p.3 #1 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
freaklikeme wrote:
The cameras have their issues, like every other camera available today, but people love them, so nothing, really. Everything else is another marketing stink making Hassy and an untold number of YouTubers look unethical and desperate.
They're very nice, though expensive and the lenses are generally enormous. The problem is that so many YouTubers got them for free, including many who would otherwise probably never have bought one, that we don't know what to believe anymore.
Generally, YouTubers always got cheaper gear for free (partly because it's expensive to ship stuff back etc.), but cameras and (expensive) lenses were just on loan or were used only at the press briefing. Hasselblad broke that mold.
And the video in the OP also makes clear that it wasn't just Hasselblad giving the kit for free (instead of sponsoring a video with money), but that it also suggested content for the resulting video (even though most YouTubers with free kit said that Hasselblad only asked them to make a video about the kit but otherwise didn't make any demands).
p.3 #2 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
Google is incredibly greedy, and squeeze the sh*t out of every little pore they can find. Currently they are recommending small channels, which I am still not sure why they are doing it. Possibly it limits their payouts to larger channels.
Making a living off YouTube these days means making a living from Patreon and so on.
p.3 #4 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
It looks like Hasselblad's or rather DJI's marketing approach is increasingly similar to Insta360's: preferred treatment of influencers vs press, freebies and strongly suggesting you make your review positive, etc.
They seem to be very successful with that, at least in their domestic market - the number of Hasselblad's I've seen during my New Zealand trip in May was insane. Some guys even with multiple X2Diis on them. All of them Chinese tourists.
I hope they get enough push back on their approach in Western markets to make them reconsider. I guess if not it at least opens up an opportunity for Fujifilm, Leica, etc to do better.
p.3 #7 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
David mentions that he borrowed the camera, then raves about how good it was! Yet he seems reluctant to discuss Hasselblad’s color science. I’m not sure why—it’s been a strong selling point since the H-series days.
Meanwhile, plenty of YouTubers claim they can get the “Hasselblad look” from a Fuji, Sony, or Leica. If that look isn’t anything special, why put so much effort into convincing people they can replicate it?
The same goes for the debate over Lightroom, Capture One, and Phocus. Which gets the most out of a Hasselblad file? I’ve used all three, and I don’t think there’s one answer. Capture One might handle the highlights a little better in some images, but it depends on the file. Lightroom can deliver amazing results with very little effort. And for black and white, I find Phocus gives me results I can’t get as easily elsewhere. For color, if the file is already close to where I want it, Phocus followed by a little finishing work in Photoshop can be an excellent route to a large print.
I own a variety of cameras and lenses. Could I say it doesn’t matter which one I use? Sure, but I’d be lying. For birds in flight, I want the A1 II. For a studio portrait, I want the H6D. If I’m lost in the mountains, I want the X2D II. Those are my choices for a reason.
I’ve sold my Leica, Fuji, Canon, and Olympus gear—not because I tried one model and dismissed an entire brand, but because I owned several from each and ultimately preferred other systems. I still have a few film cameras sitting around, although I no longer shoot film.
For me, the differences matter, and the cameras I’ve kept reflect what I enjoy shooting and the results I want.
p.3 #8 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
2613pch wrote:
David mentions that he borrowed the camera, then raves about how good it was! Yet he seems reluctant to discuss Hasselblad’s color science. I’m not sure why—it’s been a strong selling point since the H-series days.
Meanwhile, plenty of YouTubers claim they can get the “Hasselblad look” from a Fuji, Sony, or Leica. If that look isn’t anything special, why put so much effort into convincing people they can replicate it?
The same goes for the debate over Lightroom, Capture One, and Phocus. Which gets the most out of a Hasselblad file? I’ve used all three, and I don’t think there’s one answer. Capture One might handle the highlights a little better in some images, but it depends on the file. Lightroom can deliver amazing results with very little effort. And for black and white, I find Phocus gives me results I can’t get as easily elsewhere. For color, if the file is already close to where I want it, Phocus followed by a little finishing work in Photoshop can be an excellent route to a large print.
I own a variety of cameras and lenses. Could I say it doesn’t matter which one I use? Sure, but I’d be lying. For birds in flight, I want the A1 II. For a studio portrait, I want the H6D. If I’m lost in the mountains, I want the X2D II. Those are my choices for a reason.
I’ve sold my Leica, Fuji, Canon, and Olympus gear—not because I tried one model and dismissed an entire brand, but because I owned several from each and ultimately preferred other systems. I still have a few film cameras sitting around, although I no longer shoot film.
For me, the differences matter, and the cameras I’ve kept reflect what I enjoy shooting and the results I want....Show more →
Most YouTubers are idiots. You have people like Manny Ortiz comparing X2D and Sony files in Lightroom using the same Adobe profile...which doesn't show the "color science" of either camera, and in fact is designed to make files from different systems look similar. Crazy how easily they can be color matched when you do that!
I don't think I've seen a single influencer-level review of an X2D or X2Dii where the reviewer opened desktop Phocus, which is the ONLY way to actually see HNCS as intended.
p.3 #9 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
I have come to accept they adapted to the changing environment. If we did not consume YouTube would we still have a problem with the brand? Likely not, because they are works of art. I absolutely want a X2D2 and I’m not going to let a marketing team’s strategy affect my photography choices.
p.3 #10 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
One more note about David's closing bit on the podcast...I found it ironic that he shouted out two of the most disingenuous creators on YT, only because he's friends with them. There is simply such a common, low-level tinge of corruption among the YT community that I think it's really easy to gloss over it if you're knee deep in it, especially if those people are close to you personally.
This pod has definitely shifted my thoughts on David a bit, though I think it's good to have the discussion in public.
p.3 #11 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
freaklikeme wrote:
A company gave a YouTube personality expensive gear to influence their review? I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
As a side note, I am available to say nice things about Hassy if they consent to make a landscape tele that's longer than ninety and significantly smaller than the 135. Very nice things, too. They will feel the love.
Apparently they want me to join the U-Tube to watch the video.
It's a little ironic that the video complaining about is on the U-Tube or Apples.
p.3 #13 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
RoamingScott wrote:
You not understanding how a private youtube video works is on you, friend
What I understand is that it is all part of the same problem.
If you rely on some site that you have no control over then what is expected?
There are precious few sites that don't get free gear.
p.3 #14 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
RoamingScott wrote:
...I don't think I've seen a single influencer-level review of an X2D or X2Dii where the reviewer opened desktop Phocus, which is the ONLY way to actually see HNCS as intended.
Because someone trying to use Phocus in real time in a YT video wouldn't be flattering to Hasselblad?
Too bad Canon and Hasselblad haven't licensed their processing engine out to Adobe and Capture One. DPP produced absolutely stunning results from my old Canon R5 compared to Lightroom, but it wasn't worth the effort and frustration of using it.
p.3 #15 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
I have never had any problem, at all, with brand ambassadors. They tend to really know the equipment that they are using, and pass knowledge on to customers and potential buyers. I am OK, usually, with you-tuber folks being sponsored. Time is valuable. Folks need to eat. If they make too much noise about their sponsors, I stop clicking on their channel’s episodes. I can learn from someone else, who shows more respect for my valuable time.
I’ll pick on Viltrox, Thypoch and Hasselblad, as photo gear brands I find totally annoying, in the you-tuber space….
p.3 #16 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
If Hasselblad or anyone else offered me free gear, I’d take it. And if I were a Youtuber I’d definitely take it. Making money must be increasingly hard and paid promotions are really important to the survival of channels.
No one thinks these things are anything more than paid advertisements. David Imel must be doing OK to throw away 15K of free gear/income.
p.3 #17 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
flash wrote:
If Hasselblad or anyone else offered me free gear, I’d take it. And if I were a Youtuber I’d definitely take it. Making money must be increasingly hard and paid promotions are really important to the survival of channels.
No one thinks these things are anything more than paid advertisements. David Imel must be doing OK to throw away 15K of free gear/income.
Gordon
It’s interesting that in the video, he’s clearly identified as ‘journalist.’ Now, I don’t know the guy or his work, but I assume he considers himself a traditional journalist in the American vein and not a modern content creator. If that’s indeed the case and if some of his income comes from places where the ethics of traditional US journalism matter, then he has to steer clear of conflicts of interest or he’d lose those income streams.
In my own case, I started out working for a major US wire service where each year we had to fill out the ethics form which clearly stated what we were allowed to do and what we weren’t. When I subsequently did other work, I still adhered to those rules, because I didn’t want to cut off the ability to again work for top media firms. But this definitely hampered my chance to be successful in those ventures.
Always wonder how European-style journalists work nowadays. With exceptions, they were much more inclined to take the freebies and still screw over the companies giving them. That was their thinking around independent journalism at the time. But I’m talking a long time ago and last I worked for European media was in the 1990s.
p.3 #18 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
RexGig0 wrote:
I have never had any problem, at all, with brand ambassadors. They tend to really know the equipment that they are using, and pass knowledge on to customers and potential buyers. I am OK, usually, with you-tuber folks being sponsored. Time is valuable. Folks need to eat. If they make too much noise about their sponsors, I stop clicking on their channel’s episodes. I can learn from someone else, who shows more respect for my valuable time.
I’ll pick on Viltrox, Thypoch and Hasselblad, as photo gear brands I find totally annoying, in the you-tuber space….
Brand ambassadors are clearly biased toward the brand and also clearly identified as representing the brand. That’s very different from the others who act as if independent. They may be overall, but they cannot overly go against a brand without hurting their business.
In the case of Hasselblad, it went further, though. These were people who often didn’t talk much about gear or were sponsored by gear companies, people like Thomas Heaton, James Popsys, James Reader and Roman Fox, all shooting away with their Canons and Sonys and never commenting how their gear was limiting them (with the exception of James Popsys, who fell in love with the panoramic format in Fuji GFX, which he bought). These guys got their income mostly from calendar, book and preset sales plus MPB and Squarespace sponsorships but all accepted the Hasselblad offer.
p.3 #19 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
highdesertmesa wrote:
Because someone trying to use Phocus in real time in a YT video wouldn't be flattering to Hasselblad?
Too bad Canon and Hasselblad haven't licensed their processing engine out to Adobe and Capture One. DPP produced absolutely stunning results from my old Canon R5 compared to Lightroom, but it wasn't worth the effort and frustration of using it.
I think Peter Coulson uses Phocus live, but then he also clearly states he hates the modern Hasselblads and buys up the older digital models so he can keep shooting those. Plus, he seems to make enough money to not be lured by Hasselblad’s.
p.3 #20 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
johnvanr wrote:
Brand ambassadors are clearly biased toward the brand and also clearly identified as representing the brand. That’s very different from the others who act as if independent. They may be overall, but they cannot overly go against a brand without hurting their business.
In the case of Hasselblad, it went further, though. These were people who often didn’t talk much about gear or were sponsored by gear companies, people like Thomas Heaton, James Popsys, James Reader and Roman Fox, all shooting away with their Canons and Sonys and never commenting how their gear was limiting them (with the exception of James Popsys, who fell in love with the panoramic format in Fuji GFX, which he bought). These guys got their income mostly from calendar, book and preset sales plus MPB and Squarespace sponsorships but all accepted the Hasselblad offer....Show more →
If they’re still using the gear 6 months later then I have some interest in what they might have to say. those that use it for only the sponsored videos tend to fall by the wayside.Thomas Heaton still uses his X2D2 and other Hasselblads. He’s a fan who’s taken advantage of his prescience to get some gear he’d likely want to have anyways. I have no issues with that at all.
It’s not that hard to sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to *influencers*.
