Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/02/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bob, pardon me stating the bleeding obvious, but what LR version do you have? 2.6 for most folks and 2.6.1 for the M9 folks Cheers Geoff http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman On 14 February 2010 12:14, Bob Adler <rgacpa at yahoo.com> wrote: > Right now it isn't that way. CS4 can open the .fff file; LR can't. > But as I said just rename the file from .fff to .tif and it's EXACTLY the > same data. > Bob Adler > Palo Alto, CA > http://www.rgaphoto.com > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Richard Man <richard.lists at gmail.com> > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Sent: Sat, February 13, 2010 6:07:44 PM > Subject: Re: [Leica] Hassy CFV workflow suggestions? > > I'm pretty sure the Adobe Photoshop and LR both use the ACR (Adobe Raw > Converter) engine inside? So if CS4 supports it and LR doesn't, then it may > just be a matter of time for the upgrade? > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Bob Adler <rgacpa at yahoo.com> wrote: > > > I hope I'm not being redundant with what other's have said here, but I > > don't think LR can import 3f files. CS4 can (Imacon just released the RAW > > converter for CS4) but LR can't. > > > > What you have to do is go in and change the .fff (or whatever it is for > the > > files from the back) to .tif. Though you would think this would lose your > > RAW file abilities, it doesn't. It's still the RAW information. This > learned > > after a long conversation with an Imacon tech. > > > > Works very well for me with my Imacon scanned RAW (.fff) files into LR. > > Best, > > Bob > > Bob Adler > > Palo Alto, CA > > http://www.rgaphoto.com > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: "afirkin at afirkin.com" <afirkin at afirkin.com> > > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > > Sent: Sat, February 13, 2010 12:05:59 AM > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Hassy CFV workflow suggestions? > > > > George, rant away, I think we all understand ;-) If you don't change > > computers, the software last longer in my experience. But of course by > > buying the 39 you have pretty big files to deal with, not something my > > first iBook could deal with ;-) > > > > Cheers and good luck with LR. I really do like the workflow, and found > > phocus too "focused" on Blad alone. > > > > Alastair > > > > > > > Mark...nope..photoshop CS won't open em unless you "upgrade" to CS4 or > > > something else needlessly "feature rich"... > > > Alastair...thanks for that, I now see that LR can actually create > finish > > > files and can use various plug ins and now realize that I can open the > > > files > > > in photoshop CS and NOT, importantly, "upgrade" to any "face > > recognizing", > > > "GPS locating" "made easy-for-you" "new and better" software...hell, I > > was > > > really upset that I had to "upgrade" to CS in the first place...not to > > > mention it took me a while to figure out how to stop iPhoto from > grabbing > > > and "filing" all of my images...sorry for the rant...just can't stand > the > > > constant forced march to having to continually spend more money to do > the > > > same simple task. Anyway, now if I can figure out how the hell > > > LRs file model works so I can fit it into my dyslexic and disorganized > > > world > > > view, I'll be all set...but now I see at least I can create a giant > > output > > > file for printing from my print supplier...thanks very much! By the > way, > > > Hasselblad's Phocus has no provisions for outputing files like LR does > > and > > > since it looks and works very similar to LR, I just assumed LR was > > equally > > > functionally disabled. I asked Hasselblad about whether they were at > all > > > worried that other photo processing software that would need to import > > > Phocus files would alter them somehow and they said they didn't think > any > > > file alteration would occur. I'm not so sure about that...so, Phocus is > > > out, > > > LR seems to be in and since I do no retouching and only minor > alterations > > > in > > > levels I may not need to go to photoshop CS anymore...just hope I don't > > > have > > > to "upgrade" LR continuously from now on...Thanks again, > > > George > > > Chicago > > > > > > > > > On 2/12/10 8:28 AM, "lug-request at leica-users.org" > > > <lug-request at leica-users.org> wrote: > > > > > >> Message: 25 > > >> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 02:57:12 -0500 > > >> From: afirkin at afirkin.com > > >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Hassy CFV workflow suggestions? > > >> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> > > >> Message-ID: > > >> <9f1b6d88c5bf21d0db2f9636da96a83c.squirrel at emailmg.globat.com> > > >> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 > > >> > > >> George, > > >> The blad files are not really supported by the smaller companies. I"m > > >> about to get a portable storage device and it won't show the blad > > >> images. > > >> There was a small software called image converter I think, but in > > >> reality > > >> importing into lightroom and automatically converting the files into > DNG > > >> is probably the best way for you to go and LR really does a great job > > >> with > > >> "printing" once you learn it. > > >> > > >> Cheers > > >> > > >> alastair > > >> > > >> > > >>> Hello... > > >>> I managed to aquire a CFV back for my Hassy V system (hurray!) > > >>> but am really stuck about software. All I want is a quick cheap easy > > >>> way > > >>> to > > >>> convert Hassy raw files to be able to use them in Photoshop without > > >>> having > > >>> to buy $800 bucks worth of Adobe's Creative Suite. I've got > > >>> Hasselblad's > > >>> Phocus software, which is like Lightroom but you don't have any > output > > >>> flexibility (size of print etc) ...and Lightroom is just plain > > >>> frustrating and confusing to me. I don't want any features, filters, > > >>> post > > >>> processing gizmos, skins or any of that...just gimme a usable file in > > >>> my > > >>> Mac > > >>> version of Photoshop that I already own (CS I think) and let me make > > >>> prints! > > >>> Man, do I hate this fetish that software companies have for layering > on > > >>> features that I don't want. In fact, I wish I didn't have to use > > >>> photoshop > > >>> at all and could use a cheap piece of open source software that has > NO > > >>> features except file translation and output...period. Anyone got any > > >>> suggestions? > > >>> thanks > > >>> George > > >>> Chicago > > >>> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Leica Users Group. > > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > -- > // richard m: richard @imagecraft.com > // portfolio: < > http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/richard/PICS/AnotherCalifornia > > > blog: http://rfman.wordpress.com > // book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963 > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >