I am trying to get my head around why 3FR files exist and what todo with them. I think I understand that 3FRs are Hasselblad's poison pill to prevent other software editors to be used from the get go. But...
If I take my 3FR files and simply convert them to DNG. What am I losing? I am happy to use Phocus ( once it is stable ), but I would like to be able to use PhotoMechanic or CaptureOne cataloging tools. Which I can't do until my images are in a format that contains an accessible preview.
Does anybody simply convert to DNG using Phocus and throw away the 3FR files? Since Affinity can open an FFF file I am assuming the FFF file is simply a sort of TIFF File. So do people store FFF files or DNG's?
I guess my main question is really what workflow are people using? To cull, catalog, and process their files?
From the Phocus user guide:
Q. Why are there 3FR and 3F files? Why can't captures be saved directly as 3F files?
A. 3FR files consist of native Hasselblad raw data that contains a huge amount of information, particularly when compared to 35mm digital files. This is essential to produce the level of quality expected from Hasselblad products. It follows that a good deal of computing power is required to extract the maximum in the shortest pos- sible time. To avoid diverting the camera's activities to image processing, the combined advantages of Phocus and a workstation are used instead. 3FR files are then processed into a complete and workable raw format that can be saved, adjusted and exported, namely, 3F.
Q. What's the difference between 3FR and 3F files? Should I keep them all?
A. A 3FR file is the native raw file created by Hasselblad cameras and remains in that format when stored on a CF card. When loaded into Phocus, however, various corrections take place based on the hardware configuration
of the camera used. This processes the 3FR file into a 3F format file and creates a high quality preview (size according to settings in Preferences). As this is an improved and specifically-tuned file, the original 3FR file can be discarded. You may, of course, export 3F files to TIFF, PSD, JPEG etc., and just keep those but if you have the space, retaining the 3F files could be good insurance to be able to re-process sometime in the future.
You should use FFF; DNGs do not contain all "improvement corrections".
I convert to (and keep) FFF, delete 3FR.
3FR and FFF files can be read by other post-processing tools, e.g., Adobe and DxO. Capture One could support the 3FR or FFF format, but they do not want to support the Hasselblad.
Converting to DNG does not bring you any advantage, but probably embedding a preview for cataloging purposes. For DNG conversion, I recommend using the free Adobe DNG Converter instead of Phocus unless you want to keep the losslessly compressed FFF files (created upon import to Phocus). I would not discard 3FR/FFF files.
Do FFF files contain a preview JPG?
1) As far as I know, Hasselblad is under discussion with Capture One (which is now separated from Phase One), and, hopefully, a coming version of Capture One would support .3FR or .fff files (but when ? And what about HNCS and lens corrections ?).
2) I have tried to export my .fff files into .dng, and it works quite well. Once you have the .dng, you can open them in Capture One. The problem is you loose the Hasselblad RGB (or Hasselblad L* RGB) colour space when exporting. And you get an Adobe RGB 98 instead......
Thanks for all the responses. From those I now realize why Hasselblad off-loads the conversion 3FR onto the computer and it makes sense. I retract my conspiratorial comment about using the 3FR to fff as a poison pill.. :(
My complication is that my first step for a long time was to use PhotoMechanic to import (ingest) files. The main purpose is to get them named correctly and placed into folders based on capture date etc. From there I would use CaptureOne Pro, to catalog and make a first pass. PhotoMechanic now has cataloging as a feature so I was thinking about moving to that. But PhotoMechanic doesn't support FFF files. I have written to them to ask if there is a way to ingest the FFF files, but I am not holding out hope. They were first asked 12 years ago.
So what do people use for that first step? What do people use to catalog. I have scanned negs, Canon, Fuji, Leica, Nikon, Sony raw files. I can use Phocus for editing, or DXO or multiple other apps. But ingesting and cataloging is trickier.
I plan to do the following: For every photographic event create a set of folders for that event and day.
1) make a folder named eventname-date and within that 3 folders, 3FR, FFF, TIFF
2) On an External drive after import into Phocus, eventname-date and move the 3FR files.
3) Edit images in Phocus, export to TIFF folder mentioned in 1) above.
If any images need further edits I would use Capture One on the TIFF.
My workflow is to open (import) .3FR into Phocus and export them as .dng, thus without corrections, and knowing that I lose the Hasselblad colour space. Then, I import my .dng into Capture One after some trick, and use the Capture One catalogue. When I want to print pictures that I think are worth to be, I restart with .3FR from Phocus and export them as .TIFF, that I import into my Capture One catalogue (and delete the previous .dng, then), and finally print using Photoshop.
I have checked that .fff, .dng, and .TIFF are identical, as far as colours are concerned, on my calibrated display (Adobe RGB).
The reason why I work with Capture One is that I am used to it, and that I need a catalogue.
Does anybody know of the FFF file has a preview?
When 3FR files or 3f files contain respectively Phocus mobile or Phocus desktop Raw post-treatment they are no more compatible as 3FR or 3f with any other software without loosing the post treatment.
The only solution is then to export as a 16 bit TIFF and go further with Photoshop or Affinity.
Phocus is so much better than any other software with Hasselblad files (I have to use C1 Pro for my Nikon and Leica files) that I finish all my Hasselblad pictures in Phocus with exports as JPEG for screen or print, or 16bit TIFF when compositing or specialized treatment are necessary.
Phocus is the champion in sharpness (no oversharpening), colors, gradations and better X lens corrections including older Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad C, H lenses, X-Pan lenses, on X cameras
Quote from: tenmangu81 on October 10, 2022, 08:28:55 AM
My workflow is to open (import) .3FR into Phocus and export them as .dng, thus without corrections, and knowing that I lose the Hasselblad colour space. Then, I import my .dng into Capture One after some trick, and use the Capture One catalogue. When I want to print pictures that I think are worth to be, I restart with .3FR from Phocus and export them as .TIFF, that I import into my Capture One catalogue (and delete the previous .dng, then), and finally print using Photoshop.
I have checked that .fff, .dng, and .TIFF are identical, as far as colours are concerned, on my calibrated display (Adobe RGB).
The reason why I work with Capture One is that I am used to it, and that I need a catalogue.
Why do you use Phocus instead of Adobe DNG Converter to create DNGs?
I assume you used the trick to change the camera model name. If that is the case, I do not expect the files to look as good as they should, but it does not matter for cataloging.
Quote from: SrMi on October 11, 2022, 02:42:17 AM
Why do you use Phocus instead of Adobe DNG Converter to create DNGs?
I assume you used the trick to change the camera model name. If that is the case, I do not expect the files to look as good as they should, but it does not matter for cataloging.
Yes, you are right, I should give it a try.
Otherwise, I can't understand why changing the EXIF should degrade the files.
Quote from: fti9748 on October 10, 2022, 04:35:41 AM
My complication is that my first step for a long time was to use PhotoMechanic to import (ingest) files. The main purpose is to get them named correctly and placed into folders based on capture date etc. From there I would use CaptureOne Pro, to catalog and make a first pass. PhotoMechanic now has cataloging as a feature so I was thinking about moving to that. But PhotoMechanic doesn't support FFF files. I have written to them to ask if there is a way to ingest the FFF files, but I am not holding out hope. They were first asked 12 years ago.
I don't know why CameraBits/PhotoMechanic are so stubborn about this. They claim (on support site) that FFF files do not have embedded previews, but this is manifestly untrue. For me it damages their reputation to repeat this - are they dishonest or incompetent? One or the other. But I guess very few photo journalists use Hasselblad, so they don't care. They've lost me as a customer.
PhotoSupreme reads FFF files and displays the preview. Actually what I do is this:
1. Import from card into Phocus, converting to FFF in a designated capture folder
2. Import from that folder into PhotoSupreme, saving to my custom file structure (Phocus can't do this. Phocus import is very crude), then clearing the capture folder
3. Open the FFF files in Phocus at their new location. Season to taste. Optionally export to TIFF, maybe work further in Photoshop.
4. Import the TIFFs to PhotoSupreme and stack with their parent FFFs
Since PhotoSupreme allows me to directly open files in Phocus, in then acts as my hub/catalogue for Hasselblad files.
A bit convoluted to start with, but it becomes a matter of habit. One minor issue is that for some reason PhotoSupreme does not recognise orientation in FFF files. I need to raise a ticket about that...
Quote from: tenmangu81 on October 11, 2022, 04:30:26 AM
Quote from: SrMi on October 11, 2022, 02:42:17 AM
Why do you use Phocus instead of Adobe DNG Converter to create DNGs?
I assume you used the trick to change the camera model name. If that is the case, I do not expect the files to look as good as they should, but it does not matter for cataloging.
Yes, you are right, I should give it a try.
Otherwise, I can't understand why changing the EXIF should degrade the files.
I assume that a raw processor demosaics and applies colors specifically to a certain camera model. If you fake the camera model or remove it, C1 will apply suboptimal, generic settings.
Also, with C1 demosaicing, you cannot apply lens corrections.
If you want to use C1, it is best to use it on TIFFs exported by Phocus.
I completely agree with you. The TIFFs generated from Phocus are the best way to print without any restriction, as they keep all the colour space and lens corrections. This is what I do when I want to print "seriously". However, for your information, I have compared, on my calibrated display (Adobe RGB 98), the pictures demosaiced by Phocus from .3FR, those opened with the Adobe softwares from .3FR or .fff, and the .dng obtained from Phocus and opened, after a trick, in Capture One. The colours (measured with the eyedropper) and the general aspect are the same !! Which means that very few colours are beyond Adobe RGB 98 in "real life". Of course, lens corrections are not kept by the .dng. And of course, this is not the good way of proceeding for a perfect print.
Are you saying that C1's generic color profile generates the same colors as dedicated Phocus color profiles?
Yes, that's what I've observed, at least on my calibrated display. What do you mean by "dedicated colour profile" ? At which level ?
Each raw processor applies a camera specific color profile at import. It defines the colors as well as the mapping curve.
Does it exist, Printing not seriously ? ;D
When printing not seriously it's when I print just on plain office paper for exhibition simulations.
But as the files are the same as for the final big exhibition prints, I always have to make serious raw processing.
Quote from: SrMi on October 12, 2022, 08:09:09 PM
Each raw processor applies a camera specific color profile at import. It defines the colors as well as the mapping curve.
OK. You mean the input profile. They clearly look different in Capture One and in Phocus, but I wonder where is the specific camera profile (for each camera) as defined by HB and used in HNCS, then ?
Hasselblad makes for each individual camera a specific color equalization for each pixel over the whole sensor surface, compensating sensor manufacturer deviations.
As the camera color profiling works for the whole sensor but not pixel specific, I imagine that when shooting the equalization takes directly place in the intensity coding of each pixel response.
I agree with you, and this could explain why Adobe softwares are able to open .3FR and .fff while keeping the HNCS.
Quote from: tenmangu81 on October 13, 2022, 07:28:22 AM
I agree with you, and this could explain why Adobe softwares are able to open .3FR and .fff while keeping the HNCS.
Note that there is a difference in colors whether you use Phocus or LrC. That difference is sometimes barely visible and sometimes apparent.
,,Adobe software ... while keeping the HNCS." - Does it? I don't think so. LR does not process the individual calibration data from 3FR files.
Quote from: Georg Kovalcik on October 14, 2022, 06:38:38 AM
,,Adobe software ... while keeping the HNCS." - Does it? I don't think so. LR does not process the individual calibration data from 3FR files.
This can be found in the Phocus Manual:
Hasselblad raw files can also be processed with other selected software applications, namely, Adobe Camera Raw / Lightroom and Apple Aperture. Note, however, that using Phocus is the most comprehensive method. The Phocus and Adobe methods can produce almost identical results (in most cases) regarding RAW conversion so it is a matter of personal choice regarding which method would best suit your preferred workflow. Alternatively you can use Apple Aperture though you should take note that the benefits of DAC and HNCS etc, will be lost in this case. Please check the Phocus Read-Me and our web page for updated information.And it could be understood that the benefits of HNCS are preserved with the Adobe softwares, while they are not with Apple Aperture.
Quote from: tenmangu81 on October 14, 2022, 06:42:27 AM
Quote from: Georg Kovalcik on October 14, 2022, 06:38:38 AM
,,Adobe software ... while keeping the HNCS." - Does it? I don't think so. LR does not process the individual calibration data from 3FR files.
This can be found in the Phocus Manual:
Hasselblad raw files can also be processed with other selected software applications, namely, Adobe Camera Raw / Lightroom and Apple Aperture. Note, however, that using Phocus is the most comprehensive method. The Phocus and Adobe methods can produce almost identical results (in most cases) regarding RAW conversion so it is a matter of personal choice regarding which method would best suit your preferred workflow. Alternatively you can use Apple Aperture though you should take note that the benefits of DAC and HNCS etc, will be lost in this case. Please check the Phocus Read-Me and our web page for updated information.
And it could be understood that the benefits of HNCS are preserved with the Adobe softwares, while they are not with Apple Aperture.
Has that been updated for the X2D? Aperture died many years ago.
Quote from: fti9748 on October 14, 2022, 02:45:57 PM
Quote from: tenmangu81 on October 14, 2022, 06:42:27 AM
Quote from: Georg Kovalcik on October 14, 2022, 06:38:38 AM
,,Adobe software ... while keeping the HNCS." - Does it? I don't think so. LR does not process the individual calibration data from 3FR files.
This can be found in the Phocus Manual:
Hasselblad raw files can also be processed with other selected software applications, namely, Adobe Camera Raw / Lightroom and Apple Aperture. Note, however, that using Phocus is the most comprehensive method. The Phocus and Adobe methods can produce almost identical results (in most cases) regarding RAW conversion so it is a matter of personal choice regarding which method would best suit your preferred workflow. Alternatively you can use Apple Aperture though you should take note that the benefits of DAC and HNCS etc, will be lost in this case. Please check the Phocus Read-Me and our web page for updated information.
And it could be understood that the benefits of HNCS are preserved with the Adobe softwares, while they are not with Apple Aperture.
Has that been updated for the X2D? Aperture died many years ago.
This has nothing to do with the camera model, of course. And it should be still valid for the running version of Phocus.
Quote from: SrMi on October 12, 2022, 06:14:29 AM
Are you saying that C1's generic color profile generates the same colors as dedicated Phocus color profiles?
Just for fun, I have tried to compare:
- ProPhoto vs Hasselblad RGB vs Hasselblad L* RGB colour spaces. In gray, ProPhoto, compared in the first image with Hasselblad RGB, and in the second image with Hasselblad L* RGB.
- RGB values measured with the eyedropper on the same point of the same image, using Photoshop, Phocus, and Capture One. See spreadsheet.
Update from Capture One, they are not rejecting the idea:
My request:
Capture One is now distinct from Phase One, as far as I know. I started with Capture One some years ago (version 8), and last year I switched from Leica, for which C1 is fantastic, to Hasselblad (X1D and X2D). These cameras are the MF competitors of Fujifilm GFX, which are taken in charge by C1. So, why not Hasselblad ? Should I move back to Lightroom ? Thanks for your understanding !!
Their answer:
Hi Robert,
Thank you for contacting us.
We understand that Hasselblad is a big part of the medium format market, and supporting those cameras feels long overdue.
You aren't the first to inquire, however, and I've added your case to the note for R&D to consider future implementation.
Please keep in mind, that due to our policy we do not comment or give out any information on future products and development.
Best regards,
Victor
Capture One Support
When it comes to the relationship between 3FR and FFF files, I use a simple consideration: I can create FFF from 3FR, but not viceversa, so I only keep the 3FR files in a Lightroom Catalog and, for the images I plan to edit and release, I create the intermediate FFF file, do some minor corrections in Phocus, export to TIFF, 16bit, Source color space, then add the TIFF to the Lightroom catalog ready for future processing in LR/PS and delete the FFF file (since I can always recreate it on demand if necessary).
This workflow seems pretty optimal because most of the steps (eg reimporting the TIFF file in LR) is automated and does not require human intervention, while I can preserve the optimal IQ delivered by using Phocus to process the original raw files, but, since I keep the original raw data, I can take advantage of potential future software improvements in the 3FR to FFF conversion.
Quote from: fcarucci on January 01, 2023, 11:39:48 AM
When it comes to the relationship between 3FR and FFF files, I use a simple consideration: I can create FFF from 3FR, but not viceversa, so I only keep the 3FR files in a Lightroom Catalog and, for the images I plan to edit and release, I create the intermediate FFF file, do some minor corrections in Phocus, export to TIFF, 16bit, Source color space, then add the TIFF to the Lightroom catalog ready for future processing in LR/PS and delete the FFF file (since I can always recreate it on demand if necessary).
This workflow seems pretty optimal because most of the steps (eg reimporting the TIFF file in LR) is automated and does not require human intervention, while I can preserve the optimal IQ delivered by using Phocus to process the original raw files, but, since I keep the original raw data, I can take advantage of potential future software improvements in the 3FR to FFF conversion.
Why do you need 3FR files when you have FFF? LrC handles FFF files as well as 3FR files. 3FR to FFF conversion does not alter the original data. The data is only losslessly compressed (FFF also allows Phocus instructions to be stored).
Quote from: SrMi on January 01, 2023, 01:38:38 PM
Why do you need 3FR files when you have FFF? LrC handles FFF files as well as 3FR files. 3FR to FFF conversion does not alter the original data. The data is only losslessly compressed (FFF also allows Phocus instructions to be stored).
I'm sure it's totally fine to keep the FFFs instead, it's just one less step for me to import the 3FR from the camera into LR and only convert the (few) images I want to work on. When I'm in the studio and I shoot tethered, I import the FFFs for example, because that's what I end up in the "Capture Folder" within Phocus, so I import that one which doesn't need the camera. I try to optimize for the workflow and for making sure all my images are backed up automatically without any manual intervention.
I might tweak the workflow though and end up keeping only FFFs though, you make some good points.
Caveating being a X2D newbie, if all I'm looking for is a basic starting point, where XCD lens corrections are applied, and whatever, if any, special color magic Hasselblad has, before doing edits on color, brightness, keystone etc, would the workflow be:
Phocus import 3FR and convert to 3FF then, export 3FF to TIFF and use Luminar Neo or other editors to make final edits?
Just to be clear, if 3FF is exported to DNG to begin final edits, the "foundational" components such as lens corrections, Hasselblad color etc, will be not be there to start so TIFF is the only way despite large file size.
Thanks for any comments.
Phocus is able to do 90% of all edits with the best possible image quality, inclusive 2 different RAW engines with very different moods, keystoning, color grading, special color profiles building, the best lens corrections for All Hasselblad optics including V system, H system, X-Pan, layers with masks, dodge and burn, B&W conversion, adding vignettes etc.
One of the only points where Phocus does a bad job is despoting. (3FR files are discarded, edited fff files are archived)
After the Phocus job I export a 16 bit Prophoto RGB TIFF that goes in Affinity Photo (or Photoshop, GIMP) that are the only softwares that can do all possible jobs, I do in it mainly despoting, removal of unwanted details...
For some special jobs there are Topaz denoising, ... Helicon Phocus for stacking, panorama software...
edited 16 bit TIFF's are also archived.
For books or zines the final files go to Affinity Publisher
For printing it's Epson Print Layout that has the best performance with Epson printers
That's my workflow
Luminar Neo doesn't seem to me the best processing software if you want to keep "natural" colours.
The two possibilities are:
1) As stated by JCM, process your files as far as possible with Phocus, which preserves colours and applies the best lens corrections, then finish the job with Photoshop or Affinity.
2) Import your .3FR files and export them as .fff without any processing, then open the .fff files within Lightroom, which preserves the colours but doesn't apply as extensive lens corrections as does Phocus. And finish the job with Photoshop for better local corrections, when needed.
DNG files exported by Phocus are definitely not the good way to proceed, as they don't keep original colours nor lens corrections when opening with an other software, and TIFF files are not as flexible as RAW as far as basic adjustments are concerned.
Phocus is quite magical with lens corrections, especially with X-Pan lenses that don't perform that great without but come out very good after Phocus processing.
Zeiss V lenses that have a bit of chromatic aberrations (wide angles) are really fully corrected in Phocus, leaving that special incredible Hasselblad Zeiss mood, a bit less surgical as XCD lenses and a lot of details.
The problem not seeing 3FR thumbnails seems to be specific to certain Mac computers ?
I have really no problem seeing them on my Windows 10 machines (a HP desktop and a MSI laptop), and even on the iPad with the DJI CoPilot HDD I use when travelling (Hasselblad SD card backup on the CoPilot)
The main problem for me is that even on an HDD wired to the iPad X1D and 3FR files are not compatible with Phocus mobile 2, but they are with Affinity for iPad 😉
A viable option seems to be take a more mobile vs desktop workflow.
Import 3FR files into Phocus Mobile 2 on iPad Pro, which I still don't know upon import, do lens corrections and color get applied automatically, or one has to explicitly check the options, and then:
Output to TIFF for other editing programs - or
Finish all edits natively on Phocus Mobile 2 - seems there's quite a bit of editing functionalities - and then output in jpeg, or TIFF.
Ideally would prefer being able to output also to PNG but that doesn't seem to be there.
Plan to study up on Phocus Mobile 2 and see if I can change workflow from desktop on Mac, to an iPad.
Perhaps it's time to be converting to mobile; certainly can lighten up travel gear not having to carry a MacBook Pro.
3FR files edited in mobile 2 store all editing steps done in mobile 2 and when importing in phocus desktop as fff you have the option of taking account of the mobile 2 editing or nor not simply by ticking a box.
In my opinion mobile 2 editing is just a rough approach for immediate web publishing as it has way less functions and possibilities than Phocus desktop. So mobile 2 editing can be an intermediate step, but not the final step in raw editing Hasselblad files.
JCM-Photos is absolutely right Mobile 2 is an interim step.
Tried it and found it's missing keystone and geometric adjustments which is mandatory for my wide angle shots. Additionally would want to apply gps data.
Looks like I'll need to use Phocus on desktop as the editor for perspective adjustments and output to TIFF or jpeg but still have no solution for ingesting gps from a logger, nor having 1 file type for storage since prior to the X2D, all files were shot with Leica on DNGs.
Perhaps I can find a file converter for TIFFs into DNG that would retain color and other Hasselblad file qualities.
Thinking this through, welcome any suggestions on how to have 1 common workflow that can be used for both Leica and Hasselblad setups.
I too shoot Leica and Hassy, for Leica I simply use C1 in place of Phocus and proceed the same way in Affinity with TIFF's.
I work in C1 with sessions and in order to simplify the asset management I use for my Hasselblad files a folders structure analog to C1 sessions (without any data base like C1 does it).
Quote from: o2mpx on June 26, 2023, 10:11:06 AM
Thinking this through, welcome any suggestions on how to have 1 common workflow that can be used for both Leica and Hasselblad setups.
Adobe softwares, maybe.... It is not the perfect solution, but almost.
I under-estimated the change needed in the workflow adding Hasselblad to complement existing Leica setup.
Approach was to minimize edits so from Leica DNG's from M or SL, GeoTag Photos gps data taken while shooting would be combined, culling done in ApolloOne, before running through DXO Pure Raw, along with those taken with iPhone, all DNG's imported into PhotoLibrary for edits with Apple Photos/Luminar Leo, subsequently shared through iCloud albums with friends.
Now with 3FR's, import into Phocus Desktop for export into 3FF's, culling can be done with ApolloOne as it reads 3FF's fine - but to include gps data, and subsequent import into Apple PhotoLibrary for edits/sharing, 3FF's need to be exported into DNG's - with the major downside, as I understand it, not having lens correction or HNCS benefits since those are not retained when 3FF's are exported to DNG's.
Haven't dug into the difference b/t a native 3FF containing lens corrections + HNCS + Phocus edits vs 3FF exported to DNG + DXO Pure Raw + Apple/Luminar Leo.
Looks to me very, very complicated !!
Indeed, there are moments that perhaps all I need is a Q2...
In matter of editing workflow and different softwares used : "Less is more"
These days, after having tried several workflow variations, this is the one that works best for me:
1 Step
X2D (3FR) ---to--- Phocus (FFF) / Basic Adjustments, such as white/black Point; curves; colour (sometimes); Reproduction / I don't touch the clarity or details sliders
2 Step
Phocus (FFF) ---to--- Lightroom Classic (HB L*RGB (source) 16-Bit TIFF) / used as DAM or occasionaly for further processing where Photoshop is not needed
3 Step
Lightroom Classic (TIFF) ---to--- Photoshop CC (using "edit in Photohop" within LR / PS will used embedded HB L*RGB) / process as required - luminousity masking, black and white conversion; croping; denoise (Topaz); sharpen (Topaz); etc; - within PS is use tools like topaz or Silver Efex (and others)
3.1 Step (if printing)
Add watermark, proof for printing; etc. / Save copy of image (TIFF) in dedicated printing folder (using dedicated file name for the paper I am going to use ---to--- ImagePrint (or any other printing software you use)
4 Step
Move (FFF) files to NAS for storage (using dedicated folder structure / Backup is automated via iDrive
I believe this gives me optimal quality, with the least amount of effort