Albert Watson is one of the best, and best-known portraitists in the world, and in this video by Profoto he tells the story behind one of his most iconic shots: THE portrait of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs.
It's a photo that you have no doubt seen—be it on the Apple homepage the day Jobs passed, or on the cover of Walter Isaacson's biography of the tech giant—but the story behind it takes just 2 minutes to tell. Watson explains how he instantly earned Jobs' cooperation, how he got Jobs to look into the camera with his trademark intensity, and how the portrait came to adorn the Apple website on the day Jobs passed away.
Hear the story from Watson himself in the video above.
... very nice, a great photographer does his job professionally... I guess it does not matter how the photographer capture the image but the way of approach, communicate to the subject for what he wanted, the type of camera is perhaps not mattered, at least not as much
Story (location, theme, subject pose, look of the object etc), background (camera angle, point of view) and then framing (control of the story, look, details etc).
Shallow DOF is one of the overhyped elements in a good photograph of the person and shows more lack of the skills of photographer than skills.
I'm not an Apple fan, and never will be, but a man who started a small project in his back yard garage and made it the richest company on earth deserves a lot of credit. RIP Steve.
Excellent image. It should be, coming out of a 4x5 camera and an experienced photographer.
Same here... I don't use Apple-products - they are undouptly good - but the lockin-effect of the Apple-ecosystem is nothing I want to be captured in.
But I have a lot of respect for the man Steve Jobs, his visions and achievements...
The day he died I had a day off and planned to go to the local zoo here... I left the subway a few stations ealier, to visit the Apple-store... I'll never forget the atmosphere there... a monitor placed near the entrance showing this picture... some flowers placed on the ground - and few dozends of people standing there and showing respect right in the busy city center, while hundreds rushing around, not knowing and irritated what was happening there...
But the few knowing just glanced at each other... knowing mankind just lost one of its biggest visionares.
He wasn't such a visionary, more someone who knew how to communicate. Apple's marketing and the style of advertising is pure genius, and Job's got that, plus he knew when something was 'just right', what I call a 'table thumper'. He would never have allowed the abomination that is the 'notch' on the iPhone X, a massive UX fail and example of lack of use of imagination in the design process. Visionaries are those who sketch ideas. Job's poo poo'd the stylus, yet the Galaxy Note (of which I have owned most models) is not only superb, but making Samsung a lot of money, and then Apple launch the iPad Pro with superb Apple Pencil, to rave reviews. He wasn't always right. Oh he had charisma, and was very strict, not taking poop from anyone and spotting BS from a mile away. (I spent years with some of Apple's first employees, so have first hand knowledge of all this too.) In my opinion, Apple's greatest achievement is it's advertising design and copy writing.
Apparently, Jobs wasn't great at math, or physics, or science, or technology, or anything technical for that matter. He was great in one thing only -- making others who were great in math, or physics, or science, or technology to work for him.
@ tommi. They formed Apple at Steve's garage. Check out Steve's profile on Wikipedia:
"Jobs and Wozniak attended meetings of the Homebrew Computer Club in 1975.[44] In 1976, Wozniak invented the Apple I computer and showed it to Jobs, who suggested that they sell it. Jobs, Wozniak, and Ronald Wayne formed Apple Computer in the garage of Jobs's Los Altos home on Crist Drive."
"Job's poo poo'd the stylus, yet the Galaxy Note (of which I have owned most models) is not only superb, but making Samsung a lot of money, and then Apple launch the iPad Pro with superb Apple Pencil, to rave reviews. "
MrTaikitso: Jobs rejected the stylus as the primary method of OS interaction, which is what all the resistive screen smartphones of the time were using. Visionaries get things like that, regular people don't.
'Visionaries are those who sketch ideas. Job's poo poo'd the stylus...' What? Are you serious? Because Jobs didn't think that a stylus was the way to interact with an iPad you think this means he didn't believe in the benefit[s] of drawing?
You write with such authority, did you know the man?
The whole thing "formed in the garage" would only mean that they three sit down drinking beer in that garage and come up idea "Let's start a company, and call it as "Apple", do you agree?". Nothing else.
As what I said, was they did not basically do anything in that garage, it was just a "warehouse" before sending computers out. Wozniak build computers elsewhere, Jobs did the Apple business in his bedroom...
The garage is nothing else than american colored lie how a business was done "in this garage", it is just great story for "small people" how to become big in Silicone Valley.
So when someone say "but a man who started a small project in his back yard garage"
Then "The didn't do things in the garage...." is valid, wikipiedia wrong.
"What? Are you serious? Because Jobs didn't think that a stylus was the way to interact with an iPad you think this means he didn't believe in the benefit[s] of drawing?"
Exactly!
I write this on Surface Pro 3. I don't use any touchscreen functions on any laptop, including Surface. When I detach keyboard, I use it mainly as a video player sometimes for movies.
And even that I use the pen for photo retouch and drawing, I never use it for Windows use, just way way way terrible to use Windows with a pen or touch. Only way to do it well is to use keyboard and mouse!
Same is with iPad, Jobs never said that stylus ain't good for drawing, but for operating the device as input device (like keyboard/mouse) and inferior to finger. This is the difference that GUI was designed to be touch operated (unlike Windows etc) and Apple Pencil just works great for drawing where it is superior to finger!
albertwatson.net Go to the option 'All Photos', then you have to trawl through them to find the landscapes. Not an easy site to navigate (and read due to the idiotic font used!).
Plays ok on my W10 laptop without asking for any updates. I wonder how much he paid for this arty farty mess of a website? He's an accomplished landscape photographer, yet no landscape gallery, he's got a visual impediment and is of an age when your sight only goes down hill (cataract operation for me tomorrow....) yet the text is tiny and the font awful.
Red I...you sure like to argue. Go to Albertwatson.net. I have clicked on his links, reviewed a slew of photos on his site, clicked on his profile, contact, beauty, portrait and fashion links....all work.
Stop making a fool of yourself by arguing. Shall I post screenshots from my iPad proving you are wrong? How about this...for every photo I view and provide a link proving you are wrong..send me $100.
The Davinator you can post it if you like but for me the site doesn't work on both WIndows 7 Chromium/FF or Linux Chromium/FF All it does it links the logo to flash download. Now stop telling me I'm wrong that it doesn't work for me and go away.
The screen shots from my iPad...you know...the device that doesn't work on Flash sites...showing numerous pages from Albertwatson.net
Exactly as I said. Thus, as myself and others have had no issues with the site, and this is proof that it isn't flash...the problem is you. When I tell you that you are wrong, rest assured, I've my homework first and know it as fact
The problem is he's using an outdated plugin that most of the internet is going away so it is a Flash issue ie the site depends on a third party plugin to function and not natively rendered by the browser, hence the site has a usability/accessibility problem.
Interestingly enough, when he saw Watson using the 4x5 view camera, he became intrigued and was disarmed. Had he been using some DSLR, the results would have been different.
I have always shied away from portraiture as a professional; I am too shy and anxious with people for such work. But I admire those who have the chutzpah sometimes needed to get the quintessential shot.
This photo of Jobs is one such, though maybe not so much chutzpah, rather an understanding of one's subject.
The best I know of personally is this one of Winston Churchill, glowering at the camera (taken I believe by Yousuf Karsh in Canada?). Why does he look so Churchillian? Because he had just been told by the photographer that he could not light his cigar.
Karsh was a true master, and an impressive subject list. Hemingway and Crawford are faves. His lighting was simple and oft copied... but I think it was the way he brought out the strength and character of his subjects that is so telling.
Story goes (I have heard it from from of his pupils) that he was given 5min time to take the portrait of prime minister, and usually he spend a about week to set up lighting (about thousand tiny lights distributed around the space while a replacement model sit in model place most of the time, only model itself to be there for few times and final shot) and now he got random place and 5min.
So when Churchill walked in he mumbled "let's get over this" and was not interested about taking the photo. Churchill was famous for smoking all the time and Yousuf told him where to stand and then walked at the prime minister, apologize and pulled the cigar out of his mouth... And then Yousuf released shutter just a second after pulling it out.
And He was furious what Yousuf had done... And that is the "bulldog" you can see in the picture. Someone just done something unthinkable.
I am not Apple fanboy... Actually, I am often called Apple hater even. And I don't see Steve Jobs as a genius inventor or genius designer, yet... He was a genius. A genius salesman, who could take best ideas from others, compile them into something (Apple PC, Iphone, Ipod, whatever) and MAKE millions of people to desire this thing. It is an ability of a genius. It never worked with me though...
Anyway, this portrait IS great and very recognizable.
Why? They were both arguably fascists who were made infamous by human suffering in their own way. Besides, I have seen photos of Hitler with his dog, Blondi, that make the man look almost human...although Blondi always came out looking better.
Why? Because in this photo, the subject was not made to look like Mother Theresa, whether one of both or them were fascists. The subject was made to look like himself.
Hitler was behind a great PR wall, where he was portrayed as a strong yelling man to everyone.... And that is only tape existing where Hitler speaks naturally. Recorded by accident by a one Finnish soundtechnician even when all recorders and cameras were ordered to be turned off. The microphone was on hat shelve above Mannerheim and Hitler. Only after the meeting did the technician realize what has he done.
The tape is as well interesting that Hitlers closest bodycard / personal assistant didn't recognize Hitlers voice from that tape when it was played to him.
Hitler and his achievement has been twisted so badly that lies have become facts and real terrible leaders are still controlling the western world...
Always amazes me how many people who have not accomplished anything even remotely close to what Steve Jobs has. Go on and on about what a loser he is. What is more they are usually typing in a forum on a product he made happen. In this case even his photographer is getting hit.
People don't care about how many billions a person accumulated, or how successful the business he built. But they do care about what kind of person he was -- was he kind or cruel, was he loving or hating, was he forgiving or vengeful... And Jobs simply isn't an attractive human being by any measure.
You are the one talking about billions. The rest are just rumors probably from jealous people who find it easier to hate than to appreciate. He ushered in the personal computer a very big change in our way of living. On all fronts from playing games to work to personal networking and more. He was a big part of building a massive industry that changed the world. I am old enough to remember the before and after, maybe you are not. What he did was a massive achievement that will go down in the history books.
@Terry Breedlove, you say rumors, but did you know the guy personally? I think not, you just rehashing the panegyrics that others created. There is no better source than those who knew him personally. And one of those early colleagues said that you would get more warmth hugging an icicle than from Jobs. There are many facts of his life that confirm that description.
Did you know the guy personally I think not. Your just rehashing failed rumor mongering. Now I am sure he had his moments. Many great leaders are that way. You see it in high level sports figures as well. It is the winning way. I think people make way more out of it than what is actually there however.
You know, Terry, somehow you don’t hear that much about how Warren Buffet is a terrible person. I am certain one can go out of your way and find something that would make one despise him, but Steve Jobs has really excelled in the unsympathetic department. I like both the iPhone and the iPad, but there may be some truth to the points you—for whatever reason—are trying to deflect.
I would agree with the post that pointed out that Jobs real genius was in selecting and promoting items with great sales appeal. As to his overall character... If you really want insight into who Jobs was and how he treated others watch the documentary:
Steve Jobs: The Man In The Machine
My guess is the greatest photographer in the world wouldn't be able to get you thinking Steve resembled Mother Terresa!
Warren Buffet is not responsible for building anything and stays out of the limelight for the most part. However there are plenty of people who attack the 1% which includes Buffet. Steve Jobs is a different cat. Very active and a very strong leader. There would be no Apple computer without him. He changed the world. I am sure he was a tough boss. He pushed the right buttons and got things moving. That is how he did change the world.
I think the key to this video interview wasn't the technicals behind the shot (honestly, most of us could light this) but his approach and communication. I won't say "gear isn't important" because that's just not true, you can't use the built-in flash and get this result, but in this case it was definitely more "mind over matter." All the greats have a way of connecting with their subjects, that's what makes their images stand out.
Good to know. Thanks. I always wished that latest full frame digital camera could have same quality so I don't need to think further. Never get this confidence. :(
did you mean to have a hot-link where you say "this video" in the paragraph? I can't find the link, even though many others obvious had no problem finding it.
What title image?!? I am running most recent version of Firefox on my desktop computer. There is no image on my screen. (No way to embed a screenshot, so you'll have to take my word for it.) :-)
Watson comes across as the amazingly experienced talented photographer that he is, keeping it simple and getting the subject on his side to become collaborators for 30 minutes versus antagonists for 60 minutes.
He was know for spectacle schedule and performance. Arriving in time, delivering results before deadline and being available when required.
He expected others to do their work and not waste it or give excuses why something didn't work or be possible like typical Western world is in every level.
The Western world has only really become about excuses rather recently, and only in some fields. It is embarrassing how easy it is for certain service types to be serviced by people of such lazy demeanours, and who will take advantage of breaks and take umbrage at the slightest slight or confrontation. But again, that is new, and part of a general culture of laziness that comes when everything is done for you. This is especially bad in Canada. The USA is probably better in this regard.
Jobs was a shaper/doer and he did damn well. He expected a lot and got results.
To be honest, any portrait of Steve advertised and used as it did would have been iconic. I do not see this image to carry anything else but Steve personality. Sure a clean image, but that is all it is in my opinion.
@Serenity Now you miss the point that it does not take much to capture Steve's personality. So you might want to be more humble and reflective in your responses.
@eyeport maybe, I personally do not think it would have taken so much thinking and creativity to shoot such an image: 1) Apple CEO - Images should be high key, clean, simple 2) Let Steve do the rest Done It is a bit like taking an amazing landscape picture when you have an amazing sight in front of you, and the right place and time to make it Viral (which often needs to have a name associated with it). You just need to click the camera.
Again a great image, but if that was not Steve Job and the image was on a no name photographer web page portrait photography, it would hardly go noticed.
How many caveat ifs does a dismissal need before it’s a construction of spite? It is an iconic image in spite of all the ifs and because of them. Jobs had many photos taken of him. It is ONE of a few that will outlive th photographer and likely all of us reading this article.
If you decide to understand that, you will see it. If you decide against it you will make simplistic cases that indict photography, photographers, and everyone else.
What makes a picture "iconic" is usually who is in front of the camera. If you take the exact same picture with the same camera, lens, light, composition, clothes, background, exposure etc of the guy next door it won't be considered "iconic".
@landscaper1, face it, most of us could light this with a minimal amount of gear. I'm sure many people could make something VERY MUCH like it.
The key was Watson's communication with Jobs that brought out the personality and made the image special. It also helps that Jobs liked this image and picked it over the others. Who's to say that if he liked another picture, we wouldn't be discussing some other image right now? It's iconic because it's seen by billions.
It's a simple but iconic shot. But to get this shot you need to "made it" before you could even make it. The made it requires just another dimension of work and business skills.
It's often difficult to parse why an image really works, but I really think that this one does and apparently lots of other folks do because it's maybe the most famous shot of this very famous guy who surely had many, many photos taken of him.
Sure, the lighting and the composition are very simple, but that doesn't explain the process of how the photographer decided that this particular way of shooting would be such a perfect match for the subject that he was shooting... That's the genius of it.
This particular image is iconic because, in the relevance order: 1) It depicts Steve Job 2) Steve Job really liked it, so he promoted it as his portrait image 3) it is a good portrait of Steve
Again if this was a generic dude it would be far from iconic. Photographer did a good job in a technically good image satisfying the costumer taste. Basically did what a good photographer is supposed to be able to do.
@Tom Holly "If you can’t see it then you’re in the wrong business." Classic slogan style statement, you will impress me if you can actually justify it.
@neat, like to hear answer from you. Could you do the "simple portrait shooting" like this one. Portraiting is not like boasting which #any# keyboard guru could do fascinately.
@Tom Holly " good photo" means that most pro photographer should have been able to to create it. I agree with zebebito that photographer contribution to make the image iconic is modest. The end user had clearly the power to turn it into an iconic image. If that is not true I have hundreds if not thousands of iconic images. Tight frame, single light source, standard set up, high key, which makes lighting even more forgiving. Let Steve do his thing.
Whether he was a narcissist or an egotist, there's no denying Steve Jobs left an indelible impression on our world. And I might add, he did it without daily tweets to the world about how great he was. Other than my iPhone I've never owned an Apple product nor have I ever wanted any other Apple product. Nonetheless, that doesn't prevent me from acknowledging Jobs' genius.
By the way, it can reasonably argued that the 3rd Wave of the Industrial Revolution is the Information Age. If that's true, then it can also be argued that Steve Jobs' marketing of the Apple II and its descendants did more to bring about that 3rd Wave than anyone else. No, he didn't invent the personal computer, and Henry Ford didn't invent the automobile. But both men came up with "the product" that ignited the bonfires of their respective industries.
Jobs was a brilliant marketer and deal maker (a real one at that), he was quite flawed and probably didn't do as much for the world at large as he could've (outside the tech space), but he still accomplished a good deal. I think his business dealings outside the PC space (w/music studios, Pixar, etc) will be as enduring as anything more tech related tbh.
The guy never gave a dime to charity. "An indelible impression on our world" would be doing something relevant to humanity besides selling cell phones.
@zebebito, I'm not trying to defend Jobs' character, but the iPhone is Jobs' brainchild and everyone in the world readily agrees that it has left an indelible impression in society. Love him or hate him, there's no denying Jobs has left his mark on humanity.
If giving to charity were all you've cracked it up to be, then why aren't our history books heavily laden with mentions of those who have given compared to those who have succeeded? Not to demean charitable giving, but that's hardly the only measure of human worth.
@ZeBebito Jobs actually did donate quite a bit; he just never publicized it. We only know because his widow and Tim Cook started speaking up after his death.
Albert's story is yet another reminder for me regarding all photography, including portraits of human subjects:
No matter your level of technical skill with a camera or lights, how pleasing your final image will almost always come down to your ability to engage and understand your subject.
Had the pleasure to listen to Albert Watson at Nordic Light international photo festival a few years ago, and man, he is intense, and a joy to listen to! He was not afraid to talk about hos work and reveale his creative secrets with studio lights! Just impressive! If you have not looked at his body of work, do it. Now!
Professional work, professionally explained -- in just 2 minutes. A joy to watch, in stark contrast with great majority of YouTube videos... Wannabe vloggers should take notice. (A free hint: one does have to really know what he/she is doing *and* what's most important about it, to be able to explain it that clearly. Oh, and value other's time...).
No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.
Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.
As a stills camera the Fujifilm X-T3 is a pleasant update to one of our favorite APS-C cameras, significantly improving the autofocus. If you're interested in stills and video, though, it's knockout.
The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.
The Canon EOS R is the first full frame mirrorless camera to use the new RF mount. We're well underway putting it through our range of standard tests – take a look at how it compares to the competition and our thoughts on using it so far.
What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.
The Z7 presented Nikon with a stiff challenge: how to build a mirrorless camera that measures up to its own DSLRs and can deliver a familiar experience to Nikon users. Chris and Jordan tell us whether they think Nikon succeeded.
Nikon's D3500 may be an inexpensive DSLR, but the company didn't cut corners when it comes to image quality. See how it handled fall colors and tropical seas in our sample gallery.
Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.
DxO announces the latest update to Nik Collection (version 1.1) that brings better compatibility, fewer bugs to the plugin suite it acquired from Google a year ago
Nikon USA has announced that its Z6 full-frame mirrorless camera will be shipping Friday, November 16th at a price of $1999 body-only and $2599 with the Nikkor Z 24-70 F4 S lens.
The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.
ON1 Photo RAW 2019 brings an updated interface, more powerful Lightroom migration, better camera/lens support, and more to ON1's flagship editing program.
Experiencing life through the lens of a camera might mean you miss out on special moments, warns Casey Cavanaugh as he shoots a short film through the viewfinder of his Hasselblad 500CM
The New York Times has teamed up with Google to start the process of digitizing more than five million photos stored in a vault nicknamed "the morgue."
Ambitious goals, new challenges and looking ahead to 100 years of the Z mount – we spoke with senior executives and engineers at Nikon about what lies ahead.
After years focused primarily on landscapes, Erez Marom leapt on an opportunity to return to his roots in wildlife photography. A trip to the mountains of Uganda photographing endangered mountain gorillas yielded some stunning photos – and an experience of a lifetime.
Digital cameras have made it incredibly easy to do time-lapse photography, thanks to the ability to take hundreds—or even thousands—of photos without interruption. This week, Chris and Jordan walk us through the process of planning and shooting compelling time-lapse videos.
Comments