Apple Photographer Details the Process of Capturing Product Photos

[MacDownunder]

are you for real

almost all professional photos are fake. they are photoshopped to death and taken under ideal lighting conditions. thousands of photos are taken to select a few choice ones

like the food photos for fast food ads. they go to whole foods market of all places to find the best looking veggies

Because anyone can take a photo and fix it in photoshop huh.... hmm get you head out of sand and understand that to get a great shot (with or with out post) requires an eye for detail/composition, then comes the equipment being used and then perhaps post processing.

Garbage in Garbage out - there is no magic one click wand

 

[Jeffacme]

You should really try the new Canon 24-70L MK II. It's as good as my best "L" and Zeiss primes.

I have, pulled five LII's when they came out all were subpar in the corners and at the short end. I would love to lighten the load and use zooms it would surely make my assistants happy.

 

[AppleScruff1]

A true photographer would always want to show off original shots since any hack can snap a shot and PS it. There's a big difference between a true photographer and an illustrator. A photographer has the ability and knowledge to capture reality and make it look great, while an illustrator creates a great illustration that's not real. Photographers have become a dying breed since PS was born almost 30 years ago. It’s great to see that some photographers are still prospering.

Bravo! Excellent post!!

 

[tech4all]

A true photographer would always want to show off original shots since any hack can snap a shot and PS it. There's a big difference between a true photographer and an illustrator. A photographer has the ability and knowledge to capture reality and make it look great, while an illustrator creates a great illustration that's not real. Photographers have become a dying breed since PS was born almost 30 years ago. It’s great to see that some photographers are still prospering.

So by your definitions, Ansel Adams wasn't a true photographer...?

I don't think you're being fair. Photography can encompasses an entire gamut of things including in camera settings and PP. Years back in was the dark room. Now the dark room has been moved onto the computer. Same tools are available. As long as you don't stray too far off from the original, I think it's still considered "photography." Putting in a different sky wouldn't be photography IMO.

I think those that define a true photographer as one who doesn't do PP are those who either can't or don't want to learn Photoshop or similar apps. To each his/her own.

 

[\-V-/]

You are cute

You've been utterly proven wrong. The best thing to do is to just step away. Seriously, it's embarrassing. Just stop. :\

 

[thekev]

Will be interesting to have a read of the full interview. I'm not too sure about the claim that most of the work is done in camera. As far as the lighting then yeah, I guess. But Apple's product shots are too high res and polished to come straight from a camera. Those photos clearly go through an intense session of Photoshop to end up looking so pristine and almost like 3D renderings (which would be easier to start with)!

Well it's likely that this became a working relationship at a time when 3d renderings were not as good as they are today. Software used to be much more expensive, and rendering times at the output resolution levels that product photographers often use can mean a lot of memory and long render times. Much of the time renders are used simply because they can be created before a physical model is available. You still have to take whatever cad data and convert it to an even level of tessellation that shows off all details, organize all of those objects and weld any vertices along patch lines, clean up any existing triangles, UV the thing as it's natural to apply these screen dropins and things as projected textures rather than add in post.

At that point you're still setting up lights just as you would on a photoshoot. A big difference is that rather than possibly setting up different lighting sets for different details and comping in post, you can do a lot of that lighting control via linking. It's still a lot of work, and in the end renders are still photoshopped anyway as that's often faster than developing a gargantuan shader stack trying to the perfect metallic reflections (google complex index of refraction, most raytracers advocate a multiplied "fresnel IOR" setting to make it shiny, but the results come out a lot flatter, and it still slows down quite a lot if you try to manipulate channel by channel to get the right metallic color).

TLDR it does take a lot work to get images to that level of polish regardless of methodology.

Edit: I meant to say it takes work and I wonder how much of it is Apple not wanting to release almost a full set of CAD data to another vendor.

 

[cclloyd]

interesting i always assumed those shots are actually just renderings on the computer. u know .. like the food you see in commercials being plastic

As an employee of McD's, I can tell you that they are NOT plastic.

They are play-doe.

 

[Chalkperson]

I did Apple's product photography for a number of years, Steve Jobs had one simple rule, what you see on the box is what's inside it. You shoot real products, you get it all done in the lighting, you don't fake things like highlights, you actually do get it done in camera.

In 40 years of professional photography I learned more working for Steve Jobs than anyone else, his strive for perfect photographs makes you work incredibly hard, but it's worth it.

 

[ijohn.8.80]

It constantly surprises me the amount of folks that pop up out of the woodwork with the "I'm a photographer" claim on threads like this one, but, you don't see or hear a peep out of them on the photography forums here!

 

[See Flat]

The McDonalds food is real./QUOTE]

I'm not sure food and real should be in the same sentence when describing McDonald's "products"

 

[sulpfiction]

No he doesnt. He uses a Phase one back and a Sinar camera
The mark 3 is just a handheld day to day workhorse

How do u know this? Is he a friend of urs? And the 5D is MORE then capable of taking every single one of apples photos. Camera only does so much. It's the person behind it that makes pics "amazing".

 

[carl0sian]

canon vs nikon debate should start right about now

in any case, images on phones and glare are definitely added in post

nikon! hahaha

 

[thekev]

How do u know this? Is he a friend of urs? And the 5D is MORE then capable of taking every single one of apples photos. Camera only does so much. It's the person behind it that makes pics "amazing".

You can find videos of his setups on vimeo. Phase One backs can also be used on other cameras. The only reasons to use it on a Sinar would be the flexibility afforded by a view camera the the quality of lenses available. You do gain some flexibility with plane of focus and other things that isn't really the same as what can be achieved with a 5D body, and those sensors are of higher quality. They lack the anti aliasing/low pass filter. It's also common to use digital backs in jewelry and car ads or whatever portions are not rendered even today. Assuming quality post work, you won't see the difference in quality at web appropriate levels of resolution.

Edit: edit: it's some really great work.

DSLR chips definitely do break down faster when it comes to resolving very fine lines with minimal noise and capturing smooth gradients in metal. He's also using a slightly wide lens in the link I pasted. It's in the description, but I could tell from the short bag bellows prior to reading it. In a dslr that means a retrofocus design. Even medium wides in dslrs tend to be reverse mounted telephoto lenses so as to allow for mirror clearance. Here it's actually focused over a very short distance. It does allow for better lens design, and you can get some amazing view camera lenses, even if they are quite expensive.

I'm not commenting on things like lighting here, merely the reasons for technical choices. Trying to remake everything in post is really blah. If he's on it (as the video would suggest) he knows what will be done in post vs in camera. With PS there's little reason to remove screens and use cards to provide those image replacements.

Edit: I only watched the first part before. He does go into the post work about a minute in, and it's pretty basic stuff (pathing and clean up lines as most of the heavy lifting is done by lighting). If you look closely, you'll see what I mean about fine lines. Even on that back they break down a bit. It's much worse with a dslr, making it more difficult if the image has to hold up at a wide range of sizes.

 

[attiland]

almost all professional photos are fake. they are photoshopped to death and taken under ideal lighting conditions. thousands of photos are taken to select a few choice ones

like the food photos for fast food ads. they go to whole foods market of all places to find the best looking veggies

smart pants you are. how did you work this out?

 

[0098386]

Nice bit of mind blowing to wake up to - always assumed they were computer rendered!

 

[attiland]

So by your definitions, Ansel Adams wasn't a true photographer...?

I don't think you're being fair. Photography can encompasses an entire gamut of things including in camera settings and PP. Years back in was the dark room. Now the dark room has been moved onto the computer. Same tools are available. As long as you don't stray too far off from the original, I think it's still considered "photography." Putting in a different sky wouldn't be photography IMO.

I think those that define a true photographer as one who doesn't do PP are those who either can't or don't want to learn Photoshop or similar apps. To each his/her own.

Post production was always been there, even with film. using lightroom or any other raw processing software makes no difference, in terms of good or bad photography. The process has been been there with chemicals back in the days...

 

[inscrewtable]

You should try working for a psychopath/sociophath who provides you with a dodgy 8 x 10 with two fish fryers, and a bunch of silver and white cardboard and tells you to reproduce someone else's proper studio production shot!

 

[jimbo1mcm]

You can find videos of his setups on vimeo. Phase One backs can also be used on other cameras. The only reasons to use it on a Sinar would be the flexibility afforded by a view camera the the quality of lenses available. You do gain some flexibility with plane of focus and other things that isn't really the same as what can be achieved with a 5D body, and those sensors are of higher quality. They lack the anti aliasing/low pass filter. It's also common to use digital backs in jewelry and car ads or whatever portions are not rendered even today. Assuming quality post work, you won't see the difference in quality at web appropriate levels of resolution.

Edit: edit: it's some really great work.

DSLR chips definitely do break down faster when it comes to resolving very fine lines with minimal noise and capturing smooth gradients in metal. He's also using a slightly wide lens in the link I pasted. It's in the description, but I could tell from the short bag bellows prior to reading it. In a dslr that means a retrofocus design. Even medium wides in dslrs tend to be reverse mounted telephoto lenses so as to allow for mirror clearance. Here it's actually focused over a very short distance. It does allow for better lens design, and you can get some amazing view camera lenses, even if they are quite expensive.

I'm not commenting on things like lighting here, merely the reasons for technical choices. Trying to remake everything in post is really blah. If he's on it (as the video would suggest) he knows what will be done in post vs in camera. With PS there's little reason to remove screens and use cards to provide those image replacements.

Edit: I only watched the first part before. He does go into the post work about a minute in, and it's pretty basic stuff (pathing and clean up lines as most of the heavy lifting is done by lighting). If you look closely, you'll see what I mean about fine lines. Even on that back they break down a bit. It's much worse with a dslr, making it more difficult if the image has to hold up at a wide range of sizes.

Wow! Way above my pay grade. I point and shoot.

 

[wyarp]

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...

You have obviously never worked in a professional photographic studio such as this.

First of all, the post production work will usually be done in house, Secondly, it won't take days. Thirdly they do not 're-do' textures or 'paint' anything. Besides adding the screen content and perhaps cloning out the odd dust spot etc, pretty much everything is taken in the camera as the guy says. I love how people just 'assume' that because the images appear so perfect they must be all faked and cgi or 'photoshopped to death'. They look so perfect because the products themselves are incredibly well designed/built and the photography is incredibly good.

 

[nitrokev]

I don't see the point of going to all this effort to photograph them to look like CGI when they are already creating CGI for their animated work in videos, just seems like unnecessary duplication, and this is coming from a studio photographer

 

[Truss Wrod]

I wondered why my 4S pix weren't the same quality

 

[thekev]

Wow! Way above my pay grade. I point and shoot.

Just look at the subject, metal and glass. The level of faceting is very fine giving that not quite mirror like appearance, so it emphasizes the way that highly opaque objects have a tendency to display direct reflections of whatever is lighting them. It gets more complicated with metal, as the intensity of light reflected relative to the angle of the surface in relation to the viewpoint gets somewhat more complicated than it would with something like plastic (yes it was a samsung joke). I mentioned digital backs simply because they help capture the most gradation possible across such surfaces and cleaner lines when it comes to outlining. At the same time I didn't want to attribute things in weird ways. Someone that does that much work of the same subject matter knows what will hold up at what output size due to past experience.

I am a little surprised it's still that split between photography and renders used in animation when it should be possible to reuse the shaders in each.

 

[bitfidelity]

Why isn't he using a prime lens?

 

[JavaTheHut]

Why isn't he using a prime lens?

It looks like he was using a prime lens in the video

 

[nwcs]

Why isn't he using a prime lens?

Because there's no real advantage to a prime in controlled studio conditions. Most likely his aperture is such where he's using the sweet spot of the lenses he chooses. He doesn't need or want a wide open aperture, either. And most lenses look very very similar at f8 in quality.