C1 and the S2

[KurtKamka]

I believe that this is a valid question ...

Will C1 ever produce a valid profile for the S2? And if so, when?

I understand that Leica has its relationship with Lightroom, but we've all seen the concerns regarding the final files.

Meanwhile, C1 has not added an S2 profile (the current DNG option in C1 is awful) and frankly that is a joke from a software developer that professes on its website to be "designed to create the best image quality in the market and holds a series of easy-to-use tools created to match the professional photographer’s daily workflow".

Leica wants to be seen as the company that places a premium on image quality but doesn't want to utilize the best overall raw processing program out there. While PhaseOne shills a software program that appears to strive to be brand agnostic but doesn't include a profile for the S2 because it is a product that competes against its own backs.

So, in the end, it is the end user that suffers because of the arrogance of two firms that don't want to play together.

Lastly, whatever happened to the enthusiasm for the S2 voiced by Capture Integration when they announced that they would be carrying Leica products like the S2 last year? Members of that organization spoke about how they would be working with those files to determine the best way to process them in C1. Why the silence? My way-to-cynical nature is coming up with some interesting theories.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

I believe that this is a valid question ...

Will C1 ever produce a valid profile for the S2? And if so, when?

I understand that Leica has its relationship with Lightroom, but we've all seen the concerns regarding the final files.

Meanwhile, C1 has not added an S2 profile (the current DNG option in C1 is awful) and frankly that is a joke from a software developer that professes on its website to be "designed to create the best image quality in the market and holds a series of easy-to-use tools created to match the professional photographer’s daily workflow".

Leica wants to be seen as the company that places a premium on image quality but doesn't want to utilize the best overall raw processing program out there. While PhaseOne shills a software program that appears to strive to be brand agnostic but doesn't include a profile for the S2 because it is a product that competes against its own backs.

So, in the end, it is the end user that suffers because of the arrogance of two firms that don't want to play together.

Lastly, whatever happened to the enthusiasm for the S2 voiced by Capture Integration when they announced that they would be carrying Leica products like the S2 last year? Members of that organization spoke about how they would be working with those files to determine the best way to process them in C1. Why the silence? My way-to-cynical nature is coming up with some interesting theories.

Honestly Kurt, the answer is we've been busy as all heck. We're having a record year. We are extremely pleased to be Leica dealers and the demand for the M9 has been outstanding. Not quite the same level with the S2. But we have done some work with the S2 and included it at all of our events. Honestly though, demand for Phase One and Leaf products has been through the roof, and along with our extremely active event schedule (with more being added soon than what you see), we're fighting to keep up.

http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/upcoming-events/

But you're right. The time we have spent with the S2 has provided us with a sense of the promise of the product. But we need to dig our heels in a bit and see what can be done with it. From the start, I loved how it felt in my hand, and how it felt to shoot with. The lenses seem to be delivering, so that just leaves the task of getting the most out of that file.

I'll make a point to nudge us towards that objective and hopefully you'll hear some results of that soon.

Thanks for the snap to!


Steve Hendrix

 

[jbaxendell]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that Leica did not like the idea of all of the S2 owners having to register their copy of C1 as this would mean giving away their customer list to Phase One.

 

[gogopix]

I think Hasselblad's SW was used for the DMR, yes? Anyway, I remember needing to register with HB.

Victor

PS Kurt, you sound like a man with S2 on his mind....

 

[jbaxendell]

I think the DMR started with Imacon software but C1 became a better choice. Leica and Phase One formed a strategic alliance in 2008 but parted company in July 2009.

 

[robmac]

Look at it from Phase's point of view:

1. There's bad blood between Leica & Phase. Why? I have my theories, but so do 1001 other people.
2. The S2 IS a competing product - but see later point
3. The S2, from all anecdotal indications, is not selling as well as many would've hope after the initial bleeding-edge blip.
4. Leica has been very public in their praise for LR as the developer of choice/best choice for the S2 - not helping point #1.
5. Phase have a boatload of other bodies, MF and SLR that need profiles, etc any one of which will sell FAR, FAR more copies of C1 _ than the S2 would.

From their point of view as a business - the S2 simply isn't worth the effort. The bad blood between them just makes that decision all that much easier.

Why spend $$ creating a product that is unlikely to make you any $$ in order to fix the Achilles Heel of a competitor's product when that product is (and sadly will likely continue to be) a very low volume seller and said competitor has p***ed-you off and still makes a habit of taking jabs? To be a nice guy to a very small and stagnant (or glacially increasing) pool of S2 owners?

Leica, for whatever reason (the real one not the BS leaked/rumored 'customer list' one) hitched the S2's wagon (and ultimate success) to LR vs. working closely with C1 (best choice) or their own custom software (that would have been painful). By doing so they handcuffed the program -- and until they have a solution of their own, handed Phase the keys to said 'cuffs.

Leica (and their customers) have to live with that decision. That said, Leica, like the big boys they're supposed to be, need to get THEIR a**es in gear and get some sweet custom profiles cut. Adobe won't do it - it's probably so far down their priority list it probably would make the the S2 look like a priority at Phase by comparison. Leica should have known that getting headspace from Adobe would be an issue going in, but at that point any other bridge was probably a smoldering pile of ash in the background.

Why Solms is seemingly happy not to cut said tailored profiles and leave it to the customer is a mystery, but the lack of effort to fix the S2's one glaring IQ weakness vs. it's peers doesn't bode well in my mind for how much longevity Solms sees in the program.

If they were serious about making the S2 anything other than the limited-run tech showcase it's rapidly becoming, they'd swallow their pride/egos, gather up some suitable bribe material (access to S lens tech, etc), get a ___icure, hit Victoria's Secret and charter a flight to Copenhagen.

Like the famous (SAS) motto goes: "Big Boy Game, Big Boy Rules".

 

[thomas]

...

why doesn't Hasselblad support the S2 in Phocus?

RAW Developer supports the S2 and usually RAW Developer does a great job (at least IQ wise... otherwise the interface is a bit awkward and the SW is quite slow).

 

[robmac]

Good point RD seems to be a very good and very agnostic package. Limited, but great for pulling out detail in say Nikon files vs using "@&$) NX2.

 

[KurtKamka]

Steve, I'm very happy to provide the nudge.

Victor, I'm doing some evaluating of a number of options ... no decisions, yet. Before making a decision on anything, I want to get a better idea of what the final results can look like. Maybe I'm naive, but I think that C1 has the ability to provide a very nice profile for the S2. If I have a better profile from the raw processor I use all of the time I can make a better apples to apples evaluation. If Phase has a better or even equal product in terms of image quality, they have nothing to fear in any comparisons ... in fact, in can help to build sales. Whether they want to provide a profile or not, is clearly their option. But, and this is a big but, the stakes are higher than some think.

And that leads me to my response to Rob. For a very long time choosing a MF digital system has been littered with a series of compromises. The manufacturers wore the pants in the family ... retrofitting old technology into digital solutions. You took what you got if you wanted to shoot with medium format digital ... at their price. Slowly, end-users have begun to have more input into the final design of the products as high-end 35mm solutions, new systems (Leica) and economic uncertainty have made their impact on the medium format landscape. As more end-users gravitate upward to higher-end solutions, the internet is an interesting wildcard as reputations can be made or broken by a vocal minority.

At this point in time, Phase is a software and hardware company. A company that has chosen to use branding that portrays it as brand agnostic. The hope is that the software is a gateway to end-users purchasing hardware. But that can also be a double-edged sword because when you loose the software connection you can potentially loose the high value hardware lead/sale. And, that can have financial implications on the dealer and a company like Phase as a whole. The retail value of one of those system sales is $25-50k. If even 25 of those end-users become locked into a different software/hardware choice the impact is high on relatively small companies like Phase and Leica. When you factor in the lifetime value of those leads (software upgrades every two years, hardware at a conservative five year interval) the stakes get higher.

We're in an age when those high value leads spend a lot of their time making/building their impressions via online information on forums like these. If those end users loose their link to the company through the software, the companies and the dealers can potentially loose the hardware retail sales that many times follow.

Kurt

 

[robmac]

Kurt,

You raise some very valid and very eloquent points, but (you knew there was one coming..) no software vendor that also sells camera systems is agnostic.

For Phase or Hassy it comes down to pushing their own tin, keeping their own MFDB customers happy with their investment by wringing the last Nth percentile out of their backs/lenses -- and in the Phase camp when supporting non-Phase but non competiing hardware, a simple cost/benefit analysis.

Supporting SLRs makes good sense. So much so Hassy replicated the idea in the Mac version of Phocus. It sells numbers of high-margin software packages well in excess of what you'd sell via hardware sales. It also makes life easy for your back users as most also shoot a pro SLR and prefer not to deal with different work-flows.

Those margin $$s help fund R&D, build acquisition war-chests, plump-up the P&L and offset price (and thus margin) cuts as the MFDB market becomes more SLResque in it's pricing and depreciation.

As far as supporting the S2 - there's no upside for C1 (or Hassy) to do so. It would be more work than software sales would justify and would not convert any S2 or would-be users into Phase/Hassy customers. Leica will do that for you (see below).

The best S2 approach for Phase or Hassy to get S2 users to move to one of their backs (in short to compete against the S2) is just what they're doing now - nothing.

Let Leica help YOUR marketing: The longer Leica tries to push a competing uber-premium camera system coupled with generic shrinkwrap (as good as LR is) the more they illustrate to potential customers FOR YOU the merits & value of having dedicated and tailored development software.

For that, Phase (and Hassy) will happily take some heat from a small handful of S2 or potential S2 users.

Had Leica developed their own tailored software, had a more complete system, etc. ad nausea, it would be somewhat different (the software would likely be ugly for the first x generations).

That said had Leica chosen to play with Phase say to truly co-develop the system: S2 form factor but designed jointly, tightly integrated with C1, Leica-designed premium Phase lenses in Mamiya mount, took existing Phase lenses, sold & serviced thru Phase dealers at Phase price points as a compact adjunct body for Phase system users, our conversations about the (PhaseLeica) S2 would have an entirely different flavor right now. Each party does what they do best, work together and fondle the proceeds jointly.

However, Leica made their bed and they have to lie in it. The camera-nut side of me hopes it works out, but the businessman side of me wouldn't bet a dented can of Bud on it.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Rob

The comment I have heard consistently from Leica has been that they were concerned about C1 as a long term solution. The DMR was great but Leica got burned in the transition as they have by a number of their subcontractors.... right or wrong ..I know they have a bias toward keeping the critical things in house . Not lacking in confidence I am sure they want to do as much in house as they can. Not saying I agree .

I would think that Phase would want the business particularly the M9 . Isn t 12000 units at a yield of $100 average (assuming the some conversion to the PRO version) about $1.2M per year . Or maybe a $4-5M flow over the life of the contract.

The implication in your statements is that Phase couldn t be bothered with Leica because the S2 volume with be small. How is Phase going to a find buyers for Capture One? Or will they rely on the sales of their products and upgrades?

I don t like that Leica went away from capture one (and I use LR) because I know C1 can produce a better conversion and thats what the S2 needs . But I would bet they made the decision not Phase. But who knows maybe Phase saw the need to use the software as a competitive advantage.

 

[Jack]

From their point of view as a business - the S2 simply isn't worth the effort.
~~snip~~
Leica, for whatever reason hitched the S2's wagon to LR.

I think that's basically it. Plus Leica wanting to keep their own secret DNG sauce in-house. (More of that idiotic closed-system business philosophy at work.)

I know Leica was talking to Phase initially, but for whatever reason they chose Adobe and the DNG format for the S2's raws. So why on earth should Phase even bother trying to "fix" Leica's processing woes? The corollary is that it simply isn't worth Phase's time to develop an S2 module for C1 until the S2 market is of sufficient size to make it profitable. And from my view, the S2 market isn't going to grow until Leica gets a few more lenses out. And then by the time they finally do, how far behind will the existing sensor technology be?

Personally, I think S2 users and wanna-be-users should be complaining only to Leica and then maybe Adobe -- after all THEY are the ones holding all the S2's sensor secrets...

 

[Mark Gowin]

... 3. The S2, from all anecdotal indications, is not selling as well as many would've hope after the initial bleeding-edge blip...

Do you have anything other than anecdotal indications? Also, just what are those anecdotal indications - the number of S2 owners posting on forums like this?

Your statement is at odds with what I've heard from a couple of sources. I am hearing S2 sales are very good and better than expected. Of course, I can't prove what I am hearing is more accurate than your anecdotal indications, but it is an opposing viewpoint worth mentioning.

 

[robmac]

Nope, nothing more or less accurate than that -- and my cynicism aside, I truly do hope you (or your sources) prove accurate.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I know what was said to me at PMA and it was Leica that walked away and that was from Leica. Many theory's on this one and some will tell you differently of course. But if I had a S2 i would want to use C1 and nothing else unless it was a dedicated software.

 

[robmac]

I think Jacks' comments sum it up succinctly.

Roger

I don't think Leica approached Phase at the program outset and Phase said no because the volume wouldn't be there. My comment about 'not worth it' for Phase was within the context of them undertaking the work NOW.

If I were a betting man I'd say Day 1 of the discussion (way back when) was some variant of Phase wanting a tighter relationship (liking the SLResque concept, access to lens tech, etc) on the S2 program and Leica balking (or toying with the idea and then balking later) -- and things going downhill in fits and starts from there, culminating at the debacle on S2 announcement day (where there was obvisouly some SERIOUS and embarrassing confusion between Phase and Leica).

To me (and I suspect many here), putting all the pros/cons of the S2 vs ___ aside, the idea of a fat MF sensor in a DSLR-like body with Nth percentile Leica glass on the front has a serious drool factor attached. That said, to turn around, as I think one other poster put it, and 'handicap' that famous Leica lens competitive advantage by using ANY processing software other than one tailored to milk that resolution, color, DR, etc., to the utmost of the sensor+lens potential is nothing short of idiotic. Even more so given who their competition is, their pricing points/aggression and their pace of new glass/body/software releases vs Solms, well, own unique pace of doing same.

Regardless of how the soap opera played out, the S2's competitive potential is now solely in Leica's hands (and via pressure they put on Adobe). Hopefully in hindsight we won't see it as a case of "being careful what you wish for..".

 

[glenerrolrd]

I think Jacks' comments sum it up succinctly.

Roger

I don't think Leica approached Phase at the program outset and Phase said no because the volume wouldn't be there. My comment about 'not worth it' for Phase was within the context of them undertaking the work NOW.

If I were a betting man I'd say Day 1 of the discussion (way back when) was some variant of Phase wanting a tighter relationship (liking the SLResque concept, access to lens tech, etc) on the S2 program and Leica balking (or toying with the idea and then balking later) -- and things going downhill in fits and starts from there, culminating at the debacle on S2 announcement day (where there was obvisouly some SERIOUS and embarrassing confusion between Phase and Leica).

To me (and I suspect many here), putting all the pros/cons of the S2 vs ___ aside, the idea of a fat MF sensor in a DSLR-like body with Nth percentile Leica glass on the front has a serious drool factor attached. That said, to turn around, as I think one other poster put it, and 'handicap' that famous Leica lens competitive advantage by using ANY processing software other than one tailored to milk that resolution, color, DR, etc., to the utmost of the sensor+lens potential is nothing short of idiotic. Even more so given who their competition is, their pricing points/aggression and their pace of new glass/body/software releases vs Solms, well, own unique pace of doing same.

Regardless of how the soap opera played out, the S2's competitive potential is now solely in Leica's hands (and via pressure they put on Adobe). Hopefully in hindsight we won't see it as a case of "being careful what you wish for..".

Yes it Leica s problem to convince at least somebody.
But Rob we don t know that the problem is with LR. Let me give you two examples. (1) the DMR ..I thought provided pretty great results in LR2 and it had only had the embedded profile in the DNG . I know it was better in the proprietary software but it was good in LR2 . I never said yuk! I looked at DMR files and S2 in Lr shot at the same time. DMR had great color and depth ,S2 was flat. (2) when the M9 came out no profile in LR2....yuk results hard to balance,flat etc. . Sandy created a profile and immediately decent results. Lr3 comes out results are better . Then the adobe profile. I am going to have another go at C1 verse LR3 for the M9 files but I bet they are both now excellent . I think it will come down to which product is easier to develop expert level skills.

Why are no profiles being shown for the S2 ? Are we sure its the conversion software and not a firmware issue? I thought the S2 was sold by members of the forum but I ve seen zero sharing of processing profiles,presets etc. These must be part of the secret. The only truly impressive files I ve seen came from the capture integration site and where done with Capture One(posted by david kipper). This would be useful in understanding the capabilities of the S2.

 

[Mark Gowin]

Nope, nothing more or less accurate than that -- and my cynicism aside, I truly do hope you (or your sources) prove accurate.

Me too.

 

[dfarkas]

Why are no profiles being shown for the S2 ? Are we sure its the conversion software and not a firmware issue? I thought the S2 was sold by members of the forum but I ve seen zero sharing of processing profiles,presets etc. These must be part of the secret.

Roger,

I've posted both an ICC profile for C1 and a LR preset here and in the L-Camera-Forum on more than one occasion.

If you'd like, I'd be happy to email you either/both of these files so you can give them a go yourself. I've made no secret of my recommended settings and have provided these files as well as best practices to all of my S2 customers, as well as those who Test Drive the camera from us.

David

 

[glenerrolrd]

Roger,

I've posted both an ICC profile for C1 and a LR preset here and in the L-Camera-Forum on more than one occasion.

If you'd like, I'd be happy to email you either/both of these files so you can give them a go yourself. I've made no secret of my recommended settings and have provided these files as well as best practices to all of my S2 customers, as well as those who Test Drive the camera from us.

David

david my apology I missed them....shame on me roger