Apple

Still impressive as hell.

You can replicate most of these with good lighting and a hand held gimbal. While not as impressive as what Apple use, they are presenting to millions of people and they have a team so they need super smooth movement all around where as a gimbal is smooth but not super smooth.

They said in the video it’s equipment they would have used with a traditional camera and it’s just the camera itself that is different.

I wonder what app they were using for filming. Seems like a lot of controls that would be amazing to have access to it too.

Exact same equipment is used with 30k plus cameras, I don't understand what the aim is here?

On another note, why won't Apple just create a dedicated camera with a CameraOS that can also be a phone if you really really want to.

Honestly, I’m impressed! I watched the embedded video in the article. I thought half the shots were CGI backdrops and such. I was joking with my partner leading up to the Vision Pro announcement about the backgrounds/sets being VR easter eggs for the future headset. Turns out they’re just elaborate set pieces. 😂

Why won’t Apple get rid of the annoying phone part and finally release an iCamera with a useful form factor and all of the chip power behind?

Better than the shot on samsung commercials where the reflection showed it was a camera and not a phone?

I doesn’t say Lit with iPhone. This is the dumbest fucking thing lol

I’m a hobbyist videographer and this is fucking impressive. Professional lighting and gimbals would also needed to be used for pro cameras. Even if you were just shooting on a DSLR, you’d still need lighting design.

What’s actually impressive about the iPhone this time around is that they didn’t add additional LENS. That’s new. In the past you still needed to add extra glass to it.

It means that it’s just using the raw sensor and built in lens, you can replace a cinematic DSLR, that’s actually a huge deal.

Does it mean that soccer moms will start creating full feature films? No, you’d still need to know composition and lighting design and all that, but this is pretty damn cool.

Is it ever possible for The Verge to report on interesting updates/products/news etc without the author unnecessarily injecting their ridiculous takes into the story?

What's your point, The Verge?

Was it?: Apple used all the equipment any billion dollar company would use when filming a 30 minute marketing event, but instead of using a dedicated digital camera, they instead demonstrated that their latest phone could be used instead... and you wouldn't notice until they told you.

See, I peripherally knew this. The camera only captures what’s there. Light is what makes ‘there’ visible. This would be the same if they used a pro cinema camera.

The gear shown in the “Scary Fast” behind-the-scenes footage is fairly standard for big studio productions, but Apple’s implication with these so-called “shot on iPhone” promotions is that anyone can do it if only they buy the newest iPhone.

I don't agree with that statement at all. The only implication is that the iPhone's camera is so good that it can be used in high-end productions. Nothing more nothing less.

I wonder if this would be any different if the video was filmed using a Samsung or a Pixel phone, with all the same additional equipment.

Seems like more bad-faith journalism from The Verge.

This just in, professional videos shoots involve more than just a camera. More news at 11.

Did they expect some guy in a wife beater to just follow them around holding the iPhone?

Is anyone not aware of this? Like seriously lol 🤡

The Verge thought just anoyone can be a news outlet, so why be upset with Apple suggesting anyone can be a filmmaker?

Wait... they used a professional director and a professional director of photography??... I angry they didn't hire drunk novices. The iPhone doesn't come with humans that have years of directing experience and photography skills! Fake!

I'll allow it.

Apple could create a cure for cancer and The Verge would report “it’s not enough to buy the cure, you also have to roll up your sleeve and inject it. Exhausting! Impossible!”

What a dumb post. Nobody making professional video thinks you can achieve production quality like that without other gear and lighting. The person writing this post has never taken a photography class obviously. A camera is just one of many tools required to make a great video or take a great photo. The fact that they did that with a 1k iPhone and not a 20k camera is fantastic.

I suggest the author from this verge post go take photography 101.

I don’t agree with this take from The Verge. You’d have to be an absolute fool to believe you need only an iPhone to record those shots.

At least it’s better than what Nokia did…

https://www.theverge.com/2012/9/5/3294545/nokias-pureview-ads-are-fraudulent

Well duh?! 🤷🏾‍♂️

No shit, sherlock

This is stupid. If you have a $35k Red camera you would need the same equipments. Apple is just showing professionals that the iphone is capable of doing professional video and should be in a cinematographer’s arsenal. That’s it. That’s the whole thing. That’s what shot on iphone mean.

This is the stupidest take ever. Did they expect 128 iPhone flashlights in a soft box? They also used microphones. Shocker!

but Apple’s implication with these so-called “shot on iPhone” promotions is that anyone can do it if only they buy the newest iPhone.

I don't think that's the implication at all.

I don't think any reasonable person would think that's the implication.

With some a couple hundred bucks worth of el'cheapo softboxes from Amazon you can get most of the way there though..

Even for the Verge this is a bafflingly dumb take.

No shit.

I mean… yeah?

So… lighting for effect?

Absolutely zero people expected that Apple would create it with an iPhone and a flash light. That doesn’t change the fact that an iPhone was what recorded the footage.

Yes, if you want production quality results, you have to use production quality equipment…which the iPhone can be considered since it clearly helped create that production.

This article is stupid. They would’ve used the fancy equipment even if they used a professional cinema camera.

Anyone who is halfway decent at photography knows lighting is the most important thing. No shit.

People underestimate the importance of good lighting for professional video productions, no matter what camera you use.

In other news, water is wet.

Without light there will be no photography

Good!

Misleading claims should be exposed for the fraud that they are.

I swear this has to be some intentional ragebaiting from Verge because the person who wrote this article should get checked with a doc

Umm you would use the same things with a professional camera so what’s your point?

How many years before smartphones will be able to create video of approximately this quality without all the extra equipment?

We talk about computational photography; I suspect we're moving to a time when our phones will have enough compute power to completely virtualize the act of taking photographs or shooting videos—that is, they will capture the 3D environment in total detail, then allow any change to lighting or camera position after the fact. Like portrait mode taken to its logical conclusion. So you could create videos like Apple's but with zero extra equipment.

I'm guessing it's at least 10 years but less than 25.