I had called it when the rumor first appeared in January: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ts.2330972/page-2?post=30770847#post-30770847
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.
iPhone 14 Pro Renders Highlight Multiple Design Changes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
2021: ProRes with Lightning and usb 2 speed. Yes, Tim is capable of doing that s***
So you're saying it looks outdated with the lighting port, but if it had a slightly wider USB-C port that looks almost exactly the same... then it will be an amazing looking modern phone!!!!
i don't agree with U. Apple cables are one of the worst ones, yet i never had any problems with USB-C cables, and usb-c is so much faster.
Really missing the point. Nobody cares about the cable, the port that the cable plugs into - and which is at least as likely to break as the cable's connector (if not moreso) - is a difficult to repair/replace part of a $500-$1600 phone. Do you enjoy taking your phone in for service?
Renders look really good, very impressed. The Graphite looks beautiful. Looking forward to getting the 14 Pro in September. This Pro design in the Mini size would have been the perfect phone, but they scrapped the 5.4" size, so 6.1" it is!
While it is true that many would never see much difference between lightning and USB-C, people like me certainly lament plugging their phone in and waiting an HOUR for a video shoot to transfer to their Mac while every other camera/device on the planet with a proper fast transfer protocol (USB-C) does the same thing in about 7-10 minutes.
I have owned USB-C devices for years, and never once had one break down like you claim they do all the time. Is there a plague of broken iPads that exist?
I am serious. I used my Galaxy phones as hard as my iPhones and never had issues.
Please show me where I "claimed they do all the time" - perhaps you are mixing me up with some other forum member.
I was replying to a comment saying that cables weren't a concern because they were cheap, pointing out that the cable wasn't the part to be concerned with (replacing a cable is $5-$20 and you can order one in 30 seconds, while getting your phone repaired is more expensive and takes longer, and things can go wrong - you don't simply get a shiny new replacement, like with a cable), and I've also pointed out that, whatever your experience, the Lightning connector design is inherently a more robust design than the USB-C connector design.
There are valid points in favor of Apple switching to USB-C for the iPhone. There are also valid points against it. I tire of seeing people treat it as though switching would unquestionably be a 100% win all around.
I think if they do support 8K video in the next model, it will tip the balance a bit in favor of USB-C. I don't know if that will actually cause them to make the change this year. Of course, all these decisions - camera layout, 8K or not, USB-C or not, were almost certainly cast in stone months ago (the inevitible summer articles about "last minute design change" are always hilarious), we just won't know the answers for certain until September - that's a bit weird when you think of it.
Fair enough, I think I was replying to more than one comment here and might have confused yours with the others that seem to think that USB-C cables are prone to the internal connector breaking more often.
Ironically, I am replying this about twenty minutes after imazing started to transfer around 18gb of video off my phone.
Here is why I HATE Lightning. With a Passion:
You mentioned 8K video, however it has been a problem since apps like Filmic Pro have had the ability to record in 150mbps streams.
Last year it got worse with the 13 having ProRes video, which takes a staggering 5 gigabytes per minute if shot in 4k30.
And for the record, Samsung phones have done 8k for a few generations, but the bitrate is not very high, and even an 8k file created on a Samsung phone is nowhere NEAR the size of what the 13 does in ProRes.
And that is "the rub." That is where I really question Apple without Jobs running the show.
You have a feature you are selling to PROFESSIONAL FILMMAKERS. You then absolutely cripple the ability to work with the video you say they can now create.
I asked Apple, there is NO WAY to get the files off the device faster than the cable to the Mac. Even if you used a USB drive, you hit two different issues.
1. Good luck getting a USB drive large enough
2. The USB device still uses a lightning interface, so his the exact same speed bottleneck.
So if you shot 240 gigabytes of prores footage, you would have only 48 minutes of video.
This would take 1 hour 15 minutes if transferred with lightning at 480mbps
This would potentially take about 48 SECONDS or so on a USB-C connection at 40gbps
I really do believe that this comes down to money for Apple. They license the cables, people pay for the right to manufacture the lightning cable, as far as I understand it they need to purchase a license for the tech.
From there, it is 100% win for Apple, regardless of if "x company" sells their supply, or the cables end up at a wholesaler selling cheap, Apple got their licensing money.
I am an Apple user 100% in my workflow and do not even own a Windows device any longer, or any Android. I still call out their BS shenanigans on the inability to upgrade RAM and SSD's on desktop devices, and the Lightning adapter should have gone away a long time ago.
Regarding the 8k video recording:
I don't know the actual capabilities of the iPhone's lenses—are they sufficiently sharp that the difference between 4k and 8k would be perceptible?
And who is this for? Probably not for serious video production because, hey, it's an iPhone. Plus Apple doesn't have an 8k monitor, nor the ability to connect to them, and wouldn't that be needed to do serious editing in 8k?
So maybe it's just for folks who have 8k TV's and want to play their videos on them. But then the Mac on which you downloaded the videos would need to be able to send a signal to an 8k TV, which I don't believe they can do yet.
I don't know the actual capabilities of the iPhone's lenses—are they sufficiently sharp that the difference between 4k and 8k would be perceptible?
And who is this for? Probably not for serious video production because, hey, it's an iPhone. Plus Apple doesn't have an 8k monitor, nor the ability to connect to them, and wouldn't that be needed to do serious editing in 8k?
So maybe it's just for folks who have 8k TV's and want to play their videos on them. But then the Mac on which you downloaded the videos would need to be able to send a signal to an 8k TV, which I don't believe they can do yet.
Yeah, I read a number of stories of filmmakers using iPhones for 4k and having to basically have a stack of them to hand off when they got full, with a messy laborious back-end to offload the data. It is a mess, as-is. That's why I suggested that, if they offer 8k, it makes it an even shakier proposition for them to not offer some faster transfer method (USB-C, or some sort of Lightning+, which seems foolhardy at this point, but who knows, or some crazy new wireless transfer method). I think we're on the same page.
I don't know how much of it is directly money for Apple (cable sales or royalties), and how much is indirectly money for Apple (something like, "we used 30-pin for 10 years, we designed Lightning to last 10 years, users hated the change last time, we're reluctant to make changes that will make grumpy users, because grumpy users buy less phones")... Unfortunately, professional filmmakers are a minute fraction of their customer base, and Apple is likely looking primarily looking to cater to people who will get really excited about 8k and then only ever use it to film a couple of 3 minute clips (but, gee, they've already got a bunch of Lightning cables/accessories in their house and car)... It will be interesting to see how things play out.
Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing Apple drop having an actual jack, and go for something like the smart connector they have for the keyboard on the iPads (just a row of contacts and a magnet) - let it just do charging and crazy-fast data transfer. But, I think the combination of already having the round "Magsafe" wireless charging connector, and the looming "thou shalt use USB-C" regulations, I suspect USB-C is more likely.
For what it's worth, my last PC ran WinXP, I've been entirely a Mac user since the mid 2000's. Coming at it from a different angle - I'm a Unix user at heart, and the Mac has been the nicest Unix workstation/OS combination for many years running. And my last couple MBPs all got RAM and SSD upgrades that made them last many years (upgrading to configurations that Apple didn't even offer when they came out) - my new MBP, on the other hand, has a ton of storage because I know I'll never be able to upgrade it, and I find that pretty annoying (I mean, I like all the capacity, but I didn't enjoy having to pay for it up front).
So, I get the impression that very few full movies are filmed on iPhones (it has been done, at times), but often (usually?) movies are not just 1 camera / 1 director filming everything. They'll have lots of things going on simultaneously. I've heard of cases (more than a couple) where a scene will get filmed with just an iPhone, say as a test (like, say, that's going to have a lot of special effects layered over it and they just want to see what they're working with), and then they look at the result and say, "actually, this footage is good enough to use as-is, no need to bring in the "real" cameras to reshoot it".
There's a special effects company (with a YouTube channel) called Corridor Digital - they do a lot of silly stuff, but they also do some reaction videos for special effects, and frequently get in some pretty top notch CGI artists who have worked on very well-known movies, in as guests - I'm pretty sure I've heard some of them discussing this.
I have never — not once — heard of a USB-C port “breaking internally” from normal use.
Last edited:
Yeah - I get that USB-C is ubiquitous, but it's physically larger and clunkier than Lightning, and much harder to push in to actually get that final click of a connection. It's like going back to the 1950s or using UK power strips, and IMO quite the eye sore. The only reason I'd put up with USB-C is so I can attach cool external devices to my iPhone.
Although, for perspective, it's MUCH, MUCH smaller than Apple's Magsafe wireless charging option, where your connection plug is the size of a Silver Dollar. So definitely less clunky than "wireless charging".
Although, for perspective, it's MUCH, MUCH smaller than Apple's Magsafe wireless charging option, where your connection plug is the size of a Silver Dollar. So definitely less clunky than "wireless charging".
Who purchases two iPhones for himself/herself? Crazy talk or common exaggeration.
Correct, real films will almost always use more than one camera. This is why using all iphones can be quite beneficial. For an amateur team that does not want to grade color, they can know that each camera is taking the same shot (relatively speaking, if they are all setting exposure on their own and not relying on the camera to balance exposure), and for those who want to grade, they are still getting the same flat profile to work with, without needing cinema cameras.
This is why possibly in the future mobile devices can be ideal for productions.
I was at NAB this year looking at cameras, and when you see the massive scope and scale of an Arri in person, you realize how large and cumbersome they area.
However, mobile film making for hollywood is nowhere near (technology wise) where it needs to be.
Not sure how much you know about film production, I have decided to learn it this year, so here is just a list of a few things real fast:
- Pulling focus - when the cinematic mode came out, apple talked about how they worked with cinematographers to have the AI emulate focus pulling, but on a set you will have a person who just does that. A cinema lens has marks for distance, they then manually change focus from one point to another to guarantee the shot looks good. iPhone does NOT DO THIS WELL, it is still just a parlor trick and crapshoot that the camera do it.
- battery life and audio - this one is tricky. You need your camera to work all the time, but you also need good audio. You can record audio separately and then sync it in post, but it is easier to record in the device. The thing is, one port means it is not easy to do, and you need to plug an adapter that allows a mic and power connection. That exists, but it is not elegant and not worth fighting over.
- Lens selection - this one is limited by the camera hardware. I tell people on my livestreams and remind them... if they want to use the BEST video, use the primary camera. The prime camera is the largest sensor. Detachable lens cameras allow for switching from wide to prime to zoom without having the image break apart in a grainy mess like it does on smartphones where the wide and tele lenses are always a smaller sensor than the prime lens.
- Coatings on the lens. This is one of the WORST things iPhone does. It is pathetic. Take a look at this screenshot
So the iPhone has a long way to go, and while I can appreciate Steven Soderbergh stating he "only wants to shoot movies on iPhone," he is currently crazy.
And he has shot feature films completely on them. He has.
Steven Soderbergh Says He’s Done Directing Studio Movies and Wants to Only Shoot on iPhones — Sundance 2018
Back at Sundance as the producer of "The King," the filmmaker said he's ready for a whole new chapter of his filmmaking career.
www.indiewire.com
No argument that it’s bigger, but let’s be real. It’s REALLY close in size. I’m not sure that size difference is the line between clunky. Also, I’ve never found it more difficult to seat the cables.
Attachments
To be fair, I think size entered the argument when someone said that the iPhone 14 renders looked awful and antiquated because of the Lightning port. I'm with you, the Lightning port is smaller, but the size difference is trivial - thus the argument that the Lightning port ruined the look of the phone was laughable.
I know more than the average person, less than people actively working in the industry. In a past life, I wrote payroll and location accounting software for the entertainment industry for many years. Got pretty familiar with what went into a production (that is, working with the data one could see the array of jobs involved in shooting a film, and a lot of people in our Burbank office came from the studios - also, few people outside the industry understand just how complicated Hollywood contracts can get - we had to write software to handle all sorts of features of those contracts). Never went on a set, though a number of coworkers spent time on sets, and on location, making sure our software ran smoothly (actually I did get onto studio lots a few times, but to the offices, not the stages). Also we used to attend ShowBiz Expo every year, and saw all the gear involved, though that was decades ago (which is part of why I don't assume my knowledge is correct and current). I've always been a bit fascinated with the process of making movies (long before the payroll work), and seeing it through an accountant's lens was interesting (it's a step removed from the actual production, of course, but most anything anyone needs on set goes past the accountants at some point). And, yeah, pulling focus is the full-time job of the Focus Puller, appropriately enough. "Parlor trick" is a fitting term for it - similar to Apple's Portrait mode - it can give you some effects similar to the real deal, sorta kinda, on occasion, if it works right. It's something for user to try, to see if you get a nice picture, but not something to depend upon for professional use.
For battery life and audio, I suppose you could rig something to use the MagSafe ring for charging (from an external battery pack) while using the Lightning port for a mic, but it would be better to have a rig that held an iPhone, mic, and battery, and used a single USB-C port to connect them all.
And, yeah, lenses are always going to be a limitation for phones - you really can only film the scenes that work fairly close-up or wide-angle. Shooting with an iPhone would dictate the kinds of shots you can take, and thus dictates the look of your film, to a certain extent. (There have been things done to hold a longer lens in front of the iPhone's camera, but I wouldn't trust them for anything professional.)
BTW, your opening montage looks very nice! And yeah, lens artifacts. It's gotten to the point where video game makers will sometimes put similar into games because people expect to see it - it "heightens realism" (like JJ Abrams' lens flares).
I don't get going higher than 4K right now. Usually you watch movies on a home TV which is usually 4K (or less). So going higher helps how? I hope the camera sticks to 4K and some under-the-hood changes occur to make the image quality better.