iPhone does Elle Australia magazine front cover, editorial

ColSebastianMoran said:
iPhone in good light with a subject posing, not action. Good tool for the job.

Also excellent where you need extreme DOF.
Click to expand...

I'll continue: For low light, for action, for long lens work, for these the iPhone just won't do. You need a different tool.

I think it's the context, not the base quality level, that governs.
 
Happens to everybody..also, the way it was put relies on sarcasm, so, it was pretty indirect. It's kind of interesting to think about. I guess we still don't know for sure..
 
ColSebastianMoran said:
I'll continue: For low light, for action, for long lens work, for these the iPhone just won't do. You need a different tool.

I think it's the context, not the base quality level, that governs.
Click to expand...

Actually, iPhone does it well in low light. With or without flash. 8MP 5S from 2013 opens up to 2.2, ISO goes up to 1600, it has image stabilization algorithm.

Oh, and its burst mode is 10 frames per second.

It is my most trusted device to read small labels under low light, BTW.
 
I'll bet money this was nothing more than a stunt to get attention to the cover and it worked. Matter of fact I wouldn't be surprised if in the beginning the photographer simply pulled his phone out of his pocket and shaped a few images to compare to his primary camera and the art director said what a cool idea to use one of these images for the cover, if they look good enough. It's a gimmick to get people to look.

How many magazines are going to assign covers and spreads to iPhone photographers? I'll bet probably none. And I'll guarantee the photographer backed up every shot with his or her primary camera just incase the iPhone images didn't hold up. I know from experience art directors and editors have a bad habit of cropping the hell out of images. The iPhone images will quickly fall apart.

I've never had a client ask me what equipment I use. In the film days the client might say I want an 8x10 transparency or specify a format but never in the digital era has there been a client of mine care what I shot it with but there are limits. I spent last week in Macon and Atlanta GA on a shoot and if I'd walked in with only my iPhone my client would have laughed me out of the state. I'd never done another job for them.

Ok Ko.Fe. (not picking on you) you take your iPhone out and I'll take my Nikon out and let's see who gets the most assignments. You're free to take a portfolio of iPhone snaps. When the AD tells you to shoot with shallow DOF or a 600mm for compression let's see the iPhone do it.
 
Just shows that the tool is good enough for the job (and its ramifications re: equipment). Remember Terry Richardson and his use of 35mm film point and shoots, with hard flash, etc.? How about David Burnett using a Speedgraphic for sports, etc.? These are tools only; what is important is the user and his/her vision/talent/preparation/skills.
 
I found the last statement by the editor amusing. More skill? More vision?

Does that mean people using very capable, dedicated cameras let the cameras do all the work? She should know better than to say something that dumb even if she is ginning up sales for the magazine.
 
x-ray said:
I'll bet money this was nothing more than a stunt to get attention to the cover and it worked. Matter of fact I wouldn't be surprised if in the beginning the photographer simply pulled his phone out of his pocket and shaped a few images to compare to his primary camera and the art director said what a cool idea to use one of these images for the cover, if they look good enough. It's a gimmick to get people to look.

How many magazines are going to assign covers and spreads to iPhone photographers? I'll bet probably none. And I'll guarantee the photographer backed up every shot with his or her primary camera just incase the iPhone images didn't hold up. I know from experience art directors and editors have a bad habit of cropping the hell out of images. The iPhone images will quickly fall apart.

I've never had a client ask me what equipment I use. In the film days the client might say I want an 8x10 transparency or specify a format but never in the digital era has there been a client of mine care what I shot it with but there are limits. I spent last week in Macon and Atlanta GA on a shoot and if I'd walked in with only my iPhone my client would have laughed me out of the state. I'd never done another job for them.

Ok Ko.Fe. (not picking on you) you take your iPhone out and I'll take my Nikon out and let's see who gets the most assignments. You're free to take a portfolio of iPhone snaps. When the AD tells you to shoot with shallow DOF or a 600mm for compression let's see the iPhone do it.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it's a mutually exclusive thing. Sometimes I shoot 120, sometimes I shoot a full frame digital and sometimes I shoot a Nikon F from 1970. Of course, if there are specific image requirements, the photographer acts accordingly... Kofe included. In my line of work those things (DOF, image compression etc) don't come up often, so an iPhone would be useful. But photography is a varied craft.

Personally I think it's amazing that this is possible when not long ago, nobody dreamed of such a thing. Yes, I know it's all a marketing arrangement but none the less, amazing how far phones have come.
 
x-ray said:
Ok Ko.Fe. (not picking on you) you take your iPhone out and I'll take my Nikon out and let's see who gets the most assignments. You're free to take a portfolio of iPhone snaps. When the AD tells you to shoot with shallow DOF or a 600mm for compression let's see the iPhone do it.
Click to expand...

You better not to. At the end she was assigned because she is photographer with million followers. How many follows you?
 
mani said:
Don't think that's true at all in this case - the whole point is they're focussing on 'the gear'. But it's just a stunt - it's been done many times before. "Hey take a look at this billboard! Shot on an iPhone!"

Like I said - it's just marketing.

And the photographer would've had 4 assistants, and 3 makeup and hair stylists, and another 2 people handling the lighting, and an Art Director and the Creative Director probably swung by, and a couple of retouchers working on MacBooks so that the editorial team could see live mockups, and a mobile canteen, and a couple of road crew with a large van to handle all the extra equipment. Maybe even a couple of employees from Apple Australia to make sure everything was going smoothly with their 'stealth' campaign, and because being on a photoshoot makes for a cool day away from the office.

As for the equipment - really, these days no-one really cares.
Click to expand...

emraphoto said:
I'm not sure it's a mutually exclusive thing. Sometimes I shoot 120, sometimes I shoot a full frame digital and sometimes I shoot a Nikon F from 1970. Of course, if there are specific image requirements, the photographer acts accordingly... Kofe included. In my line of work those things (DOF, image compression etc) don't come up often, so an iPhone would be useful. But photography is a varied craft.

Personally I think it's amazing that this is possible when not long ago, nobody dreamed of such a thing. Yes, I know it's all a marketing arrangement but none the less, amazing how far phones have come.
Click to expand...

Amazing to me how far and how quickly digital has advanced phones included.

My first hands on with a digital camera was the AP Nikons. A PJ friend from our newspaper brought one over to my studio. We spent most of the afternoon trying to get a few decent images with both daylight and studio strobes. What a disappointing piece of junk that cost $17,000.

My first DSLR that I bought was a D1 that I got through NPS before they were introduced to the public. It was a huge advancement at 1/6 the cost of the Kodak equivalent at the time and ran circles around it in image quality.

Look where we are today and what you can get for the dollar.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
You better not to. At the end she was assigned because she is photographer with million followers. How many follows you?
Click to expand...

Don't know and don't care because I'm about 75% retired. I made my business before anyone ever heard of followers and clients pick photoraphers on style, quality and reliability. Price wasn't even a big factor in those days.
 
x-ray said:
I don't see it changing the commercial photo industry. Next year will be fifty years that I've been a commercial photographer. In the film days even medium format didn't eliminate the need for 4x5 and 8x10 film and 35mm had little impact overall except in journalism. The IPhone is just a toy and this cover was to say they did it.
Click to expand...

Yep, and my studio mate, a food photographer, has a Phase One back mated to his Sinar P. You still need camera moves. You can't PhotoShop everything. A 30 second correction on the camera is a 20-30 minute adjustment in PS.
 
mani said:
Apple will have worked hard to make this happen - it's just marketing.
Click to expand...



Yes I agree Mani ... but they did and that's a worry for me and a lot of others I suspect. Just more cultural dilution which we have to get used to or perish.

I'm off to clean out my concrete bunker! lol
 
For my college final project I looked at the iphones effect on self identity and looked at cases of the selfie becoming the "self portrait" and for one of the shoots I shot a full studio setup on a 2003ish nokia with a half a megapixel camera, and I got some average results considering the quality. The shots looked good when printed small and when printed to a3 gave something certainly different. If thats what the photographer wanted to use than all power to them.
 
Jake Mongey said:
For my college final project I looked at the iphones effect on self identity and looked at cases of the selfie becoming the "self portrait" and for one of the shoots I shot a full studio setup on a 2003ish nokia with a half a megapixel camera, and I got some average results considering the quality. The shots looked good when printed small and when printed to a3 gave something certainly different. If thats what the photographer wanted to use than all power to them.
Click to expand...

Your project sounds very interesting. Is on the web anywhere.

I think it cool they used a phone but as far as making a dent in the commercial photo market it won't. Cell phones certainly have had a negative impact on the point and shoot manufacturers and how the average Joe documents vacation and the family.
 
x-ray said:
Amazing to me how far and how quickly digital has advanced phones included.

My first hands on with a digital camera was the AP Nikons. A PJ friend from our newspaper brought one over to my studio. We spent most of the afternoon trying to get a few decent images with both daylight and studio strobes. What a disappointing piece of junk that cost $17,000.

My first DSLR that I bought was a D1 that I got through NPS before they were introduced to the public. It was a huge advancement at 1/6 the cost of the Kodak equivalent at the time and ran circles around it in image quality.

Look where we are today and what you can get for the dollar.
Click to expand...

i remember some of the early dslr offerings. i had a bag with two 1dx (early nikon version) and about 8 batteries. balls!
 
After the D1 I bought a D1x as well. The D1x was a major improvement. When FF sensors came in I looked at the Kodak full frame. I think it was the 14n but it had so many issues with color (Italian flag syndrome?) especially with wides. Kodak never got the lens profiles down and promised to correct the problem in the second version which was just as bad. Kodak then abandon the DSLR world and stopped supporting their hardware which was a disasterous mistake.

When Canon came out with FF I bought a 1D which had a 1.3x and a FF 1Ds. Both were excellent. I then went to 1DsII 's and then back to Hasselblad digital and Nikon D800 and DF. The quality has gone exponential as the price has remained constant or gone down.
 
x-ray said:
Your project sounds very interesting. Is on the web anywhere.

I think it cool they used a phone but as far as making a dent in the commercial photo market it won't. Cell phones certainly have had a negative impact on the point and shoot manufacturers and how the average Joe documents vacation and the family.
Click to expand...

Not yet, I'm polishing it up this week and submit next Thursday. Images will end up on my site after it's marked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom