Hasselblad X2D
Not currently planned
-
X2D is a large part of my work and Adobe and DXO fully support it. As such, I won't be upgrading C1 until it is supported.
1 -
thank you for all your efforts, really hope we have a chance for c1 support.. a man just can dream
2 -
Can someone help me to understand why C1 supports Leica S and the Fujifim GFX cameras but not the Hasselblad X system ?!?!
I am old enough to remember that there was a time they wouldn't support any MF camera in competition with the Phase One system but now things have changed, so what's the problem??
Its incredibly frustrating too see how silent they keep despite the overwhelming request from the community!
2 -
Thodoris Chorianopoulos Thank you for the update. This is a clear statement, and it's better than having to speculate endlessly. Maybe the avoided workload to incorporate Hasselblad's cameras can now be used to address another problem mentioned in several posts, namely the lack of performance on Apple silicon reported by several users. This is arguably a far bigger issue, as it affects people's decisions to hold off the switch from intel Macs to the new SoC platform – or, worse, a cause of frustration leading to abandoning C1 altogether.
1 -
Thanks Theodoris.
My main question is, why Capture one is intensionally not allowing any DNG files that belongs to Hasselblad to be imported in the catalog? (The only way to make it work is to erase the name Hasselblad from the DNG file)
That is more than just lucking support!
As a longtime CO user, I feel that is unacceptable.
Thanks
Ettore3 -
@SFA. The DNG format was designed by Adobe to be a universal cross platform format. The work on DNG conversion is done by Adobe's software. C1 has not offered any convincing reason why C1 blocks DNGs from Hasselblad cameras.
2 -
I think Ned Costello makes a good point. The official statement put out by CaptureOne on this subject, is not very clear on why they don’t support DNG’s. Or the simple management of files via the catalog feature. I don’t need CaptureOne to edit my X2D files, but I would appreciate being able to catalog and sort by metadata and there is nothing about an X2D file stopping CaptureOne doing that.
I def. feel this has more to do with trying to force people to adopt PhaseOne products, like the new XC. Which I imagine is designed to be a competitor to the X2D for some people.
1 -
GJT West, and others make excellent points.
Oddly I have DxO which can see and edit the Hasselblad X2D files. Adobe Bridge, etc. too There are obviously others so given the clear genius of the C1 team it's not a technical issue.
C1 is an outlier here and it seems bullheaded corporate speak rather than operational prudence. And what I might expect from PhaseOne rather than an apparently independent company.
I value my Phase One equipment (XF/XT with IQ3/IQ4 and 6 lenses), along with the Hasselblad X2D, and the Leica M11 / M11 Monochrome. Why C1 cripples itself for apparent deference to Phase One's competitor position to Hasselblad is beyond me.
This is not market driven; all the amazing work of David Glover and others to help us maximise our appreciation of C1 is undercut by this corporate mentality. A pity of playground masculinity written large.
0 -
Lets clarify a few points:
For many years Capture One wouldn't support any other MF camera that wasn't Phase One, that included Fujifilm GFX, Hasselblad H and Leica S.
I am not talking just about not "supporting" those models but doing their best to block their users from to do it! Basically even if you converted the files in to he standard DNG format, the software wouldn't allow to import the files, the only work around was to slightly change the metadata (maker name) of the DNG. for ex: "Hasselbla" without the "n" or "Fujifilm_" adding the "_" .....doing that, tricked the program, and one could import and read the files with the standard capture one DNG color rendering profile (obviously without the Lens correction and the color calibration done by Capture one for each specific camera)
From September 2017 things started changing, CO started officially to support the GFX series and slowly support for the MF Pentax and Leica was added.
Unfortunately the Hasselblad cameras are the only one not supported but worst that is that they still continue to filter the DNGs!!!!
I have been using Capture One for more then a decade and I feel that CO own to do better, at list allow the program to import the DNG files from a Hasselblad camera without the hack!
Thanks for listening.
1 -
@sfa - I'm not sure what PDF's have to do with DNGs. However, in respect of the latter, C1 will open DNG's provided one can edit the metadata to convince C1 that the DNG does not originate from a Hasselblad camera. So C1 is fine processing DNGs provided it thinks they are not Hasselblad DNGs.
0 -
@SFA regarding Phocus other camera support - there is one "minor" difference between Phocus and C1 - Phocus is free. Which, for the avoidance of doubt, rather negates any requirement or imperative for it to support non Hasselblad cameras.
1 -
What a sad and disappoint day. Logged in to see if there are any updates only to see an official reply by the moderator to attach a statement by ceo.
Hassy recently started a technical feedback chat via fb messenger. Through it , it was mentioned that hasselblad is open for it to be supported by C1. Looks like the real problem here lies with C1. As mentioned above they have for the longest time blocked all other manufacturers. Not sure why are they so worried. Users buying phase 1 and x2d are generally different target audience. While i would agree it overlaps a bit but it should not be such a big concern. Blocking hasselblad is not gonna make me buy a phase one camera.
1 -
@SFA, Thanks for your lengthy reply about DNGs. I appreciate you taking the time to explain your reasoning in detail. Personally, I'd be quite happy to take an unreconstructed DNG and work in it in C1. HOWEVER!! To be clear, the request for DNG support is based on a Hobson's choice between being able to work on Hasselblad- sourced files in C1 and not being able to do that at all. Full support for Hasselblad's RAW files is what we should be getting. Most of my work is with Fujifilm GFX's and it is utterly frustrating not to be able to use the same editing software for my X2D files. I'm putting a moratorium on purchasing any C1 upgrades until DNG support, at a minimum, is provided.
0 -
I didn't upgrade this year due in large part to lack of Hasselblad support.
3 -
Same here, I see no reason to upgrade when 16.2 works just fine for my no Hasselblad equipment and I can use it for as long as I want. This is why I did not jump on the subscription bandwagon. The price I paid was fair and it is mine, well sort of.
2 -
I'm done with upgrades unless there is support for Hasselblad.
3 -
I am with you!!
I am so tired of this charades 🤬1 -
The upgrade price for the "current" version is a joke. And for what? AI mask selection, which Adobe did ages ago and can select better either.
I've paid USD 199 for Capture One 22 with free upgrade to 23. And now the upgrade cost almost the same? In your dreams.
1 -
C1 Has pretty much structured it's pricing so that a major version upgrade costs the same as paying for 12 months of rolling upgrades.
I think one would certainly need full cross platform support to be putting up with that!!
1 -
Same thing here. I just cancel my subscription.
1 -
I have let my subscription lapse and am going over to photoshop/lightroom as a result of this....silly, petty move. I get it....but at some point the important thing to do is be open....the X2D is an amazing, achievable camera. The Phase Ones are amazing but not achievable. It is that simple. That is not likely to change...so it is just leaving money on the table from my perspective. Now if Phase one did a cost benefit camera under 8k dollars that used achievable lenses.....until then, the "bad guy" here is Phase One.
1 -
Please look beyond past differences and create what would obviously be a FANTASTIC pairing.
1 -
Have started to accepted the fact that c1 will never support hasselblad file so i've officially migrate all my post processing into LR. Wont be renewing my subscription once it ends. Pricing of subscription for C1 is nearly double of LR and doesn't support hasselblad files. Just not practical to keep C1 active just for my Leica files. While C1 icc profiles for the Leica files look better than in LR it is not day and night to make it worth keeping. So LR will be the one software to rule them all for me. Thankfully hasselblad's embedded icc profile is really good as it is that there isn't anything to complain about. While I will be slightly losing out in terms colours LR's AI tools are on a way better than C1's current implementations. Goodbye C1.
0 -
For Capture One to support a given camera platform I imagine they have to establish a relationship that grants them access to the proprietary sensor technology information so they can craft the raw processing engine to get the best quality out of their images and to be able to integrate tethering at the level we have come to expect from Capture One.
Capture One once was part of PhaseOne. There was a lot of rivalry between Hasselblad and PhaseOne. Even with Capture One being a separate company now you can imagine that it could take a long time for them to establish any kind of trusting relationship with Hasselblad. PhaseOne and Capture One are owned by the same private equity company. There may still be a lack of trust by Hasselblad to come to the table and open up their proprietary technology to enable Capture One to support their cameras.
I would not assume that lack of support for Hasselblad is due to Capture One's lack of interest. It could very well be that Hasselblad is not willing to participate.
0 -
@ Walter Rowe - Phase One competes with all kinds of camera manufacturers for high resolution business in the 45-100mp range. Arguably, Fujfilm's GFX 100 cameras are a closer competitor to Phase One than Hasselblad as the GFX system is far more extensive than Hasselblad's and it hasn't stopped C1 from supporting the GFX. If the issue is lack of cooperation from Hasselblad, then C One should just come out and say that. It may be the case and if so then C1 should make the position clear. But even if that is the case, then the should remove the internal flag that stops C1 reading DNGs sourced from Hasselblad RAWs.
0 -
The discussion is about Hasselblad support. Support for other cameras are irrelevant. It seems clear that Fujifilm and Capture One have a close relationship. It is no surprise the GFX cameras would be supported. The GFX is a relative late arrival to the high megapixel game and it doesn't compete with PhaseOne's system. I imagine that Capture One would welcome a relationship with Hasselblad. It is to Capture One's advantage to support that platform.
We don't know how Capture One "cooks" a raw file into an RGB file and what hardware / platform knowledge they need to do so. Just because a camera delivers DNG as its native raw file format doesn't mean Capture One feels it can get the very best out of the raw file for its imaging pipeline. Leica produces a DNG file as its native raw file format. Capture One seems to have a close relationship with Leica in order to peek inside the platform and get what they want from these raw files.
Capture One seems to have a close relationship with all of the hardware platforms they support. So far that relationship doesn't seem to have developed with Hasselblad. It would not surprise me if Capture One can process those Hasselblad DNG files but perhaps Capture One doesn't feel the output is to their standards because they lack certain information about the hardware platform.
It is a fair request to ask for Hasselblad support. That's what this request does. Any suggestions as to how it could be or why it isn't supported is pure speculation.
3 -
@ Walter Rowe, with all due respect, a discussion about where support for Hasselblad Files in C1 sits in the context of the wider camera ecosystem is highly relevant. In effect, this is a discussion about discrimination and such a discussion can only take place with reference to a comparator or comparators.
Further, for clarity, my reference to DNGs is to DNGs converted via Adobe DNG converter. Obviously, there are no native Hasselblad DNG files.
1 -
I can tell you from first hand knowledge that derivative DNG raw files from camera native raw files do not produce the same quality in Capture One. They have a disclaimer about DNG files in their release notes. The Adobe DNG converter does some massaging of the raw data before it is written into the DNG container. I know Adobe claims that DNG is as good as the camera native original raw file. Capture One seems to feel differently given information they apparently get from the camera native raw that they feel makes a difference in their image processing pipeline.
1 -
True! But what it’s shameful is that Hasselblad intentionally blocks any DNG file converted from a Hasselblad camera. But if you remove the name Hasselblad from the file (or even just a letter) then C1 is able to read the file with the generic DNG profile. Capture One should know better then that!
1 -
@Walter Rowe - the alleged DNG quality variation issue is well known. To empirically test that I converted some files from my X2D to DNG and manually altered the camera name in the EXIF data from Hasselblad to Basselbad so that C1 would open the files. Having done a back to back comparison of the original RAW image in Phocus and the same image converted to DNG and opened in C1, I have no confidence that I would reliably distinguish one from the other in a "blind" test. That was viewing the images at up to 200 percent magnification on a quality photographic monitor.
1
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
141 comments