and don't retouch them.

In addition, I'd also see nothing wrong with Hasselblad recommending two types of laptops -- a minimum required setup, but also, a recommended setup to get the most out of the experience. I bought a 7200rpm 17" off the shelf at SmallDog.com, and it was worth every penny. It's my tethering machine. You wonder if they fear they're scaring off a potential customer if they post anything that requires them to spend an extra dime to get it to work well. But then, the camera arrives, they hook it up to tether to an old 15", and it chugs to a crawl. That cannot create a satisified customer experience.

Or else, have a "consumer webpage", where there are landscapes, sunsets, and animals, but also have a separate pro page, where there are a bunch of worried people, standing around a laptop, waiting for the Preview to flow in, while the beads of sweat flow down the Tech's forehead.

Trust me, they are two radically different experiences, and two radically different customers.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2010, 12:24:12 PM by gwhitf » Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad