Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: high quality product photos: the iphone  (Read 8987 times)

dmg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
high quality product photos: the iphone
« on: July 07, 2007, 02:01:33 am »

Ever since the iphone ads started appearing I have been amazed by how clear and bright the screen appeared on the photos. It looked like a great job by the photographer(s).

Today I spend few  minutes looking at Apple's  "photos" of the iphone. From what I can see the "photos" of the iphone in apple's web site are all fakes: they have overlayed the image on top of the product. They should not call them photos. It is misleading. And yes, they call them photos (see the link
at the bottom of http://www.apple.com/iphone/). They should have a disclaimer of some sort.

Take, for example, a look at this image:

http://images.apple.com/iphone/gallery/ima...res20070621.jpg

notice the time? The digital one at the top has a different one than the analog clock.

look at this photo:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/156/3521971...b1e6e47af_o.png

It has different ones in both clocks (and the time is suspiciously 9:41 to 9:42)

And look at this one:

http://images.apple.com/iphone/gallery/ima...res20070621.jpg

same time as the first one.

Or this one:

http://images.apple.com/iphone/gallery/ima...res20070622.jpg,

and all the phones in this one:

http://images.apple.com/home/2007/images/i...ero20070702.jpg

What is even more. In every photo (except when it is obvious it is tilted)  the screen is _perfectly_ parallel to the plane of the
camera. Not a single pixel of perspective error.

The large resolutions photos have no apparent loss of detail. The iphone is not that high resolution, so one would expect some pixelation in the larger images..

dmg


dmg
I
Logged

X-Re

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2007, 11:20:02 am »

Quote
Take, for example, a look at this image:

     Appears to be a 3D rendering, and not a photograph.


Quote
look at this photo:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/156/3521971...b1e6e47af_o.png

It has different ones in both clocks (and the time is suspiciously 9:41 to 9:42)

     I see two clocks, and both show 9:41?? However, this could be a layered image, with the face of the iPhone laid over the photograph of the hand and some object - I don't have the expertise to tell....

Quote
And look at this one:

http://images.apple.com/iphone/gallery/ima...res20070621.jpg

same time as the first one.

     Another angle on the same 3D model, it would appear. You'll also note the carrier name differences between the two - this one and the first one say AT&T, while the 2nd one says Cingular...

Quote
Or this one:

http://images.apple.com/iphone/gallery/ima...res20070622.jpg,

and all the phones in this one:

http://images.apple.com/home/2007/images/i...ero20070702.jpg

     More rendered phones... They have the exact same clock displays as the other photos, making one think that these are not realistic photos anyhow...
« Last Edit: July 07, 2007, 11:20:22 am by X-Re »
Logged
Dave Re
[email protected] website: [u

Chris_Brown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 983
  • Smile dammit!
    • Chris Brown Photography
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2007, 02:01:51 pm »

Quote
Today I spend few  minutes looking at Apple's  "photos" of the iphone. From what I can see the "photos" of the iphone in apple's web site are all fakes: they have overlayed the image on top of the product. They should not call them photos.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126953\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think all the images except the one with the hand are 3D renderings. I think the one with the hand uses an enhanced screen capture for the display, and professional post production for enhancement & clean up.
Logged
~ CB

macgyver

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 510
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2007, 03:13:39 pm »

DMG,

I'm willing to bet most promo photos or commercial photos are not straight up 'pictures'.  If you think the iPhone is the first of these you have no idea.  One time I saw one of those home funishing magazines (the ones with the picturesque photos of all too clean rooms) where there was a photo of a comfortable looking living room with a happy looking dog whos back leg was semi-transparent.

All manner of photos have something do to them nowadays.  I think only certain types of photography such as photojournalism (and its relatives) and documentary  photos (forensics, medical, etc) even claim to be all true all the time.  

Think of it this way: when was the last time you saw a Big Mac that looks like it does in the commercials?
Logged

Slough

  • Guest
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2007, 04:20:34 pm »

Quote
Think of it this way: when was the last time you saw a Big Mac that looks like it does in the commercials?

About 20 years ago I knew someone who worked as a photographers assistant. Anyway, she told me that by law the photos of Big Macs had to be photos of the real thing. The photographer was given hundreds if not thousands of burgers, and he sorted through them until he found the perfect one.

This was in the UK, and I am not sure how it works in the US and Canada.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2007, 05:15:19 pm »

I've done some food and product photography, and very little of it is "straight" unaltered imagery. Shiny stuff in particular is a real PITA, as it's very difficult at times to find an angle that doesnt clearly show the camera or one of your lights in a reflection. So you try to shoot with as little extraneous reflection as possible, and then clean up in PS. Hi-resolution renders of shiny things can save huge amounts of time trying to shoot around reflections and subsequent PS cleanup. It's a practice taking hold in the auto industry, and some photographers specializing in that are losing business. It's cheaper to hire somebody to make a photorealistic 3-D model of the car (which is usually designed in a CAD program whose files can be exported to the 3-D modeling program anyway) than to pay a photographer and a couple of assistants to spend several days to set up a bunch of carefully-tweaked lighting in a specially-constructed studio and shoot the car, then another few days to do the PS cleanup.

Menu shots of food may be composited to keep one item from casting a shadow on another, or to avoid the "embarrassing reflection" problem, and there are all kinds of tricks, like freezing cakes and pies so the slices have neat edges, and salads and the like are carefully arranged and misted with water spray to look "fresher". And yes, typically numerous items are made, and the best is chosen to be photographed. Any shot involving ice cubes or chips is typically composited, as the layout of the items arranged in the ice is often subject to change, and rearranging layers in PS is much easier that reshooting the whole thing.

In general, advertising and marketing images have even more airbrushing, cloning, compositing, and other fakery in them than fashion and glamour images.
Logged

Khun_K

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
    • http://
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2007, 10:47:43 am »

Quote
I've done some food and product photography, and very little of it is "straight" unaltered imagery. Shiny stuff in particular is a real PITA, as it's very difficult at times to find an angle that doesnt clearly show the camera or one of your lights in a reflection. So you try to shoot with as little extraneous reflection as possible, and then clean up in PS. Hi-resolution renders of shiny things can save huge amounts of time trying to shoot around reflections and subsequent PS cleanup. It's a practice taking hold in the auto industry, and some photographers specializing in that are losing business. It's cheaper to hire somebody to make a photorealistic 3-D model of the car (which is usually designed in a CAD program whose files can be exported to the 3-D modeling program anyway) than to pay a photographer and a couple of assistants to spend several days to set up a bunch of carefully-tweaked lighting in a specially-constructed studio and shoot the car, then another few days to do the PS cleanup.

Menu shots of food may be composited to keep one item from casting a shadow on another, or to avoid the "embarrassing reflection" problem, and there are all kinds of tricks, like freezing cakes and pies so the slices have neat edges, and salads and the like are carefully arranged and misted with water spray to look "fresher". And yes, typically numerous items are made, and the best is chosen to be photographed. Any shot involving ice cubes or chips is typically composited, as the layout of the items arranged in the ice is often subject to change, and rearranging layers in PS is much easier that reshooting the whole thing.

In general, advertising and marketing images have even more airbrushing, cloning, compositing, and other fakery in them than fashion and glamour images.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127032\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It depends on subjects to use either real shoot or computer rendering. But even with computer rendering, it still needs lighting setup in the software (as did in real studio setup) so the rendering artist also needs to have some knowledge for such lighting effects.
We did quite a lot of these kind of works by creating solid/surface model from engineering software and export the file to rendering software to perfect it. It is also often after real shoot that further lighting effect were added to give clean and clear look (on Photoshop), for example the relfection on the surface of chrome steel needs to be re-arranged to be perfectly smooth that in real world it can be slightly distorted or the brushing on steel can be quite visible. In the end, a heavily retouched real product shoot can be sometimes looked like rendering. But in the case of the iPhone picture, it looked to me a pure computer rendering, which many automobile advertising today is done such way - however, the landscape is usually real capture so it provides the right reflection on the computer model.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2007, 10:49:07 am by Khun_K »
Logged

jerryrock

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 608
    • The Grove Street Photographer
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2007, 11:12:16 am »

The analog clock icon on the iPhone is just an icon for the world clock application, it does not display the correct time. It is just an icon.
Logged
Gerald J Skrocki

Steve Kerman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #8 on: July 11, 2007, 02:33:13 am »

Quote
Think of it this way: when was the last time you saw a Big Mac that looks like it does in the commercials?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127013\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I did in one instance refuse a burger at Jack-in-the-Box, and requested that they supply one that looked remotely like the photo on the menu board.  
« Last Edit: July 11, 2007, 02:38:09 am by Steve Kerman »
Logged

Steve Kerman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #9 on: July 11, 2007, 02:37:40 am »

In general when you are producing collateral materials for a new product introduction, like the iPhone, you don't actually have the real product available to photograph.  So, you do whatever you have to do with models and computer-generated images to get images that can go to press early enough that you can have literature (and web sites) available at the appropriate time for the product launch.
Logged

Khun_K

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
    • http://
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2007, 04:37:33 am »

Quote
In general when you are producing collateral materials for a new product introduction, like the iPhone, you don't actually have the real product available to photograph.  So, you do whatever you have to do with models and computer-generated images to get images that can go to press early enough that you can have literature (and web sites) available at the appropriate time for the product launch.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127527\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The computer rendering of product came from the source of computer solid/surface file that made into tool and for production of actual products so they are the same thing, in a way.  Under rendering software you pretty much set up the lighting more or less similar the way one sets up in the studio so it is photorealistic because it is very close to reality, size, proportion, materil and surface texture and just almost about everything. And it is not unusual that even one shoot the real product, it will be eventually retouched to a point there is not much difference between real product shoot and computer rendering. It is often a choice between cost to really shoot the product or to render it in computer - which is not really less costly - high end compare to high end in this case. And of course also the timing of the actual product made available to the market or apply the computer generated visual effect or parts to layer on the actual product shoot.
Logged

Cstrikedish

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
    • http://cstrikedish.blogspot.com
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #11 on: July 12, 2007, 05:29:48 am »

Quote
The analog clock icon on the iPhone is just an icon for the world clock application, it does not display the correct time. It is just an icon.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127444\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
So bad!
Logged
GO, GO, GO! [url=http://cstrikedish.blog

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13980
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #12 on: July 12, 2007, 06:15:41 am »

Most of the images for electronic goods are 3D ray tracing computations nowadays.

There are many reasons why it is the preferred options.

For those who have done product photography of goods with highly reflective surfaces, the lack of camera reflection alone is a big plus, although it is far from being the most important advantage.

Regards,
Bernard

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6231
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #13 on: July 12, 2007, 05:58:35 pm »

Quote
They should not call them photos. It is misleading. And yes, they call them photos (see the link
at the bottom of http://www.apple.com/iphone/). They should have a disclaimer of some sort.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126953\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, I'm sitting here looking at my iPhone and I gotta tell ya, the photos look pretty realistic to me. If you haven't actually seen the display, you might not believe it. The only issue with any of the shots I see is that useable angle of the actual real display is less.

As you angle the display, there's a point where it dims considerably...move it from severe angle into straight on and it litterally POPS into a really bright, sharp display.

It's also a lot higher resolution than most people realize...it's 480-by-320-pixel resolution at 160 dpi. You have to have REAL GOOD close vision to even SEE the pixels...

I've done enough commercial shooting to know that the aim is to present a realistic but optimal depiction of the product...often a prototype, often less than perfect. The screens almost ALWAYS have to be stripped in. In this case, Apple did a really good job of keeping it "real" (with the exception of the severe angle view).
« Last Edit: July 12, 2007, 05:59:22 pm by Schewe »
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2007, 05:40:02 pm »

Quote
Well, I'm sitting here looking at my iPhone and I gotta tell ya, the photos look pretty realistic to me. If you haven't actually seen the display, you might not believe it. The only issue with any of the shots I see is that useable angle of the actual real display is less.

As you angle the display, there's a point where it dims considerably...move it from severe angle into straight on and it litterally POPS into a really bright, sharp display.

It's also a lot higher resolution than most people realize...it's 480-by-320-pixel resolution at 160 dpi. You have to have REAL GOOD close vision to even SEE the pixels...

I've done enough commercial shooting to know that the aim is to present a realistic but optimal depiction of the product...often a prototype, often less than perfect. The screens almost ALWAYS have to be stripped in. In this case, Apple did a really good job of keeping it "real" (with the exception of the severe angle view).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127901\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As does mine.  It is pretty hard to decribe to somehow how crisp, clear, and vivid the iPhones screen really is.

I'm not sure how anyone could expect apple to create images of the iPhone by photographing the screen on the phone itself.  I can't imagine anyone can take such a picture and have the resulting image even remotely appear as good as the phone really does.

When you see a commercial of a TV set, do you think they really videoed a live image?

I don't think the actual experience of the phone is a "let down" compared to the images used to advertise it.
Logged

Chris_Brown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 983
  • Smile dammit!
    • Chris Brown Photography
high quality product photos: the iphone
« Reply #15 on: July 31, 2007, 12:46:13 am »

Quote
Ever since the iphone ads started appearing I have been amazed by how clear and bright the screen appeared on the photos.
Yes, but will it blend? That is the question.  
Logged
~ CB
Pages: [1]   Go Up