Apple Showcases 'Shot on iPhone 6' World Photo Gallery on Homepage [Updated]

[Snoozin]

There's plenty of unprocessed photos online, google them yourselves. Apple showcases amazing after amazing photo. The level of clarity and ability to extract that level of detail from it's camera is nothing short of incredible. Look at the amount of detail extracted from a sunbeam through the trees, something that would ordinarily be overexposed, perfectly captured diffusing through the foliage. Not just some over saturated samsung photo.

These are ordinary people with their iPhones capturing beautiful images, not limited to professional photographers.

 

[Keirasplace]

Apple said those photo's are not pure, I want to see every one of those photos directly from the lens with no extra processing. They are claiming that the camera can take amazing photos. Sure I could take a out of balanced photo and turn it into something pleasing as well. How many of those photos were retouched in some way.

Right.. .So, you take crap pictures and make them better. Makes so much sense. The Iphone 6 has a well reviewed camera, known to take good pictures. That's not a surprise at all. So, what are you objections precisely? Be specific, out of balance means nothing.

If the 100+ current Android models take good picture, maybe its time they make a site too to feature those pictures so you can specifically link to them. Instead of telling those things exist. Pictures speak louder than words.

 

[mozumder]

Lots of generic stock-photos... they couldn't have found more awesome photographers?

 

[MacNut]

Right.. .So, you take crap pictures and make them better. Makes so much sense. The Iphone 6 has a well reviewed camera, known to take good pictures. That's not a surprise at all. So, what are you objections precisely? Be specific, out of balance means nothing.

If the 100+ current Android models take good picture, maybe its time they make a site too to feature those pictures so you can specifically link to them. Instead of telling those things exist. Pictures speak louder than words.

I am not saying the iPhone takes bad photos, but why do they have the need to show touched up ones? If they are so confident in the ability of the camera show them without adjustments.

 

[Keirasplace]

It's a shame that with Cook's desire for Apple to be a platform for different human values and acceptance of difference in general, that this photographic portfolio is so limited in vision. Limited in that is, for the most part, only using the public to create images it might have created for use in its own own marketing assets.

The images are generally landscapes, architecture, babies or animals - the easy tick boxes. There is no challenge, no real narrative, and a tendency towards visual beauty rather than human connection.

In other words - pictures many would use for screensavers, or generic images for vision statements.

Obviously there is a strong desire for Apple's consumers to be advocates for the "Apple Way" - but ultimately I think it's a narrow marketing philosophy which limits the company's ability to be truly inclusive - and truly different.

Taking good pictures of people is hard, very hard. That's explains why its that way. Most people only really take pictures of people when its their own family. And even then, they're mainly really crappy snapshots. If those snapshots were published, you'd probably get 90% pictures of upper middle class people all around the world, most of them white... That's diversity?

People with Iphones are not National Geographics photographer. To be able to do a sociological pictorial of people, you need skill skills that go beyond the camera. Even if these people had top of the line cameras, they couldn't take those pictures.

 

[Imory]

The camera in the iPhone 6 is really great, I'm not denying that. I've achieved some really nice shots on it. My frustration with shooting with my iPhone 6 Plus is that I can't shoot RAW. You end up with somewhat compressed, lossy JPEGs which don't edit well. So you're very restricted with what you can do afterwards. I'm used to shooting RAW with my camera and then having the freedom to make it into exactly what I want in Lightroom. You just can't do that with iPhone shots, you get the photo you take and that's pretty much it. Well, you can apply a bunch of filters with apps like VSCO, but ultimately you still end up with compressed, lossy JPEGs with which you can't do much.

If Apple brings out a phone that shoots RAW, THEN I'll be impressed!

I was actually surprised by how well some of the pictures looked after being edited by both VSCO and Afterlight. I've always assumed that doing too much post-process would simply compromise the pictures too much since they're already lossy. That there's only so much a picture can take in terms of editing before it gets ruined, if you catch my drift?

 

[Keirasplace]

I am not saying the iPhone takes bad photos, but why do they have the need to show touched up ones? If they are so confident in the ability of the camera show them without adjustments.

These are basically shots people took from their own Iphone 6 camera. People often retouch photos from their cameras, its a compulsion really; there is hundreds of apps for that. Why they can't leave them alone. Who knows? Often I'd prefer the original shot anyway, but they don't.

Apple has published unretouched photos from a professional photographer just prior to the launch of the Iphone 6. Some didnt want to believe the photos came from the Iphone camera... So, Apple can't win either way.

 

[sniffies]

Shouldn't it say Shot with iPhone, and not Shot on iPhone?

 

[FieldingMellish]

Have the photographers been named and given compensation for use of their images?

 

[Even Longer]

Outstanding. That move reminds me of Apple from the old days.

Sad only, that nowadays such subtile and genius reactions moving alongside with:

- huge recent software problems

- critical bugs and sometimes vulnerabilities not being fixed for years

- uncertain future of the professional line of Apple products (both: devices and software)

- cutting down features in working software as iWork, Aperture and FCP->FCPX (and no, featuring FCPX in focus movie production alone won't bring all the professionals, who abandoned that software dissapointed).

 

[bezants]

Here is a slow mo video of lightning in Brisbane taken by an iPhone 6. Turned out great:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAam-0cRJl0

 

[candle]

There are some beautiful shots in there. Your turn, photocopier -- er, samsung.

I like your witty comment. I have not read that before.

I agree there are great shots. Apple does pull together resources and markets these neat showcases very well. Ingeniously, with the volume of pics involved, mathematically, many will inevitably look great.

 

[Rogifan]

Apparently Apple is turning this into a major ad campaign with these photos going up on billboards and in subway stations.

 

[Silveryfruit]

Taking good pictures of people is hard, very hard. That's explains why its that way. Most people only really take pictures of people when its their own family. And even then, they're mainly really crappy snapshots. If those snapshots were published, you'd probably get 90% pictures of upper middle class people all around the world, most of them white... That's diversity?

People with Iphones are not National Geographics photographer. To be able to do a sociological pictorial of people, you need skill skills that go beyond the camera. Even if these people had top of the line cameras, they couldn't take those pictures.

Keirasplace -


I know how hard it is to take good pictures - whatever the camera. But it is the person's eye, not the camera (or camera phone) that informs the story you're trying to tell. The skills you mention.

I agree that most iPhone 6 owners aren't National Geographic photographers - but when did I mention National Geographic? Again, there is a very noticeable house style when you see Nat Geo's work. What their editors see as the Nat Geo brand - and what they commission the photographers they employ to deliver.

Which is what Apple is doing here - except with the public, not with professionals, via their fairly banal selection. And yet I strongly believe that with millions of owners of an iphone 6 currently snapping away, that there is a much richer variety of good and even great photography out there Apple could have chosen.

But of course they may not be super sharp, or generic, or unchallenging, and therefore not on brand.

 

[576316]

I was actually surprised by how well some of the pictures looked after being edited by both VSCO and Afterlight. I've always assumed that doing too much post-process would simply compromise the pictures too much since they're already lossy. That there's only so much a picture can take in terms of editing before it gets ruined, if you catch my drift?

That statement is absolutely true for JPEGs, but not RAW files or TIFFs. Lossless files will take heaps of none-destructive editing. I don't think there's a point they'd ever become 'ruined'. But JPEGs, yeah. Those things will crumble under the slightest alteration.

----------

You're hard to impress #

But maybe you're using the wrong tool for your purpose?

Exactly my point. They always say the best camera is the one you always have with you, well I always have my iPhone with me. But for aforementioned reasons, it's just not a practical choice for me when it comes to taking photographs. Which is a real shame, really.

----------

Even if these people had top of the line cameras, they couldn't take those pictures.

Please don't suggest an expensive camera makes somebody a better photographer.

 

[postpc]

love my 6p but the camera has been a bit of a let down, not much improvment over my 4s. dont get me wrong the camera is ok for a smartphone but it feels like progress has stalled.

 

[Keirasplace]

Keirasplace -


I know how hard it is to take good pictures - whatever the camera. But it is the person's eye, not the camera (or camera phone) that informs the story you're trying to tell. The skills you mention.

I agree that most iPhone 6 owners aren't National Geographic photographers - but when did I mention National Geographic? Again, there is a very noticeable house style when you see Nat Geo's work. What their editors see as the Nat Geo brand - and what they commission the photographers they employ to deliver.

Which is what Apple is doing here - except with the public, not with professionals, via their fairly banal selection. And yet I strongly believe that with millions of owners of an iphone 6 currently snapping away, that there is a much richer variety of good and even great photography out there Apple could have chosen.

But of course they may not be super sharp, or generic, or unchallenging, and therefore not on brand.

I wish there were so many great pictures, but I fear that there may not be. Through, maybe they don't need to be. We have a tendency to be much more critical of shots of people than of animals or landscapes, maybe this is what needs to change. Picturing normal life in all its non perfectness.... Anyway, were moving more into philosophy and humanism with this than photography.

----------

love my 6p but the camera has been a bit of a let down, not much improvment over my 4s. dont get me wrong the camera is ok for a smartphone but it feels like progress has stalled.

Actual photos under various usage in various reviews of 4S vs 6 disagree.

But, there are physical limits to what can be done in a cell phone, and beyond that they'd need a radically different way of taking pictures (that doesn't really exist) or a thicker camera.

 

[abbstrack]

learned my lesson

love the iPhone 6's camera, but now i carry around a Pro-level point and shoot. I've had too many cases where i've loved a photo I took with my iPhone and wanted to blow it up (I like big prints) and i'm not able to. I need some 30 x 40's for my walls...and more importantly than needing to print every one, I like having the option to should I so desire.

The best camera you have is the one you have with you...until you need to make some prints.

That said, this is a dope campaign, and I love seeing the beautiful work people are making with their phones.

 

[kagharaht]

They look great, but seriously, vs a 20+ MP camera? Side by side there would be no comparison.

 

[darcyf]

I am not saying the iPhone takes bad photos, but why do they have the need to show touched up ones? If they are so confident in the ability of the camera show them without adjustments.

I think you're missing the point/spirit of this endeavour. Apple are showcasing how great the photos people produce with the iPhone, from camera to editing app to final product, can be. The editing apps are listed. The whole process is being celebrated.

It's not meant to be a photography purist's peeing contest - not that the iPhone couldn't step to that. But if that's what you're looking for then this showcase is not for you.

 

[Keirasplace]

They look great, but seriously, vs a 20+ MP camera? Side by side there would be no comparison.

If that 20MP camera is another cell phone... yes they compare, if its against even a 12MP mid range compaqs like the Canon G16 (which is far from top range), no they don't compare. Not even sure you put mega pixel as some kind of gauge of quality here. There is no direct relationship between quality and resolution, unless you also take into account the sensor size, sensitivity and the lenses.

 

[Jessica Lares]

It's a shame that with Cook's desire for Apple to be a platform for different human values and acceptance of difference in general, that this photographic portfolio is so limited in vision. Limited in that is, for the most part, only using the public to create images it might have created for use in its own own marketing assets.

The images are generally landscapes, architecture, babies or animals - the easy tick boxes. There is no challenge, no real narrative, and a tendency towards visual beauty rather than human connection.

In other words - pictures many would use for screensavers, or generic images for vision statements.

Obviously there is a strong desire for Apple's consumers to be advocates for the "Apple Way" - but ultimately I think it's a narrow marketing philosophy which limits the company's ability to be truly inclusive - and truly different.

Those kind of pictures have their place to be showcased, and that is not on a company's product page. I totally understand what you mean, but when I look at these photos, I do not think about the content, but rather the detail and clarity.

 

[kagharaht]

If that 20MP camera is another cell phone... yes they compare, if its against even a 12MP mid range compaqs like the Canon G16 (which is far from top range), no they don't compare. Not even sure you put mega pixel as some kind of gauge of quality here. There is no direct relationship between quality and resolution, unless you also take into account the sensor size, sensitivity and the lenses.

Lets compare it to the new Samsung S6. Once the comparison is available, iP6 photos will just look pale in comparison. Lets be real now Apple fans.

 

[kirky29]

What do you guys think about editing or enhancing photos? I do it with mine (taken on the iPhone 6 Plus) to bring out the colours, particually the blue sky or green grass. I've got one friend who doesn't really know anything about photography and tells me I'm wrong for doing it, that I'm faking the picture. Fair enough it's his opinion but it just gets annoying lol.

 

[japanime]

Have the photographers been named and given compensation for use of their images?

The photographers' names are listed in large type underneath every photo in the gallery — not sure how you could have missed that.

I think it's safe to say the photographers were also compensated by Apple in some way. It would be tacky for Apple to say so on the gallery page, though, don't you think?