What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Processing Hasselblad Files

T

tapas

New Member
Hi

This is my first question - so be kind. I've been reading this forum for years and recently upgraded my Hasselblad V and Phase One back to a H4D31. The information on this forum has been really helpful and I'm very pleased with the camera for my uses.

My question is about processing the files and in particular the speed of doing so. One of my main hesitations in switching was the loss of Capture One but I tend to use Lightroom 3 for the majority of my work and the introduction of Hasselblad profiles seemed to be the clincher.

Now my problem is that using Lightroom with the H4D31 files is really slow, even if I render 1:1 previews it seems to take ages to be able to view the files, almost as if the computer has to undertake special rendering (or has indigestion !). The speed is an order of magnitude slower than the Phase One files, Leica or Canon 5Dii files.

I'm using a 2009 version Mac Pro Quad Core with 12GB RAM, 2 video cards and 4 drives so that image files are separate from applications. I don't really want to use Phocus which doesn't seem that quick anyway.

Many Thanks

Tapas
 
I know you are hesitant - BUT - I would go with Focus, as I find it really gives the best colour rendition etc. It is also remarkably easy to use.
On my Mac Book Pro the current version of Focus is pretty good - granted the size of the files.
 
tapas said:
Hi

This is my first question - so be kind. I've been reading this forum for years and recently upgraded my Hasselblad V and Phase One back to a H4D31. The information on this forum has been really helpful and I'm very pleased with the camera for my uses.

My question is about processing the files and in particular the speed of doing so. One of my main hesitations in switching was the loss of Capture One but I tend to use Lightroom 3 for the majority of my work and the introduction of Hasselblad profiles seemed to be the clincher.

Now my problem is that using Lightroom with the H4D31 files is really slow, even if I render 1:1 previews it seems to take ages to be able to view the files, almost as if the computer has to undertake special rendering (or has indigestion !). The speed is an order of magnitude slower than the Phase One files, Leica or Canon 5Dii files.

I'm using a 2009 version Mac Pro Quad Core with 12GB RAM, 2 video cards and 4 drives so that image files are separate from applications. I don't really want to use Phocus which doesn't seem that quick anyway.

Many Thanks

Tapas
Click to expand...

Hmmm, something seems amiss with your system somewhere.

I process Leica S2, Leica M, Sony A900 and Hasselblad H4D/60 RAWs in LR3 ... (note: 60 meg not 31!)

The 60 files are a bit slower than the 31 or 40 were when I had those cameras, but not that much slower. To be expected, since it's crunching twice the data.

And I have the same computer with less RAM and only one graphics card ... which also is driving dual 30" screens.

Which Graphic's cards are in your machine? My original one got pretty tired and slow, and when I replaced it with a ATI Radeon HD 5770 everything pepped right back up.

I'd also recommend running the Disk utility pretty frequently when processing big files. Especially the HD with the LR library.

There is another solution that I can't remember exactly ... it's about trashing something, but I'll have to look it up before opening my big mouth ... LOL!

-Marc
 
Hi

Thanks for the replies.

Swissblad - I do accept that I need to get used to Phocus but if I'm mixing cameras etc then LR3 is great for continuity of look.

Marc - I have 2 x NVidia GEForce GT120 cards ? Maybe there is something wrong with my set up

Tapas
 
I understand - I would prefer to use Aperture - I just found the colours much better in Focus.
I'm sure Marc had a few tips up his sleeve.
 
As far as I know, unlike Aperture, Hasselblad has collaborated with Adobe to provide all lens DAC corrections and the Hasselblad color profile.

Hasselblad's David Grovner has stated that, as far as these IQ aspects are concerned, LR and Phocus are now virtually identical.

Phocus is essential for tethered work, and has a few tools for specialized work not available in Lightroom ... and I prefer the Phocus color wheel selector to adjust very specific colors.

However, for general workflow ... the speed, array of selective processing tools, much improved noise tool, and ability to apply other software solutions like Nix Define 2, or open a file in PSCS5 to work in layers without leaving the LR library ... is a workflow and quality control bonanza in Lightroom.

I also have C1 Pro v 6.3.2 on my machine and while I know how to use it, have never really taken to it. It is a darned good software, but I could never get my workflow stream-lined to come anywhere near the speed of Lightroom. For some cameras, C1 is the best there is ... but Hasselblad obviously isn't one of those cameras : -)

In general, Lightroom now supports every camera I own, and makes standardizing workflow a reality. Standardization leads to one valuable thing ... expertise. The more you work in one RAW software program, the faster and better you get at it. Nothing takes the place of practice and experience IMO.

As far as issues of speed in LR, it is very difficult to diagnose long distance because the variables can be legion.

Some variables are covered by Adobe: Here is the link to adobe's suggestions for optimizing performance in Lightroom:

http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/400/kb400808.html

Hope this helps,

-Marc
 
Thanks Guys,

I used to be a dedicated C1 user before LR3 but LR3 is just so convenient and quick. The only thing I really miss is the keystone correction on C1 which is just amazing. Obviously I can't tell if C1 would be faster with Hasselblad files.

I had another look at Phocus and can't see any value in it, apparently tethering from LR3 for Hasselblad may be a possibility in the near future.

I did do a full disk repair on the hard drives which has helped somewhat. I feel the main bottleneck is accessing the previews - I am going to try an SSD and a new graphics card.

All said and done though, I am so pleased with the H4D and Hasselblad, the True Focus is amazing, the service I have got from the company has been excellent and the price was so much better than anyone else. Rest is up to me.

Tapas
 
Processing Files

Tapas, I have about the same Mac like you and I changed the 120er Card with the 5770. The difference is really big and I miss nothing. Working also with Phocus and Lightroom 3. I have the H4D-40.
lg, rem
 
Hi Rem

Thanks for that, I have a 5870 that should arrive tomorrow so looking forward to the hopeful speed increase.

Tapas
 
I really prefer Phocus to LR I got with my M9. Anyway I have to use LR too as phocus does not work with Leica files.
 
tapas said:
Hi Rem

Thanks for that, I have a 5870 that should arrive tomorrow so looking forward to the hopeful speed increase.

Tapas
Click to expand...

Well Tapas,

How much speed increase did you get with the 5870 Video Board?

I would expect a good increase in speed whenever processing the RAWs or displaying the files in large preview windows.

Speed with Phocus should definitely increase.

Please let us know your conclusions.
 
Hi Rob

I've had some chance to use LR3 and Phocus but my main testing was for LR3.

For LR3 I found that the 5870 did not make much difference but having 2 SSDs really makes a huge difference. One SSD as the main drive with applications on it and a separate SSD to use for LR3 catalogues.

For Phocus however, everything seems complete turbocharged the program is now really responsive and actually usable. I would argue that my brand new Macbook Pro was faster with Phocus than my Mac Pro before I put the new graphics card in.

All in all I would recommend the upgrades but obviously I can't tell whether the 5870 is worth it against say a 5770 which is less than half the costs. SSDs are definitely the way to go for applications and for immediate work files.

Tapas
 
I'm pretty new to this with an H4D-31 but so far Phocus seems to work well enough and it's free so I don't have to buy Lightroom.

One thing about it though is that none of the Export options seem to preserve the TIF filename to be the same as the 3FF filename. This seems strange or am I missing something?
 
DougDolde said:
I'm pretty new to this with an H4D-31 but so far Phocus seems to work well enough and it's free so I don't have to buy Lightroom.

One thing about it though is that none of the Export options seem to preserve the TIF filename to be the same as the 3FF filename. This seems strange or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Hi Doug,

In the Export window, go to Name Preset and select "Full Raw Name". You exported Tiff's will use the name as indicated on the raw file. Example, if my Hasselblad 3f raw file is Boxing_Gloves001.fff and i Export to Tiff, my file will be Boxing_Gloves001.Tif
There are quite a few "Name Preset" options available to you or you can create your own by going into Edit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top