Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Hasselblad representation?

  1. #1
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Hasselblad representation?

    With all the Phase, Sinar and even recently Leaf byplay here, the Hasselblad reps seem absent. ARe you there?

    I would like to see a strong HB advocate. Marc's images, and others have been suggestively interesting, but we don't have anyone chiming in on the H3d advantages.

    And I don't mean promo material ; what about some raw files to look at?

  2. #2
    thsinar
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Victor,

    I think Marc is a very good HB advocate: I can't see any rep able to do a better job!



    I would love to see some files as well, taken under the same light conditions as the eMotion 75 ISO 800 sample I have posted, and with the same type of subject, to get access to the raw/DNG, to be able at least to understand what is the plasticity mentioned.

    Best regards,
    Thierry


    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    With all the Phase, Sinar and even recently Leaf byplay here, the Hasselblad reps seem absent. ARe you there?

    I would like to see a strong HB advocate. Marc's images, and others have been suggestively interesting, but we don't have anyone chiming in on the H3d advantages.

    And I don't mean promo material ; what about some raw files to look at?

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Victor, I invited my Hasselblad rep Jim Arnosky of City Lights Digital to join us here.

    City Lights Digital is a subdivision of City Lights Stage, a working commercial photography studio. They are an official reseller of a number of photographic solutions including Hasselblad, but they are not like a typical retail type operation. Their main focus is the studio and making photographs. Jim knows a lot more than I do about the mechanics of all this ... including real world applications from renting their stage, lighting, and all kinds of digital gear to a wide range of photographers for all kinds of applications.

    Unfortunately, he is very busy selling, assisting his clients and making photographs. Just the other day he spent 1/2 day in my studio testing, adjusting and shimming my new Rodenstock 120 APO Macro that I didn't think performed up to expectations, and confirmed I was right, so he is exchanging it. Excellent service.

    But, I'll bug him again.

    Concerning the evaluation of various RAW files, I'm not sure how valuable that is.

    This isn't some preset P&S ... each one of these systems requires a fair level of experience working with the camera settings and software. For images posted here, all one can do is assume that the poster IS familiar with this, and the viewer simply applies their subjective opinion as to whether it meets the demands of their eye.

    For example, I watched with interest as Irakly worked through becoming familiar with his newly acquired Phase One P25. What a difference two weeks of intense work made. Now it's much better than when he started ... and he is a wizard at such technical things. If someone had sent him a RAW file like his first ones, he probably would've thought them to be junk compared to his Kodak ProBack that he knows so well.

    In other words, if someone is not intensely familiar with Flexcolor or Phocus, why would I send them a RAW 3F file and subject it to criticism of the uninitiated? Look at the finished work of a number of users. If it doesn't meet the subjective demands of your eye, then look elsewhere.

    Or get a first hand demo from someone who DOES know the system well. That is what I did with my first Hasselblad H, and what I did recently with a Leaf AFi. I had already seen a Phase One operated in the hands of top level photographers and expert tech assistants, so I knew what was possible from Phase. As I have said repeatedly, I have never seen a Sinar in action, nor would I know what to do with a Sinar file someone else had shot. So, all I can do is evaluate what's presented by those that do know, and are familiar with the Sinar back and software use.

  4. #4
    thsinar
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Marc,

    isn't there an option to create a DNG with the Phocus? I was thinking yes.
    That would be enough for one has not many options to do something wrong when converting to DNG.

    Best regards,
    Thierry


    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    V
    In other words, if someone is not intensely familiar with Flexcolor or Phocus, why would I send them a RAW 3F file and subject it to criticism of the uninitiated? Look at the finished work of a number of users. If it doesn't meet the subjective demands of your eye, then look elsewhere.

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Quote Originally Posted by thsinar View Post
    Marc,

    isn't there an option to create a DNG with the Phocus? I was thinking yes.
    That would be enough for one has not many options to do something wrong when converting to DNG.

    Best regards,
    Thierry
    I disagree. Even setting aside the DAC corrections, both Flex and Phocus produce much better results. Every professional photographer that I know who uses the H system agrees with this ... and it is clearly the advice of Hasselblad in all of their communications.

    I also use Flexcolor for processing Leica DMR files because it produces far better results than any other software, especially higher ISOs ... not surprising given that Imacon is the one who made the DMR back for Leica.

    DNG conversion is available, and is a very swift process with either Flex or Phocus, however the proprietary software is optimized for the 3F files and it shows. The biggest difference is color rendition and tonal gradations.

    However, the DNG conversion ability is sometimes valuable for application where I am shooting with a number of cameras (like at a wedding). I drop all the different RAW files into one file, open them all in LR and sort by time shot. Chronological order and speed take priority over absolute IQ when working on 500 files ... most of which will never be printed over 8X10. In special cases, I'll go back to the 3F file and process it in Phocus to extract more quality.

    All my commercial work is processed through Phocus. I recently loaded Aperture 2 on my machine which now directly supports the Hasselblad 3F file format, but it's still a compromise compared to Phocus.

    After paying a King's ransom for one of these super high resolution backs, I want everything that the back makers intended I get out of it.

  6. #6
    thsinar
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Marc,

    I don't disagree with you. I am just saying (or trying to say), that a DNG would do it: why not providing one? I have done it, and I know eXposure can do bether, as much as Phocus can do better. But I can tell you that I have as well my fair experience with Flexcolor and Phocus.

    I would have loved to see raws, even if they really aren't.

    Anyway, thanks.
    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I disagree. Even setting aside the DAC corrections, both Flex and Phocus produce much better results. Every professional photographer that I know who uses the H system agrees with this ... and it is clearly the advice of Hasselblad in all of their communications.

    I also use Flexcolor for processing Leica DMR files because it produces far better results than any other software, especially higher ISOs ... not surprising given that Imacon is the one who made the DMR back for Leica.

    DNG conversion is available, and is a very swift process with either Flex or Phocus, however the proprietary software is optimized for the 3F files and it shows. The biggest difference is color rendition and tonal gradations.

    However, the DNG conversion ability is sometimes valuable for application where I am shooting with a number of cameras (like at a wedding). I drop all the different RAW files into one file, open them all in LR and sort by time shot. Chronological order and speed take priority over absolute IQ when working on 500 files ... most of which will never be printed over 8X10. In special cases, I'll go back to the 3F file and process it in Phocus to extract more quality.

    All my commercial work is processed through Phocus. I recently loaded Aperture 2 on my machine which now directly supports the Hasselblad 3F file format, but it's still a compromise compared to Phocus.

    After paying a King's ransom for one of these super high resolution backs, I want everything that the back makers intended I get out of it.

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Quote Originally Posted by thsinar View Post
    Marc,

    I don't disagree with you. I am just saying (or trying to say), that a DNG would do it: why not providing one? I have done it, and I know eXposure can do bether, as much as Phocus can do better. But I can tell you that I have as well my fair experience with Flexcolor and Phocus.

    I would have loved to see raws, even if they really aren't.

    Anyway, thanks.
    Thierry
    To what end?

  8. #8
    thsinar
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Forget it, Marc.

    Thanks anyway,
    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    To what end?

  9. #9
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    With all the Phase, Sinar and even recently Leaf byplay here, the Hasselblad reps seem absent. ARe you there?

    I would like to see a strong HB advocate. Marc's images, and others have been suggestively interesting, but we don't have anyone chiming in on the H3d advantages.

    And I don't mean promo material ; what about some raw files to look at?

    Unfortunately, Hasselblad does not allow their employees to post on public or private forums. I've always felt this caution is ultimately to their detriment. Certainly posting to forums can be a dicey proposition, the wrong guy can say the wrong things, give out the wrong information, or just come off inappropriately. That said, Hasselblad certainly has some qualified individuals who are knowledgeable and know how to conduct themselves. It's their decision.

    But I do feel Leaf and Sinar have benefitted from the participation from Yair and Thierry. Phase also does not seem to have a frequent representative who posts on forums, but Capture Integration does participate regularly, which helps to make up for it because they are knowledgeable about what they're talking about with regard to that product.

    I have not posted a lot here yet on Get DPI regarding Hasselblad, mostly because there has not been a lot of misinformation posted (so far ). I have been a regular poster on Luminous Landscape, but there are frequent posts regarding Hasselblad products and their capabilities which are often not accurate at all. And so, with no rep to defend them, I have taken it upon myself to clarify what the system can and cannot do. I also do this with Sinar and Leaf, since I sell all 3 brands, but much of the time, Thierry or Yair beat me to the punch!

    All that said, I believe a (good) dealer who sells multiple systems is an important information asset. The reason is because that dealer knows how 3 different systems compare with their strengths and weaknesses and - most importantly - he knows the history of their evolution and what the capability is as of right now! Many times I have read someone's opinion, and the reason for the misinformed opinion is that they're discussing a previous hardware or software generation. I only deal with where a product has been, how it has evolved, and most importantly, how it is now for a prospective buyer.

    All of the 4 primary medium format players are constantly improving their product, and they pass each other frequently, only to get passed back again on the next go round. So, accurately knowing where they stand in the present is critical to a buying decision. My customers don't buy based on any repuation of past glories, they buy based on current, reproducable performance.

    As for files, I have plenty of em. Here's my classic Tifa shot from an H3DII-31. The capture was made at ISO 800, 1/30th of a second (hand held) with the 28mm. No noise removal tool has been used at all. Notice the cleanliness of the details in her fur that is in focus, and in the blurred background - super clean. I have different versions of this file, but you can see in the current version, the adjustment history in the Phocus screenshot shows no sharpening, no curves, no noise reduction. It had a saturation boost, a white balance and levels tweak, and was even pushed a stop.

    Steve Hendrix
    www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Quote Originally Posted by thsinar View Post
    Forget it, Marc.

    Thanks anyway,
    Thierry
    Sorry Thierry, maybe I sounded a bit stand-offish and abrupt. That's not really my intent.

    I just think that if folks are really interested in any of these high-end systems they need first hand experience working with knowledgeable people before investing such huge amounts of money.

    I also think the whole high ISO discussion is not what this equipment is all about. Optimal ISOs published by the back makers provides a clue to that.

    So, IMO, just because you can expose at a higher ISO, doesn't mean you should.

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix/PPR View Post
    Unfortunately, Hasselblad does not allow their employees to post on public or private forums. I've always felt this caution is ultimately to their detriment. Certainly posting to forums can be a dicey proposition, the wrong guy can say the wrong things, give out the wrong information, or just come off inappropriately. That said, Hasselblad certainly has some qualified individuals who are knowledgeable and know how to conduct themselves. It's their decision.

    But I do feel Leaf and Sinar have benefitted from the participation from Yair and Thierry. Phase also does not seem to have a frequent representative who posts on forums, but Capture Integration does participate regularly, which helps to make up for it because they are knowledgeable about what they're talking about with regard to that product.

    I have not posted a lot here yet on Get DPI regarding Hasselblad, mostly because there has not been a lot of misinformation posted (so far ). I have been a regular poster on Luminous Landscape, but there are frequent posts regarding Hasselblad products and their capabilities which are often not accurate at all. And so, with no rep to defend them, I have taken it upon myself to clarify what the system can and cannot do. I also do this with Sinar and Leaf, since I sell all 3 brands, but much of the time, Thierry or Yair beat me to the punch!

    All that said, I believe a (good) dealer who sells multiple systems is an important information asset. The reason is because that dealer knows how 3 different systems compare with their strengths and weaknesses and - most importantly - he knows the history of their evolution and what the capability is as of right now! Many times I have read someone's opinion, and the reason for the misinformed opinion is that they're discussing a previous hardware or software generation. I only deal with where a product has been, how it has evolved, and most importantly, how it is now for a prospective buyer.

    All of the 4 primary medium format players are constantly improving their product, and they pass each other frequently, only to get passed back again on the next go round. So, accurately knowing where they stand in the present is critical to a buying decision. My customers don't buy based on any repuation of past glories, they buy based on current, reproducable performance.

    As for files, I have plenty of em. Here's my classic Tifa shot from an H3DII-31. The capture was made at ISO 800, 1/30th of a second (hand held) with the 28mm. No noise removal tool has been used at all. Notice the cleanliness of the details in her fur that is in focus, and in the blurred background - super clean. I have different versions of this file, but you can see in the current version, the adjustment history in the Phocus screenshot shows no sharpening, no curves, no noise reduction. It had a saturation boost, a white balance and levels tweak, and was even pushed a stop.

    Steve Hendrix
    www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
    Thanks Steve. I have tried to counter the "old" information and mis-information concerning Hasselblad... not always successfully. I've worked through a number of iterations of the cameras and the software, so I understand where some of the mis-conceptions come from ... but that was then and this is now.

    Thanks for the "Now!"

  12. #12
    thsinar
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    No harm, Marc.

    And I am with you on this: I am always telling people to try equipment under THEIR conditions to see if it can satisfy their particular needs.

    I agree also on the "High-ISO" issue, unfortunately the "market" is speaking about that at the moment and seems to take this issue as the most relevant. At other times it was the "shooting rate", or this or that.

    We (I) have to deal with this and deliver somehow.

    FYI, I had never before tried an ISO 800 shot, not even 400, ISO 200 very rarely: my idea of an optimal use of such equipment is nominal ISO exclusively, obviously.

    Best regards,
    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Sorry Thierry, maybe I sounded a bit stand-offish and abrupt. That's not really my intent.

    I just think that if folks are really interested in any of these high-end systems they need first hand experience working with knowledgeable people before investing such huge amounts of money.

    I also think the whole high ISO discussion is not what this equipment is all about. Optimal ISOs published by the back makers provides a clue to that.

    So, IMO, just because you can expose at a higher ISO, doesn't mean you should.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Thanks Steve. I have tried to counter the "old" information and mis-information concerning Hasselblad... not always successfully. I've worked through a number of iterations of the cameras and the software, so I understand where some of the mis-conceptions come from ... but that was then and this is now.

    Thanks for the "Now!"
    Boy, I cannot agree more here, with both Marc and Steve. Your contributions here have been extremely valuable, and know that they are appreciated....at least by me, and I am sure many others.

    I only drift to some of the other forums occasionally now, as there does seem to be a lot of "old" and other misinformation. You guys and Thierry have done an admirable job to set the record straight, but it seems to be a much clearer discussion here (GetDPI) than in other places.

    Please keep up the great contributions. Your perspectives about real world shooting and issues are much more valuable than many "test" shots. The final images are what tell the story, and in the hands of experienced users, that should be all that matters. I understand all the pixel peeping and ISO comparing, etc., much of it a carryover from digicam and DSLR comparisons, but the MF world, though sharing the same tech and stuff, is just at a different place/level.

    LJ

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    Quote Originally Posted by thsinar View Post

    I agree also on the "High-ISO" issue, unfortunately the "market" is speaking about that at the moment and seems to take this issue as the most relevant. At other times it was the "shooting rate", or this or that.

    Best regards,
    Thierry
    Thierry,
    Your comments and contributions have been spot on, and please know they are appreciated. The "High ISO" issue is coming into sharper play now, as I think there are a lot of folks that have been shooting DSLRs and are thinking about moving to MF, but to continue shooting much the same way they do with cameras that have higher ISO capabilities. To me this does speak of evolving needs for MF. If folks are seriously looking at these wonderful tools for more spontaneous and varied use than controlled studio lighting and commercial shooting, that will create some pressures for sure. I do not see that as a bad thing, but it will require more patience on the side of new buyers, as well as some tech work on the side of manufacturers, both of which are starting to happen.

    In the 35mm DSLR world, it started with the megapixel wars, then moved on to ISO, somewhat bypassing DR as a focus. In the MF world, they are already starting with more megapixels and better DR for the most part, so ISO seems like the next hurdle to tackle, especially considering growing pressure to shoot MF as a 35mm DSLR

    Thanks again for your continued contributions, corrections, comparisons and suggestions. I know it is helping me sort things out a lot.

    LJ

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad representation?

    I really think things are circling back to comments made many weeks/threads ago....there is a lot more going on involving the sensor/back, the camera and lens and the capture/processing software. The end product should be to get the image one wants with the least effort. That really becomes a loaded statement, as it does place the burden of image criteria square on the shoulders of the shooter, where I think it should be. The companies are offering up their solutions to help that shooter, but the photog is still the one responsible for defining their needs and having the experience with the tools to achieve those goals, including the new/evolving software.

    So Marc's , Steve's, Thierry's and other's comments about hands on testing, familiarity, and some clear idea of needs become ever more germane. Sharing RAW files can be helpful to get some general idea of how robust a file may be, or the details that may be captured, etc., but it is only a part of the story. Seeing what can be produced at the hands of an experienced user and one familiar with the tools becomes more valuable. Actual hands on use in one's own real world needs and use should be the criteria for a final choice for purchase. That may not always be possible or easy, but it is definitely a better path to pursue for such an expensive buy.

    LJ

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •