3FR to FFF quality in Phocus and Lightroom?

[mar-ko]

Hey everyone,

I am using Lightroom as my main picture database.

Will the best quality FFF files be achieved only when processed with Hasselblad's Phocus software?
I understand, that 3FR files contain data, that need to be processed to eventually get an FFF file (which is the Hasselblad RAW file format with all calibration data etc. applied). This is normally done in Phocus. However, Lightroom can read 3FR files as well. So, can the same quality of processing be achieved in Lightroom?

If not, that would mean, that you should always shoot tethered into Phocus, not into Lightroom, If you want to get the best  FFF quality possible?

[pflower]

I have been using LR for Hasselblad files since v4 - with my H3D-39.  I do not do colour critical work - i.e. I do not need (or want) to absolutely nail colours in my files as against a standard reference file.  My understanding from conversations with Hasselblad back in LR v 4 days is that Hasselblad has provided Adobe with all the relevant technical information and details so that the Adobe treatment of 3FR files is based upon the same data.  Indeed Hasselblad used to bundle Lightroom with its products for quite a long period.

Back in LR v4 days there was a very clear difference between LR and Phocus in saturated reds and yellows.  Phocus was definitely better.  That now seems, to my eyes, to have been solved.  Using my H3D-39, a CFV-50c and now the X1D I cannot tell the difference between a 3FR file, a 3fff file and a tiff exported from Phocus when looking in Lightroom.  However many with much better colour discrimination and need than I (and probably better monitors) consistently say that Phocus provides better colour rendition than just LR.

However I now do import my 3FR files into Phocus and then load the 3fff files into LR and then develop from then on in LR.  Partly because the consensus that Phocus is better than LR at an initial stage may be right even if I can't notice it.  But also because weirdly the 3FR files are supposed to be compressed and the 3fff files uncompressed.  With the H3D-39 and the CFV-50c the size of the 3fff files is about 20% larger than the 3FR files.  But with the X1D the opposite is true.  The X1D 3fff files are about 25% smaller than the (theoretically) compressed 3FR files.  No idea why.  I was told when I demoed the H6D-50 at its launch and commented on this that the reason was that compression hadn't been implemented on the new camera.  2 years later it still hasn't been.  Yes hard disks are cheap but it all still adds up if you shoot a lot.

So even though it does involve an additional step in the workflow, importing 3FR files into Phocus and then the resultant 3fff files into LR can't do any harm and does save a bit of disk space.

[maxct]

I am going through the same process and trying to figure out the best workflow.  I also don't shoot against a reference or do color-critical commercial work.  So far I am leaning heavily towards just using Lightroom - the workflow is so easy and the results are great - no need for additional .fff files, exporting to LR, LR has excellent XCD lens profiles, and I am not seeing any noticeable improvements in file quality when using Phocus (unlike when I was comparing Lightroom to Capture One for my Leica files).  So for my uses, I just don't think it's worth the extra step and time to use Phocus.  YMMV.

I am interested to read about others' experiences.

Peter

[PhotoKratky]

I use Phocus for three reasons: I'm shooting tethered 99% of the time, the lens profiles and corrections are built in, and the Moiré correction (if needed) is quite effective (and not available anywhere else, as far as I know).

That said I only do very basic corrections in Phocus, mostly boosting shadows and recovering Highlights and from there it's over to Lightroom and then to Photoshop...

[hvk]

In my opinion the results from sharpening and noise reduction in Phocus are better.
Also, if you use the HTS (I use it for ~1/3 of all my shots) there are no profile corrections in Lightroom.

I use Phocus for basic adjustments and export as TIFF in to Lightroom.

/Henrik

[Miller]

When I bought my H3DII ACR and Lightroom  could not compete with Phocus conversions. Nowadays that may be different, but as I am used to Phocus I feel no need to change my workflow.
File compression was important back then. More files on a CF card. When shooting tethered, only FFF files are transferred.
Nowadays, file size is less of an issue. With the X1D, heat management is. No file compression means less heat production. Why 3FR files are written instead of FFF I do not know. It could be for reasons of compatibility with firmware or software. Anyway, both file formats contain identical raw data as far as I know.
If you do not see any differences in ACR/Lightroom between a 3FR, a FFF or a TIFF exported from Phocus, to me that would mean that the TIFF was produced without adjustments made in Phocus.

[hvk]

My understanding is that 3FF files are 3FR files with a profile applied and a preview embedded. The two types were implemented because of limited hardware resources in the older backs.

/Henrik