Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Photographer Details the Process of Capturing Product Photos

Moonlight said:
This guy is hilarious. Does he have no idea that his photos get taken to the agency and worked on in photoshop for days after he is "done". They get cleaned up, screens added, textures redone, hi-lights painted, glass cleaned, lighting fixed, logos reimported from vector art, etc, etc...
Click to expand...

I'm sure he has NO idea whatsoever. You're just that much smarter than him. Thats why he's the one providing Apple with product shots, and you're the one posting on an Apple forum about somebody elses job at Apple :rolleyes:
 
Millah said:
I'm sure he has NO idea whatsoever. You're just that much smarter than him. Thats why he's the one providing Apple with product shots, and you're the one posting on an Apple forum about somebody elses job at Apple :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Don't talk about things you have no knowledge about right??? OK, I stand by my story. Do you?
 
Holy C-Stands for days!

I wonder if he uses an iPhone to photograph an iPhone!

Because I sold 10K of photo equipment about a year after Instagram evolved simply because no one appreciates a quality photograph anymore, they'd rather take a photo of their Margarita and slap a preset filter on it and call themselves a photographer, and get likes... can't forget the likes. :) So like a sheep, I joined the party and increased my savings account.
 
belangersetup.jpg

That guy is the Neil Peart of photography :D

rush.jpg
 
Amazing. Like almost everyone else, I also thought all the "photo realistic" images were computer renderings.

E: Also lol @ moonlight
 
I'm surprised - and happy - to hear they still actually photograph the products - many companies have moved to CGI renderings long ago, simply because of the fussiness: you can adjust everything any time you want, including the angle, lighting, texture, etc… Add to that the fact that all products today come with CGI renderings already completed by the designer, part of the job is already done. But of course a photo is a photo, and often it's actually easier to get everything right for the camera than try to recreate it in CGI. CGI takes a hell of a lot of work too.
 
baryon said:
I'm surprised - and happy - to hear they still actually photograph the products - many companies have moved to CGI renderings long ago, simply because of the fussiness: you can adjust everything any time you want, including the angle, lighting, texture, etc… Add to that the fact that all products today come with CGI renderings already completed by the designer, part of the job is already done. But of course a photo is a photo, and often it's actually easier to get everything right for the camera than try to recreate it in CGI. CGI takes a hell of a lot of work too.
Click to expand...

Apple can afford to do it the best way :D Experimenting on screen is less effective than experimenting with real life setups. Render times for minor adjustments would take longer than to slightly tweak a bounce card in real life etc. Plus you get unbiased perfect real world results vs even the most accomplished unbiased render packages.

I know a lot of people think Apple is only in it for the money even when Apple says they do it firstly for the love of the product and this only proves their love for their products.

----------

I wonder if Apple has the same approach for their animations. I think the post work tidy up of props to hold the products would be too time costly and also you can't beat artificial smoothness vs real life robotic movement.
 
As a photographer myself, both still and video, I'd rather be giving elephants enemas that doing this kind of banal photography to pay the bills.

"You know, if I had your job I'd kill myself. Wait here & I'll see if I can dig up a pistol." (Jon Lovitz in "League of Their Own")
 
Nice article but no depth to it.

Would be nice to see an original shot and the retouched file side-by-side.
Product photography is an art but always benefits from at least some (to a lot) of PP.
 
WoFat said:
As a photographer myself, both still and video, I'd rather be giving elephants enemas that doing this kind of banal photography to pay the bills.

"You know, if I had your job I'd kill myself. Wait here & I'll see if I can dig up a pistol." (Jon Lovitz in "League of Their Own")
Click to expand...

If you can't understand the art that goes into these kinds of shots it's unfortunate.

Do tell, what makes your work so much more exciting? What do you specialize in, weddings and school pictures?
 
He doesn't use a Canon for studio work

If you go to the original article on The Verge, you will see him on a video, working with what looks like a large format camera on a gigantic tripod/stand. Later on the article he acknowledges:

In the studio I shoot with a Phase One digital back with a Sinar X view camera, and Phase One 645 camera system. Outside the studio or doing handheld work I use a Canon 5D Mark III.
Click to expand...

Not trying to start a flames war, but MacRumors got it wrong when they wrote "He captures the majority of his images with the Canon 5D Mark III".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back