| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Macworld Magazine time lapse
David Bailey, Photographer
 |
Flower Mound | TX | USA | Posted: 11:21 PM on 08.11.09 |
->> An interesting time lapse video of Peter Belanger's commercial shoot for the cover of Macworld magazine. Shows the setup all the way to the creation of the cover.
http://tinyurl.com/oefjnu |
|
Daniel Putz, Photographer
|
Jefferson | MD | USA | Posted: 12:09 AM on 08.12.09 |
| ->> With all the editing they did...why bother with a photo? |
|
Dave Prelosky, Photographer
|
Lower Burrell | Pa | US | Posted: 12:13 AM on 08.12.09 |
| ->> I'm confused. Either someone's bandwidth allotment is gone, the version of Flash I have in the office machine is beyond the expiration date, or all the links I've tried are dead. I can't get any link to this time-lapse to open. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 12:17 AM on 08.12.09 |
| ->> Cool it's a GREAT ad for Adobe. |
|
Danny Munson, Photographer
|
San Dimas | Ca | United States | Posted: 1:32 AM on 08.12.09 |
| ->> I agree with Daniel |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 1:53 AM on 08.12.09 |
->> @daniel,
i actually thought it was a great illustration of why you use a professional photographer to deliver the image. sure he did some retouching (like any cover image would have been), but i thought it was equally fascinating to see how much he worked the lighting to get what he wanted in terms of reflections, etc. it flies in the face of the "guy with camera" who believes that all he needs is a Rebel XT to get the shot, and a good reminder to photo editors as to why you might use a pro instead of a $5 iStock image.
i think i saw 5 strobes, a silk, two table top reflectors, putty to angle the phones, etc, etc. nothing easy about product photography, that's for sure. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 3:49 AM on 08.12.09 |
->> I shoot product pretty regularly, but I agree with Daniel and others on this one. It would be one thing if they were going for a live model setup or something which would be much harder to do in a 3d modeling program. But it's a simple shot where they replaced almost everything including the screen and the background. An iPhone is a simple shape with simple textures - trivial to make look real in a modeling program.
There are several free/cheap 3d models of the iPhone available in 3dsmax format from a number of sources. For example:
http://www.exchange3d.com/cubecart/free-3d-models/iphone/prod_3634.html#pre...
Really surprised that a computer magazine didn't go that route. I would bet cost-wise it would have been cheaper. |
|
Ray Anderson, Photographer
|
San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 6:13 AM on 08.12.09 |
->> Great, lets encourage a magazine that still uses a great photographer that gives a damn and works his ass off to get the best results to forget about using him in the future and go with some crummy stock photo.
Maybe we can get Sports Illustrated to stop using Robert Beck and go with something that is more cost - wise and cheaper.
I think it i a great video and nice to see Macworld is willing to pay to get the best results. The only problem I have every had with quality magazine covers is that damn bar code |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 9:26 AM on 08.12.09 |
->> Heh... I'm with Allen and Ray...
Michael |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 11:01 AM on 08.12.09 |
->> Ray,
Not that way at all, but I can see why you'd think that from my post.
Where I'm coming from is that I would have rather have seen them use his entire photo more-or-less as-is and let him do something more extensive/creative than a simple shot that they then butcher with fake screens, removed backgrounds and everything else. They didn't use him even close to his fullest potential for this kind of shot. So given that...why waste the talent of a creative photographer on a shot that ends up being 80% computer generated anyway?
For me, it's an example of not using a photographer to their fullest potential and ending up with something that is predictable. It would have been cool to see what he could have done with it "unchained". |
|
Daniel Putz, Photographer
|
Jefferson | MD | USA | Posted: 12:06 PM on 08.12.09 |
->> Great photographer. Check.
Great prep/workflow/image. Check.
Could it have been done a buttload cheaper with the _exact_ same results? Yes. (see David's second post)
Knowing how well 3ds max renders can be done...It wasn't necessary to hire a first-class photographer in the first place to muck about with the image in photoshop, to get the results they ended up with.
Now think of it from the other side, the professional who designed a digital version of an iPhone is now thinking..."they could have used me instead...Photoshopping etc etc". |
|
Ray Anderson, Photographer
|
San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 8:38 PM on 08.17.09 |
->> David
Thank you for clearing up your position. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|