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

Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 152 posts

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#141

Post by m463 »

SirMaster wrote: post #75

I don't think many people were really wondering if this sort of thing "could" be done. IMO that's not the important question. The question is, did the people who filmed and created the video with the iPhone hardware actually enjoy this process / workflow? Or did this process cause a bunch more pain and hassle to deal with the iPhone as the source camera? Compared to some alternative they could have used. Is there act…

This seems to be more like people doing software development on their laptop vs at a desk with large monitor, a proper keyboard and ergonomics.

(on a tangent, there are no osha-approved laptops, they are not ergonomic. To work for hours, you should have a proper body posture. You should be looking forward at the screen with your head balanced on your neck, not up or down. there is also posture for arms, wrists, shoulders, etc.)

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#142

Post by steve1977 »

Shawnj2 wrote: post #138
steve1977 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why would you? This is not some low-budget video, it’s a high-end production. If you have that kind of budget, your producer probably won’t care if you’re using an iPhone or a Sony FX-3(0) or even a rented “real” cinema camera like a Sony Venice or an Arri

I think this is targeted towards low budget productions

But those would probably not be able to afford the other equipment and crew, that was my point.

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#143

Post by steve1977 »

olliej wrote: post #110
izzydata wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The phone itself looks like a pretty insignificant portion of the total equipment cost. Why would you use an iPhone instead of an full camera at that point?

Yes, a phone is a small part of the cost in this set up. An actual film camera instead can be much, much more per day. In reality no one other than apple is going to have high end professional light rigs and a phone camera. But plenty of people could use the money they aren't spending on a "proper" camera on better lighting instead and perhaps get a better final product than the historical configuration of "we've spe…

> An actual film camera instead can be much, much more per day.

You can rent a Sony Venice for around 250 bucks per day. ARRI Alexa is maybe twice as much?

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#144

Post by Shawnj2 »

steve1977 wrote: post #142
Shawnj2 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is targeted towards low budget productions

But those would probably not be able to afford the other equipment and crew, that was my point.

Obviously not but any other professional production would have those, all Apple did is remove the real camera and put an iPhone in. So any professional video setup able to afford say a camera rental and shit lighting or Bob the producer’s iPhone for free and actually good lighting can feasibly pick the latter.

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#145

Post by TimTheTinker »

someNameIG wrote: post #123
TimTheTinker wrote: post #37

Since editing tools weren't mentioned, I suspect they must have used DaVinci Resolve or similar, instead of Final Cut Pro and Motion.

Why do you think so?

It was a guess, based on what so many editors in Hollywood use. The "behind the scenes" video confirms it though - yes, they were using DaVinci Resolve.

I hope Apple takes that as a shot across the bow -- they need to up their game with FCP and its ecosystem, if the contractor they hired to produce an Apple event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac doesn't even use FCP.

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#146

Post by joshspankit »

vr46 wrote: post #129
zavertnik wrote: post #120

A lot of people here are bringing up all of the expensive gear surrounding the iPhone that helped give it the professional look. This isn't unique to iPhone as a sensor. I work in TV and have spent a great deal of time on set shooting. The only time I've ever relied entirely on the camera's sensor and lens for a high quality image is shooting outside, and even then that requires adjustments, such as facing away from…

Without the expensive gear, the iPhone looks considerably downgraded compared to better source equipment. I had a Canon 5DII the day it was released and within a week some friends and I had a music video entered into a festival, and within a year, two short films, all done without any extra lighting or equipment - including gimbals. The source camera and lenses were good enough - and the look was amazing compared to…

Ok, but the 5D Mark II was a gamechanger and in my opinion creates a result that still beat the III, IV, and many cameras that came after.

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#147

Post by randomdata »

kstrauser wrote: post #104
randomdata wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it's clearly going to be good enough to take pictures of my vacation. Is that clear? Even ignoring the form factor, I expect you would be quite disappointed casually shooting your vacation on a camera typically used on these types of shoots.

It's clear to me, perhaps because I don't know enough about it to appreciate why I might be wrong. When it comes to cameras, I'm just a regular Joe who points my phone at stuff and then it shows up in Photos. More camera == more better, right?

> More camera == more better, right?

That may be true, but cinema cameras are often less camera in many ways. For example, they often lack autofocus (at best, poor autofocus). It assumed you will have a dedicated focus puller on set. Probably not something you want to bring with you on vacation.

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#148

Post by vr46 »

joshspankit wrote: post #146
vr46 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without the expensive gear, the iPhone looks considerably downgraded compared to better source equipment. I had a Canon 5DII the day it was released and within a week some friends and I had a music video entered into a festival, and within a year, two short films, all done without any extra lighting or equipment - including gimbals. The source camera and lenses were good enough - and the look was amazing compared to…

Ok, but the 5D Mark II was a gamechanger and in my opinion creates a result that still beat the III, IV, and many cameras that came after.

Maybe. I reprocessed a couple of 5D2 raw files a year ago with new tech (Capture One 22) and the images were fabulous, no complaints. I shouldn’t have been too surprised, I was making A1 prints from the 5D2 in 2009 so the camera is more than good.

But the 5D4 is superior, from the lovely focus-pulling via touchscreen to 1D-grade focusing. Let alone GPS, dual cards and the buffers.

There were definitely areas where these SLRs could improve from generation to generation, which seems to be much reduced regarding the iPhones, since the form is fixed, and upgrades or changes are often extremely unobvious.

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#149

Post by hulitu »

conductr wrote: post #90
SirMaster wrote: post #75

I don't think many people were really wondering if this sort of thing "could" be done. IMO that's not the important question. The question is, did the people who filmed and created the video with the iPhone hardware actually enjoy this process / workflow? Or did this process cause a bunch more pain and hassle to deal with the iPhone as the source camera? Compared to some alternative they could have used. Is there act…

> Or did this process cause a bunch more pain and hassle to deal with the iPhone as the source camera? Did you read/skim the article because that's the focal point of the whole piece and discussions taking place in the videos. The whole thing is touting how easy the pros were able to slot this in and do their normal workflows on top. > Is there actually a compelling reason to use an iPhone for this type of work over…

> The whole thing is touting how easy the pros were able to slot this in and do their normal workflows on top.

They always do this. The question was if this is what really happened.

Re: Apple’s keynote event shot on iPhone and edited on Mac

#150

Post by seec »

zavertnik wrote: post #133
vr46 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without the expensive gear, the iPhone looks considerably downgraded compared to better source equipment. I had a Canon 5DII the day it was released and within a week some friends and I had a music video entered into a festival, and within a year, two short films, all done without any extra lighting or equipment - including gimbals. The source camera and lenses were good enough - and the look was amazing compared to…

To be fair, the iPhone is not a camera, its a smart phone with a camera. There is no question that a DSLR with an interchangeable lens will beat out iPhone. > The source camera and lenses were good enough - and the look was amazing compared to camcorders - to achieve this. I would bet that the camera and lenses used didn't do the heavy lifting there, the selection of the location, the time of day, and the direction f…

I think it's just not true. Supplementary equipment is REQUIRED to get something decent out of the iPhone. Without it the quality really is not great at all. If you don't have any budget then you don't have the equipment then the iPhone is just not that useful for anything more than amateur vlogging type of stuff.

Also, it's funny seeing arguments about 1k+ iPhones being able to "save money" for video production when a Canon 5D MKII can be picked up for about 500 with a decent lens; and it cost less than 50 a day to rent. Results would be infinitely superior to the iPhone. The iPhone can be a camera argument to justify its price is simple pure nonsense.

Post reply on HN