I hope Capture One will support Hasselblad files soon. There is no better RAW converter. Until then I use Phocus for the basic adjustments and when I need more I convert to Capture One or Photoshop (TIFF).
Happy new Year
Quote from: Middle2023 on January 07, 2023, 07:50:23 PM
I hope Capture One will support Hasselblad files soon. There is no better RAW converter. Until then I use Phocus for the basic adjustments and when I need more I convert to Capture One or Photoshop (TIFF).
Happy new Year
Well, whether there is no better raw converter is debatable (and has been debated ad nauseam).
Once, hopefully, C1 adds Hasselblad support, you may still want to go via Phocus to extract the most out of your files.
OMG 🤣
Quote from: SrMi on January 08, 2023, 05:56:58 AM
Once, hopefully, C1 adds Hasselblad support, you may still want to go via Phocus to extract the most out of your files.
Well, I am not yet convinced..... I don't know the kitchen Phocus makes with the colours and HNCS when exporting, but it works very well with Capture One. My .dng's as exported from Phocus and opened in Capture One give me EXACTLY the same colours as my TIFF's exported from Phocus as read in Capture One, in the 3 colour spaces I have checked : Adobe RGB 98, Prophoto and sRGB. I am very surprised and don't know why, but I am very happy with Capture One by now, even if sometimes I go back to Phocus just to have a look at the result I could obtain. Not better than Capture One, anyway. The only thing I miss is a good printing module in Capture One.
Weird, isn't it ?
Software printing modules I know have all bad ergonomics compared to Canon (print studio pro) or Epson (Epson print layout) manufacturer printing modules.
I only use "Epson Print Layout" software with my Epson printer, in place of Capture One, Photoshop, Affinity, Phocus printing functions.
Live is so easy with Epson print layout having a real WYSIWYG printing preview including reliable margins preview and management, real time native soft proofing, semi automatic batch printing ...
For example, in case of a printing profile choice error, that can happen when you have dozens aper profiles on your computer, you notice it immediately in the preview before starting to print (colors shift in the preview)
You even see in the preview rendering differences between different paper types ! Of course this only works well with a perfect tuned high end monitor.
How do you export the file from Phocus to C1? When I select "DNG" in Phocus, I still cannot import to "C1". However, Tiff does not work DNG.
Quote from: Middle2023 on January 09, 2023, 03:58:01 AM
How do you export the file from Phocus to C1? When I select "DNG" in Phocus, I still cannot import to "C1". However, Tiff does not work DNG.
https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2018/12/18/my-journey-with-the-hasselblad-x1d-by-ettore-causa/
;)
Very "amateurish" look these C1 images !
way oversharpened
oversaturated
no tonal richness
Yes, but this depends upon the quality of the photographer, the post-processing that has been done, etc.... Nothing to do with the given recipe for opening Blad images using C1.
Quote from: tenmangu81 on January 09, 2023, 05:34:39 AM
Quote from: Middle2023 on January 09, 2023, 03:58:01 AM
How do you export the file from Phocus to C1? When I select "DNG" in Phocus, I still cannot import to "C1". However, Tiff does not work DNG.
https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2018/12/18/my-journey-with-the-hasselblad-x1d-by-ettore-causa/
;)
You export to DNG, hack the EXIF data, and still cannot apply camera-specific color profiles and lens corrections (vignetting and distortion).
I hate the default rendering of C1, despite I have to use it for my leica RAW's.
But it works very fine on Phase One RAW's because you can choose in a whole bunch of different default renderings (camera profiles)
I know some people who swear on C1 for their Nikon RAW's, and when I ask : how can you ? they answer : I have my own dedicated camera profile 😄
With Phocus I don't have to do extensive corrections, it is always perfect. Biggest duty is to enter manually lens and shooting datas when using V lenses to activate the unique lens corrections.
Camera color profile is kept, I don't know how and why, as I can obtain in Capture One exactly the same colours as in Phocus for three different colour spaces I have checked. And the same when I compare colors between a .fff file in Phocus and the same file converted to .dng and opened in Capture One. Once again, I don't know how and why, but what imports to me is the result, not only checked by eyes, but also with an eyedropper.
As far as lens corrections are concerned, I agree that the extensive corrections made in Phocus, taking into account the focus distance and the aperture are not possible with Capture One, but I have made my own preset and I get almost the same correction. Actually, I can't really see by eyes the difference between my lens corrections preset (distortion and vignetting) and the corrections made within Phocus. The only problem I have is with my XCD45P, as it has a pincushion distortion, that Capture One can't correct.
Once again, only the result is important to me, and it is at the same level as the one I can get with Phocus. Furthermore, I am used to Capture One and its very performing tools, and its catalogue, that I personnally need.
And finally, as I don't know what Capture One would do when implementing HB files (if they ever do), I prefer to keep my workflow, that I am very happy with !!
Quote from: JCM-Photos on January 09, 2023, 08:33:17 AM
I know some people who swear on C1 for their Nikon RAW's, and when I ask : how can you ? they answer : I have my own dedicated camera profile 😄
With Phocus I don't have to do extensive corrections, it is always perfect. Biggest duty is to enter manually lens and shooting datas when using V lenses to activate the unique lens corrections.
Yes, it is well known that some Nikon camera profiles are very bad in Capture One, and people had to make their own profile. I had a customized profile for my Leica, too.... This is the reason why I won't trust very much Capture One if they ever make their software to be able to open Blad files !!
With Capture One, I don't have to make extensive corrections : my X1D II files are almost perfect when opening (from the technical point of view !!). I would say that I have to make almost nothing, and I am very happy with this.
Note, the question of Hasselblad support came up in the recent interview by Paul Reiffer of Capture One's CEO, on Paul's YouTube channel.
Let's say the reply was not exactly overwhelmingly positive.
If so, with Capture One's new commercial policy encouraging subscription, it might be necessary to look for another solution...
I'm curious to understand if the lack of Hasselblad support in C1 is down to C1 or Hasselblad?
I've heard both from talking to people on this matter, Hasselblad is refusing to cooperate, and also that C1 is the bottle neck. I'm really keen to champion this integration for my commercial workflow, so am looking for the right angle to approach it from.
Paul.
It's completely C1/Phase One. They have never forgiven Hasselblad for "closing" the newer H series camera bodies to Phase One backs, forcing Phase One to go pick up Mamiya of the scrap heap in order to provide a plat form for the Phase backs.
Capture One is now a different company. Yes, there are more possibilities for the Phase One cameras and backs than for other cameras, but it is just a sort of "legacy". With the HNCS system on the HB side, and the specific colour monitoring on the C1 side, I understand it could be very difficult to find an agreement, at least on the technical and license side.
Thanks for the info, so it seems likely both sides are resistant, which could mean no integration coming soon, at least not without some external pressure.
Do we know if anyone has ever reached out directly to Hasselblad or C1 to get an official statement on it? If not I'll attempt to do this myself. Appreciate it's not going to be an overnight change, but I believe the appetite is there, so worth trying to get to the bottom of it all.
Phocus is great, but C1 is such an integral part of the majority of commercial photographers on set workflow, it's often a deal breaker for buying a Hasselblad.
I spoke with a very well respected Digi op in the UK and they now refuse to work with Hasselblad commercially for this reason. I think you'd do well to find any Digi op who would choose to work with Phocus.
So, if Hasselblad was compatible with C1, it would certainly open up Hasselblad cameras to the commercial world on a larger scale.
I'll try to find the best contacts at Hasselblad and C1 to communicate with, if anyone has any leads / emails it would be much appreciated.
Thanks.
I have a contact with a French member of the commercial staff in Sweden, and I will ask her.
For Hasselblad cameras Phocus is the great RAW Converter. Unmatched colors.
For Phase One cameras is Capture One the best RAW Converter, also for Leica M and SL in my experiences.
We need Phocus and Capture One for the RAW Conversion - but Photoshop beats them all in the post production!
Quote from: jhasselblad on April 05, 2023, 10:50:58 PM
For Hasselblad cameras Phocus is the great RAW Converter. Unmatched colors.
For Phase One cameras is Capture One the best RAW Converter, also for Leica M and SL in my experiences.
We need Phocus and Capture One for the RAW Conversion - but Photoshop beats them all in the post production!
We do already have that, so seems you're all sorted. My aim is getting Hasselblad supported in C1 for my own and many others on set professional work flow.
Quote from: tenmangu81 on April 05, 2023, 09:43:05 PM
I have a contact with a French member of the commercial staff in Sweden, and I will ask her.
That would be amazing, thank you for your support :)
Quote from: jhasselblad on April 05, 2023, 10:50:58 PM
For Hasselblad cameras Phocus is the great RAW Converter. Unmatched colors.
Right !! But I have compared the colours (with a Colour Checker image) in Phocus and in Lightroom, and they are identical (I mean for the .fff files). And Lightroom is already far better, as far as processing is concerned, than Phocus. So why not Capture One ? ;D
Quote from: tenmangu81 on April 04, 2023, 05:37:45 AM
Capture One is now a different company. Yes, there are more possibilities for the Phase One cameras and backs than for other cameras, but it is just a sort of "legacy". With the HNCS system on the HB side, and the specific colour monitoring on the C1 side, I understand it could be very difficult to find an agreement, at least on the technical and license side.
Not really separate at this point. The same private equity firm owns both of them and they probably still have the same directors running both of them. has put each of the two businesses into a separate business entity, probably to maximize value on a sale by cleaning up the balance sheet of the software business by removing the drag on earnings from the Phase camera business and facilitating a sale of each business to a separate buyer.
The bad blood between Phase and Hasselblad is tribal. The potential income from additional licenses of Capture One being sold to Hasselblad shooters is very minor in the scheme of things. Hasselblad would have to pay Phase to agree to do it, which is apparently what Fuji did.
Wow, okay, sounds like a complicated one to solve!
Quote from: jhasselblad on April 05, 2023, 10:50:58 PM
For Hasselblad cameras Phocus is the great RAW Converter. Unmatched colors.
For Phase One cameras is Capture One the best RAW Converter, also for Leica M and SL in my experiences.
We need Phocus and Capture One for the RAW Conversion - but Photoshop beats them all in the post production!
Capture One does not fully support M and SL cameras (crop and LPC). AFAIK only Adobe software does.
Quote from: SrMi on April 06, 2023, 03:56:20 AM
Capture One does not fully support M and SL cameras (crop and LPC). AFAIK only Adobe software does.
I've had a M9 and a M240, and I've never seen any issue with the crops. What do you mean by LPC : LCC or lens corrections ? Lens corrections are not that bad. I haven't use LCC very often, and thus I don't know about this tool. Could you give some examples, and I'll try ? Thanks.
Even if Capture One were to be opened up to Hasselblad files, what are the chances that Phase One would work effectively and reliably with Hasselblad so that the conversion of those files in Capture One would be competitive with Phocus (or even LR)?
Quote from: hcubell on April 06, 2023, 07:47:52 AM
Even if Capture One were to be opened up to Hasselblad files, what are the chances that Phase One would work effectively and reliably with Hasselblad so that the conversion of those files in Capture One would be competitive with Phocus (or even LR)?
It may sounds shallow, but I'm not sure this would bother me at all, I just need to have them be compatible for an on set workflow. Once the 'live' shoot is over, I can take those files into any RAW conversion software for the final output.
Quote from: tenmangu81 on April 06, 2023, 05:07:35 AM
Quote from: SrMi on April 06, 2023, 03:56:20 AM
Capture One does not fully support M and SL cameras (crop and LPC). AFAIK only Adobe software does.
I've had a M9 and a M240, and I've never seen any issue with the crops. What do you mean by LPC : LCC or lens corrections ? Lens corrections are not that bad. I haven't use LCC very often, and thus I don't know about this tool. Could you give some examples, and I'll try ? Thanks.
LPC is Leica Perspective Control. Here is an article about it:
https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2021/01/leica-perspective-control-for-m10-r-m10-p-and-m10m/ (https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2021/01/leica-perspective-control-for-m10-r-m10-p-and-m10m/)
It is available in M10P and later and in SL2/SL2-S.
Q2 and SL2 embed crop instructions (1:1, 35mm, 50mm) that should generate a default crop when the raw is imported.
.
Quote from: paulcalver on April 06, 2023, 08:24:01 AM
Quote from: hcubell on April 06, 2023, 07:47:52 AM
Even if Capture One were to be opened up to Hasselblad files, what are the chances that Phase One would work effectively and reliably with Hasselblad so that the conversion of those files in Capture One would be competitive with Phocus (or even LR)?
It may sounds shallow, but I'm not sure this would bother me at all, I just need to have them be compatible for an on set workflow. Once the 'live' shoot is over, I can take those files into any RAW conversion software for the final output.
Understood.
Quote from: SrMi on April 06, 2023, 12:38:24 PM
LPC is Leica Perspective Control. Here is an article about it:
https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2021/01/leica-perspective-control-for-m10-r-m10-p-and-m10m/ (https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2021/01/leica-perspective-control-for-m10-r-m10-p-and-m10m/)
It is available in M10P and later and in SL2/SL2-S.
Q2 and SL2 embed crop instructions (1:1, 35mm, 50mm) that should generate a default crop when the raw is imported.
.
Ah yes, I remember that and saw it when the M10 and M11 were released. As I quit with my M240, I didn't check this opportunity with Capture One. And, indeed, we couldn't predict how Capture would manage the HB files in case it would.
Quote from: tenmangu81 on April 05, 2023, 09:43:05 PM
I have a contact with a French member of the commercial staff in Sweden, and I will ask her.
No answer from her by now :(
No problem, I've been reaching out to both C1 and Hasselblad but mostly to deads so far... I'll keep trying.
I've just found a work around to shoot tethered to Capture One with my X2D, although should work for all Hasselblad Cameras:
- Set up a Capture One session
- Open Phocus and connect your camera to shoot tethered
- Shoot 1 file and then export this as a DNG to a folder which is within your Capture One session inside the Captures folder
- Now you've exported one file to correct folder, you can enable the 'Export New Images Automatically' option in Phocus.
Now for the import and slightly tech part.
- Install exifTool https://exiftool.org (follow their instructions)
- Open MacOS Automator and create a new Folder Action.
- Set the folder you want to monitor as the "Folder" input in the "Folder Action receives files and folders added to" dropdown menu. This is the folder you made inside Capture One in which the DNG files are being exported to.
- Add a "Run Shell Script" action to the workflow.
- In the "Run Shell Script" action, set the Shell dropdown to "/bin/bash".
- In the text field, enter the following command:
for f in "$@"
do
/usr/local/bin/exiftool -overwrite_original -MakerNotes= "$f"
/usr/local/bin/exiftool -overwrite_original -Make=HB "$f"
done
Save the workflow and enable the folder action.
Screen shot of the automator action attached.
There's a fairly long lag, about 8-10 seconds, but it will import the DNG files directly into Capture One.
Hope this helps some of you while we wait for an official integration.
P
You can make it faster with a slight tweak in the automator script:
for f in "$@"
do
/usr/local/bin/exiftool -overwrite_original -MakerNotes= -Make=HB "$f"
done
Capture One is laying off staff:
https://petapixel.com/2024/01/30/capture-one-lays-off-staff-amid-a-significant-internal-restructure/
It is more and more unlikely Capture One would support HB files, then.
It is indeed unlikely that Capture One will provide support for Hasselblad raw files, cameras and lenses.
Here is a link to an official statement on this subject from Capture One: https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/10297394968989-Hasselblad-X2D (https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/10297394968989-Hasselblad-X2D)
Bob
I am also a long term Capture One user since release 3, and in my opinion they sold their soul to the devil ! ! !
Their image rendedering got more and more in direction of what want the big amateurs community with oversharpened, overcontrasted, oversaturated default renderings. This was not the case in the past.
They do it for all compatible camera brands except for their own. When I open a Phase One file it appears perfect on the gecko ! (and there are also many more profiles to fine tune these Phase One files).
All professionals I know turn down there default serttings with a personal profile at import, then it's OK.
When opening a Hasselblad file in Phocus it turns out to be perfect with minimal to no correction, this is for me a huge advantage.
I like Phocus. It is missing a lot of features that you need, like an effective spot removal (the Phocus one is absolutely terrible), being able to fix blemishes on portraits, being able to remove an object just in the frame if it spoils an otherwise fantastic image. So professional X series users seem to export to Photoshop.
I've been a Capture One user for over ten years and although I'm happy to use Phocus, can't really get my head around Photoshop and I dislike Lightroom.
I asked CO a couple of weeks ago if they would support the Hasselblad files and (as mentioned several times already) they replied not at this time.
Quote from: JCM-Photos on February 02, 2024, 07:02:12 PMI am also a long term Capture One user since release 3, and in my opinion they sold their soul to the devil ! ! !
Their image rendedering got more and more in direction of what want the big amateurs community with oversharpened, overcontrasted, oversaturated default renderings. This was not the case in the past.
They do it for all compatible camera brands except for their own. When I open a Phase One file it appears perfect on the gecko ! (and there are also many more profiles to fine tune these Phase One files).
All professionals I know turn down there default serttings with a personal profile at import, then it's OK.
When opening a Hasselblad file in Phocus it turns out to be perfect with minimal to no correction, this is for me a huge advantage.
Many seem to judge a post processor by the initial "unprocessed" rendering. So, not long ago, Adobe added stronger default sharpening. Most professionals seem to turn it down.
Quote from: Whitten on February 15, 2024, 12:49:09 AMI asked CO a couple of weeks ago if they would support the Hasselblad files and (as mentioned several times already) they replied not at this time.
Yes, Capture One replied to all current or former users who wanted it to support HB files.
You can find the link above (#38).
Two posts about this?
I know they replied ages ago, but the only possible way to persuade them is to keep asking, however forlorn that hope. The more people who ask for support the more they might feel pressured to relent.
I was talking to a pro photographer yesterday who is about to buy a Fuji medium format, his main reason is that he wanted to continue using Capture One.
I don't know people who choose their camera according to the software they are used to. But I can understand they could have their own way of thinking.
As far as I am concerned, I decided to switch from Capture One (that I used for years) to the Adobe world (Lightroom + Photoshop) after I bought my X1D II, and I am very happy.
If you prefer Capture One and are fast using it, then yes you are not going to choose a system that can't be processed with Capture One.
I started using Lightroom for the first time a year ago. I have never been that happy. I had to use my copy of Capture One to work on some old RAW files a couple of weeks ago and immediately felt more at home and enjoyed my day editing.
For me, having to use Phocus or Lightroom/PS on my X1D2 files is a compromise.
Interesting thread.
I use Canon and Hasselblad. The Canon profile in C1 is excellent.
For the Hasselblad, colour fidelity and tonal gradation in Phocus beat anything else I've tried. But, I find it clunky and not near as feature-rich as C1.
One has to wonder if the limitations of Phocus are one of the reasons the H series was discontinued? Even though the files can be processed in third-party software, did Phocus put people off?
That said, I read somewhere recently that about 10,000 medium-format cameras are sold every year, and Canon make about that many a day. May be an urban myth, but probably at least half true.
D.
Well, approx. 8.000.000 digital cameras are sold every year, and Canon has almost a 50% of the market share... so yes, 10.000 cameras per day make sense. :-)