Connect with us


iPhone 11 portrait mode vs plain-old digital camera: Love or hate all the photo fakery?



Most people’s spontaneous photographs these days are taken with a smartphone, and that’s been the case for many years now. Because the smartphone is so ubiquitous, most of us may not be aware of how it has changed, and continues to change, the way we capture memories.

Apple’s iPhone 11, which went on sale last month, is an amazing technical achievement, and I was interested to examine just how it is changing the way that we see. 

I performed an experiment: I took a series of shots with an iPhone 11 and a digital still camera at the same time. The set-up for the test was a photo shoot with my friend Natalia. The camera loves Natalia — every camera loves this lady — so she was a perfect choice as the model for the experiment. 

I took all the iPhone pictures with Apple’s top-of-the-line device, the iPhone 11 Pro Max, the model that starts at $1,099. It has three different cameras so it gives you three different options for depth of field. It also has all kinds of new software capabilities to dress up your photos. 

For comparison, I used a five-year-old digital camera called the “Quattro DP3,” from Japan’s Sigma Corp. It has a couple of good attributes for this kind of experiment. It has an excellent sensor, made by Silicon Valley chip company Foveon (owned by Sigma) that can capture lots of nuances of light and texture, and a lens that never lies about the lines or curves in a scene. And it’s a very straightforward camera: It gives you hardly any fancy options to dress-up photos. In a sense, it’s very truthful.

Look at this first picture of Natalia from the iPhone 11. This is using all the basic settings in “Portrait” mode, with no attempt to adjust anything. Nothing has been edited after the fact. You can see immediately that the picture captures a lot of light, and colors pop, and there’s a nice job of blurring the background, the “bokeh” effect that mimics the effect of a professional lens. 


This picture uses all the basic settings in the iPhone 11 “Portrait” mode, with no attempt to adjust anything. 

Now look at the iPhone picture set next to the DP3 picture. The iPhone is on the left, the DP3 on the right. Again, nothing has been edited in the case of either shot, they both come straight out of the camera. The DP3 doesn’t pop, and it doesn’t have a lot of light in it. I could have done some things to capture more light, but I decided to leave the DP3 with the gloom of the actual environment. So it actually captures the scene pretty accurately. It’s at an Apple store, the artificial light isn’t great, and the outside light coming through the windows of the store wasn’t very bright because it was a gray, rainy day. 


The iPhone is on the left, the DP3 on the right. Nothing has been edited in the case of either shot.

The iPhone photo floods the scene with light but it also does some weird other things. It makes the colors rather artificial. The colors in the DP3 are more true to life. The iPhone makes Natalia’s lips more pink, it makes her skin oddly rosy when she has a Mediterranean complexion that has more olive tones in it. The iPhone turns her dress and hat and coat from the dark blue-black they are in life, which are pretty closely captured by the DP3, to a kind of cobalt blue. Not a bad blue, but not accurate. 

Natalia and I looked at the results after the first few shots. “Fake,” we said in unison. The iPhone version is Instagram-ready, we both realized. It creates an effect that is easier to read, in the sense of seeing what’s there. Natalia’s earrings, the lace of her top, her eyeglass frames — all of it is “documented” in the sense that it’s all visible in the shot. And the iPhone version creates aspects that people value on Instagram, such as colors and shapes that pop and catch the eye and are kind-of candy colors. 

The next shots show some interesting extra items. Natalia’s skin has a kind of  sheen to it, a luminescence that is more than what you’d see in real life. It’s not just a smoothing of skin texture, it’s a kind of weird, glossy shine.


With the DP3 [right], there’s detail only in the area of focus, which in this case would be Natalia’s face. The iPhone photo has detail throughout.

You can also see an odd thing going on with detail. With a digital camera, such as the DP3, there’s detail only in the area of focus, which in this case would be Natalia’s face. The iPhone photo has detail throughout. It’s almost as if every part of the picture is screaming for attention. Her lace top is intricate, her hair is detailed down to the individual strands. You might call it “photorealist.” Even though Natalia’s face is still the focus, it’s as if all parts of the picture are equally important, except, perhaps, for the blurred background. There’s something flat about the picture because every part of it is given equal emphasis in terms of detail. 

Lastly, we come to a stark contrast. As I said, the light in the store was terrible for a photo shoot. The DP3, on the right, captures the shadow effects of the situation. Not only is it a kind of interesting, dramatic effect, it places Natalia at a definite place in time. A shadowy corner of an industrial space on an overcast morning. There’s a record here, in light and shadow, of what it was like for this one person to be at this place in the universe at this unique moment.


The DP3, on the right, captures the shadow effects of the situation. The iPhone brings in a large amount of light to the scene, more than was actually evident at the time.

The iPhone once again brought a large amount of light to the scene, more than was actually evident at the time. The colors pop, again. Surfaces are somewhat flat, because shadows never get deeper than a certain threshold. 

What you see from the iPhone consistently is a fakeness. Colors are dramatically altered, incidental light is boosted beyond anything that existed in the actual field of view. And detail is consistent throughout the picture in a way that isn’t really the case when you focus on something in the world in real life. 

You can look at it another way. The iPhone is about information more than anything else. The pictures it produces don’t have much mood or tone. They aren’t really faithful to the moment in time. But they have tons of information. You’ll know everything about the design of the person’s earrings, everything about the pattern of her dress, everything about the highlights of her hair, the contours of her body. Etc., etc. etc. Rather than a picture, it creates a visual collection of data, an abundance of info.

I imagine people can feel lots of different ways about this. Some might not be crazy about the fake aspects. However, a lot of people will probably be pretty delighted at the kind of instant Photoshop, Instagram-ready aspects of the iPhone. One thing is certain: as computing power increases on the phone, there will be even more of an ability for the device to modify and alter pictures as they’re taken. 

It’s interesting to ponder whether the iPhone may someday grow up and decide to stop producing brilliantly lit pictures that are heavy on info and instead seek to create more mood, more tone and “feeling,” for lack of a better word. 

Do you like the new fakery? Do you long for the natural look in digital photos? Tell me what you think in the comments section.

See also

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


5 tips for brands that want to succeed in the new era of influencer marketing – TechCrunch



If I told you a decade ago that a spin bike would be a social community, you’d have had a good laugh. But that’s precisely what Peloton is: A spin bike with a social community where the instructors are the influencers.

Peloton is just one example of how social is being integrated into every aspect of the customer experience in an increasingly digital world. Whether it’s considering a new restaurant to check out, a movie to see or a product to buy, most people look at reviews before making a final decision. They want social proof as an indicator of quality and relevance.

Influencers are a natural byproduct of this desire for social validation, and as social permeates the customer journey, creators have become an essential source of validation and trust.

Influencers are a natural byproduct of this desire for social validation, and as social permeates the customer journey, creators have become an essential source of validation and trust. Indeed, social validation is what social platforms are built on, so it’s a significant component of how we derive relevance online — and the deeper integration of social is changing the dynamic between brands and digital creators.

The shifting economy of creator monetization

Brand sponsorships are the holy grail for creators hoping to monetize their online influence. According to an eMarketer report, brand partnerships are still the No. 1 source of revenue for most digital creators.

However, digital creators have a lot more monetization options to choose from, thanks to Patreon, affiliate platforms, paid content platforms and platform revenue sharing, making it easier to earn a living without relying so heavily on brand sponsorships.

Have you worked with a talented individual or agency who helped you find and keep more users?
Respond to our survey and help us find the best startup growth marketers!

As a result, creators are diversifying their revenue streams, which, for some creators, allows them to be more selective about the brands they work with. What’s more, creators aren’t reliant on just one channel or one form of revenue.

YouTube creators probably have the most diversified revenue, often combining brand sponsorships, subscription models, affiliate deals, tipping/donations, their line of branded products and revenue share. However, it’s important to note that not all monetization options apply to every creator. But with so many options to choose from, making a living as a digital creator is more accessible than ever.

Here are a few of the ways online creators can monetize their content:

Ad revenue sharing: Advertising is the most traditional form of revenue for online creators. With this model, ads are injected into and around the creator’s content, and they make a certain percentage of revenue based on impressions. However, the revenue split can vary based on the platform, and some platforms have a specific threshold creators must hit before they can participate in ad revenue sharing.

Affiliate marketing: Similar to advertising or a brand sponsorship, affiliate marketing is an agreement for a share of revenue based on products sold. This kind of arrangement generally works best when the creator has a blog, website or YouTube account. Affiliate links allow the influencer to proactively choose the products they want to talk about and earn from, rather than having to wait for a brand deal to come their way.

Continue Reading


Instagram’s TikTok rival, Reels, rolls out ads worldwide – TechCrunch



Instagram Reels are getting ads. The company announced today it’s launching ads in its short-form video platform and TikTok rival, Reels, to businesses and advertisers worldwide. The ads will be up to 30 seconds in length, like Reels themselves, and vertical in format, similar to ads found in Instagram Stories. Also like Reels, the new ads will loop, and people will be able to like, comment, and save them, the same as other Reels videos.

The company had previously tested Reels ads in select markets earlier this year, including India, Brazil, Germany, and Australia, then expanded those tests to Canada, France, the U.K. and the U.S. more recently. Early adopters of the new format have included brands like BMW, Nestlé (Nespresso), Louis Vuitton, Netflix, Uber, and others.

Instagram tells us the ads will appear in most places users view Reels content, including on the Reels tab, Reels in Stories, Reels in Explore, and Reels in your Instagram Feed, and will appear in between individual Reels posted by users. However, in order to be served a Reels ad, the user first needs to be in the immersive, full-screen Reels viewer.

Image Credits: Instagram

The company couldn’t say how often a user might see a Reels ad, noting that the number of ads a viewer may encounter will vary based on how they use Instagram. But the company is monitoring user sentiment around ads themselves, and the overall commercially of Reels, it says.

Like Instagram’s other advertising products, Reels ads will launch with an auction-based model. But so far, Instagram is declining to share any sort of performance metrics around how those ads are doing, based on tests. Nor is it yet offering advertisers any creator tools or templates that could help them get started with Reels ads. Instead, Instagram likey assumes advertisers already have creative assets on hand or know how to make them, because of Reels ads’ similarities to other vertical video ads found elsewhere, including on Instagram’s competitors.

While vertical video has already shown the potential for driving consumers to e-commerce shopping sites, Instagram hasn’t yet taken advantage of Reels ads to drive users to its built-in Instagram Shops, though that seems like a natural next step as it attempts to tie the different parts of its app together.

But perhaps ahead of that step, Instagram needs to make Reels a more compelling destination — something other TikTok rivals, which now include both Snap and YouTube — have done by funding creator content directly. Instagram, meanwhile, had made offers to select TikTok stars directly.

The launch of Instagram Reels ads follows news of TikTok’s climbing ad prices. Bloomberg reported this month that TikTok is now asking for more than $1.4 million for a home page takeover ad in the U.S., as of the third quarter, which will jump to $1.8 million by Q4 and more than $2 million on a holiday. Though the company is still building its ads team and advertisers haven’t yet allocated large portions of their video budget to the app, that tends to follow user growth — and TikTok now has over 100 million monthly active users in the U.S.

Both apps, Instagram and TikTok, now have over a billion monthly active users on a global basis, though Reels is only a part of the larger Instagram platform. For comparison, Instagram Stories is used by some 500 million users, which demonstrates Instagram’s ability to drive traffic to different areas of its app. Instagram declined to share how many users Reels has as of today.

Continue Reading


Twine raises $3.3M to add networking features to virtual events – TechCrunch



Twine, a video chat startup that launched amid the pandemic as a sort of “Zoom for meeting new people,” shifted its focus to online events and, as a result, has now closed on $3.3 million in seed funding. To date, twine’s events customers have included names like Microsoft, Amazon, Forrester, and others, and the service is on track to do $1 million in bookings in 2021, the company says.

The new round was led by Moment Ventures, and included participation from Coelius Capital, AltaIR Capital, Mentors Fund, Rosecliff Ventures, AltaClub, and Bloom Venture Partners. Clint Chao, founding Partner at Moment, will join twine’s board of directors with the round’s close.

The shift into the online events space makes sense, given twine’s co-founders —  Lawrence Coburn, Diana Rau, and Taylor McLoughlin — hail from DoubleDutch, the mobile events technology provider acquired by Cvent in 2019.

Coburn, previously CEO of DoubleDutch, had been under a non-compete with its acquirer until December 2020, which is one reason why he didn’t first attempt a return to the events space.

The team’s original idea was to help people who were missing out on social connections under Covid lockdowns find a way to meet others and chat online. This early version of twine saw some small amount of traction, as 10% of its users were even willing to pay. But many more were nervous about being connected to random online strangers, twine found.

So the company shifted its focus to the familiar events space, with a specific focus on online events which grew in popularity due to the pandemic. While setting up live streams, text chats and Q&A has been possible, what’s been missing from many online events was the casual and unexpected networking that used to happen in-person.

“The hardest thing to bring to virtual events was the networking and the serendipity — like the conversations that used to happen in an elevator, in the bar, the lobby — these kinds of things,” explains Coburn. “So we began testing a group space version of twine — bringing twine to existing communities as opposed to trying to build our own, new community. And that showed a lot more legs,” he says.

By January 2021, the new events-focused version of twine was up-and-running, offering a set of professional networking tools for event owners. Unlike one-to-many or few-to-many video broadcasts, twine connects a small number of people for more intimate conversations.

“We did a lot of research with our customers and users, and beyond five [people in a chat], it turns into a webinar,” notes Coburn, of the limitations on twine’s video chat. In twine, a small handful of people are dropped into a video chat experience– and now, they’re not random online strangers. They’re fellow event attendees. That generally keeps user behavior professional and the conversations productive.

Event owners can use the product for free on twine’s website for small events with up to 30 users, but to scale up any further requires a license. Twine charges on a per attendee basis, where customers buy packs of attendees on a software-as-a-service model.

The company’s customers can then embed twine directly in their own website or add a link that pops open the twine website in a separate browser tab.

Coburn says twine has found a sweet spot with big corporate event programs. The company has around 25 customers, but some of those have already used twine for 10 or 15 events after first testing out the product for something smaller.

“We’re working with five or six of the biggest companies in the world right now,” noted Coburn.

Image Credits: twine

Because the matches are digital, twine can offer other tools like digital “business card” exchanges and analytics and reports for the event hosts and attendees alike.

Despite the cautious return to normal in the U.S., which may see in-person events return in the year ahead, twine believes there’s still a future in online events. Due to the pandemic’s lasting impacts, organizations are likely to adopt a hybrid approach to their events going forward.

“I don’t think there’s ever been an industry that has gone through a 15 months like the events industry just went through,” Coburn says. “These companies went to zero, their revenue went to zero and some of them were coming from hundreds of millions of dollars. So what happened was a digital transformation like the world has never seen,” he adds.

Now, there are tens of thousands of event planners who have gotten really good at tech and online events. And they saw the potential in online, which would sometimes deliver 4x or 5x the attendance of virtual, Coburn points out.

“This is why you see LinkedIn drop $50 million on Hopin,” he says, referring to the recent fundraise for the virtual conference technology business. (The deal was reportedly for less than $50 million). “This is why you see the rounds of funding that are going into Hoppin and Bizzabo and Hubilo and all the others. This is the taxi market, pre-Uber.”

Of course, virtual events may end up less concerned with social features when they can offer an in-person experience. And those who want to host online events may be looking for a broader solution than Zoom + twine, for example.

But twine has ideas about what it wants to do next, including asynchronous matchmaking, which could end up being more valuable as it could lead to better matches since it wouldn’t be limited to only who’s online now.

With the funding, twine is hiring in sales and customer success, working on accessibility improvements, and expanding its platform. To date, twine has raised $4.7 million.

Continue Reading