Apple's latest 'Shot on iPhone' short films capture the essence of soccer

Posted:
in iPhone
Apple on Thursday published a trio of "Shot on iPhone" short films that take an intimate look at the beautiful game, which for many transcends boundaries to act as a force of identity, meditation and inspiration.




Just in time for the World Cup quarter-finals, Apple's latest ad spots run from just over two minutes to nearly four minutes in length. Each focuses on soccer, or more specifically how the sport touches the lives of its passionate devotees.

The first film chronicles this year's Berlengas Island Cup, a small but culturally significant game for two sea-faring communities in Portugal. Fishermen from the town of Peniche face off against rivals from the nearby island of Baleal.

The two barebones teams travel by boat to neutral ground, Berlengas Island, to play a pick-up game. A dirt field stands in as a makeshift pitch, flanked by two rusty soccer goals. It is the game stripped down to its essence. No cheering throngs witness the competition, only a pair of coaches, the island's few residents and the players themselves.

Peniche and Baleal have been taking part in the ritual since 1940.





A second short, "The 'Wa' of Soccer," tells the story of Kenshi Arifuji, a soccer playing Japanese monk who practices Buddhism in Kagoshima. Soccer, Arifuji says, is the embodiment of life's struggle in 90 minutes. The sport elicits bare emotions. Players charge to take the advantage, sometimes committing fouls along the way.

According to Arifuji, soccer is a chance to practice the Buddhist philosophy of "wa," or peaceful unity and conformity within a social group. Through soccer, players can learn different aspects of themselves, Arifuji says.





The third short, entitled "The Heart of Australia," frames soccer as a tool of opportunity. It tells the story of 16-year-old Shadeene Evans, an Aboriginal Australian who followed her passion from pitches in the Northern Territory to play as a professional in Sydney.





Each of the three videos were shot on iPhone with unspecified additional equipment and software.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,665member
    Similar, more generic but world cup focussed, ads have been airing in Spain during the tournament. While they run, the words 'additional hardware and software used' also appear.

    I can't really see the point of pushing the video or photographic aspects of a device and then using additional software and hardware for the end result. 

    Same applies to print when companies call out the sticker features of their smartphone camera abilities only to use a photo on the phone's screen in the ad with an asterisk which points out that the photo itself wasn't take by the phone.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 2 of 11
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,842moderator
    avon b7 said:
    Similar, more generic but world cup focussed, ads have been airing in Spain during the tournament. While they run, the words 'additional hardware and software used' also appear.

    I can't really see the point of pushing the video or photographic aspects of a device and then using additional software and hardware for the end result. 

    Same applies to print when companies call out the sticker features of their smartphone camera abilities only to use a photo on the phone's screen in the ad with an asterisk which points out that the photo itself wasn't take by the phone.
    That’s not at all equivalent.  People have done editing of pictures and video since the first pictures and videos were taken.  I’m confident the disclaimer on the ads is just so nobody will suggest that those videos can’t be shot all on the iPhone without any editing or splicing.  But that’s not what you were shooting for, was it?  Clarity.  
    edited July 2018 tmaygeekmee
  • Reply 3 of 11
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,665member
    avon b7 said:
    Similar, more generic but world cup focussed, ads have been airing in Spain during the tournament. While they run, the words 'additional hardware and software used' also appear.

    I can't really see the point of pushing the video or photographic aspects of a device and then using additional software and hardware for the end result. 

    Same applies to print when companies call out the sticker features of their smartphone camera abilities only to use a photo on the phone's screen in the ad with an asterisk which points out that the photo itself wasn't take by the phone.
    That’s not at all equivalent.  People have done editing of pictures and video since the first pictures and videos were taken.  I’m confident the disclaimer on the ads is just so nobody will suggest that those videos can’t be shot all on the iPhone without any editing or splicing.  But that’s not what you were shooting for, was it?  Clarity.  
    Shooting for? Is there a pun there.

    There was a 'shot on iPhone' run that promoted user photos and I saw no such disclaimers. I think the campaign was a success precisely necabec of that. If I was shooting for anything it would be that.

    No issies with editing. That isn't the problem but if you are using additional hardware/software which isn't included in the box and trying to promote the capability of your phone's cameras, it seems somewhat counterproductive.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 4 of 11
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,328member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Similar, more generic but world cup focussed, ads have been airing in Spain during the tournament. While they run, the words 'additional hardware and software used' also appear.

    I can't really see the point of pushing the video or photographic aspects of a device and then using additional software and hardware for the end result. 

    Same applies to print when companies call out the sticker features of their smartphone camera abilities only to use a photo on the phone's screen in the ad with an asterisk which points out that the photo itself wasn't take by the phone.
    That’s not at all equivalent.  People have done editing of pictures and video since the first pictures and videos were taken.  I’m confident the disclaimer on the ads is just so nobody will suggest that those videos can’t be shot all on the iPhone without any editing or splicing.  But that’s not what you were shooting for, was it?  Clarity.  
    Shooting for? Is there a pun there.

    There was a 'shot on iPhone' run that promoted user photos and I saw no such disclaimers. I think the campaign was a success precisely necabec of that. If I was shooting for anything it would be that.

    No issies with editing. That isn't the problem but if you are using additional hardware/software which isn't included in the box and trying to promote the capability of your phone's cameras, it seems somewhat counterproductive.
    https://www.filmicpro.com

    I have the Filmic Pro App, among others, and with an Anamorphic adaptor for my iPhone 7 Plus, ($170), I can shoot 2.4 to 1 cinematic video rather than 16:9, and post process on my iMac in FCP to decompress the video, which I have anyway. I haven't purchased that adaptor yet for the simple reason that I'm looking towards the next X Plus, and these are machined to fit a specific iPhone. Since I also have a 12.9 inch iPad Pro, I can use the Filmic Pro App, but not the adaptor. There are also a lot of other third party lenses available.

    As for film rigs, they are relatively inexpensive and common, including the stabilized ones. The biggest issue to deal with is audio and microphones, not the video content.

    The link has all of that and more.

    The iPhone is especially well supported with video accessories, simply because there are large numbers and few models to deal with, and iPhone videographers also lean heavily towards Macs which are ideal for post processing that same video. It's possible to do it on an Android OS device, but it would be much more of a chore.
  • Reply 5 of 11
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,665member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Similar, more generic but world cup focussed, ads have been airing in Spain during the tournament. While they run, the words 'additional hardware and software used' also appear.

    I can't really see the point of pushing the video or photographic aspects of a device and then using additional software and hardware for the end result. 

    Same applies to print when companies call out the sticker features of their smartphone camera abilities only to use a photo on the phone's screen in the ad with an asterisk which points out that the photo itself wasn't take by the phone.
    That’s not at all equivalent.  People have done editing of pictures and video since the first pictures and videos were taken.  I’m confident the disclaimer on the ads is just so nobody will suggest that those videos can’t be shot all on the iPhone without any editing or splicing.  But that’s not what you were shooting for, was it?  Clarity.  
    Shooting for? Is there a pun there.

    There was a 'shot on iPhone' run that promoted user photos and I saw no such disclaimers. I think the campaign was a success precisely necabec of that. If I was shooting for anything it would be that.

    No issies with editing. That isn't the problem but if you are using additional hardware/software which isn't included in the box and trying to promote the capability of your phone's cameras, it seems somewhat counterproductive.
    https://www.filmicpro.com

    I have the Filmic Pro App, among others, and with an Anamorphic adaptor for my iPhone 7 Plus, ($170), I can shoot 2.4 to 1 cinematic video rather than 16:9, and post process on my iMac in FCP to decompress the video, which I have anyway. I haven't purchased that adaptor yet for the simple reason that I'm looking towards the next X Plus, and these are machined to fit a specific iPhone. Since I also have a 12.9 inch iPad Pro, I can use the Filmic Pro App, but not the adaptor. There are also a lot of other third party lenses available.

    As for film rigs, they are relatively inexpensive and common, including the stabilized ones. The biggest issue to deal with is audio and microphones, not the video content.

    The link has all of that and more.

    The iPhone is especially well supported with video accessories, simply because there are large numbers and few models to deal with, and iPhone videographers also lean heavily towards Macs which are ideal for post processing that same video. It's possible to do it on an Android OS device, but it would be much more of a chore.
    The point wasn't what could or couldn't be done but rather that it couldn't be done out of the box. The ad is for the video capabilities of the phone and logically leads the viewer to conclude that buying an iPhone would give him/her the ability to create similar videos just by buying an iPhone. What I mean is, from a marketing perspective, that producing a similar campaign but limiting it to onboard hardware and software would be more effective even if the footage were not as good and wouldn't necessitate the additional hardware/software disclaimer. They could even then step the campaign up in a second round to highlight what could be done by using iPhone accessories.
    edited July 2018 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 6 of 11
    jumejume Posts: 209member
    First off the sport is called FOOTBALL and not soccer... because its played with foot and ball!
    edited July 2018 rotateleftbyteavon b7
  • Reply 7 of 11
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,328member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Similar, more generic but world cup focussed, ads have been airing in Spain during the tournament. While they run, the words 'additional hardware and software used' also appear.

    I can't really see the point of pushing the video or photographic aspects of a device and then using additional software and hardware for the end result. 

    Same applies to print when companies call out the sticker features of their smartphone camera abilities only to use a photo on the phone's screen in the ad with an asterisk which points out that the photo itself wasn't take by the phone.
    That’s not at all equivalent.  People have done editing of pictures and video since the first pictures and videos were taken.  I’m confident the disclaimer on the ads is just so nobody will suggest that those videos can’t be shot all on the iPhone without any editing or splicing.  But that’s not what you were shooting for, was it?  Clarity.  
    Shooting for? Is there a pun there.

    There was a 'shot on iPhone' run that promoted user photos and I saw no such disclaimers. I think the campaign was a success precisely necabec of that. If I was shooting for anything it would be that.

    No issies with editing. That isn't the problem but if you are using additional hardware/software which isn't included in the box and trying to promote the capability of your phone's cameras, it seems somewhat counterproductive.
    https://www.filmicpro.com

    I have the Filmic Pro App, among others, and with an Anamorphic adaptor for my iPhone 7 Plus, ($170), I can shoot 2.4 to 1 cinematic video rather than 16:9, and post process on my iMac in FCP to decompress the video, which I have anyway. I haven't purchased that adaptor yet for the simple reason that I'm looking towards the next X Plus, and these are machined to fit a specific iPhone. Since I also have a 12.9 inch iPad Pro, I can use the Filmic Pro App, but not the adaptor. There are also a lot of other third party lenses available.

    As for film rigs, they are relatively inexpensive and common, including the stabilized ones. The biggest issue to deal with is audio and microphones, not the video content.

    The link has all of that and more.

    The iPhone is especially well supported with video accessories, simply because there are large numbers and few models to deal with, and iPhone videographers also lean heavily towards Macs which are ideal for post processing that same video. It's possible to do it on an Android OS device, but it would be much more of a chore.
    The point wasn't what could or couldn't be done but rather that it couldn't be done out of the box. The ad is for the video capabilities of the phone and logically leads the viewer to conclude that buying an iPhone would give him/her the ability to create similar videos just by buying an iPhone. What I mean is, from a marketing perspective, that producing a similar campaign but limiting it to onboard hardware and software would be more effective even if the footage were not as good and wouldn't necessitate the additional hardware/software disclaimer. They could even then step the campaign up in a second round to highlight what could be done by using iPhone accessories.
    You really don't have a clue about iPhone users or its ecosystem, likely because you spend so much time resisting iOS, which is why you will never understand Apple's marketing. Apple is all about creating an experience, and that's why most of us here use a breadth of Apple products.
    edited July 2018
  • Reply 8 of 11
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,665member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Similar, more generic but world cup focussed, ads have been airing in Spain during the tournament. While they run, the words 'additional hardware and software used' also appear.

    I can't really see the point of pushing the video or photographic aspects of a device and then using additional software and hardware for the end result. 

    Same applies to print when companies call out the sticker features of their smartphone camera abilities only to use a photo on the phone's screen in the ad with an asterisk which points out that the photo itself wasn't take by the phone.
    That’s not at all equivalent.  People have done editing of pictures and video since the first pictures and videos were taken.  I’m confident the disclaimer on the ads is just so nobody will suggest that those videos can’t be shot all on the iPhone without any editing or splicing.  But that’s not what you were shooting for, was it?  Clarity.  
    Shooting for? Is there a pun there.

    There was a 'shot on iPhone' run that promoted user photos and I saw no such disclaimers. I think the campaign was a success precisely necabec of that. If I was shooting for anything it would be that.

    No issies with editing. That isn't the problem but if you are using additional hardware/software which isn't included in the box and trying to promote the capability of your phone's cameras, it seems somewhat counterproductive.
    https://www.filmicpro.com

    I have the Filmic Pro App, among others, and with an Anamorphic adaptor for my iPhone 7 Plus, ($170), I can shoot 2.4 to 1 cinematic video rather than 16:9, and post process on my iMac in FCP to decompress the video, which I have anyway. I haven't purchased that adaptor yet for the simple reason that I'm looking towards the next X Plus, and these are machined to fit a specific iPhone. Since I also have a 12.9 inch iPad Pro, I can use the Filmic Pro App, but not the adaptor. There are also a lot of other third party lenses available.

    As for film rigs, they are relatively inexpensive and common, including the stabilized ones. The biggest issue to deal with is audio and microphones, not the video content.

    The link has all of that and more.

    The iPhone is especially well supported with video accessories, simply because there are large numbers and few models to deal with, and iPhone videographers also lean heavily towards Macs which are ideal for post processing that same video. It's possible to do it on an Android OS device, but it would be much more of a chore.
    The point wasn't what could or couldn't be done but rather that it couldn't be done out of the box. The ad is for the video capabilities of the phone and logically leads the viewer to conclude that buying an iPhone would give him/her the ability to create similar videos just by buying an iPhone. What I mean is, from a marketing perspective, that producing a similar campaign but limiting it to onboard hardware and software would be more effective even if the footage were not as good and wouldn't necessitate the additional hardware/software disclaimer. They could even then step the campaign up in a second round to highlight what could be done by using iPhone accessories.
    You really don't have a clue about iPhone users or its ecosystem, likely because you spend so much time resisting iOS, which is why you will never understand Apple's marketing. Apple is all about creating an experience, and that's why most of us here use a breadth of Apple products.
    Oh, I understand it all right and iOS, that's why I mentioned a previous Apple campaign (iPhone 6 series) that did what I am commenting on.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 9 of 11
    FolioFolio Posts: 698member
    Best publicity for Apple yet in World Cup? The free stuff, like Brasil's superstar Neymar wearing AirPods walking into stadium. [Photo in yesterday's GUARDIAN newspaper from UK, if AI wishes to run it]
    entropys
  • Reply 10 of 11
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,166member
    The essence of soccer?
    whenever I think of the “essence” of soccer I think of some highly overpaid actor writhing on the ground to fake an injury. 
  • Reply 11 of 11
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,357member
    entropys said:
    The essence of soccer?
    whenever I think of the “essence” of soccer I think of some highly overpaid actor writhing on the ground to fake an injury. 
    That's because you're narrowly thinking of only professional soccer. What professional sports are about anything other than money.

    Once any sport becomes 'professional', essence is eroded until it's all about the Benjamins.

    Apple makes commercials to sell products. But I like that there's only two indications that it's an Apple commercial– the Shot on iPhone, and the Apple logo, at the end. Up until that point, you have a choice to take from that what you will.


Sign In or Register to comment.