Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Releases New Behind-the-Scenes Video for '1.24.14' Mac 30th Anniversary Ad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh... so this "shot with iPhone" thing that leads the average watcher to think it was all handheld regular shooting, was actually shot on thousand dollar steadicams and jib-cranes.... Hmm.
It wasn't too long ago that the idea of filming a broadcast quality video on anything but a large, expensive camera was unheard of. The thought of doing it on a phone you can put in your pocket was laughable.
That's the point.
Sure, to make it look great, you still need lighting, dollies, etc, but that's just the physical equipment. The iPhone is still creating the image.
That message might have been made more clear had the production been much more simple, say giving iPhones to 15 different cinematographers to go out and shoot with minimal gear (or none at all). Instead what we get is a full blown big budget production, kind of negating the whole point.
Yeah, the iPhone is capable of some great video. But outside of this marketing stunt, no one with that kind of budget is going to use an iPhone for video acquisition. And considering quality cameras are getting cheaper every day (Blackmagic) it's probably not a consideration for any budget level.
It's definitely a cool video, but saying "hey look, this was done with iPhones" doesn't mean as much when you see what actually went into it. The reason the GoPro has been so successful with their marketing is because we're seeing amazing video that was shot by actual customers.
That's simplifying it a bit. Quality camera support is always getting cheaper and more accessible. But the quality you get from the high end gear is still unmatched for most shots.
----------
The term "broadcast quality" is pretty ambiguous. It's actually rather meaningless anymore.
But what's the point when you can just use an actual video camera that will deliver better results?
If that was the case, I wonder, why do professionals still buy the expensive cameras? And in my personal experience, despite higher resolution home videos shot with modern smart phones on average have much worse quality than the videos taken years ago with proper camcorders. Do I have to mention those great videos shot in portrait mode? Lack of zoom and optical stabilization are huge disadvantages. Just look at the material provided by Apple. It is painful to look at how difficult it is for those folks to just hold the phones during shooting.
----------
Only because Samsung can afford proper equipment.
The biggest part of what happened at the Chicago Sun-Times was they fired the people who actually knew something about photography... and replaced them with people who know nothing about photography.
You could give a $4000 DSLR to a reporter and the pictures would still suck. It's not about the equipment.
Don't blame the iPhone for what happened at the Chicago Sun-Times... blame the loss of talented photojournalists.
Competent photographers can actually get good results from something as simple as an iPhone.
Or in this case... competent filmmakers (with a nice budget)
You're right though... I wouldn't hire a guy with a smartphone to shoot a wedding. But there are professional photographers who now shoot with cheaper non-professional Micro4/3 cameras instead of big honkin' DSLRs.
But again... they know what they're doing. Skill trumps equipment.
No, I was explaining the advertising.
(Just because I understand what someone is communicating doesn't mean I necessarily agree with it. Also, The Chicago Sun-Times thing has nothing to do with this. The main thing there was that they replaced phtographers with non-photographers. While also pathetic, using camera phones in place of professional equipement was secondary.)
Also, I guess I should have clarified, although it should be obvious from the context (Apple): the advertising message is aimed at average consumers not video professionals.
And competent photographers with proper equipment can do wonders (and they can definitely do much better than competent photographers with iPhones).The biggest part of what happened at the Chicago Sun-Times was they fired the people who actually knew something about photography... and replaced them with people who know nothing about photography.
You could give a $4000 DSLR to a reporter and the pictures would still suck. It's not about the equipment.
Don't blame the iPhone for what happened at the Chicago Sun-Times... blame the loss of talented photojournalists.
Competent photographers can actually get good results from something as simple as an iPhone.
Or in this case... competent filmmakers (with a nice budget)
You're right though... I wouldn't hire a guy with a smartphone to shoot a wedding. But there are professional photographers who now shoot with cheaper non-professional Micro4/3 cameras instead of big honkin' DSLRs.
But again... they know what they're doing. Skill trumps equipment.
I personally think would have been better served not releasing the behind the scenes video. Sure there are people who know the original video wouldn't have been possible just whipping out an iPhone but everything doesnt have to be explained to the Nth degree. I think marketing like this works better inside the RDF. It works better as inspiration. With all that $$$ equipment any decent smartphone could have been used and the video would have been no different. In this instance the iPhone was nothing more than a glorified prop.
Knowing how the magician does the trick sort of makes it less magical.
would have been better served not releasing the behind the scenes video. Sure there are people who know the original video wouldn't have been possible just whipping out an iPhone but everything doesnt have to be explained to the Nth degree. I think marketing like this works better inside the RDF. It works better as inspiration. With all that $$$ equipment any decent smartphone could have been used and the video would have been no different. In this instance the iPhone was nothing more than a glorified prop.Knowing how the magician does the trick sort of makes it less magical.
I personally think
Wait, so now we're in favour of the 'reality distortion field'? I find the transparency refreshing and would rather encourage more, not less, of it.
I'll pick this comment. So many of these commenters so absolutely did NOT get what the videos are about, and they tried so hard to be negative and cynical to cover up their lack of understanding, and they so succeeded in making fools of themselves over another Apple breakthrough.
Here's the point: Fifteen crews on five continents shot 70 hours of footage on 100 iPhones, many of them taking pictures of people using iPhones, iPads, MacBooks, and iMacs in various ingenious ways, the whole worldwide shoot directed in real time from one location in L.A. by Jake Scott—using FaceTime, Apple's own system-wide network—then presumably digitally sent it all in for editing using MacBooks, iPads and iMacs, and then delivered to us fully edited IN TEN MEASLY DAYS.
And the thing is interesting, exciting, beautiful and good, and there was enough behind-the-scenes crew photography to deliver a "making-of" movie at the same time.
This is historic, and it will be picked up and used as a lesson in film schools. It could not have been done two years ago. It will be done over and over again in the future.
It wasn't about the iPhone. It was about the media-aware ecosystem that appeared with the first Mac 30 years ago, which Apple has been working on ever since. The equipment you design and add to the system is the economy that springs up around any genuine technological revolution.
Last edited by a moderator:
The "point" is simple - who would have thought, 30 years ago, that this was even remotely possible?
And, if Apple hadn't done it - who would have?
Unlike the generation of under-20's that can't communicate with the outside world other than through anonymous tweets, I wasn't born with an entitlement to these wondrous creations. Making a phone call meant a stinky, diseased phone booth reeking of urine. Today you can make a call from your wrist phone, just like Dick Tracy did when I was a kid. I don't take that for granted, because half a lifetime ago it was only a dream. I see newborns getting iPods today.
No.... my generation had to dream these up, and then make them come true. Only one company had the foresight, engineering, and derring-do to put these to life rather than simply show them as props on a movie set. And that company is celebrating the 30th anniversary of the first device that truly set that creativity free.
These devices have changed the world - perhaps at a magnitude greater than the airplane and automobile did two and three generations ago. These devices bring the world closer together, without needing the massive infrastructure of a highway or an airport. These devices can be anywhere, anytime, capturing or delivering information and sights that would never have been celebrated outside of their own back yard. And now they are in your shirt pocket.
That is amazing. Sorry you can't see it for what it is - a celebration of the wonder.
Who else did this? Nobody. Just Apple. Because if someone else had done it, they would have done it.
Thank you, Apple, and happy anniversary.
Correct. I agree with that.
But my point was... the Chicago Sun-Times fired all their competent photographers. That's the big one.
The fact that they switched to non-photographers with iPhones ranks a distant 2nd in this story.
But everyone seems to focus on the iPhone part of the story.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard things like "look at how bad the Chicago Sun-Times' photos are now that they use the iPhone"
In fact... that's what cdmoore74 was alluding to.
I say... the loss of skilled employees was their downfall... not an equipment change.
No, it's not historic. Please enlighten us as to why this couldn't have been done 2 years ago.
It's a cool, well done marketing video showcasing their products. It's certainly not the groundbreaking production you make it out to be.
On not so distant past, sending a man on space or even flying a plane around the world was considered something against the laws of physics. As with any generations, there are things considered impossible.... that is until inevitably they are possible
----------
Oh... so this "shot with iPhone" thing that leads the average watcher to think it was all handheld regular shooting, was actually shot on thousand dollar steadicams and jib-cranes.... Hmm.
You don't need a thousands of $ for that. You can achieve super-smooth video with things like iStabilizer dolly etc.
I'm disappointed we didn't get any behind the scene of the guy off-roading Jurassic Park style with a MBP in his lap.
Since it seems that there's some sensitive people who are getting upset when others are calling the latest Mac anniversary video by calling this an iPhone centric video, like I did earlier:
Let me clarify.
I know very well that Apple is headed into having computing move from the desktop and have it literally fit into our hands. I know that Apple is continuously innovating and computing has gone beyond the desktop/notebook. I can't emphasize enough how much I appreciate Apple's efforts as I use their products daily.
With that said, when I saw the latest Mac 30th anniversary video, I didn't see a video about the Mac but a video showcasing the iPhone. I get that what they were showing is where they are in terms of innovation all because of the Mac, but they should have made the video more Mac centric than iPhone centric.
Seriously, how hard would it have been to show modern uses of the Mac, even if it had the iPhone or iPad in it, than what was released? On top of that, this would have also been a great opportunity to sell the Mac Pro but we didn't get that.
Bottom line, I stand by what I said.
Let me clarify.
I know very well that Apple is headed into having computing move from the desktop and have it literally fit into our hands. I know that Apple is continuously innovating and computing has gone beyond the desktop/notebook. I can't emphasize enough how much I appreciate Apple's efforts as I use their products daily.
With that said, when I saw the latest Mac 30th anniversary video, I didn't see a video about the Mac but a video showcasing the iPhone. I get that what they were showing is where they are in terms of innovation all because of the Mac, but they should have made the video more Mac centric than iPhone centric.
Seriously, how hard would it have been to show modern uses of the Mac, even if it had the iPhone or iPad in it, than what was released? On top of that, this would have also been a great opportunity to sell the Mac Pro but we didn't get that.
Bottom line, I stand by what I said.
The biggest part of what happened at the Chicago Sun-Times was they fired the people who actually knew something about photography... and replaced them with people who know nothing about photography.
You could give a $4000 DSLR to a reporter and the pictures would still suck. It's not about the equipment.
Don't blame the iPhone for what happened at the Chicago Sun-Times... blame the loss of talented photojournalists.
Competent photographers can actually get good results from something as simple as an iPhone.
Or in this case... competent filmmakers (with a nice budget)
You're right though... I wouldn't hire a guy with a smartphone to shoot a wedding. But there are professional photographers who now shoot with cheaper non-professional Micro4/3 cameras instead of big honkin' DSLRs.
But again... they know what they're doing. Skill trumps equipment.
If you have ever shot with a pro slr and associated kit, you will realise that no amount of skill will get you remotely close with an iPhone.
When it comes to photojournalism it's in fact the sports aimed SLRs that are the preferred choice, extra reach, lightning quick AF, and high FPS . None of which a smartphone has.
And equipment. Give the same average joe an iPhone , and say a canon 80mm 1.2 lens, and ask them to do a portrait shot. There is a very good reason why a lens costs more than an iPhone ..... Equipment makes a huge difference, and can make an unskilled operator produce impressive shots.
Though I agree with you, same equipment in the hands of skilled and unskilled makes a huge difference.
Okay, the ad is very well done, a nice team effort. But some people here act as if Apple invented the computer. They didn't. Many people did the same things and never used a Mac in 30 years.