14 ms·
Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac
- ggoo 3y agoWhat did they shoot the behind the scenes with though?
- whalesalad 3y agoone of those kids tablets in the blue rubberized shell with built-in handle that is covered in sticky apple juice and smells like earrings
- aresant 3y agohttps://np.reddit.com/r/motorcycles/comments/5v1j2i/my_waterproof_gloves_stopped_being_waterproof_and/ddyj8co/ https://np.reddit.com/r/motorcycles/comments/5v1j2i/my_water...
- LesZedCB 3y agoi believe this is 'the original' https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/cmwov/comment/c0tpyls https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/cmwov/comment/c0...
- joshmanders 3y agoI love their commitment to walking the walk with the camera on the iPhone, but as this footage shows, while YES it is "shot on an iPhone 15 Pro Max" it also uses thousands of dollars worth of equipment that makes it hard for the average user to replicate similar quality.
- plussed_reader 3y agoThat's always been part of the prosumer equation; kit to go around the digital lynchpin. It's the void Digidesign/Avid filled with the mbox series back when. Consumer --> Prosumer --> Pro Aka tacit endorsement of the incumbent 'way things be.'
- m3kw9 3y agoyou can likely jerry rig a cart and attach a tripod to it, not expensive, bottom line is that it is possible with the iPhone to film something like that.
- nerdjon 3y agoSo I think the important question is though, if you had spent thousands on dollars on a camera would those lights still be required? If the answer is yes, then the feat is still an important one. I know that some lights would still be required, but I honesty don't know the answer if they needed additional lights to compensate or if they could have gotten away with less.
- awesomeMilou 3y ago> If the answer is yes, then the feat is still an important one. I can recommend watching the Better Call Saul DVD documentary, they regularly have the lead lighting guy answering questions in there. The tl;dr was to me that yes, you definetely need additional lighting, even if your camera has a massive, light sensitive sensor. I don't think anyone expects an iPhone to compete with a top of the line Arri 65 or other IMAX enabled cameras when it comes to low light performance (the sensor on these is huge after all), but the intro shot with Apple Park shows that it's possible. Maybe don't try to reenact a shooting of Barry Lyndon on an iPhone, but for nearly everything else it seems to work just fine.
- nateroling 3y agoExplaining that semi-obscure reference: Barry Lyndon is a Kubrick film that famously has shots lit by only candlelight. This was accomplished by using extremely ”fast” lenses created by NASA for (I believe) the Apollo missions.
- threeseed 3y agoLenses were custom Carl Zeiss 50mm f/0.7. So yes extremely fast even with today's technologies.
- itishappy 3y agoThat's insane! > After "tinker[ing] with different combinations of lenses and film stock," the production obtained three super-fast 50mm lenses (Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f/0.7) developed by Zeiss for use by NASA in the Apollo Moon landings, which Kubrick had discovered. These super-fast lenses "with their huge aperture (the film actually features the lowest f-stop in film history) and fixed focal length" were problematic to mount, and were extensively modified into three versions by Cinema Products Corp. for Kubrick to gain a wider angle of view, with input from optics expert Richard Vetter of Todd-AO. The rear element of the lens had to be 2.5 mm away from the film plane, requiring special modification to the rotating camera shutter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Lyndon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Lyndon > The lens was designed and made specifically for the NASA Apollo lunar program to capture the far side of the Moon in 1966. > In total there were only 10 lenses made. One was kept by Carl Zeiss, six were sold to NASA, and three were sold to Kubrick. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_Planar_50mm_f/0.7 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_Planar_50mm_f/0.7
- Moto7451 3y agoLike siblings comments have mentioned, the gear has always been part of the game. Before I was in software I did low budget videography. Lighting, audio, set equipment, editing, and the little bits that add extra quality have always been part of a good production. There are hacks to make equipment or repurpose things for the same effect as the expensive and nice hardware you’re seeing. One of the most common hacked together items is a steady cam rig. The simplest version is made from a couple iron pipes and an appropriate screw for your camera mount.
- kube-system 3y agoThe equipment is nice, but it's really the expert staff that make the difference.
- threeseed 3y agoSure and now you can learn with nothing more than an iPhone and cheap LED lighting. Apple has massively reduced the barrier to entry.
- kube-system 3y agoMost renowned filmmakers refined their skills before digital photography even existed.
- stuff4ben 3y agoI mean just get a gimbal on your iphone 15 pro max and you're pretty much there. A DJI Osmos 3-axis gimbal is only $150.
- guptaneil 3y agoApple is showing that an iPhone Pro can be used by _professionals_ to replace their existing camera. It’s not trying to replace an entire studio (yet). That would be like expecting a new centrifuge machine to replace an entire lab of equipment. Nobody expects an average user to compete with professionals, even if they were given a $20k RED camera.
- skhr0680 3y ago> Apple is showing that an iPhone Pro can be used by _professionals_ to replace their existing camera It still looks strictly worse than an equivalently priced $1000 camera+lens when directed, lit, operated, and edited by professionals.
- doteka 3y ago[flagged]
- threeseed 3y agoBe curious what the new $1000 camera is that has a 13-120mm lens, 48MP and is capable of shooting ProRes Log.
- diggan 3y agoA Blackmagic Pocket Cinema starter bundle comes close, would be under 1500 but over 1000 USD. Gives you BRAW or ProRes, both log. Infinite more control over the captures, huge ecosystem of (professional) tooling and equipment that is compatible with it.
- chmod775 3y agoThat's already way more than you need to beat the iPhone. The iPhone can't even capture 4k 60fps ProRes on device - you need to connect an external recording device to use that. Also note that, according to its datasheet, the iPhone cannot capture video on its tiny 48MP sensor at that resolution at all - just 4k.
- awesomeMilou 3y ago> worth of equipment that makes it hard for the average user to replicate similar quality. Define quality. What I take away from the documentation is that you can replace iPhone's in workflows that would have traditionally used a heavy and expensive film grade camera. The gimbals, rigs and software used the video are actually quite normal for professional video shoots and you'd see them in use with more expensive cameras as well.
- kstrauser 3y agoI think what this shows is that it's capable of being used at all for pro-level work. No, I don't have all the nice gear that Apple has, but I can have the same camera. It's similar to how they show MacBook Pro users making movies, doing AI work, processing huge datasets, etc. The message is that I don't need to do all those things. But if I did, the computer would be good enough to do them. In the context of the iPhone's camera, I'm not going to shoot an ad on one, but it's clearly going to be good enough to take pictures of my vacation.
- randomdata 3y ago> but it's clearly going to be good enough to take pictures of my vacation. Is that clear? Even ignoring the form factor, I expect you would be quite disappointed casually shooting your vacation on a camera typically used on these types of shoots.
- kstrauser 3y agoIt's clear to me, perhaps because I don't know enough about it to appreciate why I might be wrong. When it comes to cameras, I'm just a regular Joe who points my phone at stuff and then it shows up in Photos. More camera == more better, right?
- randomdata 3y ago> More camera == more better, right? That may be true, but cinema cameras are often less camera in many ways. For example, they often lack autofocus (at best, poor autofocus). It assumed you will have a dedicated focus puller on set. Probably not something you want to bring with you on vacation.
- geodel 3y agoSo if some rando is given millions dollar worth equipment they can shoot movie like James Cameron?
- altairprime 3y agoBlue light gels are cheap, no need for millions of dollars.
- asimpletune 3y agoAll that equipment would be necessary for an ARRI as well.
- steve1977 3y agoAlso interestingly, shot with the Blackmagic app. Not sure if they also used Davinci or FCP. But if they would have used FCP, I guess they would have mentioned it?
- _factor 3y agoThis could have been accomplished with an iPhone 8 years ago. For a keynote that 99.9% of the population will watch on YouTube, what is this trying to prove? It's an interesting demonstration, that's about it.
- m3kw9 3y agowouldn't get the low light and dynamic range, if you've ever used an iphone to take pics 8 years ago
- blairbeckwith 3y agoConsider that all it was trying to prove was that it was an interesting demonstration.
- threeseed 3y agoNo it couldn't be accomplished with anything other than iPhone 15 Pro. It is the only one to support ProRes with the Log profile. Without it it's not possible to do decent video color grading.
- empath-nirvana 3y agoIt's amazing how quickly people get acclimated to what are basically miraculous technological advancements. So much of what people have been doing matter of factly on iphones daily for years was just pure science fiction when I was a kid.
- i_love_cookies 3y ago[dead]
- artimaeis 3y agoAn iPhone 8 years ago (iPhone 6S released Sep 2015): - Is limited to a 12MP sensor (15 Pro has 48MP on the main sensor) - Can only shoot 4K SDR at 30fps - Cannot shoot ProRes LOG mode You could absolutely get a great video with an iPhone 6S. Soderbergh shot all of Unsane with an iPhone 7 and FiLMiC Pro. But comparing the video quality from Unsane to this clearly shows how far the iPhone has come. It's an interesting demonstration. That's all it ever needed to be.
- RomanPushkin 3y agoI wish somebody can tell me what was wrong with the video being shot on iPhone, is it visible for a professional eye that it is iPhone? I was always told that the lens and matrix size is everything. Have things changed dramatically since the time you could only make a good shot on a full-frame DSLR?
- brokencode 3y agoWho said there’s something wrong with it? I’ve mainly been seeing people be impressed that they didn’t notice.
- baz00 3y agoThe camera is ok. The difficult bit is the expensive rig + post processing software + extensive skills required to get this result.
- mholm 3y agoIt's noticeable if you're specifically looking for it, but much harder to tell. Log color makes a huge difference, and the equipment they're using around the iPhone, along with the editing (and now better color grading) really close a lot of the gap.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- astrange 3y ago"Full frame DSLRs" were not ever the cameras that took the best pictures, they were just the top end prosumer for a while. Mirrorless are somewhat better than DSLR now, rangefinders always were if you were into Leica, and medium format or large format have always been better than full frame.
- asimpletune 3y agoReally it’s the lighting that’s everything.
- chazeon 3y agoLens and matrix size is everything when you cannot control the environment, when you can change the lighting and design the scene, then you can make up for the smaller sensor.
- rconti 3y ago> the preferred smartphone for creative pros and filmmakers. Upon reading that, I immediately looked at the domain of the source. I know, I should be in this habit BEFORE reading anything, but still.
- ayoreis 3y agoInteresting that they used the Blackmagic Camera app instead of their own, maybe it's finally time for an upgrade to the default one.
- sandofsky 3y agoThe first party camera is designed to be operated by every human being on the planet. Redesigning it to accommodate highend workflows makes as much sense as redesigning a $50,000 cinema camera to accommodate parents who want to record their kid's soccer game.
- ayoreis 3y agoI believe it could be designed in a way to accommodate both user groups. I don't mind another app but they've always been paid (while writing this I checked and turns out Blackmagic camera is free, awesome!)
- aalimov_ 3y agoWith all of the emphasis they put on the iPhone cameras i think they have considered this and decided against it, at least for now.
- sandofsky 3y agoI think you should try designing such an app and report back your results.
- diggan 3y agoMost software/hardware goes for one group, as otherwise you'll need to make sacrifices to equalize the experience. It's just not feasible to build something that works as well for average joe as for a professional user, they use their tools differently.
- nerdjon 3y agoI was honestly curious about that myself, I have generally just used the stock one but I am now curious if that one works better or has some better features.
- flakiness 3y agoThis is a super impressive tech-demo. Not practical for us consumers (who don't have expensive pro-level equipment surrounding the phone-camera), and not meaningful for professionals (who would just use a normal camera), but it is still a pure technical achievement that deserves a look and a cheer.
- NelsonMinar 3y agoSee also a more skeptical take, emphasizing all the expensive studio equipment involved: https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/31/23940060/apple-event-shot-on-iphone-behind-the-scenes https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/31/23940060/apple-event-sho...
- elicash 3y agoYou can be skeptical of it like the Verge or impressed by it like some in these comments, but either way it's good that Apple is showing you exactly what that means in practice. The transparency here is welcome and both Google and Apple should do something similar when it comes to the photographs they show off when rolling out new phones. They shouldn't show a photo in those keynotes without also showing exactly what it took to get those photos out of those phones.
- threeseed 3y agoI think you and others have completely missed the point. Apple was always going to use that equipment. It's needed for all decent video production work. What they've shown is that you can skip the Red Camera and use an iPhone instead.
- RockRobotRock 3y agoHow are they missing a point? They only provided a link to a different take.
- kemayo 3y agoExpanding slightly on this, the cheapest Red Camera costs $6k (and I think might not include a lens?), so that's a pretty big savings.
- CodeBrad 3y agoIs it though? How much does all the associated gear, operators, actors, sets, producers cost? In the context of professional video production, a one time savings of $6k seems pretty small.
- cglong 3y agoA lot of people were asking why yesterday's keynote wasn't just a press release instead. I wonder if this was the actual point of the presentation.
- alberth 3y agoAnd having the event early evening (which is super odd for a press event), to demonstrate the low-light capabilities.
- spacedcowboy 3y agoVincent is an awesome guy - I met him when I was a manager on Aperture, and sweet-talked him into being my wedding photographer.
- TimTheTinker 3y agoSince editing tools weren't mentioned, I suspect they must have used DaVinci Resolve or similar, instead of Final Cut Pro and Motion.
- someNameIG 3y agoWhy do you think so?
- TimTheTinker 3y agoIt was a guess, based on what so many editors in Hollywood use. The "behind the scenes" video confirms it though - yes, they were using DaVinci Resolve. I hope Apple takes that as a shot across the bow -- they need to up their game with FCP and its ecosystem, if the contractor they hired to produce an Apple event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac doesn't even use FCP.
- randomdata 3y agoSeems like a reasonable suspicion. The behind the scenes video shows use of DaVinci Resolve throughout.
- neilv 3y ago"Yeah, uh, we're just gonna crop out the SpaceCam logo. The doomscroller surveillance handheld is the star here."
- inparen 3y agoIs this really that big deal ? Soderberg already shot two movies on iPhone.
- altairprime 3y ago(Soderbergh.)
- alberth 3y ago0m 39sec This is definitely a nitpick… Presuming they also shoot this behind the scenes video with an iPhone as well, the video quality is out-of-focus for the individual on the right at 0m39s. Look how the right side of their face is fuzzy, not well defined. https://ibb.co/xLKZkQ8 https://ibb.co/xLKZkQ8 As an aside, I do appreciate Apple bringing Pro-Level functionality to the masses.
- eigenvalue 3y ago“The production was advised by Apple’s Jon Carr, a Pro Workflow video specialist whose credits include Top Gun: Maverick and Terminator: Dark Fate, and Jeff Wozniak, who has worked on productions including Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Avatar, and Iron Man 2.” I can’t even imagine how annoying it must be for that guy to be working with Apple on stuff with the last name Wozniak and to have everyone whispering around him “is he related to Steve??”. It’s an uncommon enough name that it’s not an unreasonable supposition. I bet people are really nice to him just in case!
- MarkusWandel 3y agoGenuine question, since I'm not part of the Apple ecosystem and my smartphones tend to be from the low end of the range. Even my humble one takes great pictures and video, but the touch-screen UI is really limiting. Whereas professional movie camera work has smooth pan/zoom work that, at least until now, was done with appropriate controls. Do professionals using a slab phone have external pan/tilt/zoom/focus rigs that they can plug in as an accessory, or do they have to do all that via the touchscreen UI?
- lbourdages 3y agoIf you watch the video, you can see that they have a big rig with like a gimbal and external controllers and screens. So it's not "just an iPhone" but it's also not a $50k+ pro camera body.
- hnburnsy 3y agoHow do the external controllers interface with the third party camera app? How.much do these controllers cost?
- FemmeAndroid 3y agoI think a lot use separate apps. I had a gimbal that I used to use with an old iPhone with buttons to move the gimbal and direct the phone, but also with buttons to start/stop recording, and do other things without touching the phone itself. This gimbal was in the $300-$500 range.
- brianpan 3y agoLook at pretty much any one of the pictures in the article for your answer. No professional camera, iPhone or not, isn't in a rig/harness/on a trolley etc. That's for pan/tilt/push in/pull out. For controlling camera settings/zoom/focus, the article says they are using Blackmagic Camera.
- kuschku 3y agoI'd love to see what they did to work around the framerate issues. iPhones record in variable framerate (they just encode one frame, once that's fully encoded read the next frame and repeat). This leads to fps varying by up to ±10%, which causes a lot of issues with most editing software.
- mnemoni_c 3y agoThat's why they used third party app to control ISO and shutter speed I presume
- oittaa 3y agohttps://twitter.com/MKBHD/status/1719384434041090452 https://twitter.com/MKBHD/status/1719384434041090452 MKBHD says it was a camera app from BlackMagic. Their software Resolve is used in professional movies, but for some reason it's also available for free with some minor limitations. I've used it when I needed quickly combine some simple video clips and it was really intuitive use. Though the color grading and other advanced tabs looked scary to a noob :)
- kuschku 3y agoEven the BMD camera app — at least the version that's publicly available — can't work around those limitations. It still records footage in VFR.
- hnburnsy 3y ago-1 for Apple for using a third party app to capture the footage. I dont have an iphone so how do they control the camera app without touching the screen?
- chr-s 3y agoOne of the stills [0] shows a Tilta Nucleus-M focus/zoom wheel [1], see it in use on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yx5s0M-_ib4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yx5s0M-_ib4 [0] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/images/2023/10/behind-the-scenes-at-scary-fast-apples-keynote-event-shot-on-iphone/article/Apple-Shot-on-iPhone-Blackmagic-Camera-app_big.jpg.large_2x.jpg https://www.apple.com/newsroom/images/2023/10/behind-the-sce... [1] https://tilta.com/shop/nucleus-m-fiz-unit/ https://tilta.com/shop/nucleus-m-fiz-unit/
- SirMaster 3y agoI don't think many people were really wondering if this sort of thing "could" be done. IMO that's not the important question. The question is, did the people who filmed and created the video with the iPhone hardware actually enjoy this process / workflow? Or did this process cause a bunch more pain and hassle to deal with the iPhone as the source camera? Compared to some alternative they could have used. Is there actually a compelling reason to use an iPhone for this type of work over the various alternatives?
- kranke155 3y agoThe fact that Apple has done this can be helpful to filmmakers to prove a point. Ie go to your producer and say hey Apple did this. We can do it
- steve1977 3y agoBut why would you? This is not some low-budget video, it’s a high-end production. If you have that kind of budget, your producer probably won’t care if you’re using an iPhone or a Sony FX-3(0) or even a rented “real” cinema camera like a Sony Venice or an Arri
- Shawnj2 3y agoI think this is targeted towards low budget productions
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kart23 3y agookay apple, take your wallpaper photos on iphone also.
- masto 3y agoI think that explains why they did this one at night and it had that same annoyingly dark look as modern streaming shows. "Look, our phone makes it possible for the best DPs and colorists in the world to produce the same unwatchable dimness as they could with cameras costing orders of magnitude more!"
- residentraspber 3y agoYes! I recently watched Hello Tomorrow during the day and had to turn up the brightness on my TV to make out some of the scenes. Day or night shots in the show didn't matter, it was all too dark and pale looking. Watching the same episode at night for me was a much nicer experience. ~4 yr old 4k Samsung Smart TV with all the motion blur and vivid stuff turned off.
- y04nn 3y agoA major problem with telephone cameras, including the iPhone (not sure for the last model), is that they suffer from very notable reflections of light [1] which are very distracting. Dealing with this on a set must not be easy. [1]: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/251977011 https://discussions.apple.com/thread/251977011
- Tepix 3y agoThe iPhone 15 Pro Max costs more than 1400€. You can get a nice "real" video camera for that money! Now, the iPhone has the advantage of being always available (without all the pro gear that Apple used). But in the case of a production like this, that's not relevant. My guess is that most upcoming filmmakers on a budget will continue to other options such as Blackmagic cameras.
- kaugesaar 3y agoGood on them for walking the walk. But I genuinely believe you could, with that equipment, get the same footage with a 10-year-old dslr-camera and its stock lens for just a few hundred bucks.
- zavertnik 3y agoA lot of people here are bringing up all of the expensive gear surrounding the iPhone that helped give it the professional look. This isn't unique to iPhone as a sensor. I work in TV and have spent a great deal of time on set shooting. The only time I've ever relied entirely on the camera's sensor and lens for a high quality image is shooting outside, and even then that requires adjustments, such as facing away from the sun, moving away from contrasty shadows, ect. Outside of documentaries, every other shoot will have a great deal of time, effort, and money spent on lighting and set design to elevate what is being shot. For scripted projects/films, an even smaller % of shots will be shot with the raw, available light/environment. What Apple did with the iPhone 15 proved that the iPhone can be used in a professional setting without being the on set bottle neck. For example, a short film shoot which had it's budget blown entirely on renting an Alexa will be bottle necked by the lack of lighting for the scene. Similarly, a short film which had its budget blown entirely on renting lights will be bottle necked if its shot on an iPhone 4. The goal is balance and for smaller productions, that balance is found in budgeting. If anyone on set has an iPhone 15 Pro in their pocket, the shoot suddenly has a viable second camera-- maybe its not good enough for the entire shoot, but its surely going to be good enough as a B-Cam or even as an A-Cam in certain scenarios where a smaller form factor is required to get the shot. I don't think Apple is sugar coating their demonstration here with all the expensive toys being used in parallel with the iPhone. The use of these tools in parallel with the iPhone IS the demonstration. Like any good video, if its shot correctly and edited correctly, you won't have an easy time visually identifying what sensor is being used.
- vr46 3y agoWithout the expensive gear, the iPhone looks considerably downgraded compared to better source equipment. I had a Canon 5DII the day it was released and within a week some friends and I had a music video entered into a festival, and within a year, two short films, all done without any extra lighting or equipment - including gimbals. The source camera and lenses were good enough - and the look was amazing compared to camcorders - to achieve this. Forgetting "shoots" and professional lighting, the iPhone isn't going to have the massive range of other equipment, and when you're spending literally thousands of pounds on studio time, lighting hire, operator costs, etc etc, are you really going to pick up and shoot on an iPhone when you've got a Black Magic or Sony or Canon at hand? Unless you're being paid by Apple? I get that it's viable but there really is a lot of road between viable and superlative.
- t0bia_s 3y agoSo you have professional set with high tech tools like cranes, gimbals, LED panels... And shoot on iPhone. Why this doesn't make any sense?
- tambourine_man 3y agoWhile watching the presentation, I found the faces a bit too sharp, but I was watching on a different, newer screen, which I imagined had a higher pixel density than the one I'm used to everyday. But I just checked and the difference is neglectable (224 vs 218 ppi), so my guess is the over-sharpening of the iPhone. Not that it was bad, just different enough to be noticeable.
- GoToRO 3y agoThe iphones have horrible lens flares. The editing is a necessity.