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 CFV II 50C and LCC?

nameBrandon

Active member
Here are some test files people can play around with if they want....

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1s3nRR7HuPv6cCVPgB0JbF2AXKMfbQCq0?usp=sharing

CFVII, Alpa 12 Plus, 40 HR, and 70HR. There's a series of -15mm, 0, +15mm shift (no rise/fall) and -15mm, 0, 15mm (+5mm rise...or -5mm? can't remember) for each lens. Electronic shutter used on the back, each lens was maybe at f8? Remote used with the back for capture. Body leveled according to spirit levels on the 12 Plus.

The corresponding LCC frame for each shot is the filename of the original shot +3....so if the original capture was xxx1.fff, the corresponding LCC shot is xxx4.fff.

I think for whatever reason I did 15mm and not 20mm but it could be 20mm too. Would be nice if we could enter the data manually via the back.

Not a scientific test or anything and the light was changing pretty fast. Have not tried to do any shimming or anything with the back yet to make sure infinity focus is spot on either (each lens was at infinity).

Feel free to post your results in this thread or elsewhere on GetDPI, just please credit me for the capture if you do. Please ask for permission if you post them anywhere else :)

Anyway...have fun :cool:
-Todd
Thank you! Curious what you're using to shoot your LCC frames with? Also, what is your approach with the +3? Do you just only take 3 shots, then back out and shoot 3 LCC frames, then continue the process? I've been trying to figure out a good workflow myself. It's getting tedious doing 1 LCC + 1 real frame (and repeat). I've also started printing out an excel sheet I made to write down the file # and the shift and corresponding LCC file #..
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
Thank you! Curious what you're using to shoot your LCC frames with? Also, what is your approach with the +3? Do you just only take 3 shots, then back out and shoot 3 LCC frames, then continue the process? I've been trying to figure out a good workflow myself. It's getting tedious doing 1 LCC + 1 real frame (and repeat). I've also started printing out an excel sheet I made to write down the file # and the shift and corresponding LCC file #..
I’m using one of the CI LCC cards...maybe the pocket LCC? I use the highly scientific “hold the LCC up to the lens” method of LCC capture haha.

As for the three shots, I shoot whatever I’m going to shoot first, then do the LCCs. That day I was doing three image captures so that’s why +3. If I had done two shots, it’d be +2, if four +4 etc etc. I do the capture sequence first, then repeat the same sequence with the LCC card.
 

nameBrandon

Active member
I’m using one of the CI LCC cards...maybe the pocket LCC? I use the highly scientific “hold the LCC up to the lens” method of LCC capture haha.

As for the three shots, I shoot whatever I’m going to shoot first, then do the LCCs. That day I was doing three image captures so that’s why +3. If I had done two shots, it’d be +2, if four +4 etc etc. I do the capture sequence first, then repeat the same sequence with the LCC card.
Gotcha, ok, thanks! I have the CI LCC cards coming in tomorrow, just curious as for now I'm using a blank sheet of photo paper held in front of the lens.. not entirely sure I'm getting accurate LCC frames with that method.

The both the 40HR and 70HR are seemingly allowing for a lot more shift than the 35XL is. 35XL has been pretty much razor sharp, but I haven't been successful thus far with more than +-10mm shift in any direction.

I'll have to give the V-series lenses (50 CF FLE, 80 CFE) a go and see how much movement I can get out of them as well.
 

nameBrandon

Active member
Here's a link to some of my tests.. again, not entirely sure I did the best that could be done with my white piece of photo paper for LCC captures. Will retest when the CI cards come in.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ez7akltjht98btj/AACcMSpMLl9oMoAGf2plfyica?dl=0

Code:
Cambo WRS-1600
SK 35 APO-Digitar XL
Hasselblad CFVii50c back


B0000608.3FR. (LCC - 35XL @ F11 -10mm vertical shift and -10mm horizontal shift)
B0000608.3FR. (Image - 35XL @ F11 -10mm vertical shift and -10mm horizontal shift)

B0000593.3FR. (LCC - 35XL @ F11 0mm vertical shift and -0mm horizontal shift)
B0000594.3FR. (Image - 35XL @ F11 0mm vertical shift and -0mm horizontal shift)


B0000606.3FR. (LCC - 35XL @ F11 -5mm vertical shift and +5mm horizontal shift)
B0000607.3FR. (Image - 35XL @ F11 -5mm vertical shift and +5mm horizontal shift)
 
Last edited:

nameBrandon

Active member
I was running into a weird issue with LR not generating the DNG via flat-field plugin, even though it said it was.. so I hopped over to Phocus and generated some LCC / scene calibrated DNG files. However, the new DNG's are not showing the corrections when I import into LR. I know the LR (flat-field generated) DNG's do generate the corrected DNG files with color cast / vignette removed.

Is this a preview issue on my end, perhaps? Curious if you all can get focus to take an Hasselblad raw file, do scene calibration, then export a properly corrected DNG so that it can be used in LR or elsewhere with proper raw adjustments?
 
Last edited:

SrMphoto

Active member
I was running into a weird issue with LR not generating the DNG via flat-field plugin, even though it said it was.. so I hopped over to Phocus and generated some LCC / scene calibrated DNG files. However, the new DNG's are not showing the corrections when I import into LR. I know the LR (flat-field generated) DNG's do generate the corrected DNG files with color cast / vignette removed.

Is this a preview issue on my end, perhaps? Curious if you all can get focus to take an Hasselblad raw file, do scene calibration, then export a properly corrected DNG so that it can be used in LR or elsewhere with proper raw adjustments?
It is probably related to the fact that you lose all Phocus adjustments/modifications when exporting DNGs from Phocus.
 

anyone

Well-known member
I have a related LCC question and do not want to start a new thread for it. For those who created a library of LCC's: I am shooting with my SWC quite successfully with my IQ1 60 back. Currently I take an LCC shot after every image, but I was wondering whether the falloff will stay always the same, i.e. I could take a LCC with the main apertures (11, 16) and use it for all my images? That would make the SWC again handheld, which would be really nice.

Thank you!

Edit: my own very unscientific tests are indicating that this approach may work, but would love to hear from someone who used this more extensively.
 

nameBrandon

Active member
I have a related LCC question and do not want to start a new thread for it. For those who created a library of LCC's: I am shooting with my SWC quite successfully with my IQ1 60 back. Currently I take an LCC shot after every image, but I was wondering whether the falloff will stay always the same, i.e. I could take a LCC with the main apertures (11, 16) and use it for all my images? That would make the SWC again handheld, which would be really nice.

Thank you!

Edit: my own very unscientific tests are indicating that this approach may work, but would love to hear from someone who used this more extensively.
I think this may just be more subjective than anything, and probably YMMV kind of thing depending on the lens and the degree of shift involved.

Will having a standard library be as accurate as a dedicated LCC shot after each image? I don't see how it could be without a very extensive library...

Will you be able to actually identify the difference between an image corrected with an LCC image shot immediately after vs one in your library.. maybe.. maybe not. Depends on the lens, the lighting conditions, the shift, etc..

I too would be intersted in more feedback on the library approach.. in theory it should work for a lot of scenarios without too much work invested in building out a library.. though I guess that depends on how many lenses you have :)
 

anyone

Well-known member
In this specific case there is no shift involved; it's the design of the lens that requires LCC, that's why I was thinking that possibly one LCC will be good for all images.
 

Geoff

Active member
Tend to shoot always at f11 so the idea of library isn't impossible. For one lens, could have (if using movements only in 1 dir):
Left 5mm, 10mm, 15mm
Right same
Up same
down same....
so that's 12 images per lens.

Could you get away with cropping, so if say 12mm of shift, just use the 15mm and trim? Or less %?

Things get much more complicated if shifting in two directions at same time.
 

anyone

Well-known member
Short update, maybe someone is interested: in case of the SWC/M, where the lens design requires an LCC, it's possible to use one LCC for each aperture. I tested it now (compared library LCC vs individual LCC taken after each image) without seeing a difference. Therefore, I built a 'mini library' of two LCC's, one with f11 and one with f16, and can now use the camera handheld. :thumbup:
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
Short update, maybe someone is interested: in case of the SWC/M, where the lens design requires an LCC, it's possible to use one LCC for each aperture. I tested it now (compared library LCC vs individual LCC taken after each image) without seeing a difference. Therefore, I built a 'mini library' of two LCC's, one with f11 and one with f16, and can now use the camera handheld. :thumbup:
@ anyone

I never change the aperture setting when doing an LCC shot . I always alter the exposure time .
And I think its not a good idea of building up an LCC shot library .
The LCC shot you take from the same position you take your image from , is really the only "valid" LCC .
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
Short update, maybe someone is interested: in case of the SWC/M, where the lens design requires an LCC, it's possible to use one LCC for each aperture. I tested it now (compared library LCC vs individual LCC taken after each image) without seeing a difference. Therefore, I built a 'mini library' of two LCC's, one with f11 and one with f16, and can now use the camera handheld. :thumbup:
Thanks for sharing

I don't see any issue with the library/mini-library approach personally. Although I still think LCC after every shot is best practice, that may not always be needed or practical (or one might just forget). With a library approach (or shooting LCC after the fact, if you can remember movements, aperture, etc) at least you've got something, which might be better than no LCC at all (depending on combo of lens/back, etc etc etc etc etc).

Glad this approach works for your workflow :thumbup:
 

anyone

Well-known member
Just to avoid confusion, my question was about LCC's for the Hasselblad SWC/M camera. This specific model has a fixed 38mm Biogon lens and no movements, but the lens produces color cast on my digital back and therefore demands for LCC. The question I tried to answer was: do I need a LCC after each shot, or can I use a pre-made LCC file from a library?

Since the SWC/M is such a great small camera, it always bothered me to be tied to a tripod, therefore I investigated the issue. Now I'm confident to use it handheld.

@ anyone

I never change the aperture setting when doing an LCC shot . I always alter the exposure time .
I meant: when I took a picture at f16, I'd pick later at home the f16 LCC from my 'mini library' and use it.

Although I still think LCC after every shot is best practice, that may not always be needed or practical (or one might just forget).
I agree - with all my cameras with movements I take a LCC right after the capture. Since the whole workflow is anyway tripod-based, it doesn't matter much and saves time in post.

To sum it up, for my tech cameras I continue to take a LCC right after the capture, for my SWC/M I'll go with the mini library.
 

nameBrandon

Active member
Just to avoid confusion, my question was about LCC's for the Hasselblad SWC/M camera. This specific model has a fixed 38mm Biogon lens and no movements, but the lens produces color cast on my digital back and therefore demands for LCC. The question I tried to answer was: do I need a LCC after each shot, or can I use a pre-made LCC file from a library?

Since the SWC/M is such a great small camera, it always bothered me to be tied to a tripod, therefore I investigated the issue. Now I'm confident to use it handheld.



I meant: when I took a picture at f16, I'd pick later at home the f16 LCC from my 'mini library' and use it.



I agree - with all my cameras with movements I take a LCC right after the capture. Since the whole workflow is anyway tripod-based, it doesn't matter much and saves time in post.

To sum it up, for my tech cameras I continue to take a LCC right after the capture, for my SWC/M I'll go with the mini library.

Thanks for adding the info on the SWC/M that's great info.. and one of the reasons I started this thread!

I think that given the price point of the CFVii50c and the impending release of the chrome version (and the back probably not requiring a 907x purchase) we're going to see A LOT of new users in this space (well, "a lot" relative for the MF world)..
 

nameBrandon

Active member
Some good news, as expected from my testing with Hasselblad V lenses and the Cambo.

With both the 50mm CF FLE and 120mm CF (f/4) I'm seeing zero color cast any any shift, even extreme 20mm+. I saw very minor vignetting with the 120mm at extremes. The 50mm did very well, sharing an example image below shifted 20mm vertically and 20mm horizontally. The vignetting at 20+20 is not fully correctable, but dropping down to 20mm vertical and 15mm horizontal get it back to correctable (meaning image data is still present across the full frame, even if it is significantly underexposed).


Original uncorrected 20mm + 20mm shifted 50 CF FLE image.



LCC shot for above



"Corrected" with LCC (flat field in LR). Purposely overexposed. Notice we cannot fully recover the corner.




20mm (vertical) + 15mm (horizontal) "Corrected" with LCC (Flat field in LR) . Purposely overexposed. Definitely a lot of noise in the corrected corner but it's not very large of an area at all.




I also will say that I detect a fair amount of field curvature on that 50mm at larger shifts. That's my guess as to what it is, I'm far from an optics expert. I'd say 70-75% of the frame is in proper focus but at the edge in the directions shifted seem to suffer from this defocused / softened effect.

I don't have 40mm to test with. I do have an 80mm but given the results at 50mm, I expect like the 120mm the 80mm will take 20mm/20mm shifts just fine.
 

jng

Well-known member
Hi Brandon,

I can confirm that I've seen essentially no lens cast when shifting the V system lenses, not surprising given their design to accommodate the ~75mm distance from rear mount to film/sensor plane imposed by the mirror box. I also found that the 50 FLE suffered from field curvature unshifted on a 40 x 54mm sensor - an otherwise very sharp lens whose properties can be used to bring foreground elements nicely into focus. :eek:

According to Wildi's iconic "The Hasselblad Manual, 7th edition," the lenses in your kit should accommodate amounts of shift similar to what you're seeing with the 50 FLE. This is easy enough to determine empirically, of course...

John
 
Top