6 ms·

> The other is "If you have an iPhone you too can make such a video". Which is what anyone who isn't affiliated with the film industry (aka 99% of the populatio

> The other is "If you have an iPhone you too can make such a video". Which is what anyone who isn't affiliated with the film industry (aka 99% of the population) might think, especially if they didn't see the behind the scenes. I honestly don't think it's a reasonable takeaway for anyone who is at all interested in creating highly produced video with their iPhone. Even if you're an absolute beginner, it's abundantly clear that these Apple videos are serious productions. It's not significantly different than hearing that an accomplished journalist wrote a column on their iPad, or a successful entrepreneur manages their schedule with their iPhone calendar, or a famous musician uses GarageBand for songwriting (or even full production). The point in all of these examples is never that you can accomplish these things with an iPhone and don't need talent, creativity, years of practice, other gear, etc. The only point is that the iPhone is not a significant limiting factor on the quality of results you can achieve.

user_7832 3y ago
> I honestly don't think it's a reasonable takeaway for anyone who is at all interested in creating highly produced video with their iPhone. Even if you're an absolute beginner, it's abundantly clear that these Apple videos are serious productions. I agree that that's how it is in reality, but that's not something many people really know or understand. Apple also likes to sell their products as "see how good our x product is that we used in-house" which likely further may make some people think an iPhone is enough to make a high quality video. (I think the funny thing is that even without extra hardware an iPhone can shoot very good/near professional quality video but this debate is only about Apple using very fancy hardware. I also made a small edit to my comment.)
- gumby 3y ago
  Yes, but did you make the edit with an iphone?
  - philistine 3y ago
    The behind the scenes video had lavish scenes of the editor working on the footage shot on iPhone ... with Adobe Premiere.
    - nimbleal 3y ago
      Lots of shots of Davinci Resolve, didn't spot any Premier at a quick glance? But it's not unusual for both to be used on the same production
      - prawn 3y ago
        Further, Resolve is available on iPad now, and Black Magic have a film app on iPhone (that I think was shown in the BTS). So technically they could've edited on iOS if necessary. On the photo side, Lightroom on iOS is pretty decent.
chrisweekly 3y ago
"musician uses GarageBand for songwriting (or even full production Sergeant Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band (The Beatles' masterpiece, one of the most highly-regarded and influential albums of all time) was recorded on an analog 4-track.
- jkaptur 3y ago
  At the time it was recorded, that was cutting edge tech, wasn't it?
  - jauntywundrkind 3y ago
    >2 track recording is still a rare & deluxe feature in most consumer gear! Even in professional gear, it's usually a ridiculous jump in price - often double - to much fancier hardware to get more channels. It makes sense as few people do need it, but I do wish there were more assorted consumer electronics that would throw in more channel recording just because. Rather than as an upsell to way more expensive gear.
  - jcrawfordor 3y ago
    Yes, in that everything was being recorded on analog tape in that era because it was the best quality recording format available. The album is a little unusual in that by 1967 tape recorders with larger channel counts were becoming more common, allowing separate recording of most of the original channels. But linear editing of audio was very difficult, recording engineers still did the mix as live, so there were recording studios that hadn't seen a reason to make the upgrade or were attached to older equipment that they were very familiar with. Especially with analog equipment prominent recording engineers were often averse to new equipment since they would learn how to get the best results out of their particulat setup - and things like frequency response could vary noticeably from one model to another.
- ksherlock 3y ago
  ... and no amount of money or technology can make "Now and Then" a good song.
- 3y ago
rchaud 3y ago
Yep. As any photographer or videographer will tell you, it's not the camera that makes the difference, it's the person operating it. Do they understand the importance of lighting? Can they get around the technical limitations of the device? We all know that Apple demos take place under the most regimented of conditions. Jobs' iPhone demo had full reception bars hard-coded into it. I imagine the iPhone cameras were used in similarly generous conditions.
- seec 3y ago
  I hate this type of argument; it is very often nonsense. Sure, someone is not good because of its tools, but those enable him to be good it is not an either/or relation. A lot of the time, some skills are indissociable from the necessary tooling, and it does not matter how good you are if you do not get the tool to enable it. I had this argument with a friend about darts. I recently started playing with him and he has a lot more experience than I do, thus he is quite a bit better than me no matter what darts we use. But after we broke some darts, I decided to look at what the pro uses and buy something similar. He said the same thing about skills not requiring a particular dart. Yet since we have had the new darts, we are both more consistent in our shots and hit the targets way more often, the consistency is extremely obvious considering how grouped the darts land compared to cheaper one. I did not become magically better than he is, he still wins more often than I do. However, with those darts I improved a lot more than he did and if the end goal is proficiency, it seems logical to use as close the "end game" tooling as is reasonable for training. Sometimes people feel like others are trying to minimize their achievements, but this is not about that at all. The tools are a major part of the road to expertise and anyone pretending otherwise is lying and I would be very suspicious. It reads like: "yeah I achieved my skill with this high level, performant tool, but just use this much worse one, it will be fine." I feel like it is disingenuous and most of the time, people trying to prevent new competitions in their fields. And this is exactly why Apple's marketing is extremely deceptive at best. Sure, if you are an accomplished videographer and understand all the limitations coming from working with such a tool, you will work around/with those limitations, because you already know. But if you are starting out or still an amateur the iPhone is a poor choice as it will make your work harder than it would be with a more specialized camera (that can be had for cheaper than a brand-new iPhone, that most people do not need...).
matwood 3y ago
> The only point is that the iPhone is not a significant limiting factor on the quality of results you can achieve. Which is a big deal.
- petesergeant 3y ago
  Right, and I thought the line in the article: > [before this] Apple was effectively saying “pro enough for you, but not for us.” summed that up nicely
onion2k 3y ago
I honestly don't think it's a reasonable takeaway for anyone who is at all interested in creating highly produced video with their iPhone. That isn't who this marketing is aimed at though. Apple are acutely aware that 'camera quality' is a key selling point for consumers. People want to point their phone at something and take a good looking photo. That isn't 'people interested in creating highly produced video'; it's people who want their selfies to look nice. By showing a professionally shot production where the camera is an iPhone and everything else is pro video production Apple make people believe their non-pro photos will be much higher quality than other people's photos. The fact Apple released a behind the scenes video should tell you that they've thought about a scenario where someone makes a video with an iPhone to show it's not as good as Apple's marketing demonstrates. The behind the scenes video is Apple covering their ass because they know as well as we do that buying an iPhone isn't going to get you pro video quality footage. If anything Apple's marketing makes me think that selfies on a Google or Samsung phone are probably better than an iPhone just because Google and Samsung don't seem to need to tell me "you can make this video with our phone! (but wait, not like that..)"
- grujicd 3y ago
  Well, Samsung did hire Ridley Scott to make a short movie using S23 Ultra.
- kergonath 3y ago
  > By showing a professionally shot production where the camera is an iPhone and everything else is pro video production Apple make people believe their non-pro photos will be much higher quality than other people's photos. Which is true. The pictures from my phone are just as good as those taken with my semi-professional DSLR. The phone loses in some specific situations (typically low-light, small depth of field, and long-range) because it does not have the same glass and the sensor is smaller, but that’s about it. I guarantee you that if you were to give a professional medium format camera to random people on the street, they would take much worse pictures than with their phones (assuming somewhat high-end devices).
etempleton 3y ago
I have worked in some moderate level video production and the iPhone is potentially a game changer. It significantly reduces the kit you need to produce a professional looking video. This is an extreme use case, but what the iPhone really has the potential to replace are all of the videos being shot on DSLRs and Mirrorless cameras. It is getting closer and closer to these cameras and is significantly easier to use.

user_7832 3y ago

> I honestly don't think it's a reasonable takeaway for anyone who is at all interested in creating highly produced video with their iPhone. Even if you're an absolute beginner, it's abundantly clear that these Apple videos are serious productions. I agree that that's how it is in reality, but that's not something many people really know or understand. Apple also likes to sell their products as "see how good our x product is that we used in-house" which likely further may make some people think an iPhone is enough to make a high quality video. (I think the funny thing is that even without extra hardware an iPhone can shoot very good/near professional quality video but this debate is only about Apple using very fancy hardware. I also made a small edit to my comment.)

gumby 3y ago
Yes, but did you make the edit with an iphone?
- philistine 3y ago
  The behind the scenes video had lavish scenes of the editor working on the footage shot on iPhone ... with Adobe Premiere.
  - nimbleal 3y ago
    Lots of shots of Davinci Resolve, didn't spot any Premier at a quick glance? But it's not unusual for both to be used on the same production
    - prawn 3y ago
      Further, Resolve is available on iPad now, and Black Magic have a film app on iPhone (that I think was shown in the BTS). So technically they could've edited on iOS if necessary. On the photo side, Lightroom on iOS is pretty decent.

chrisweekly 3y ago

"musician uses GarageBand for songwriting (or even full production Sergeant Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band (The Beatles' masterpiece, one of the most highly-regarded and influential albums of all time) was recorded on an analog 4-track.

jkaptur 3y ago
At the time it was recorded, that was cutting edge tech, wasn't it?
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  >2 track recording is still a rare & deluxe feature in most consumer gear! Even in professional gear, it's usually a ridiculous jump in price - often double - to much fancier hardware to get more channels. It makes sense as few people do need it, but I do wish there were more assorted consumer electronics that would throw in more channel recording just because. Rather than as an upsell to way more expensive gear.
- jcrawfordor 3y ago
  Yes, in that everything was being recorded on analog tape in that era because it was the best quality recording format available. The album is a little unusual in that by 1967 tape recorders with larger channel counts were becoming more common, allowing separate recording of most of the original channels. But linear editing of audio was very difficult, recording engineers still did the mix as live, so there were recording studios that hadn't seen a reason to make the upgrade or were attached to older equipment that they were very familiar with. Especially with analog equipment prominent recording engineers were often averse to new equipment since they would learn how to get the best results out of their particulat setup - and things like frequency response could vary noticeably from one model to another.
ksherlock 3y ago
... and no amount of money or technology can make "Now and Then" a good song.
3y ago

rchaud 3y ago

Yep. As any photographer or videographer will tell you, it's not the camera that makes the difference, it's the person operating it. Do they understand the importance of lighting? Can they get around the technical limitations of the device? We all know that Apple demos take place under the most regimented of conditions. Jobs' iPhone demo had full reception bars hard-coded into it. I imagine the iPhone cameras were used in similarly generous conditions.

seec 3y ago
I hate this type of argument; it is very often nonsense. Sure, someone is not good because of its tools, but those enable him to be good it is not an either/or relation. A lot of the time, some skills are indissociable from the necessary tooling, and it does not matter how good you are if you do not get the tool to enable it. I had this argument with a friend about darts. I recently started playing with him and he has a lot more experience than I do, thus he is quite a bit better than me no matter what darts we use. But after we broke some darts, I decided to look at what the pro uses and buy something similar. He said the same thing about skills not requiring a particular dart. Yet since we have had the new darts, we are both more consistent in our shots and hit the targets way more often, the consistency is extremely obvious considering how grouped the darts land compared to cheaper one. I did not become magically better than he is, he still wins more often than I do. However, with those darts I improved a lot more than he did and if the end goal is proficiency, it seems logical to use as close the "end game" tooling as is reasonable for training. Sometimes people feel like others are trying to minimize their achievements, but this is not about that at all. The tools are a major part of the road to expertise and anyone pretending otherwise is lying and I would be very suspicious. It reads like: "yeah I achieved my skill with this high level, performant tool, but just use this much worse one, it will be fine." I feel like it is disingenuous and most of the time, people trying to prevent new competitions in their fields. And this is exactly why Apple's marketing is extremely deceptive at best. Sure, if you are an accomplished videographer and understand all the limitations coming from working with such a tool, you will work around/with those limitations, because you already know. But if you are starting out or still an amateur the iPhone is a poor choice as it will make your work harder than it would be with a more specialized camera (that can be had for cheaper than a brand-new iPhone, that most people do not need...).

matwood 3y ago

> The only point is that the iPhone is not a significant limiting factor on the quality of results you can achieve. Which is a big deal.

petesergeant 3y ago
Right, and I thought the line in the article: > [before this] Apple was effectively saying “pro enough for you, but not for us.” summed that up nicely

onion2k 3y ago

I honestly don't think it's a reasonable takeaway for anyone who is at all interested in creating highly produced video with their iPhone. That isn't who this marketing is aimed at though. Apple are acutely aware that 'camera quality' is a key selling point for consumers. People want to point their phone at something and take a good looking photo. That isn't 'people interested in creating highly produced video'; it's people who want their selfies to look nice. By showing a professionally shot production where the camera is an iPhone and everything else is pro video production Apple make people believe their non-pro photos will be much higher quality than other people's photos. The fact Apple released a behind the scenes video should tell you that they've thought about a scenario where someone makes a video with an iPhone to show it's not as good as Apple's marketing demonstrates. The behind the scenes video is Apple covering their ass because they know as well as we do that buying an iPhone isn't going to get you pro video quality footage. If anything Apple's marketing makes me think that selfies on a Google or Samsung phone are probably better than an iPhone just because Google and Samsung don't seem to need to tell me "you can make this video with our phone! (but wait, not like that..)"

grujicd 3y ago
Well, Samsung did hire Ridley Scott to make a short movie using S23 Ultra.
kergonath 3y ago
> By showing a professionally shot production where the camera is an iPhone and everything else is pro video production Apple make people believe their non-pro photos will be much higher quality than other people's photos. Which is true. The pictures from my phone are just as good as those taken with my semi-professional DSLR. The phone loses in some specific situations (typically low-light, small depth of field, and long-range) because it does not have the same glass and the sensor is smaller, but that’s about it. I guarantee you that if you were to give a professional medium format camera to random people on the street, they would take much worse pictures than with their phones (assuming somewhat high-end devices).

etempleton 3y ago

I have worked in some moderate level video production and the iPhone is potentially a game changer. It significantly reduces the kit you need to produce a professional looking video. This is an extreme use case, but what the iPhone really has the potential to replace are all of the videos being shot on DSLRs and Mirrorless cameras. It is getting closer and closer to these cameras and is significantly easier to use.