Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 165 posts

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#131

Post by matwood »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #46
LegitShady wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>few hundred on apps I don't even understand what you think you're going to buy that will make you a good macro photographer for hundreds of dollars. Hundreds on apps instead of dedicated macro hardware? I can't imagine that will do anything but waste hundreds of dollars.

What I was personally referring to when I mentioned "software" is a photo editing application like Photoshop, Lightroom, DxO Photolab, etc. The subscriptions/purchase prices of these type of software is $200+. There are free software versions of these apps but most photographers do not use them.

PS + LR CC comes in a photography bundle for $10/month.

https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom/compare-p...

I've tried a lot of other DAM + editing software and keep coming back to LR. YMMV.

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#132

Post by LegitShady »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #54
LegitShady wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're going to need such software whether you use an iphone or a DSLR. There's no difference in cost except the hardware.

Sorry, to be extra clear, my point is that you will not get these results without such software, because photos almost universally require editing in order to look their best. But my belief is that Apple, with their "Shot on iPhone" marketing, is trying to convey that you will get these results straight out of the camera. This is unlikely to actually be the case. That's the sum of my point w.r.t. software.

You can get 98% of the same capability with much cheaper software - you don't need spend several hundred on software (affinity photos does focus stacking raws, for example). But you're right the best looking photos are usually processed somehow.

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#133

Post by bee_rider »

jacobolus wrote: post #113
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #2

The trick to getting the best out of camera phones is to shore up their weaknesses with external devices. Cell phone cameras are multiple stops slower than "real" cameras (i.e. they take in 1/4 to 1/8th as much light). So you add light to the scene to shore up that weakness. Most of these pictures were probably lit very carefully with high quality lights, or else were taken in bright daylight, and the phone was proba…

> “Most of these pictures were probably lit very carefully with high quality lights, or else were taken in bright daylight [...] hundreds of dollars worth of software was used to edit [...] analogous to the videos of fake hamburgers” You don’t have to speculate. Most of the photographers directly tell you how these were set up: > love going on early morning walks with my iPhone 13 Pro. The ‘golden hour’ brings the be…

I am a little suspicious of some of these, though. For example in the last one, it seems a bit weird that his son discovered a tulip, and it just happened to be directly in front of a perfectly black background (?). I suspect some of the stories have been tweaked to play up the convenience of having the phone handy. But they are still very nice shots!

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#134

Post by matwood »

jacobolus wrote: post #113
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #2

The trick to getting the best out of camera phones is to shore up their weaknesses with external devices. Cell phone cameras are multiple stops slower than "real" cameras (i.e. they take in 1/4 to 1/8th as much light). So you add light to the scene to shore up that weakness. Most of these pictures were probably lit very carefully with high quality lights, or else were taken in bright daylight, and the phone was proba…

> “Most of these pictures were probably lit very carefully with high quality lights, or else were taken in bright daylight [...] hundreds of dollars worth of software was used to edit [...] analogous to the videos of fake hamburgers” You don’t have to speculate. Most of the photographers directly tell you how these were set up: > love going on early morning walks with my iPhone 13 Pro. The ‘golden hour’ brings the be…

I love the descriptions b/c they explain the 'art' behind photo taking. It's people being creative, which is really what photos should be about.

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#135

Post by qq66 »

The macro lens is the reason I bought the iPhone 13 Pro and the extreme sizem weight, and poor ergonomics of the phone are why I returned it. I'd buy an iPhone the dimensions of an iPhone Mini (but say, twice as thick) with the fancy cameras, LiDAR, etc.

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#136

Post by matwood »

MaXtreeM wrote: post #124

Slight OT: I am thinking about buying a camera. I have never had a good camera system nor I ever had a flagship phone (iPhone/Samsung/Pixel). I though a mirrorless with good lenses would be a good starting choice. I don't want to do professional photography, I just want to shoot holidays in nature and my upcoming baby. I did some internet research and was blown away when people compare photos from best phones to phot…

It depends. I've only bought more gear when I had an exact need. My first camera was a D40, and I used it for years until it simply stopped working. My next camera was a D7100 that added features I knew I wanted after using the D40 for years. I still use this camera. Recently I bought a Z5 because I wanted FF and to move to mirrorless. My lenses followed similar trajectories - want to take bird pictures, need a zoom.

All the time I also mostly had the latest iPhone.

The iPhone takes great pictures with little work in many (most?) situations.

Is it worth buying a non-phone camera in 2022? I think if you really like taking pictures and are bumping into phone limitations, sure. But, if I started today, I would get a flagship phone first and grow from there.

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#137

Post by Karawebnetwork »

subhro wrote: post #109
Karawebnetwork wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's pretty cool that you can get such nice results from a phone. But you'd probably have an easier time of it on a five year old aps-c camera with a macro lens, to say nothing of modern 35mm cameras. Sure, but how often do you have them on your person in time to take candid photos? I am in a lot of entomology and myrmecology online groups and people are able to take clear photos of insects that look like professio…

> Sure, but how often do you have them on your person in time to take candid photos? Totally bad argument in justifying phone cameras. If you are having the expectation of getting photos of similar quality as shown on the page, my question is, how often do you have a high quality ring light on your person along with a stable tripod?

A lot of reptiles, fishes and insects are in vivariums that already provide a good light source. For wild animals, you are fine without a light since they are mostly outdoor and unless you're planning for it chances are that you'll stumble on them during daylight.

Personally, I have a lot of ring lights because beauty and makeup brands give them for free with a lot of products.

But even without all of this, you can get great footage and photos.

Take a look at this spider that was walking around my sink for example.

The phone (pixel 3, already quite aged) did not have a lot of trouble to focus on it even if we are talking about a small spider that is only a few milimiter in size.

It's a video so focus comes and goes but the parts where the focus is set on the spider are quite clear (ignoring the upload compression).

I am no artist and was focusing more on the spider's behavior. Someone who is an artist could have snapped great macros at that moment.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/z2RALoGeXiAo6uHG6

Another example is this queen ant when it was in it's founding stage. The nanitics (first workers) are small even when it comes to ant scale. You can see them in great details and can even see the translucent parts of their gaster with the sugar water inside.

Again, I focused on the behavior more than the art. But an artist could have taken a photo instead of a video with great results.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/dmzMXLqG5v1cfFKx9

Both of those were candid moments that I happened to snap because I had my phone in my pocket while my 4k camera and my canon reflex were in their box in my desk.

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#138

Post by Karawebnetwork »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #98
Karawebnetwork wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's pretty cool that you can get such nice results from a phone. But you'd probably have an easier time of it on a five year old aps-c camera with a macro lens, to say nothing of modern 35mm cameras. Sure, but how often do you have them on your person in time to take candid photos? I am in a lot of entomology and myrmecology online groups and people are able to take clear photos of insects that look like professio…

Well, I often have a "real" camera on my person, because I like cameras. It definitely gets me better results than when I use my phone camera. That's just my taste. I'm certainly not saying your average joe would be best-served by going out and buying a GFX-100S. I'm not sure what YouTuber you're referring to, but most popular photography YouTubers mostly use real cameras still. Occasionally they'll do a gimmick vide…

For sure, if I am on a trip I'll have my reflex big bulky camera around my neck. But day to day, commuting to work, at a friend's, etc., all I have is my phone.

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#139

Post by autoexec »

58x14 wrote: post #62

If I counted correctly, 8/10 of the selected submissions specifically mention the iPhone and the macro feature by name. Same with the comments on different submissions. Okay, okay, I know, it's Apple, this is a marketing campaign. I guess next time, I'm going to take a photo of the contents of my fridge, with the caption: "Every morning, when I check my new iPhone 14 Pro Max Plus, I'm filled with a sense of inspirati…

I didn't even read the text. I just noticed that plants and water seem to be huge winners. The one that wasn't a plant or water was "sea glass" so... still water. Next time try flowers and water.

Re: Apple unveils the best photos from the Shot on iPhone Macro Challenge

#140

Post by matwood »

shagie wrote: post #8
drexlspivey wrote: post #3

Pretty crazy that you can get this kind of shots with a mobile tbh. Until very recently you would require a DSLR with a bulky specialized lens. For reference this is what a typical macro lens looks like https://images.app.goo.gl/nf5keSiugxyb2pmA6

The issue is the working distance. You'll note that the photographer there is shooing with a lens that has a fairly long barrel. For the Nikkor 105mm macro lens - https://coinimaging.com/nikon_105vr.html At 1:1, there's 15.3 cm between the front of the lens and the subject. But if you're shooting with a rather short lens (e.g. those in the camera of a phone) then the working distance is very close. This becomes impor…

> This becomes important important when photographing insects (you'll note there are no photos of insects in that collection)

I've gotten some interesting insect shots using Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6G ED from a short distance.

I think people sometimes get too caught up with the gear instead of trying out what they have.

Post reply on HN