Not impressed at all with this pic. I'm a heavy user of a Canon 5DM3 dSLR and I don't see why carrying that camera with one good lens is not as good, if not better than an iPhone camera. I love the camera on my iP6+ don't get me wrong, but when it comes time to take pics that will really pop, there's just no comparison.
A camera phone has the advantage is true portability, and not being so obvious though.
Picture is too dark, details are fuzzy. Not his best work I would think.
There really is no comparison from an iPhone camera to a DSLR. The DSLR obviously blows away any mobile phone camera. Having said that, I do think the camera on the iPhone 6 Plus is really good. It just can't compare to the large sensors of DSLR cameras. I do commend Apple for having the right vision on phone cameras compared to the other phone manufacturers who are in a megapixel race.
There really is no comparison from an iPhone camera to a DSLR. The DSLR obviously blows away any mobile phone camera. Having said that, I do think the camera on the iPhone 6 Plus is really good. It just can't compare to the large sensors of DSLR cameras. I do commend Apple for having the right vision on phone cameras compared to the other phone manufacturers who are in a megapixel race.
My point - vague as it was - if this guy was shooting in the White House of all places and given a little bit of breathing room to take pics... I would not have used a mobile phone camera. They both have their places. I think given the right time to adjust the exposure, he most likely would have gotten better results. This photo just doesn't do it for me.
This photographer didn't do something right with the photos. They're almost all too dark and muddy. I get that it can be challenging shooting in a building with stone walls, as the light doesn't behave as you expect, but I would not have shown any of those photos to friends, let alone to a magazine.
He didn't note whether he was using HDR or not, but guessing from the shots, he didn't. Which was a mistake. I'm sure, as a photographer, he figured he could do better himself, but there are lots of times when you just need the help digitally to get the lighting correct, so the photographer can focus on the art of the shot.
This photographer is about as accomplished as they come. I can't imagine that the photo in its full glory is either too soft or too dark.
After writing my post, I quickly tried a shot, which I then noted on another post. It's not the photographer, but rather the camera settings for the iPhone that are causing the images to appear too dark. Obviously adjustments can be made after the fact, which I would have thought he would have done, but again, we don't know what he did or didn't do with the images - just that I find them to be rather poor shots in viewing them on the Time site.
The picture of the tree is mostly a framing exercise, what with all the geometry involved. The big viewfinder helps enormously in these situations.
Not much color or other visual interest in that subject though. Fir trees look better in the woods, especially when there are red mushrooms under them, which is what all this Yule stuff is originally about.
if so, the framing is not very impressive - not well balanced left/right with the flags at all, and the seal 1/2 cutoff at the top....
I looked at this Photogs work - some really amazing stuff for sure - this xmas tree just doesn't seem to be one of them
Ha! I came to comment, and say exactly the same thing that was already said in first comment by B Frost. (and then by everybody else).
The iPhone 6 can take such incredible photos. Somebody should bury this one.
A toaster can take a good picture in the hands of a skilled photographer. But hand that same photographer a much better camera and you will get much better results.
The guy can obviously use a camera, that is evident. However it seems he is pushing the iPhone beyond its abilities. Compared to a DSLR or Mirrorless any cellphone will suffer such as in this case.
if so, the framing is not very impressive - not well balanced left/right with the flags at all, and the seal 1/2 cutoff at the top....
I looked at this Photogs work - some really amazing stuff for sure - this xmas tree just doesn't seem to be one of them
True, it should be cropped, or a second shot might have grabbed both flags, but you can still see that it's a hand-held attempt at framing first, visual interest second. It's really a snapshot, not a successful composition. An impossible shot, with that lighting and the tree being eight feet or so behind the door frame, no depth whatever. But I suppose the tree is supposed to be the money shot. Oh well.
I would still maintain your framing mandate is clearer the larger the viewfinder display, maybe to the detriment of othe picture elementa, like here.
Aside from the photo shown here being compressed to much, that photo is awesome. There is a lot of depth in that shot. The reflections in the doors, the portal behind them and the floor are great. The symmetry is fine. The flags are really not needed in the shot, and are only there to imply that the photo was likely taken in a government building, so their form and shape need only be implied. The tree is probably 12 feet through that portal and to show the details of the tree (the subject) and the architecture in and out of the room shows how well the aperture responded to the artist intentions.
iThink you are all being too critical. The photographer did a wonderful job, so did the iPhone.
Aside from the photo shown here being compressed to much, that photo is awesome. There is a lot of depth in that shot. The reflections in the doors, the portal behind them and the floor are great. The symmetry is fine. The flags are really not needed in the shot, and are only there to imply that the photo was likely taken in a government building, so their form and shape need only be implied. The tree is probably 12 feet through that portal and to show the details of the tree (the subject) and the architecture in and out of the room shows how well the aperture responded to the artist intentions.
iThink you are all being too critical. The photographer did a wonderful job, so did the iPhone.
If you wanted a large depth of field, you should use an iPhone 5. Both the 5s and 6(6+) have a larger sensor and a larger aperture so it will give a shallower depth of field than the 5 (or 4S). The aperture is actually fixed so it responded as it always will as it will never change.
aperture fixed? not fixed? i think I need a citation. Wouldn't matter anyway, the iPhone 6+ camera SMOKES to fucking hell the camera in the 5, so ...
i am only an photography enthusiast. I understand the mechanics of it all, aperture-shutter-iso... but there is no way you can try to say that the 5 could make the depth in that photo look better. Only a slr, dslr or another comparable smartphone camera could do so.
aperture fixed? not fixed? i think I need a citation. Wouldn't matter anyway, <span style="line-height:1.4em;">the iPhone 6+ camera SMOKES to fucking hell the camera in the 5, so ...</span>
i am only an photography enthusiast. I understand the mechanics of it all, aperture-shutter-iso... but there is no way you can try to say that the 5 could make the depth in that photo look better. Only a slr, dslr or another comparable smartphone camera could do so.
The 5 has a smaller sensor and a smaller aperture(not by much). That will give a larger DoF.
If you can find aperture blades on your iPhone please let me know. Else I can assure you that you cannot change the aperture.
Ha! I came to comment, and say exactly the same thing that was already said in first comment by B Frost. (and then by everybody else).
The iPhone 6 can take such incredible photos. Somebody should bury this one.
A toaster can take a good picture in the hands of a skilled photographer. But hand that same photographer a much better camera and you will get much better results.
The guy can obviously use a camera, that is evident. However it seems he is pushing the iPhone beyond its abilities. Compared to a DSLR or Mirrorless any cellphone will suffer such as in this case.
Are you kidding me??
Based on the photo above (that's the only one I'm talking about), you say that guy can "obviously" use a camera??
And then you go on to say he's pushing the camera "iPhone beyond its abilities"??
?You clearly know nothing about this camera, and are too lazy to even do a rudimentary search for photo samples illustrating it's capabilities.
(pushing the iPhone beyond its abilities : give me a frickn' break )
Are you kidding me??
Based on the photo above (that's the only one I'm talking about), you say that guy can "obviously" use a camera??
And then you go on to say he's pushing the camera "iPhone beyond its abilities"??
?You clearly know nothing about this camera, and are too lazy to even do a rudimentary search for photo samples illustrating it's capabilities.
([SIZE=12px]pushing the iPhone beyond its abilities : give me a frickn' break[/SIZE] :no: )
No, based on a Google search of this photographer. Not based on this one image. These images are amatuerish from a technical and artistic standpoint. If you want, there is a link in this article from this shoot, they are all poor images.
Go handle a Canon Rebel or a Sony a5000 and see if you can use even 10% of what they can do, if these pictures truly impress you.
This photo is pretty terrible in every way, and that has nothing to do with the camera. It's not composed well. The only interesting thing about it is the low angle, which isn't that interesting.
Comments
Not impressed at all with this pic. I'm a heavy user of a Canon 5DM3 dSLR and I don't see why carrying that camera with one good lens is not as good, if not better than an iPhone camera. I love the camera on my iP6+ don't get me wrong, but when it comes time to take pics that will really pop, there's just no comparison.
A camera phone has the advantage is true portability, and not being so obvious though.
Picture is too dark, details are fuzzy. Not his best work I would think.
There really is no comparison from an iPhone camera to a DSLR. The DSLR obviously blows away any mobile phone camera. Having said that, I do think the camera on the iPhone 6 Plus is really good. It just can't compare to the large sensors of DSLR cameras. I do commend Apple for having the right vision on phone cameras compared to the other phone manufacturers who are in a megapixel race.
There really is no comparison from an iPhone camera to a DSLR. The DSLR obviously blows away any mobile phone camera. Having said that, I do think the camera on the iPhone 6 Plus is really good. It just can't compare to the large sensors of DSLR cameras. I do commend Apple for having the right vision on phone cameras compared to the other phone manufacturers who are in a megapixel race.
My point - vague as it was - if this guy was shooting in the White House of all places and given a little bit of breathing room to take pics... I would not have used a mobile phone camera. They both have their places. I think given the right time to adjust the exposure, he most likely would have gotten better results. This photo just doesn't do it for me.
This photographer didn't do something right with the photos. They're almost all too dark and muddy. I get that it can be challenging shooting in a building with stone walls, as the light doesn't behave as you expect, but I would not have shown any of those photos to friends, let alone to a magazine.
He didn't note whether he was using HDR or not, but guessing from the shots, he didn't. Which was a mistake. I'm sure, as a photographer, he figured he could do better himself, but there are lots of times when you just need the help digitally to get the lighting correct, so the photographer can focus on the art of the shot.
This photographer is about as accomplished as they come. I can't imagine that the photo in its full glory is either too soft or too dark.
Here is link to his site http://www.brookskraft.com/#
Edit: Just noticed link was also posted by jfc1138 above.
After writing my post, I quickly tried a shot, which I then noted on another post. It's not the photographer, but rather the camera settings for the iPhone that are causing the images to appear too dark. Obviously adjustments can be made after the fact, which I would have thought he would have done, but again, we don't know what he did or didn't do with the images - just that I find them to be rather poor shots in viewing them on the Time site.
The picture of the tree is mostly a framing exercise, what with all the geometry involved. The big viewfinder helps enormously in these situations.
Not much color or other visual interest in that subject though. Fir trees look better in the woods, especially when there are red mushrooms under them, which is what all this Yule stuff is originally about.
if so, the framing is not very impressive - not well balanced left/right with the flags at all, and the seal 1/2 cutoff at the top....
I looked at this Photogs work - some really amazing stuff for sure - this xmas tree just doesn't seem to be one of them
Ha! I came to comment, and say exactly the same thing that was already said in first comment by B Frost. (and then by everybody else).
The iPhone 6 can take such incredible photos. Somebody should bury this one.
The photo looks so bad because of Obama. Right?
Oh wait; I get it.
The photo looks so bad because of Obama. Right?
Is he a tree?
Ha! I came to comment, and say exactly the same thing that was already said in first comment by B Frost. (and then by everybody else).
The iPhone 6 can take such incredible photos. Somebody should bury this one.
A toaster can take a good picture in the hands of a skilled photographer. But hand that same photographer a much better camera and you will get much better results.
The guy can obviously use a camera, that is evident. However it seems he is pushing the iPhone beyond its abilities. Compared to a DSLR or Mirrorless any cellphone will suffer such as in this case.
True, it should be cropped, or a second shot might have grabbed both flags, but you can still see that it's a hand-held attempt at framing first, visual interest second. It's really a snapshot, not a successful composition. An impossible shot, with that lighting and the tree being eight feet or so behind the door frame, no depth whatever. But I suppose the tree is supposed to be the money shot. Oh well.
I would still maintain your framing mandate is clearer the larger the viewfinder display, maybe to the detriment of othe picture elementa, like here.
Aside from the photo shown here being compressed to much, that photo is awesome. There is a lot of depth in that shot. The reflections in the doors, the portal behind them and the floor are great. The symmetry is fine. The flags are really not needed in the shot, and are only there to imply that the photo was likely taken in a government building, so their form and shape need only be implied. The tree is probably 12 feet through that portal and to show the details of the tree (the subject) and the architecture in and out of the room shows how well the aperture responded to the artist intentions.
iThink you are all being too critical. The photographer did a wonderful job, so did the iPhone.
Aside from the photo shown here being compressed to much, that photo is awesome. There is a lot of depth in that shot. The reflections in the doors, the portal behind them and the floor are great. The symmetry is fine. The flags are really not needed in the shot, and are only there to imply that the photo was likely taken in a government building, so their form and shape need only be implied. The tree is probably 12 feet through that portal and to show the details of the tree (the subject) and the architecture in and out of the room shows how well the aperture responded to the artist intentions.
iThink you are all being too critical. The photographer did a wonderful job, so did the iPhone.
If you wanted a large depth of field, you should use an iPhone 5. Both the 5s and 6(6+) have a larger sensor and a larger aperture so it will give a shallower depth of field than the 5 (or 4S). The aperture is actually fixed so it responded as it always will as it will never change.
aperture fixed? not fixed? i think I need a citation. Wouldn't matter anyway, the iPhone 6+ camera SMOKES to fucking hell the camera in the 5, so ...
i am only an photography enthusiast. I understand the mechanics of it all, aperture-shutter-iso... but there is no way you can try to say that the 5 could make the depth in that photo look better. Only a slr, dslr or another comparable smartphone camera could do so.
The 5 has a smaller sensor and a smaller aperture(not by much). That will give a larger DoF.
If you can find aperture blades on your iPhone please let me know. Else I can assure you that you cannot change the aperture.
Ha! I came to comment, and say exactly the same thing that was already said in first comment by B Frost. (and then by everybody else).
The iPhone 6 can take such incredible photos. Somebody should bury this one.
A toaster can take a good picture in the hands of a skilled photographer. But hand that same photographer a much better camera and you will get much better results.
The guy can obviously use a camera, that is evident. However it seems he is pushing the iPhone beyond its abilities. Compared to a DSLR or Mirrorless any cellphone will suffer such as in this case.
Are you kidding me??
Based on the photo above (that's the only one I'm talking about), you say that guy can "obviously" use a camera??
And then you go on to say he's pushing the camera "iPhone beyond its abilities"??
?You clearly know nothing about this camera, and are too lazy to even do a rudimentary search for photo samples illustrating it's capabilities.
(pushing the iPhone beyond its abilities : give me a frickn' break
)
Go handle a Canon Rebel or a Sony a5000 and see if you can use even 10% of what they can do, if these pictures truly impress you.