Got My IQ140 today, but what is these gray spots?

[lance_schad]

I'd recommend uploading the image to Phase One support. So far I've found them very helpful.

I agree . I would recommend sending a raw file your dealer/phase one support. That way they can investigate weather it is pixel related or something else.

Lance

 

[baudolino]

I think there are too many spots for these to be dead pixels. Could be dust but looks too small for that, in my view. I experienced something similar (albeit far fewer spots but very similar in appearance) with my Sinar eMotion back when I was using an unsupported raw converter (Brumbaer). Was told by Sinar that these were artifacts caused by incorrect interpretation of the sensor data by the software. They disappeared completely when I started using the new CaptureShop 6 for raw conversion. I assume that you are using C1 for conversion, so this should not really be the cause, but I thought I'd still mention it since the spots look very similar to what I experienced.

 

[Stefan Steib]

Is the back set to "no Latency" ? This means there is no Wakeup signal, instead the Back powers permanently to be ready to shoot. This warms the chip and may cause the - I would say "Noise".
Try to go to normal latency- this uses a wakeup signal. You will have a slight delay after pressing the shutter release, but I think then this is gone.

Greetings from Munich
Stefan

 

[Wayne Fox]

Well, I just took it from the dealer, straight to the studio.
So I will (should) not pay whatever it is .-)

I"ve never had a new MF back that didn't need cleaning right out of the box ...

good news is it's extremely easy to clean MF backs, just don't use solution A in the cleaning kit they gave you ... just use B.

The detail shot however I"m not sure what you are referring to, but does appear to need a little more noise reduction ...

 

[docmoore]

Willow,

I (we) have been checking back to see if this has been resolved to your satisfaction....did you find an answer that works?

New equipment has a whole different set of issues than that which we have used prior...teething issues that need to be resolved. Normally at this level it all works well...once we get the workflow and process sorted.

It is of great interest to all of us here to know how you have handled this. The more points we fill in the more we know for ourselves and others.

Regards,

Bob

 

[Graham Mitchell]

Willow, I doubt it is dust - it does look a bit like a processing artefact to me. What settings did you use to process the file? Perhaps posting a raw file would help us to see what's going on.

 

[dougpeterson]

Definitely NOT dust. Knowing more about the settings used (e.g. was zero latency on), getting a raw file, knowing what VERSION of Capture One and what digital back firmware was used, knowing what adjustments have been made to the raw file (e.g. massive amounts of shadow recovery?), and knowing the situation (ambient temperature, shooting pace, etc) in which the shoot took place would all be useful to figuring out what's going on.

Those are hot pixles and depending on the answers to the above questions they are either completely out of the ordinary or entirely expected (e.g. incorrect latency setting in a warm room with fast shooting and processed in a old version of C1 with lots of shadow recovery I'd expect to look even worse than this). We need more info!

I suspect you found what was up with your dealer so haven't been back on the thread but an update would be appreciated by all!

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

Masters Series Workshop:
New England Landscape - Fall Color (Oct 5-8)

 

[Willow]

Hello guys.

I have been very busy doing other stuff, so I havent be able to look into
this problem until now.

Thanks for all your help and interest.
I have looked at the sensor and found nothing.
Didnt think I would either because the spots where to small to be dust
or anything like that.

Then I started to look at the pictures I took before and after the shot
I posted.
Some of them where pretty much similar to the one I posted, posing and lightning wise.
NONE of them had these spots.
I am talking about unmanipulated RAW files.

I had the back on NORMAL latency, low ISO, flash and in a studio
with temperature in the low 70s.

It must be something in the IQ140 processing of the RAW file is my guess.

Sorry for crying wolf too soon guys .

I borrowed an IQ180 until I received my IQ140, and it was not
with an easy heart I returned it.

But I must say the IQ140 more than met my expectations!!!

Its different from the IQ180, but not in a bad way.
Straight out of the box, I think the files from IQ140 are less contrasty.

I havent been able to work enough with either two backs to come to
a conclusion.

And from now on it is only IQ140 anyway .

I came from Nikon D3X and I told myself that the difference between
MFDB and D3X is so little that is not worth the extra money and hassle to
go for MFDB. And that was after I tested and owned H3D31 and H4D40.
And before the Hasselblad guys starts to knock me down , I also meant
that after working with a PhaseOne P30+.

Looking at, and working with these IQ180 and IO140 files, I think the
difference is huge!

I am very happy with my purchase and equally happy with the help and
support I get on this forum.

Thanks again guys.

Willow