The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Hasselblad RAW editing in Capture One

I'm wondering if anyone is doing this, or if it can be done (without loss of IQ)?

I know Capture One doesn't natively open Hasselblad RAW files, but what if you convert the RAW file to DNG, and then import into Capture One? Or what about 16 bit TIFF?

I'm considering the Hasselblad X1D, but I'm not sure I'm prepared to give up my Capture One work flow.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

Capture One's support for DNGs have improved from none to some. Don't expect it to use DCP profiles. If you use TIFFs, the files are no longer raw, the other raw converter has already made the raw conversion.

Capture One does not support competing MFD, it is a mangement decision by Phase One.

Best regards
Erik


I'm wondering if anyone is doing this, or if it can be done (without loss of IQ)?

I know Capture One doesn't natively open Hasselblad RAW files, but what if you convert the RAW file to DNG, and then import into Capture One? Or what about 16 bit TIFF?

I'm considering the Hasselblad X1D, but I'm not sure I'm prepared to give up my Capture One work flow.
 

etto72

Member
I'm wondering if anyone is doing this, or if it can be done (without loss of IQ)?

I know Capture One doesn't natively open Hasselblad RAW files, but what if you convert the RAW file to DNG, and then import into Capture One? Or what about 16 bit TIFF?

I'm considering the Hasselblad X1D, but I'm not sure I'm prepared to give up my Capture One work flow.
You have to export the Hasselblad raw in to DNG using Phocus software and additionally remove the name Hasselblad from the exif (I use graphic converter)
It's a bit of a pain but the results are simply stunning!!
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Yes,

But it does not support DCP colour profiles and does not use the processing pipeline defined for DCP. So it would use a generic colour profile.

DNG handling in C1 used to be a mess and I would guess it may still be a mess.

Would be interesting to test. The version I have of C9 either doesn't open or crashes when I try to open a DNG file converted from Hassy. I can download latest version and retest.

Update: 9.3 crashes immediately when I try to open any image, no great improvement…

Found a workaround, but C1 still ignores the DNG file converted from an older Hassy camera. Capture One does not love Hassy…


Best regards
Erik

Surely C1 will edit any DNG?
 
Last edited:

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Phase One has, for more than a decade, provided Capture One support for a huge range of small-format cameras, but only their own medium-format cameras. I do not expect this to change.

To be more specific, C1 does not support viewing, editing, processing, or otherwise handling raw files from any other medium format cameras than their own brands (Phase One, Leaf, Mamiya) regardless of how those raw files are repackaged (e.g. DNG does not change things).

There are hacks (e.g. hacking the raw file to show altered metadata) but I strongly suggest against these in any professional or serious workflow. Generally speaking it's bad practice to alter raw files, and doing so does not equal support (e.g. no color profile, lens profiles may not work as expected, C1 may crash etc) and such hacks may break at any time (e.g. C1 updates may render them inoperable).

(this post is not an endorsement, defense, or commentary on that policy - just an explanation)
 

f8orbust

Active member
If I were P1 I'd just say what the heck and make the software available to all and put the money in the bank.

Especially when it comes to something like the Fuji GFX 50 ? In all likelihood prospective buyers of that were never going to drop $50k on a P1 system, so why cut off your nose to spite your face just because it's a MF offering from a competitor ? Do a deal with Fuji, bundle C1 with the camera, get them hooked, and then keep putting the money in the bank with the updates.
 

Jamgolf

Member
If I were P1 I'd just say what the heck and make the software available to all and put the money in the bank.
I am sure PhaseOne would like to sell more C1 licenses and make more money. But official support is not something straight forward, unfortunately. And once a company claims official support for a device/product, they are on the hook to maintain that support through OS updates, third party component updates and what not. That is not simple. I have personally been in that situation. It can drain resources and cripple progress on other far more business critical projects. So, sometimes what appears to be low hanging fruit is better left alone.

Even Adobe can not keep up with supporting new Cameras and file formats. Continuous and seamless support across proprietary file formats requires active collaboration between companies and sharing of proprietary information. This is not always possible or even in the best interest of competitors.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
If (when? never can tell) I obtain a CFV-50c or X1D, I will use Phocus to do raw processing (presuming that Lightroom doesn't supply raw file support); it might not matter even if LR does... Hasselblad has put a lot of effort into their software for these sensors and their lenses; I'd rather have that then struggle with another (hostile) vendor's software.

G
 

pflower

Member
If (when? never can tell) I obtain a CFV-50c or X1D, I will use Phocus to do raw processing (presuming that Lightroom doesn't supply raw file support); it might not matter even if LR does... Hasselblad has put a lot of effort into their software for these sensors and their lenses; I'd rather have that then struggle with another (hostile) vendor's software.

G
LR does support Hasselblad Raws (both the 3FR and fff files). From memory this has been since LR 3.5. At that time I was told that Hasselblad provided Adobe with the same profile as was used in Phocus. I doubt that this has changed over the various iterations of both LR and the Hasselblad line (but I don't know). I have been using an H3D-39 and, more recently, the CFV-50c. Whilst there are many who maintain that Phocus produces "better" colour, I am not convinced that the differences are that significant and have continued to use LR. I have also generated my own profiles using Color Checker Passport and, frankly, the differences between the LR profile and those are again marginal. The big advantage of LR is that you work on the Raw file as opposed to a tiff generated by Phocus - 16 bit tiffs from the CFV-50c run at c270MB as opposed to c50MB Raws.

Possibly if you are doing colour critical reproduction work Phocus would be preferable, possibly also with skin tones (which don't feature in my work much). LR provides lens profiles for the HC lenses and so I would anticipate will also provide profiles for the X1D lenses. Phocus does provide lens corrections for the CF lenses which you would use with the CFV-50c, but frankly whenever I have played around with these I have failed to see any significant improvement.

Of course the CFv-50c and the X1D use the same sensor. I haven't had a chance to look at the X1D (although I ordered on June 23rd) but the files from the CFV-50c are wonderful.
 

f8orbust

Active member
I am sure PhaseOne would like to sell more C1 licenses and make more money. But official support is not something straight forward, unfortunately...
The days of CCD and all the 'secret sauce' of A/D conversion have gone - P1 and HB use the same CMOS sensors made by Sony - so, at their heart they are the same beast. Even an idiot like me can perform a simple hack of the exif data on a 3FR (50c) file to fool C1 into thinking it's looking at an image from an IQ150; when opened in C1 it looks great. I'm sure the boffins at P1 could easily support the HB 50MP and 100MP (single shot) backs if they wanted to. Maybe they don't, but me - I'd take the money and run.
 

Jamgolf

Member
Even an idiot like me can perform a simple hack of the exif data on a 3FR (50c) file to fool C1 into thinking it's looking at an image from an IQ150; when opened in C1 it looks great. I'm sure the boffins at P1 could easily support the HB 50MP and 100MP (single shot) backs if they wanted to.
What I said is based on experience after several years of developing plugins for Photoshop. Providing "official" support can sometimes prove to be quite detrimental. This applies to Adobe, Hasselblad, Nikon, Phase One or any other outlet making image processing software. I think I'll just leave it at that.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
LR does support Hasselblad Raws (both the 3FR and fff files). From memory this has been since LR 3.5. At that time I was told that Hasselblad provided Adobe with the same profile as was used in Phocus. I doubt that this has changed over the various iterations of both LR and the Hasselblad line (but I don't know). ...
Thanks, that's good to know. Now, we'll see whether/when the lens I want surfaces, and then whether/when I can afford it... :toocool:

G
 

PabloR

Member
The best performance with 3FR files you will get, will be processing them with the native software. Always.

Hasselblad is know for their huge lens correction data base, Arri has trust them for that reason.

So, editing 3FR in C1 you will loose file performance and Hasselblad lens correction!!

Even if you use Lr, there is a difference. Small, but there is.

Just makes yourself a question, why use a different software with a Hasselblad ??

There is no reason.

Maybe you would like the Capture One work flow. Then go for a P1 camera!

Phocus is a powerfull software. If you need local correction, perspective correction, best work with the lightning or an HTS...

I think Phocus is very powerful, and makes you a better photographer for that simplicity on the software.

And is so stable and robust, trustly, not as C1 wich is always crashing.

And another question, anytime in a museum or a magazine, can you find if a picture was processed with Phocus or C1, I think it is not the software, because all are the same..

Dont worry, you will find Phocus amazing.

And Lr will be a great alternative if you need BBDD or local adjustements.

Excuse my english, still learning :)
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi Pablo,

The best reason not to use Capture One with Hasselblad raw files is that it doesn't support them and made a deliberate act of locking them out even in DNG format.

So, you may trick C1 into reading Hasselblad files, it is not supported and will be broken sooner or later.

Phocus is a raw converter offered by Hasselblad for their raw files at no cost. It sort of works with other files on the Mac, but it is not a general purpose raw converter like Lightroom and Capture One.

Phase One has made a corporate decision not to support competing MFD systems.

It is understandable that C1 users want to keep their workflow, but the suggestion to stay with Phase One is not that simple. Phase One has not camera that competes with X1D so users longing for a slick and affordable MFD system need to go to Hasselblad, Fuji or possibly Leica. The affordable part Pentax 645Z does also very well.

Personally I have no experience with Phocus, but Lightroom works pretty well with my P45+ back. But, I always used my own DCP profiles. I bought both C1 v7 and C1 v8, but don't any longer buy products I don't use. Capture One v9 supports Team Phase One backs, though, so I try it now and than.

Regarding conversion, I wouldn't say that I have been impressed by C1. No doubt, it is a great converter, but it doesn't give me good vibrations.

Best regards
Erik



The best performance with 3FR files you will get, will be processing them with the native software. Always.

Hasselblad is know for their huge lens correction data base, Arri has trust them for that reason.

So, editing 3FR in C1 you will loose file performance and Hasselblad lens correction!!

Even if you use Lr, there is a difference. Small, but there is.

Just makes yourself a question, why use a different software with a Hasselblad ??

There is no reason.

Maybe you would like the Capture One work flow. Then go for a P1 camera!

Phocus is a powerfull software. If you need local correction, perspective correction, best work with the lightning or an HTS...

I think Phocus is very powerful, and makes you a better photographer for that simplicity on the software.

And is so stable and robust, trustly, not as C1 wich is always crashing.

And another question, anytime in a museum or a magazine, can you find if a picture was processed with Phocus or C1, I think it is not the software, because all are the same..

Dont worry, you will find Phocus amazing.

And Lr will be a great alternative if you need BBDD or local adjustements.

Excuse my english, still learning :)
 
Last edited:

PabloR

Member
Hi Erik

Yeesterday I was enjoying your website with the P45+ images. contratulations, really good captures. ( a friend is offering me a p45+ for V and I am investigating)

About the post

Even if you trick your files, there is no sense to edit your Hasselblad raws on C1. Why? because there is no profile, but mainly, there is no Hasselblad DAC, Digital Apochromatic Correction.

Hasselblad was the first brand in a professsional use of lens correction by software, then, their lenses need it, and with their huge bbdd of lens profile you will get the best performance.

Even using an HTS tilting the lenses, you have correction.

For me DAC is one of the best thing I can work with, because it convert automatically my pictures en great pictures.

Leica doesnt have lens correction, so you always will be fighting with the vignetting, with bad results.

I work with all of them, and find Phocus the best with Hasselblad files.

I have talked with some Hasselblad technicians about file processing, hot pixels, profiles... and always getting the best result with their native software.

Go to an X1D and C1 is not a good idea in my opinion.

If you dont like Phocus go to Lr 6, wich is a nice software, really powerful.

but if you want C1 ( open platform hahaha ), the buy an expensive P1 back paying the 10000 extra for their marketing strategies.

I know P1 dont have a mirrorles camera. Im sorry :)

the Hasselblad know how to build bodies is so long, and several steps in front of P1.

And dont forget, who made possible P1 comes to be a big company today, Hasselblad H1.

Trust Phocus, it is very very very nice, and you will get amazing skin tones with ther "Natural Color Profile" with no adjunstments needed.

Regards and excuse my english
 

PabloR

Member
Personally I think, if you use different cameras, is better to use Lr 6

If not, you will get totally mad. Different catalogues, folders, metadata... uffff

And Lr has LR Mobile, every thing you need. All your pictures in your pocket.

Lr developing is so close in quality terms, that is the best way, just because makes your life easier
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi Pablo,

Some people have a very strong preference for Capture One. Personally, my history with Lightroom goes back to 2006, or so, and LR is my preferred tool.

I had some discussion of Capture One vs. LR and there were many good inputs:http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/59120-capture-one-lr6.html

In my view, Hasselblad does some 'out of the box' thinking, the Flexbody, Archbody and now the HTS are examples of that. The HTS takes lens corrections into movements, great idea!

I have been told that Hasselblad makes very good camera profiles and they strive to make profiles that give similar rendering across the product line. What could be nice of Hasselblad to fully support DNG and creating some good DCP profiles.

I unfortunately don't see Phocus as a workflow solution. Lightroom is pretty much what I wanted back in 2006. At that time I was working on some stuff that pretty much were in line with Lightroom, but I guess I needed some 300 years to finish that project – so I went with Lightroom.

For the kind of stuff I am shooting there seems to be little benefit of Capture One, would I shoot in a studio and doing portrait work, it may be different.

I do find Phase One pricing somewhat odd, but that is really a thing between P1 and their customers.

Best regards
Erik


Hi Erik

Yeesterday I was enjoying your website with the P45+ images. contratulations, really good captures. ( a friend is offering me a p45+ for V and I am investigating)

About the post

Even if you trick your files, there is no sense to edit your Hasselblad raws on C1. Why? because there is no profile, but mainly, there is no Hasselblad DAC, Digital Apochromatic Correction.

Hasselblad was the first brand in a professsional use of lens correction by software, then, their lenses need it, and with their huge bbdd of lens profile you will get the best performance.

Even using an HTS tilting the lenses, you have correction.

For me DAC is one of the best thing I can work with, because it convert automatically my pictures en great pictures.

Leica doesnt have lens correction, so you always will be fighting with the vignetting, with bad results.

I work with all of them, and find Phocus the best with Hasselblad files.

I have talked with some Hasselblad technicians about file processing, hot pixels, profiles... and always getting the best result with their native software.

Go to an X1D and C1 is not a good idea in my opinion.

If you dont like Phocus go to Lr 6, wich is a nice software, really powerful.

but if you want C1 ( open platform hahaha ), the buy an expensive P1 back paying the 10000 extra for their marketing strategies.

I know P1 dont have a mirrorles camera. Im sorry :)

the Hasselblad know how to build bodies is so long, and several steps in front of P1.

And dont forget, who made possible P1 comes to be a big company today, Hasselblad H1.

Trust Phocus, it is very very very nice, and you will get amazing skin tones with ther "Natural Color Profile" with no adjunstments needed.

Regards and excuse my english
 
Top