Fun with the Hasselblad 907x

[spb]

Thanks Olaf. I hope to report similar tomorrow when I collect.

 

[Tim Floyd]

...having some fun

View attachment 177306

Nice studio! (reflection in shutter release)

 

[fmueller]

New to Hasselblad digital Just received the 907x and a few lenses. The ability to put the CVF50II on my Cambo tech cam nudged me over the line to make the decision..

My question is workflow.

For the past few years I have been running Capture One side by side with Lightroom serving as asset manager (and occasional raw developer). Capture One is my tool of choice, but I've always been more confident of Lightroom's catalog management. I've got Lightroom processing skills but have simply preferred C1. But C1 doesn't directly support the Hassy raw formats (Boo on you Phase 1!)

I've fiddled with Phocus. It is not a C1 replacement. I'm still befuddled with the whole import/export paradigm that Phocus uses and just don't see the point--along with Hassy raw files coming in two different flavors, one processed out the other not. The fact that I can't download files from an SD card and have Phocus place the files into my year/month/day organized file arrangement (and then letting me edit them in place) is maddening. Am I missing something?

It's starting to look like Lightroom is going to be my starting point with the Hasselblad raw making special trips to C1 or Phocus as needed. It is disappointing on many levels. Having to produce 300+mb tiff files from the 3fr or fff raw file to enable Capture One processing is a non-starter.

I'm wondering what workflows you all have settled on with your Hasselblad files. I tried searching the forum and couldn't really find any threads from the last year or two addressing this topic.

I'm trying to not reinvent the wheel.

I appreciate hearing what works for you.

Thanks,

Fred

 

[spb]

Fred I think you are missing something. re "The fact that I can't download files from an SD card and have Phocus place the files into my year/month/day organized file arrangement (and then letting me edit them in place) is maddening. Am I missing something?"

If you double-click any 3FR file, Phocus will open with an import screen, and there you can indeed choose exactly where your resulting FFF files go to.

 

[usm]

Looking forward to seeing other”s solutions. Coming from C1 and thinking to change from Leica M to 907xCVFii50c (is there another short name).
My theoretical approach is to use Phocus for the fff files and to import 8bit TIF files into my C1 master catalog. If I need a perfect print version I would go back into Phocus.

 

[Godfrey]

Looking forward to seeing other”s solutions. Coming from C1 and thinking to change from Leica M to 907xCVFii50c (is there another short name).
My theoretical approach is to use Phocus for the fff files and to import 8bit TIF files into my C1 master catalog. If I need a perfect print version I would go back into Phocus.

Just call it the 907x. There's no need to articulate what back is on the camera, since there's only one back that will work with it.

New to Hasselblad digital Just received the 907x and a few lenses. The ability to put the CVF50II on my Cambo tech cam nudged me over the line to make the decision..

My question is workflow.

For the past few years I have been running Capture One side by side with Lightroom serving as asset manager (and occasional raw developer). Capture One is my tool of choice, but I've always been more confident of Lightroom's catalog management. I've got Lightroom processing skills but have simply preferred C1. But C1 doesn't directly support the Hassy raw formats (Boo on you Phase 1!)

I've fiddled with Phocus. It is not a C1 replacement. I'm still befuddled with the whole import/export paradigm that Phocus uses and just don't see the point--along with Hassy raw files coming in two different flavors, one processed out the other not. The fact that I can't download files from an SD card and have Phocus place the files into my year/month/day organized file arrangement (and then letting me edit them in place) is maddening. Am I missing something?

It's starting to look like Lightroom is going to be my starting point with the Hasselblad raw making special trips to C1 or Phocus as needed. It is disappointing on many levels. Having to produce 300+mb tiff files from the 3fr or fff raw file to enable Capture One processing is a non-starter.

I'm wondering what workflows you all have settled on with your Hasselblad files. I tried searching the forum and couldn't really find any threads from the last year or two addressing this topic.

I'm trying to not reinvent the wheel.

I appreciate hearing what works for you.

I've never gotten on with C1 at all, so that's no option for me for anything. It doesn't support Hasselblad files? No surprise to me. I can't make it do anything I want to do with any ease at all.

Lightroom (LR; now Lightroom Classic) has been my standard tool for image rendering and image archive management since 2006. I've tried nearly everything else on the market and so far not seen much benefit one way or the other, and LR's Print module is about the best around for my use.

Phocus Mobile 2 works beautifully on my iPad Pro 11", for both tethered control of the 907x and for image processing afterwards. After I finish a rendering, I move the completed work and the original raw file to my desktop system and bring it into LR for management purposes.

Phocus on macOS still confuses me a bit. I'm learning, and have produced some very nice results with it, but it is still a bit of a struggle. As a result, I tend to just import from the SD card to LR and do the work there unless I'm in a learning moment, most of the time. My LR workflow is complete, efficient, produces excellent results, and doesn't need to change at all to handle the 907x files.

Whatever works for you is best.

G

 

[nameBrandon]

I don't use C1 or Phocus. I import the 3FR files into Lightroom and manage my catalog there. I use the LR Develop module to process the RAW files, and make the round trip to PS if necessary. PS outputs a TIFF (or PSD or JPEG or...) file that is automatically stored in the same folder as the RAW file, so file management is once again simple. I'm not a fan of Phocus, and C1 continues to stiff-arm Hasselblad, as you pointed out.

Joe

My approach is roughly the same. I create a folder for each import, then I use a program prior to LR to rename/cull/rate quickly. After that it's all into LR for processing and export to PS if needed.

There are two times I use Phocus..

1 - Shooting tethered.. and then when done, I just copy off the .fff's and use my standard approach above for editing.
2 - An LCC correction with Lightroom's Flat Field tool looks "off", then I'll then give it a go in Phocus.

 

[fmueller]

I don't use C1 or Phocus. I import the 3FR files into Lightroom and manage my catalog there. I use the LR Develop module to process the RAW files, and make the round trip to PS if necessary. PS outputs a TIFF (or PSD or JPEG or...) file that is automatically stored in the same folder as the RAW file, so file management is once again simple. I'm not a fan of Phocus, and C1 continues to stiff-arm Hasselblad, as you pointed out.

Joe

This seems the way I'm headed. For quite a while Phase One disallowed Fuji GFX support in C1 but eventually relented, perhaps not seeing the 44x33 market as a direct threat. But with Hassy offering 53x40 sensors in the H6 line using the same 3fr and fff raw files I'm not sure Phase One is going to relent unless they figure out that C1 support isn't going to cannibalize Phase One MFDB and XF sales. To be honest, if the price to use Capture One is a Phase One MFDB, I'm a little put off by that alone. And I had a Credo 60 which kinda got me into Capture One and even though its "free" with a Leaf Credo or Phase MFDB, I paid for a full version to work with my other cameras.

Yesterday I worked a file, processing it separately in Lightroom, Phocus and Capture One. I picked the one I liked best initially and then tweaked the other two to match. And I matched them pretty darn close and honestly, I can't tell you which version I preferred over the other, they were all really nice--I never even took them to Photoshop.

So, for simplicity sake, I think I'm going to be spending more time in Lightroom again.

My approach is roughly the same. I create a folder for each import, then I use a program prior to LR to rename/cull/rate quickly. After that it's all into LR for processing and export to PS if needed.

There are two times I use Phocus..

1 - Shooting tethered.. and then when done, I just copy off the .fff's and use my standard approach above for editing.
2 - An LCC correction with Lightroom's Flat Field tool looks "off", then I'll then give it a go in Phocus.

The wireless tethering is really nice with Phocus. I've tried using other "connected" apps with Fuji and Leica. Phocus just works, every time without fuss, unlike the Fuji and Leica apps.

I'm using the HR40 and HR70 primarily on the tech cam and my initial impression is that LR flat field correction does a good job, I will have to do a closer compare with the Phocus scene calibration when the weather stops being so nice.

Trying not get bogged down in front of a computer screen...

 

[nameBrandon]

The wireless tethering is really nice with Phocus. I've tried using other "connected" apps with Fuji and Leica. Phocus just works, every time without fuss, unlike the Fuji and Leica apps.

I'm using the HR40 and HR70 primarily on the tech cam and my initial impression is that LR flat field correction does a good job, I will have to do a closer compare with the Phocus scene calibration when the weather stops being so nice.

Trying not get bogged down in front of a computer screen...

Agreed, when in the field with the tech cam I bring the iPad and tethering works great, very stable and easy to use with Phocus. In the studio I use the desktop version via USB and it works just as well.

I've found the same with the 40HR and LCC correction via flat field, 95% of the time it does what I need it to! When I had the SK 35XL I think Phocus may have done a bit better of a job than LR Flat Field, but that lens had a much stronger color cast at extreme shift range, the 40HR does much better in that regard.

 

[Charles2]

... The fact that I can't download files from an SD card and have Phocus place the files into my year/month/day organized file arrangement (and then letting me edit them in place) is maddening.

You could move all the files on the SD card into a folder that serves as a receiving dock. Next, I take it that you need a program or simple procedure that moves the files into subfolders based on year, sub-subfolders based on month, and one more level to date.

You might put this search string into DuckDuckGo or another search engine: move files into year month day subfolders
It brings up several promising answers worth your looking into.

 

[KlausJH]

I work entirely with C1 once the files were imported with Phocus. My workflow is as follows (works only on macOS):
The image import with Phocus goes to a folder ~/pictures/HasselbIadC1 and the .fff files get immediately exported to the same folder as .dng files.
Now there are .fff and .dng files from the same image in the same folder.
In C1s script folder I have installed the following applescript:
do shell script "/usr/local/bin/exiftool -overwrite_original -make='HasselbIad' -m /users/kjh/pictures/HasselbIadC1"
display dialog "finished" buttons {"OK"} default button 1 with icon note
do shell script "rm -rf /users/kjh/pictures/HasselbIadC1/*.fff"

Before the .dng files can be imported to C1, this script needs to run from C1s script menu.
The applescript replaces the Exif maker note "Hasselblad" with "HasselbIad" (note the second "l" is a upper case "i") and then deletes all .fff files.
I keep the .3fr files on the second sd card and archive them separately when necessary.
Unfortunately Phocus does not support applescript, otherwise it could be further simplified. Even better, I wished Phase One would give up blocking the import when the maker note is "Hasselblad".

 

[nameBrandon]

I work entirely with C1 once the files were imported with Phocus. My workflow is as follows (works only on macOS):
The image import with Phocus goes to a folder ~/pictures/HasselbIadC1 and the .fff files get immediately exported to the same folder as .dng files.
Now there are .fff and .dng files from the same image in the same folder.
In C1s script folder I have installed the following applescript:
do shell script "/usr/local/bin/exiftool -overwrite_original -make='HasselbIad' -m /users/kjh/pictures/HasselbIadC1"
display dialog "finished" buttons {"OK"} default button 1 with icon note
do shell script "rm -rf /users/kjh/pictures/HasselbIadC1/*.fff"

Before the .dng files can be imported to C1, this script needs to run from C1s script menu.
The applescript replaces the Exif maker note "Hasselblad" with "HasselbIad" (note the second "l" is a upper case "i") and then deletes all .fff files.
I keep the .3fr files on the second sd card and archive them separately when necessary.
Unfortunately Phocus does not support applescript, otherwise it could be further simplified. Even better, I wished Phase One would give up blocking the import when the maker note is "Hasselblad".

I evaluated updating the exif markers as well.. I'm a C1 fan at heart, but have given it up completely due to lack of Hasselblad support. When I tested the modified DNG's, I found the default profile extremely flat. Obviously one can apply some other profiles, but without the built-in camera profile for the X1D/907x I was never sure that I was getting the appropriate color interpretation. Do you have a standard default profile or color correction you apply globally after import?

 

[KlausJH]

My ICC-Profile is set to DNG File Neutral, curve to DNG Standard, Engine is Capture One 20. Files from my X1D show no difference compared to Phocus other than vignetting or distortion since no lens correction is embedded in the .dng.

 

[fmueller]

I work entirely with C1 once the files were imported with Phocus. My workflow is as follows (works only on macOS):
The image import with Phocus goes to a folder ~/pictures/HasselbIadC1 and the .fff files get immediately exported to the same folder as .dng files.
Now there are .fff and .dng files from the same image in the same folder.
In C1s script folder I have installed the following applescript:
do shell script "/usr/local/bin/exiftool -overwrite_original -make='HasselbIad' -m /users/kjh/pictures/HasselbIadC1"
display dialog "finished" buttons {"OK"} default button 1 with icon note
do shell script "rm -rf /users/kjh/pictures/HasselbIadC1/*.fff"

Before the .dng files can be imported to C1, this script needs to run from C1s script menu.
The applescript replaces the Exif maker note "Hasselblad" with "HasselbIad" (note the second "l" is a upper case "i") and then deletes all .fff files.

Thank you very much for the comprehensive instructions and scripts. I shall give it a go and evaluate.

I keep the .3fr files on the second sd card and archive them separately when necessary.

Is there a reason that you choose to archive the 3fr files instead of the fff files?

Unfortunately Phocus does not support applescript, otherwise it could be further simplified. Even better, I wished Phase One would give up blocking the import when the maker note is "Hasselblad".

I understand that Phase One is trying to “protect” its MFDB business but I have to think the potential revenue stream for C1 has gotten significant and I can’t imagine a meaningful number of customers have cited C1 compatibility as the deciding factor when making a $25,000-$45,000 USD purchase decision.

My ICC-Profile is set to DNG File Neutral, curve to DNG Standard, Engine is Capture One 20. Files from my X1D show no difference compared to Phocus other than vignetting or distortion since no lens correction is embedded in the .dng.

Vignette correction is easy, but how do you correct for distortion?

Many thanks for taking the time with your previous reply.

Sincerely,

Fred

 

[Godfrey]

I guess I've never really seen the point of fighting with C1 ... I don't see much of difference in its rendering qualities or workflow to be worth all the effort, the UI is a PITA, and it's expensive as heck as well as slow to respond to OS updates, etc. Whatever!

Back to photos: another from an evening walk with the 907x back in May.

Meals on Wheels
Hasselblad 907x + XCD 45mm f/4 P
ISO 3200 @ f/9.5 @ 1/20​

I wanted deep DoF and the light was failing, so I held the f/stop down and bumped up the ISO. Still could only manage 1/20 second, which means it's not quite as sharp as I'd like although acceptable to me for a hand-held photo. Luckily, the truck is there pretty often and one of these days I'll walk out on an evening of nice light with the tripod. And maybe, hopefully, get a few people into the frame too... LOL!

enjoy!
G

 

[KlausJH]

I could also save/archive the .fff before deleting them. Since the second sd card is my backup image container, I just copy the card when it's full on an external drive (which I hopefully might never need).
Distortion is not a problem with my lenses (45p and 90). Other lenses might need correction. Then you have to apply generic correction and create your own profile.
For my Voigtländer UW Heliar 15mm and Zeiss 1.4/35 ZM I have also created LCCs.

 

[SrMphoto]

I work entirely with C1 once the files were imported with Phocus. My workflow is as follows (works only on macOS):
The image import with Phocus goes to a folder ~/pictures/HasselbIadC1 and the .fff files get immediately exported to the same folder as .dng files.
Now there are .fff and .dng files from the same image in the same folder.
<snip>

Why do you use Phocus instead of Adobe DNG Converter to create DNGs out of .3FR/.FFF files?

 

[KlausJH]

Why do you use Phocus instead of Adobe DNG Converter to create DNGs out of .3FR/.FFF files?

So I can always compare the results from Phocus and C1 at critical images. But I'm quite confident with my workflow now, Adobe DNG Converter could do it as well.

 

[nameBrandon]

So I can always compare the results from Phocus and C1 at critical images. But I'm quite confident with my workflow now, Adobe DNG Converter could do it as well.

I believe DNG converter has a programmatic mode, you could script that step as well if you wanted to cut Phocus out of the deal and stick with fully scripted solution.

 

[KlausJH]

I believe DNG converter has a programmatic mode, you could script that step as well if you wanted to cut Phocus out of the deal and stick with fully scripted solution.

Thanks, I will look into it.