I've been waiting with baited breath for some reviews on the Hy6 but am surprised to read how much is still not known. Why is this taking so long to get sorted? I read the review on LL and the accompanying thread but still am left wondering for sure about if I bought it would my files have EXIF data in them or only if I use certain software.
That literally, printing houses went out and bought hundreds of backs -at this point I dont understand why printing houses and not photographers, but i am quoting him...
I can explain the separation-of-color-from-density thing latter, since that is also mentioned in the manual that I am reading...
you expect a Ferrari to behave like ... a Ferrari.
Forget about not having a 28 or a 35, just compare the way a P 25 is built (I mention this because is the one I am most familiar with) and this Sinar back is. Phase makes a complete metal enclosure that works dissipating heat, has no fan, so no air is blowing inside and out of the back casing --like the Leafs--, the LCD is small to generate minimum heat and consume juice, and the battery fits with the back exposed in the other direction of the back, also to expel any exes heat.
In other words, the design of the Sinar camera is function following form. It is not improving the standard...
Hi Leonardo,
I am really surprised that after all the hype this thing is still not finished, has a lot of apparently large design flaws. Plus they already had the 6008 AF so its not exactly like they started at square one. Really a surprise. I think they put all their money into PR instead of engineering.
Eric
He said that this was the reason why Phase One backs got the lion share of the market for digital backs. That literally, printing houses went out and bought hundreds of backs -at this point I dont understand why printing houses and not photographers, but i am quoting him.
So, a Phase One back will give you -according to my source - a more consistent file that converts better to the printing process. "Photographers that provide good CMYK converted images get paid big time " hi explained.
High-end digital repro work, particularly with oversized originals is done with cameras and digital backs, I gather, as often as or more than scanners. A camera with a digital back is faster than a scanner and can deal with any size original. Betterlight scanning backs are also attractive to this market, particularly for museum reproductions, where they might need the additional resolution that a scanning back can offer over a single-shot back.
Bob Salomon from HP Marketing has mentioned occasionally on the LF forum that libraries, museums and other businesses and institutions that do copy work are a significant market for Linhof products.
The streams of data are kept separated -- this it the vital element -- "The black data is saved as lightness data, and the color data is saved in a similar technology to chroma and hue information as found on the LAB color model."
The Manual also claims that:" In addition, the Phase One model of pixel building creates superior sharpness, color and range in highlights and shadows. this result is possible through superior quantities of color and density information even in highlights and shadows. Extreme lighting conditions also succeed with surprising hight quality"
... so, should we consider this book as an Phase One infommercial ?
Rainer, I think that there is a high component of BS in what is said about this systems. I met an expert in Leaf cameras that insited that the Leaf handles colors and can be profiled in a superior way, and the statements that I quoted from Mr. Borchenkos's Applied Crasftsmanship Manual.
The independent expert voices are not as comon. I agree that a good camera in the hands of a bad photographer will, as you said, produce rabbish...
-- but there is a lot of marketing info-commercials out there and it can't be all true when Thierry is saying that "I can assure you that "Sinar" files are considered by almost all serious printing houses as the best and cleanest files, needing the less PP." and Borchenko claimes the same !
On the other side, if I had to send a CMYK converted image to print next Monday -- either with a Sinar or Phase -- it would probably not be as good as the next image since: I have no experience doing it !. My point is that there is probably so much variation in photographers skills that a consistent superiority of files coming from either Phase or Sinar would be improbable.