Disclose Hasselblad image format to Adobe

[Andy Johnson-Laird]

So that Adobe Camera Raw can process Hasselblad image files without needing to go through Flexcolor.

[alexkent]

here here.
this is a no-brainer in my opinion.

allowing adobe ACR / Lightroom to read .fff and .3fr files directly would allow us all many more options in our workflow. just as apple's support for these files does.

i wonder if hasselblad have asked adobe Not to add this support, as dcraw (on which ACR is based) has supported these files for years.

as an added bonus, giving us more workflow options would push Hasselblad to make Phocus better (much better)... so people are using it because it's the best available, not because it's all they let us use.

[Dustbak]

I can only support this. This would help Hasselblad tremendously. I know people that have been put off with the idea of giving up their Lightroom/PS workflow and went with other solutions.

Another option for Hasselblad would be to make sure the conversion towards DNG delivers the same quality as processing in flex of phocus. This is also a better solution than the current one.

[alexkent]

Another option for Hasselblad would be to make sure the conversion towards DNG delivers the same quality as processing in flex of phocus. This is also a better solution than the current one.

this is not so straight forward.
the very nature of a RAW file from camera's sensor is that it needs to be interpreted to make an image. Each different company; Adobe, PhaseOne, Hasselblad, Canon, et al. have a different set of ideas about how to make that interpretation (and different goals for their software).
so it is inherently not possible to expect any two pieces of software from different companies to render the same RAW file the same way.
Hasselblad's colour treatment and DAC features are entirely in the raw processing software. so if you convert a FFF to dng then process it in ACR/Lightroom you will loose these features.
the only way hasselblad could make ACR/Lightroom render the same as flex would be to present adobe with the entire software rendering code from Flex' and try to convince them to include it in ACR: "ok adobe, whenever you try and load a hasselblad file, you must run it through this code, not your own".

all that said,
adobe are making some interesting headway in terms of mimicking other manufacturer's RAW processing.
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2008/08/the_dng_profile_editor.html

[robertpoll]

Hi Alex,

You're right, processing through ACR wouldn't give the same result as through Phocus, but that's no different from the situation with Canon or Nikon files. They have their own software (DPP for Canon, Capture(?) for Nikon) with itheir own raw processing engine (and DAC like lens corrections in DPP) and users have the choice of using the proprietary software or going the Adobe route. I'm sure that if both were available for Hasselblad you'd find some people prefer one and some the other as with 35mm. Clearly you wouldn't get DAC with the Adobe route but that's not critical for everyone, and people working across mf and 35mm might see benefit in using the same raw processor for both platforms as (you'd imagine) you'd get images with a more similar 'feel'.

Aside from the 'all Phocus' or 'all Adobe' workflows though there's a middle ground that would be very appealing to me (if Lightroom could understand Hasselblad files). I would like to be able to import Hasselblad files into Lightroom for management and sorting and then once I have my picks to use Phocus (as an external editor) to do the raw processing to produce a TIF to retouch in photoshop. This would, from my perspective, give the best of all worlds - the sorting and cataloguing features of lightroom (which are totally absent from Phocus) and the raw conversion from Phocus (along with all of the DAC features and fantastic colour accuracy).

Aperture now understands Hasselblad files (so presumably the above workflow is possible for Aperture - is anyonoe using it?) so adding Lightroom is a reasonable thing to expect - I had heard a rumour it was going to happen in some for or another, but was just a rumour.

...rob

[alexkent]

rob,
i didn't mean to sound like i was against the idea (see my previous post in this thread),
i was just explaining that the idea of ACR/Lightroom processing dng's to look identical to Flex/Phocus processing 3f's was more complex than it may appear.

i think in general,
more workflow options = good.

... and people working across mf and 35mm might see benefit in using the same raw processor for both platforms as (you'd imagine) you'd get images with a more similar 'feel'.

this brings up another question that i think is interesting,
in an ideal world, should Phocus be able to shoot tethered and process files from Canon/Nikon D-slr's ?
it certainly hasn't done Phase / CaptureOne any harm.

incidentally i have started using Aperture to shoot tethered with Nikon dslr's (because it's less hassle than nikon's Camera Control Pro software) but i still process the majority of my d-slr stuff in ACR.

[alexkent]

Is Hasselblad FFF the only RAW with DAC type options?

Canon's DPP software will do automatic lens distortion and chromatic abberation corrections for files from Canon camera's.
Phaseone also has its 'lens+' technology which does apparently a similar thing for theirs, but i haven't used it so can't really comment.

Does Adobe allow for a RAW plugin so manufacturer specific functions can be applied to RAW files?

no they don't, their RAW processing 'pipeline' is a closed system. AFAIK none of the RAW processors allow plug-ins to the actual RAW computations.

[alexkent]

put simply, you would loose Hasselblad's DAC when going through ACR.
as you do now if you convert to DNG in Flexcolor and process in ACR or if you process hassy 3f's using Aperture.

but, adobe have their own solutions, there are manual (slider) chromatic aberration and lens vignetting tools in ACR and lens distortion correction tools in Photoshop filter's menu.
i think the point is, in some situations, having a streamlined workflow (Bridge / ACR / Photoshop / Automation via Actions) is more important then having the perfect image quality (Flexcolor).
also, ACR offers a fantastic amount of control for processing RAW files, much more than Phocus: Fill Light, Highlight recovery, Clarity, HSL colour control, Black&White conversion...

i (and many other people) use ACR rather than Canon's DPP for files from my canon. ok so we miss out on canon's automatic lens corrections, but gain the speed, flexibility, reliability and great controls that ACR has.

[DenisM]

Using ACR to process is, as has been said above, a complete no-brainer.

Colour-wise, the HSL tab in ACR, along with the Healing Tool are its killer applications, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm PC only and use Flexcolor. I've never seen Phocus in use.

That said, if Flexcolor had a HSL tab similar to ACR along with a Healing Tool, it would be a complete solution for me.

Oh, and ACR's curves tab with its four levels of adjustment is a joy too. But, Flexcolor is fast becoming the discarded child now, isn't it?

ACR is an exquisitely designed program that can be learned in half an hour. The use of a Gretag CC in conjunction with the HSL tab renders all colour issues irrelevant vis a vis Flexcolor. The ability to open twenty files and remove that one annoying spot in all 20 simultaneously is a joy.

Hasselblad should stick to what they do best - making great cameras - and let others get on with the extremely complex and costly area of software development. The very, very long Phocus gestation period is proof of this - does it have a Healing Tool? Where's the PC version? I thought it was coming at Photokina?

I can't help feeling that there is a bit of Scandinavian stubbornness in all of this - trying to run with the big boys in an area where they don't have any history, unlike their camera pedigree.

Surely, surely, opening up fff files to others programs would sell more cameras?! And with the market leveling out in price terms, this will become even more apparent.

D.

[DenisM]

And don't expect Adobe-type tools in Phocus (healing, etc...) either. It is RAW developing program.

Hi Derek,

And isn't ACR a "RAW developing program"? And doesn't it have a healing tool?

Apologies if I'm missing the point! 

Denis

[jattree]

I'd like to join the list of users wanting better support in ACR/PS. I realize there's always a bit of give and take using the camera manufacturers software compared to a third party. I'm sure Phocus is powerful etc but I'm sorry Adobe just make better software than Hasselblad. I shoot with Canon 1ds m3 and I know DPP was meant to be a better post processing application as well but it suffers from the same problems as Phocus. I'm sure Hasselblad think there protecting us from ourselves but if there serious about there "If you thought you couldnt afford a Hasselblad" campaign they should realize that the people that can now afford a $20k camera over the ones that thought that $35k was okay are going to be the same ones saying "Why cant I use ACR?, I dont want to have to do DNG conversions first"

My two cents feel free to leave it on the pavement and ignore it if you want.

Jon

[NickT]

It's not as simple as just emailing Adobe a bit of code that they can plug in to ACR. I can tell you that Hasselblad and Adobe have been working very closely on this issue... stay tuned
Nick-T