About that "Hasselblad Color Science"...

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

That'd be me. Adobe universe. Photoshop and Illustrator. Most of my shots wind up as the base image on a t-shirt or such. With other elements added the customer wants. And so the output of Photoshop is just the beginning. The rest is done in Illustrator and all the adjustments are driven by the DuPont Artistri Inks the Direct To Garment printer uses.

Or, other adjustments for one of several different Process printing schemes on the automatic screen printing press. The DTG is better, of course, but it's slow. So not much good for those large orders. That's when we do all the extra work with the older Process methodology.

Anyway, the end result has to look decent when printed with whatever inkset. Often times it look odd on the computer screen. And I can always seem to get the tweaks right using Adobe. The best part is the two tools work well together.


M+R 8 Color Automatic Screenprinting press and conveyor dryer.

The Auto is the blue one in the background. That's the Manual press in the foreground printing some shirts for a local Wing + Bar restaurant. Beer is my friend. No photos involved there.


Direct To Garment printer

This is the DTG. Showing one of my Lighthouse shots producing a Quilt Block on fine fabric. So, no other stuff added like there might be on a shirt. The only thing Illustrator did here was feather the edges. Something much easier to do in AI than PS. Also we added some text at the bottom about the year the lighthouse was built. And the DTG RIP takes the PSD file as input. Pretty seamless.

Notice that four of the eight ink channels are white. That produces a proper color underbase for the CYMK inks. So this doesn't work out quite like we are used to on paper printers.

Stan

--
Amateur Photographer
Professional Electronics Development Engineer
Once you start down the DSLR path, forever will it dominate your destiny! Consume
your bank account, it will! Like mine, it did!

 

[colinsurprenant]

It seems to me that the way most people interpret "color science" is in fact the highly subjective act of interpreting the factory-set/predefined/default color rendering provided by the manufacturer. This to me seems very silly. When precise color reproduction is important in my shots, I will first create a profile for my camera/lens/lighting with a color checker card then use that in my edit process. When I am free to apply my color creativity I always start as flat as possible using the neutral profile (in LR) then go from there manually. I understand this process might not be practical for some, but in the end I do believe you can always get to where you want color-wise and do it in an relatively efficient way if needed. Bottom line, for me, the whole "color-science" topic is the least of my concerns when considering a new body!

Colin

 

[Rob de Loe]

It seems to me that the way most people interpret "color science" is in fact the highly subjective act of interpreting the factory-set/predefined/default color rendering provided by the manufacturer. This to me seems very silly. When precise color reproduction is important in my shots, I will first create a profile for my camera/lens/lighting with a color checker card then use that in my edit process. When I am free to apply my color creativity I always start as flat as possible using the neutral profile (in LR) then go from there manually. I understand this process might not be practical for some, but in the end I do believe you can always get to where you want color-wise and do it in an relatively efficient way if needed. Bottom line, for me, the whole "color-science" topic is the least of my concerns when considering a new body!

Colin

It does seem to matter a lot to some folks judging by what one reads. If I had to guess, I would suggest that it matters the most to people who are unwilling or unable to do the profiling, or who don't want to stray too far from the defined path.

I bought the camera I use now (GFX 50R) because of budget, mechanical fit issues, adaptability, user interface, image quality, etc. "Colour science" (or "Colour Engineering") wasn't even on the list of considerations because I was shooting black and white exclusively at the time.

 

[bobby350z]

This is an example of an image processed in Phocus, imported with "Nature Adjustment" and modifications in Shadow Fill and Recovery (highlights). I could not create these colors with Lightroom, with which I have much more experience.


X1D + XCD45P

P.S.: I probably could if I spent enough time with the HSL panel.

Would have been nice to see side by side from LR. To me it doesn't look any different from what GFX or any camera can do. I use CaptureOne but can't imagine Lr to be that different.

LrC, Using Adobe Landscape profile, fixing shadows and highlights a bit.

Thanks. Would you mind sharing the raw file. I would like to see what CaptureOne does.

Capture One cannot read Hasselblad files.

Wow, didn't know that. No wonder colors look better with Phocus. Between Lr and C1, I will take C1.

 

[Rob de Loe]

This is an example of an image processed in Phocus, imported with "Nature Adjustment" and modifications in Shadow Fill and Recovery (highlights). I could not create these colors with Lightroom, with which I have much more experience.


X1D + XCD45P

P.S.: I probably could if I spent enough time with the HSL panel.

Would have been nice to see side by side from LR. To me it doesn't look any different from what GFX or any camera can do. I use CaptureOne but can't imagine Lr to be that different.

LrC, Using Adobe Landscape profile, fixing shadows and highlights a bit.

Thanks. Would you mind sharing the raw file. I would like to see what CaptureOne does.

Capture One cannot read Hasselblad files.

Wow, didn't know that. No wonder colors look better with Phocus. Between Lr and C1, I will take C1.

To be fair, Adobe Landscape is not a profile I would use because it messes rather heavily with the colours.

In other words, SrMi's helpful samples are comparing Hasselblad's very neutral version to a decidedly non-neutral Adobe version.

A fairer comparison would have been to Adobe's Camera Matching profile, which is Adobe's best attempt at what Hasselblad intended.

 

[SrMi]

This is an example of an image processed in Phocus, imported with "Nature Adjustment" and modifications in Shadow Fill and Recovery (highlights). I could not create these colors with Lightroom, with which I have much more experience.


X1D + XCD45P

P.S.: I probably could if I spent enough time with the HSL panel.

Would have been nice to see side by side from LR. To me it doesn't look any different from what GFX or any camera can do. I use CaptureOne but can't imagine Lr to be that different.

LrC, Using Adobe Landscape profile, fixing shadows and highlights a bit.

Thanks. Would you mind sharing the raw file. I would like to see what CaptureOne does.

Capture One cannot read Hasselblad files.

Wow, didn't know that. No wonder colors look better with Phocus. Between Lr and C1, I will take C1.

To be fair, Adobe Landscape is not a profile I would use because it messes rather heavily with the colours.

In other words, SrMi's helpful samples are comparing Hasselblad's very neutral version to a decidedly non-neutral Adobe version.

A fairer comparison would have been to Adobe's Camera Matching profile, which is Adobe's best attempt at what Hasselblad intended.

Thank you for the comments, Jim.

Here is a comparison of LrC output using Camera Standard (default) and Phocus using "Adjustment: Standard." The difference in colors is less pronounced, but I like the Phocus version a bit better:




LrC, Camera Standard




Phocus, Adjustments: Standard

 

[Sixby45]

Hi Rob - in regards to the color profile / interpretation for HNCS - I seem to recall that for the older CCD bodies, Hasselblad supplied Lightroom with the profiles to use openly, whereas Phase One did not, and kept the profiles in house with capture one.

Now I have to say that I use Phocus and Lightroom and to my eyes with HB files Phocus is doing some behind the scenes base adjustments that arent there in LR - so much like when using Capture one, which applies different base adjustment, you would likely have to move some sliders in LR or make a custom profile as it comes in to match by eye what you will see in each editor.

Dont know if that helps, but thats what my research on it yielded when I shot lots with my H3Dii

 

[Rob de Loe]

These are a lot closer. As was the case when I compared a few files, it's close, but not the same -- so I can easily see why someone would prefer one over the other.

 

[Rob de Loe]

Hi Rob - in regards to the color profile / interpretation for HNCS - I seem to recall that for the older CCD bodies, Hasselblad supplied Lightroom with the profiles to use openly, whereas Phase One did not, and kept the profiles in house with capture one.

Now I have to say that I use Phocus and Lightroom and to my eyes with HB files Phocus is doing some behind the scenes base adjustments that arent there in LR - so much like when using Capture one, which applies different base adjustment, you would likely have to move some sliders in LR or make a custom profile as it comes in to match by eye what you will see in each editor.

Dont know if that helps, but thats what my research on it yielded when I shot lots with my H3Dii

Thanks Rich. This far into the thread a person could conclude I'm interested in buying one of these. Alas, my pockets are insufficiently deep. I am curious about how things work though, which is why I started the thread.

Your experience matches what I've seen to date, in other words, LR is getting "close", but it's not the same. It seems to be close enough for a lot of people to not want to bother with using Phocus and then Lightroom -- but that's obviously a personal choice.

Thanks for weighing in.

 

[TechTalk2]

Hasselblad has never given much more than fairly general information regarding the technical aspects of Hasselblad Natural Color Solution (HNCS). I was using Imacon digital backs prior to their merger with Hasselblad and can say that in addition to a scanner and digital back product line, Hasselblad acquired some excellent color engineering talent from Imacon.

I can only relay some fragments, as I understand them, of HNCS. I believe that a substantial portion lies with their extensive sensor calibration. The calibration, like all calibration, is to a standard or standards. The standards being used by Hasselblad, as best I understand it, is to a set of color response profiles they put a great deal of time and resources into developing.

Their goal, as their marketing implies, was to create one profile that would deliver "natural and pleasing color" (which is subjective of course) over a wide range of conditions. It's the wide range of conditions part of this goal, where I believe the extensive calibration enters the picture to achieve not just the color response Hasselblad wants, but to do that as consistently and reliably as possible all the time.

I think it's fairly well known that Hasselblad goes to rather extraordinary lengths to calibrate their sensors over a very broad range of exposure and lighting conditions. It occasionally gets mentioned in reviews that there is a very large calibration file stored in each camera. Hasselblad in one of their videos mentions there are over 700 calibration exposures made for each sensor. That calibration data is applied to each image file before it is written to memory.

There are plenty of testimonials from photographers regarding the unique consistency of color results from their Hasselblad, but not much that demonstrates clearly that Hasselblad delivers on the consistency promise.

But, I stumbled across a test here at DP Review, that I found interesting. It's a test of the Sony A1 which includes some interesting comparison options. In addition to the standard test scene comparison, there are two others labeled: Raw DR: Exposure Latitude and Raw DR: ISO-invariance. So, I selected some cameras and settings and got the following results...

 

[TechTalk2]

Standard ISO 100



Raw DR: Exposure Latitude


Raw DR: ISO-invariance

The Hasselblad X1D images were processed in Adobe Camera Raw, so Phocus does not play a role in these results. My suspicion is that the degree of color consistency from Hasselblad is most likely the result of the extensive calibration process for each sensor.

I found it an interesting experiment and result.

 

[TechTalk2]

For anyone interested in a partial glimpse of how Hasselblad Phocus software provides consistent color from different cameras used under different lighting and exposure conditions, Anders Torger has been able to determine some of the internal processes. Some of you may know Anders Torger as the creator of Lumariver Profile Designersoftware.

Here is a link to his description of the Phocus color handling portion of the Hasselblad Natural Color Solution. I'll quote just a few excerpts below...

"...Unlike Capture One they don't use ICC profiles for camera input (unless you roll your own for repro!), and they don't use Adobe's DCP either (of course). Instead they have their own camera profile format, an XML format which you can find in the "ColorMaps" directory. The XML files are not easy to interpret though, but I've figured out some basics...

The idea of Phocus color is that you don't need to select an input profile, the color rendition should be good for any type of light condition. In Capture One and many other raw converters you select profiles based on light condition, and in Lightroom there's the dual illuminant DCP files (they use StdA and D65 illuminants). What is Hasselblad's approach?

When playing around with my H4D-50 doing some boring test shots I've noticed that the color is indeed good in both daylight and tungsten, despite using the same profile, which is supposed to be "impossible".

However, it turns out it's indeed a multi-illuminant system, they have Tungsten (~2950K), Low Tungsten (~2100K) and Flash (~5650K), plus "Flash-Daylight" (less sure of that name, anyway same temperature as flash but daylight version), that is no less than four illuminants. Each of those illuminants have their own color matrix. Then there are color correction tables for Tungsten and Flash (there's no separate tables for the Low-Tungsten or Flash-Daylight variants, too similar I guess), each in two versions, one for the "Standard" look and one for "Reproduction", ie one subjective with more punch, and one tuned for accuracy. There's also one "neutral vector" for tungsten and flash, probably a way to describe the whitepoint with RGB multipliers...

...As far as I understand Phocus will automatically select illuminant matrix and chroma correction LUT based on the white balance you set in Phocus, and blend between them for intermediate values, that is the same way dual illuminant DCP works in Lightroom. The difference from DCP is that Phocus profiles have more illuminants, and is more sophisticated in that aspect, but have a bit simpler LUT. On the other hand will the simpler LUT make sure that they're no nasty non-linearities which you can have in (bad) DCPs.

In all I'm quite impressed with the color model in Phocus, it's simple towards the user and advanced under the surface."

 

[Rob de Loe]

This is really fascinating. Thanks for writing that all out.

The thing I find particularly interesting here is the consistency that is claimed for different lighting conditions. That seems a very difficult challenge.

 

[Erik Kaffehr]

This is really fascinating. Thanks for writing that all out.

The thing I find particularly interesting here is the consistency that is claimed for different lighting conditions. That seems a very difficult challenge.

I am a bit familiar with Anders Torger's analysis of Phocus internals.

Just to say, I don't think there is a lot of issues with the sensor data, those are pretty linear devices.

The are where I think Hasselblad may have done an excellent work is providing a set of good 'looks', exposure dependent hue and saturation adjustments.

There is a lot of marketing stuff involved that may make little sense.

Best regards

Erik

 

[SrMi]

Here is an in-depth discussion of Hasselblad's image processing workflow for raw capture:

(16:13)

Also: Webinar: Color Management with the Hasselblad Natural Color Solution