Well one advantage to a pro-workflow (i.e., a Mac Pro with all the expensive apps) is that you can fix that kind of thing in post.
True, but that would require frame by frame editing and most likely access to Photoshop which was not part of the criteria in this production. I have been looking at a lot of car ads today to compare and every other brand has somehow fixed the issue on their videos. I can't find any professionally produced ads that exhibit the problem, although I have found several amateur video clips which show the same flickering phenomena .
While this is very cool, it is very similar to giving your kid a Stradivarius. The Stradivarius is a very cool piece of equipment and the very best violin in the world. Let you kid play on it and see how good the music is.
The iPhone is cool and has some very competent capabilities, but most of us reading this blog are not going out tomorrow and producing this kind of results. There is a very talented team with years of skill and knowledge making this happen.
It is still cool to know it can be done, but there tends to be an unspoken theme coming from Apple that anyone can go out and make content like this. That is a bit of a stretch of the imagination.
Good analogy, but I don't think the article was trying to imply this was a quick job that any one with an iPhone can do.
It actually kind of goes out of its way to highlight this *can't* be done on just an iPhone. It took a professional production crew with @$5500 in add-on accessories (not sure how much a 'modified Schneider lens' runs but I'd guess quite a bit over the $220 standard ones). Its only when you start to read the user comments that you'd think the phone gets all the credit.
So yes, if you give any of the users on this forum an iPhone alone, exactly 0 of them will be able to produce anything of comparable quality to this video- I think the point is that the iPhone has entered the zone of competence where something like this video is even possible. That alone is very impressive.
I would guess the same pro crew with $5500 to buy accessories for a high end android phone could make something pretty impressive too- but would lean toward the iPhone having the better capabilities currently.
Well one advantage to a pro-workflow (i.e., a Mac Pro with all the expensive apps) is that you can fix that kind of thing in post.
I've been studying it more carefully and they have indeed fixed the problem of the flickering LEDs in some scenes but not in all which leads me to believe they may not be entirely forthcoming in how the video was edited and produced. I'm suggesting they may now be using more advanced work stations to perfect it, The whole concept was flawed from the beginning in my opinion.
Shows what can be done on a budget and also attracts the attention of design conscious Apple customers to their design conscious automobile. It's really the skill of the people not the equipment.
While this is very cool, it is very similar to giving your kid a Stradivarius. The Stradivarius is a very cool piece of equipment and the very best violin in the world. Let you kid play on it and see how good the music is.
The iPhone is cool and has some very competent capabilities, but most of us reading this blog are not going out tomorrow and producing this kind of results. There is a very talented team with years of skill and knowledge making this happen.
It is still cool to know it can be done, but there tends to be an unspoken theme coming from Apple that anyone can go out and make content like this. That is a bit of a stretch of the imagination.
I believe it's saying something of you can make such a quality video using standard Apple hardware and software. Sure the people shooting the video were highly skilled, but they used the same stuff you and I own and use. Usually such shoots are done with professional hardware most of us can't even identify or afford.
I believe it's saying something of you can make such a quality video using standard Apple hardware and software. Sure the people shooting the video were highly skilled, but they used the same stuff you and I own and use. Usually such shoots are done with professional hardware most of us can't even identify or afford.
I'd say the $5500 in add-on equipment used tends to put the majority of the stuff outside what most Apple users would want to afford, and more on the scope of professional gear (a professional cinema camera capable of shooting ultra HD 4k video can be had for under $3500). The phone does deserve major props, but trying to downplay the extensive role of professionals and adding equipment that costs 10 times more than the price of the phone itself is a little silly.
It's a little like claiming the iPhone is amazing because it can teleport you halfway across the globe, surround you in luxury, and put dozens of servants at your beck and call* It is achievable with a standard iPhone and a few third party accessories that any Apple user can afford.
*iPhone used to book travel arrangements. Additional $5500 in plane tickets, luxury hotel accomadations, and use of trained pilots played a minor role in achieving this result.
I'd say the $5500 in add-on equipment used tends to put the majority of the stuff outside what most Apple users would want to afford, and more on the scope of professional gear (a professional cinema camera capable of shooting ultra HD 4k video can be had for under $3500). The phone does deserve major props, but trying to downplay the extensive role of professionals and adding equipment that costs 10 times more than the price of the phone itself is a little silly.
It's a little like claiming the iPhone is amazing because it can teleport you halfway across the globe, surround you in luxury, and put dozens of servants at your beck and call* It is achievable with a standard iPhone and a few third party accessories that any Apple user can afford.
*iPhone used to book travel arrangements. Additional $5500 in plane tickets, luxury hotel accomadations, and use of trained pilots played a minor role in achieving this result.
I'm unsure of the point you are trying to make. My point is that the Apple iPhone and MBA are good enough in their own right to allow professionals to complete the shoot. For example, if the iPhone lens were of an inferior quality, then any additional lenses added to the camera would not give professional quality results, no matter the skill of the photographer. Were the MBA too wimpy of a computer to run the programs needed to edit the captured video, then again the professional would be stymied in completing the project. The essential elements of technology were met by the iPhone and Apple's low-end MBA. THAT impressed me!
Annoying flickering like that would probably be unacceptable in a traditional cinematic production.
I think it may depend on how you define "cinematic production." The production values on "Top Gear" are perhaps not as stringent as a Hollywood feature but are very good by episodic TV standards and the flicker is frequently seen on that show.
I will be the first to admit that I steadfastly refused to believe that 100% of all the video/audio pre/post-production work was done solely on iOS devices. I believe that somewhere in there there was an iMac or MacPro being used, if even just for some light polishing.
I knew they were being used for some pretty amazing commercials and even to film certain segments of big-budget movies, but there were always workstations behind the scenes to put it all together and make it production quality.
So this video surprised even me, an avid iOS fan into full believer-mode that production-quality scenes can be done. Of course, even the best gear doesn't mean squat if the person using it is clueless. It makes the field really open up to more joe-consumers. This is exciting.
I've been an avid underwater photographer for 10+ years (non-professional) and I'm amazed at how technology is bringing all this power to the average consumer. It won't replace my trusty 35mm DSLR, but the next 5 years of this kind of light-speed optics advancement will be fun to see.
Interesting usage of a less-common adjective on your part, since Avid Technology has been a long-time industry leader in professional software-based non-linear editing systems. Coincidence?
While this is very cool, it is very similar to giving your kid a Stradivarius. The Stradivarius is a very cool piece of equipment and the very best violin in the world. Let you kid play on it and see how good the music is.
The iPhone is cool and has some very competent capabilities, but most of us reading this blog are not going out tomorrow and producing this kind of results. There is a very talented team with years of skill and knowledge making this happen.
It is still cool to know it can be done, but there tends to be an unspoken theme coming from Apple that anyone can go out and make content like this. That is a bit of a stretch of the imagination.
The fact is anybody can. The cost to produce something like this has dropped to within reach of 'normal' people. What Apple does not say or suggest is that if you are only half interested, half arsed, or are not fully committed, you can produce this kind of stuff.
Like Stradivarius example above. But the cost of entry has never been lower.
Re: the phone going off during a take. I can guarantee that none of the iPhones used were 'phone enabled'. They were cameras only. Letting your own phone go off during a take is unforgivable.
What's more, with due diligence, you, too, can play a Stradivarius; you don't need to be born rich.
Rule #16: under no circumstances shall an iOS device or Apple receive credit or praise when demonstrated in a professional context (music, stage or video production) or when used by professionals in a commercial or creative role. Resident trolls are encouraged to engage the Apple community by posting alternative views which magnify the credit given to everything else (e.g. professional equipment or the skill of the professionals involved, review the applicable article for specifics). If details of the production are not known, it is acceptable to post vague doubts that professional results could be obtained with iOS devices. Do not use absolute, clear, or falsifiable statements, always be sure to include vague qualifiers such as "most people" or "a lot of". If proven wrong later, ignore calls for mea culpa and continue trolling by modifying your arguments around any facts (do not directly attack the facts), or shift tactics. Admitting wrong will seriously undermine your effectiveness as a forum troll or contrarian (see also, Rule #23 on being caught lying). If you run out of attack vectors, disengage from the thread and simply wait for the next opportunity to re-engage the forum community. For general help in finding the applicable attack vector(s), see Appendix A for a list of common logical fallacies and Appendix C for a list of troll memes. (A more up-to-date list of memes is also available in the AppleInsider Forum Troll Support app, available free from the Google Play store)
What it shows is the power of a $4.99 app, FilmiC.
I think you're giving credit to the tip of the iceberg for the rest of the iceberg. The app merely allows the user to access and exploit the full capabilities of the underlying hardware.
While I do appreciate the point that giving full credit to iPhone/iPad for the quality of the Bentley ad is somewhat "rich", given the expense of add-ons (and professional expertise of the users), at least they did use Apple hardware.
This Bentley ad is hardly as fraudulent as the Nokia 920 ad, of a couple years ago:
I'm unsure of the point you are trying to make. My point is that the Apple iPhone and MBA are good enough in their own right to allow professionals to complete the shoot. For example, if the iPhone lens were of an inferior quality, then any additional lenses added to the camera would not give professional quality results, no matter the skill of the photographer. Were the MBA too wimpy of a computer to run the programs needed to edit the captured video, then again the professional would be stymied in completing the project. The essential elements of technology were met by the iPhone and Apple's low-end MBA. THAT impressed me!
He misses the point that many talented people, small companies (Apple Insider?), startup's and schools from high school to college can afford to produce very good content with talented people at the helm using Apple hardware and software, which has been true since the mid eighties.
"Wall Street already knows Android has 80% of the smartphone market share" Constable Odo where do you get your "facts" from. Wall Street already knows that this is not the case because it includes "sticks", and sundry other devices at have been registered multiple times and are not used for internet access as evidenced by the fact that iOS devices garner 80% of mobile internet use.
"Wall Street already knows Android has 80% of the smartphone market share" Constable Odo where do you get your "facts" from. Wall Street already knows that this is not the case because it includes "sticks", and sundry other devices at have been registered multiple times and are not used for internet access as evidenced by the fact that iOS devices garner 80% of mobile internet use.
You missed Constable Odo's sarcasm tag. You are right, though, much of the Android "product shipped" only happened in the analyst's mind. My personal opinion is that Apple is enjoying their stealth position of shipping a larger percent of the iDevice market then the analyst's report. One of these days the truth will come out and by then it will be too late to ever catch Apple's real share...
While this is very cool, it is very similar to giving your kid a Stradivarius. The Stradivarius is a very cool piece of equipment and the very best violin in the world. Let you kid play on it and see how good the music is.
The iPhone is cool and has some very competent capabilities, but most of us reading this blog are not going out tomorrow and producing this kind of results. There is a very talented team with years of skill and knowledge making this happen.
It is still cool to know it can be done, but there tends to be an unspoken theme coming from Apple that anyone can go out and make content like this. That is a bit of a stretch of the imagination.
Good analogy, but I don't think the article was trying to imply this was a quick job that any one with an iPhone can do.
It actually kind of goes out of its way to highlight this *can't* be done on just an iPhone. It took a professional production crew with @$5500 in add-on accessories (not sure how much a 'modified Schneider lens' runs but I'd guess quite a bit over the $220 standard ones). Its only when you start to read the user comments that you'd think the phone gets all the credit.
So yes, if you give any of the users on this forum an iPhone alone, exactly 0 of them will be able to produce anything of comparable quality to this video- I think the point is that the iPhone has entered the zone of competence where something like this video is even possible. That alone is very impressive.
I would guess the same pro crew with $5500 to buy accessories for a high end android phone could make something pretty impressive too- but would lean toward the iPhone having the better capabilities currently.
Comments
True, but that would require frame by frame editing and most likely access to Photoshop which was not part of the criteria in this production. I have been looking at a lot of car ads today to compare and every other brand has somehow fixed the issue on their videos. I can't find any professionally produced ads that exhibit the problem, although I have found several amateur video clips which show the same flickering phenomena .
Very cool indeed...
While this is very cool, it is very similar to giving your kid a Stradivarius. The Stradivarius is a very cool piece of equipment and the very best violin in the world. Let you kid play on it and see how good the music is.
The iPhone is cool and has some very competent capabilities, but most of us reading this blog are not going out tomorrow and producing this kind of results. There is a very talented team with years of skill and knowledge making this happen.
It is still cool to know it can be done, but there tends to be an unspoken theme coming from Apple that anyone can go out and make content like this. That is a bit of a stretch of the imagination.
Good analogy, but I don't think the article was trying to imply this was a quick job that any one with an iPhone can do.
It actually kind of goes out of its way to highlight this *can't* be done on just an iPhone. It took a professional production crew with @$5500 in add-on accessories (not sure how much a 'modified Schneider lens' runs but I'd guess quite a bit over the $220 standard ones). Its only when you start to read the user comments that you'd think the phone gets all the credit.
So yes, if you give any of the users on this forum an iPhone alone, exactly 0 of them will be able to produce anything of comparable quality to this video- I think the point is that the iPhone has entered the zone of competence where something like this video is even possible. That alone is very impressive.
I would guess the same pro crew with $5500 to buy accessories for a high end android phone could make something pretty impressive too- but would lean toward the iPhone having the better capabilities currently.
I've been studying it more carefully and they have indeed fixed the problem of the flickering LEDs in some scenes but not in all which leads me to believe they may not be entirely forthcoming in how the video was edited and produced. I'm suggesting they may now be using more advanced work stations to perfect it, The whole concept was flawed from the beginning in my opinion.
Shows what can be done on a budget and also attracts the attention of design conscious Apple customers to their design conscious automobile. It's really the skill of the people not the equipment.
I believe it's saying something of you can make such a quality video using standard Apple hardware and software. Sure the people shooting the video were highly skilled, but they used the same stuff you and I own and use. Usually such shoots are done with professional hardware most of us can't even identify or afford.
I believe it's saying something of you can make such a quality video using standard Apple hardware and software. Sure the people shooting the video were highly skilled, but they used the same stuff you and I own and use. Usually such shoots are done with professional hardware most of us can't even identify or afford.
I'd say the $5500 in add-on equipment used tends to put the majority of the stuff outside what most Apple users would want to afford, and more on the scope of professional gear (a professional cinema camera capable of shooting ultra HD 4k video can be had for under $3500). The phone does deserve major props, but trying to downplay the extensive role of professionals and adding equipment that costs 10 times more than the price of the phone itself is a little silly.
It's a little like claiming the iPhone is amazing because it can teleport you halfway across the globe, surround you in luxury, and put dozens of servants at your beck and call* It is achievable with a standard iPhone and a few third party accessories that any Apple user can afford.
*iPhone used to book travel arrangements. Additional $5500 in plane tickets, luxury hotel accomadations, and use of trained pilots played a minor role in achieving this result.
I'm unsure of the point you are trying to make. My point is that the Apple iPhone and MBA are good enough in their own right to allow professionals to complete the shoot. For example, if the iPhone lens were of an inferior quality, then any additional lenses added to the camera would not give professional quality results, no matter the skill of the photographer. Were the MBA too wimpy of a computer to run the programs needed to edit the captured video, then again the professional would be stymied in completing the project. The essential elements of technology were met by the iPhone and Apple's low-end MBA. THAT impressed me!
I think it may depend on how you define "cinematic production." The production values on "Top Gear" are perhaps not as stringent as a Hollywood feature but are very good by episodic TV standards and the flicker is frequently seen on that show.
Interesting usage of a less-common adjective on your part, since Avid Technology has been a long-time industry leader in professional software-based non-linear editing systems. Coincidence?
What's more, with due diligence, you, too, can play a Stradivarius; you don't need to be born rich.
I think you're giving credit to the tip of the iceberg for the rest of the iceberg. The app merely allows the user to access and exploit the full capabilities of the underlying hardware.
While I do appreciate the point that giving full credit to iPhone/iPad for the quality of the Bentley ad is somewhat "rich", given the expense of add-ons (and professional expertise of the users), at least they did use Apple hardware.
This Bentley ad is hardly as fraudulent as the Nokia 920 ad, of a couple years ago:
http://www.zdnet.com/nokia-admits-to-faking-lumia-920-ad-7000003842/
I'm unsure of the point you are trying to make. My point is that the Apple iPhone and MBA are good enough in their own right to allow professionals to complete the shoot. For example, if the iPhone lens were of an inferior quality, then any additional lenses added to the camera would not give professional quality results, no matter the skill of the photographer. Were the MBA too wimpy of a computer to run the programs needed to edit the captured video, then again the professional would be stymied in completing the project. The essential elements of technology were met by the iPhone and Apple's low-end MBA. THAT impressed me!
He misses the point that many talented people, small companies (Apple Insider?), startup's and schools from high school to college can afford to produce very good content with talented people at the helm using Apple hardware and software, which has been true since the mid eighties.
You missed Constable Odo's sarcasm tag. You are right, though, much of the Android "product shipped" only happened in the analyst's mind. My personal opinion is that Apple is enjoying their stealth position of shipping a larger percent of the iDevice market then the analyst's report. One of these days the truth will come out and by then it will be too late to ever catch Apple's real share...
While this is very cool, it is very similar to giving your kid a Stradivarius. The Stradivarius is a very cool piece of equipment and the very best violin in the world. Let you kid play on it and see how good the music is.
The iPhone is cool and has some very competent capabilities, but most of us reading this blog are not going out tomorrow and producing this kind of results. There is a very talented team with years of skill and knowledge making this happen.
It is still cool to know it can be done, but there tends to be an unspoken theme coming from Apple that anyone can go out and make content like this. That is a bit of a stretch of the imagination.
Good analogy, but I don't think the article was trying to imply this was a quick job that any one with an iPhone can do.
It actually kind of goes out of its way to highlight this *can't* be done on just an iPhone. It took a professional production crew with @$5500 in add-on accessories (not sure how much a 'modified Schneider lens' runs but I'd guess quite a bit over the $220 standard ones). Its only when you start to read the user comments that you'd think the phone gets all the credit.
So yes, if you give any of the users on this forum an iPhone alone, exactly 0 of them will be able to produce anything of comparable quality to this video- I think the point is that the iPhone has entered the zone of competence where something like this video is even possible. That alone is very impressive.
I would guess the same pro crew with $5500 to buy accessories for a high end android phone could make something pretty impressive too- but would lean toward the iPhone having the better capabilities currently.
Sure-currently meaning: for the past seven years.