[video=youtube;hcMSrKi8hZA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcMSrKi8hZA[/video]
cool ad
That's a wonderful ad
[QUOTE=Fausty;52232561]That's a [i]powerful[/i] ad[/QUOTE]
ftfy
that's a nice ad for a change
[QUOTE=gokiyono;52232631]It's a barber shop that turns people into hipsters. They certainly know their target audience :v:[/QUOTE]
having a good hair cut doesn't equal hipster right away.
It's a barber shop that turns people into hipsters. They certainly know their target audience :v:
[video]https://youtu.be/CQY3KUR3VzM[/video]
[video=youtube;aFPcsYGriEs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFPcsYGriEs[/video]
Apple actually has a few good and funny ads
Jesus christ does everybody in that town live in 1979?
[QUOTE=gnampf;52232765]Jesus christ does everybody in that town live in 1979?[/QUOTE]
I think the idea is that the town actually is in 1979.
With iPhones.
[QUOTE=El Periodista;52232887]I think the idea is that the town actually is in 1979.
With iPhones.[/QUOTE]
So...Archer?
Fuck Apple
[QUOTE=Not64;52233098]Fuck Apple[/QUOTE]
What's so bad about the ad?
[QUOTE=Snickerdoodle;52233187]What's so bad about the ad?[/QUOTE]
Nothing, really. It's a pretty good ad. Just, fuck them.
[QUOTE=Plaster;52232630]having a good hair cut doesn't equal hipster right away.[/QUOTE]
your soul is lost to the fashion devil the moment you walk out the shop
also great commercial conceptually but I have no idea what portrait mode does without googling around. Their explanation is the same old 'it's magic'.
looking into it it seems it's forcing you to use the body's telephoto lens [forcing you to stand at an optimal portrait distance, nice] and there's some sort of face/body mapping feature that figures out the difference between subject and background, allowing it to fake some DOF in
sounds cool, but it doesn't like mid and lower lighting situations, and will refuse to shoot a lot when indoors. Hopefully they refine it a bit more
[QUOTE=dai;52233556]your soul is lost to the fashion devil the moment you walk out the shop
also great commercial conceptually but I have no idea what portrait mode does without googling around. Their explanation is the same old 'it's magic'.
looking into it it seems it's forcing you to use the body's telephoto lens [forcing you to stand at an optimal portrait distance, nice] and there's some sort of face/body mapping feature that figures out the difference between subject and background, allowing it to fake some DOF in
sounds cool, but it doesn't like mid and lower lighting situations, and will refuse to shoot a lot when indoors. Hopefully they refine it a bit more[/QUOTE]
iphone 7 plus has two cameras. one wide, one tele
it uses one to take pic of face/object, it uses the other to make the dof effect. combines both photos together and makes a good photo
they keep making commercials about it because its pretty good.
[video=youtube;_Gzw1C7etZU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gzw1C7etZU[/video]
[video=youtube;r8mR33cp_Fk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8mR33cp_Fk[/video]
[QUOTE=dai;52233556]your soul is lost to the fashion devil the moment you walk out the shop
also great commercial conceptually but I have no idea what portrait mode does without googling around. Their explanation is the same old 'it's magic'.
looking into it it seems it's forcing you to use the body's telephoto lens [forcing you to stand at an optimal portrait distance, nice] and there's some sort of face/body mapping feature that figures out the difference between subject and background, allowing it to fake some DOF in
sounds cool, but it doesn't like mid and lower lighting situations, and will refuse to shoot a lot when indoors. Hopefully they refine it a bit more[/QUOTE]
It blurs out the background leaving just the face in focus? I think
wonder if this is comparable to the similar feature android camera apps have, although apparently you're able to see the effect a lot faster on iphones.
iphone 7 has two cameras according to the analysis, android tells you to take the picture then tilt the phone a little to get the same effect
The iPhone 7 Plus has two cameras so I would bet they can glean some focus info from that and blur the background of your subject.
[QUOTE=gokiyono;52232631]It's a barber shop that turns people into hipsters. They certainly know their target audience :v:[/QUOTE]
Having a good looking haircut = hipster?
man i can smell you from here
It's not just the blur. Greater focal length plays a very big role.
[img_thumb]http://static.uglyhedgehog.com/upload/2014/2/20/1392896355514-portrait_focal_length_ii.jpg[/img_thumb]
[QUOTE=Monkey pie;52235709]Having a good looking haircut = hipster?
man i can smell you from here[/QUOTE]
Having a hipster looking haircut makes you more hipstet
You'd know
[QUOTE=notbarnik;52235861]It's not just the blur. Greater focal length plays a very big role.
[img_thumb]http://static.uglyhedgehog.com/upload/2014/2/20/1392896355514-portrait_focal_length_ii.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]
Noob please, you know that's 8 people right?
[QUOTE=Monkey pie;52235709]Having a good looking haircut = hipster?
man i can smell you from here[/QUOTE]
Having a good looking haircut makes you good looking, having a hipster haircut makes you a hipster.
Alternatively you could spend almost half as much money on a decent DSLR camera and get actual professional results.
It's cool and all but when the fuck am I going to get a phone that doesn't slow to a crawl when I have YouTube and maps in the background. When am I going to get a phone thats actually fast? How about one that lasts longer on battery?
I'm fuckin sick of this trend of slimmer devices. That just makes them more fragile. I'm sick of these innovations in features that don't effect things that matter. This solves a problem that it doesn't need to. Get a $300 DSLR and get even better results.
[QUOTE=haloguy234;52249586]Alternatively you could spend almost half as much money on a decent DSLR camera and get actual professional results.
It's cool and all but when the fuck am I going to get a phone that doesn't slow to a crawl when I have YouTube and maps in the background. When am I going to get a phone thats actually fast? How about one that lasts longer on battery?
I'm fuckin sick of this trend of slimmer devices. That just makes them more fragile. I'm sick of these innovations in features that don't effect things that matter. This solves a problem that it doesn't need to. Get a $300 DSLR and get even better results.[/QUOTE]
The idea isn't that it's supposed to replace a full DSLR camera, obviously. I think Apple knows that.
Let's say Grandma wants a new phone with a good camera for taking pictures of her grandkids. Grandma isn't going to go buy a cheaper phone and use the rest on a DSLR camera and learn to use it, she's going to find the phone with the best camera.
And lets be honest, most people are not paying full price for the latest flagship phone, they're signing two year contracts and then upgrading halfway through using whatever promotions are going on.
Also, the iPhone 7 is the fastest phone on the market right now (to my knowledge), the thickness is the same as last generations, the battery is rated for 14 hours talk (10 days standby), and it's on par in terms of price with other current gen phones.
[url]http://www.antutu.com/en/ranking/rank1.htm[/url]
[QUOTE=haloguy234;52249586]Alternatively you could spend almost half as much money on a decent DSLR camera and get actual professional results.
It's cool and all but when the fuck am I going to get a phone that doesn't slow to a crawl when I have YouTube and maps in the background. When am I going to get a phone thats actually fast? How about one that lasts longer on battery?
I'm fuckin sick of this trend of slimmer devices. That just makes them more fragile. I'm sick of these innovations in features that don't effect things that matter. This solves a problem that it doesn't need to. Get a $300 DSLR and get even better results.[/QUOTE]
That kind of defeats the point, of course professional photography will always win over phone cameras, but almost everyone has a phone in their pocket these days. Why is it a bad thing to improve a smartphone camera?
tbh the iphone camera isnt bad when you have the right app
i took amazing 4k footage with filmic pro. dslr quality. 4k at 100mbps bitrate
[url]http://www.filmicpro.com/apps/apple/filmic-pro/[/url]
then it meshes really well with my DJI osmo mobile i got, which is a godtier piece of hardware.
[url]https://www.dji.com/osmo-mobile[/url]
i can try to rip some examples out in a sec if people need em
Then on the photo side, you can do stuff like Snapseed or Adobe Lightroom Mobile, which can take photos in a RAW format for you to edit in lightroom.
No client is going to take you seriously if you bring your iPhone to shoot something with them
[QUOTE=exhale77;52232592]
[QUOTE=Fausty;52232561]That's a [I]powerful [/I]ad[/QUOTE]
ftfy[/QUOTE]
Huh? What was powerful about it?
[editline]19th May 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=garychencool;52250615]No client is going to take you seriously if you bring your iPhone to shoot something with them[/QUOTE]
I've seen lots of people in business use their phone cameras to take photos for many things, there's no need for a fancy DSLR or anything, really, when your phone (which you're going to have anyway) can also accomplish the task just as efficiently
[QUOTE=drake90001;52249776]The idea isn't that it's supposed to replace a full DSLR camera, obviously. I think Apple knows that.
Let's say Grandma wants a new phone with a good camera for taking pictures of her grandkids. Grandma isn't going to go buy a cheaper phone and use the rest on a DSLR camera and learn to use it, she's going to find the phone with the best camera.
And lets be honest, most people are not paying full price for the latest flagship phone, they're signing two year contracts and then upgrading halfway through using whatever promotions are going on.
Also, the iPhone 7 is the fastest phone on the market right now (to my knowledge), the thickness is the same as last generations, the battery is rated for 14 hours talk (10 days standby), and it's on par in terms of price with other current gen phones.
[url]http://www.antutu.com/en/ranking/rank1.htm[/url][/QUOTE]
14 hours talk and 10 day standby isn't particularly a good representation of how long it lasts. When talking the screen is off, which is the largest power eater on any smartphone. In terms of practical use where you use it for 10 minutes every hour it's pretty comparable to basically any phone on the market right now. Watch a YouTube video at max brightness and you'll lose 4 or 5% battery.
You're right that most people don't buy new phones outright. Which is stupid. What you do when you buy into this bullshit of upgrading is entering a contract of perpetual lease. You still pay for the phone in the form of higher monthly bills. If your phone breaks beyond repair you still have to pay it off and it's not even something you can use anymore. Imagine if every time you paid down a mortgage you got a new one and a new house. What's the point? Used phones are truly the way to go. You get them for a third or a fourth of the cost of a new phone and you can stay one or two gens behind and still get the same experience as the hottest flagship phone because they're all the same now anyway.
Honestly I'd rather Grandma have a cheaper phone so if she breaks it she's not out $200 deductible for price gouging highway robbery "insurance". When was the last time you dropped a camera compared to a phone?
[QUOTE=Protocol7;52249835]That kind of defeats the point, of course professional photography will always win over phone cameras, but almost everyone has a phone in their pocket these days. Why is it a bad thing to improve a smartphone camera?[/QUOTE]
Because it's an unnecessary improvement. It solves a problem that doesn't need to be solved. Takes up more space internally than it could. From a design perspective it's like opening 3 more lanes on a major highway but only 2 seater cars can drive in them.
And then there's the problem of repairability. Dual cameras and a supposed """"sapphire"""" lens that scratches and scuffs at 7 mohs. Where are the tangible improvements like higher efficiency display technologies or better engineering and design in the boost circuits to provide power to the screen? What about better improvements in the field of wireless charging?
There's been no inherent changes in design philosophy on phones in the last 5 years. The only phone to break the mold was the G5, that is easily the most repairable phone in existence and it has decently cheap parts to do so. But I dont think I'll ever be able to trust LG after the insane amounts of reported board failures in the G3 and G4.
[QUOTE=haloguy234;52250657]Honestly I'd rather Grandma have a cheaper phone so if she breaks it she's not out $200 deductible for price gouging highway robbery "insurance". When was the last time you dropped a camera compared to a phone?[/QUOTE]
I think most people would prefer having to pay a deductible ($200 is egregious, most companies charge maybe $150; the most expensive I have personally paid is $99 flat) versus dropping their phone and being fucked; especially if you're on an early upgrade plan.
Most people don't drop cameras anymore because they bring their phone everywhere they go. Because the smartphone has basically 100% replaced point and shoot cameras.
[QUOTE=haloguy234;52250657]Because it's an unnecessary improvement. It solves a problem that doesn't need to be solved. Takes up more space internally than it could. From a design perspective it's like opening 3 more lanes on a major highway but only 2 seater cars can drive in them.[/quote]
Why is it unnecessary? The benefits of having a camera on an Internet-capable device are obvious. Why can't the camera on the Internet-capable device be a good one too? Do you think if smartphone manufacturers put worse cameras in their phones that they'd magically be able to make everything else better?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
