Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-03-2015, 01:52 PM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,209
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
Actually they did not. If they would have just dressed them in clothes that makes the best of their figures it probably would have been fine for you (ask yourself this question, if two women walk down the street who will you look at, the one dressed plane, or the one with make-up etc). But now they extra with posture and light and take a picture and it is not fine because it is "fake". Well it is not fake, They are still the same person, they are just being uplifted for the photo.
Why do you think some poses do work in portret photography and others not, because they are better suited. Is it then fake if someone "looks"better because they use a better posture?
.
Do you agree they're trying to make people think some change in the subjects body has occurred between photos? If so, we must have different definitions of the word 'fake'. If not, we have different views of what these advertisements are trying to do.

03-03-2015, 02:19 PM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 4,217
Original Poster
Before and after photos are often "fake" in that they are intentionally misleading. Is the product being advertised responsible for the difference? If they were advertising spray tans and studio lights, then the before-after comparison would be truthful.

Imagine if something similar was done in a photography related ad. Let's say I'm advertising batteries. Stick brand X batteries into a camera and take a photo that is purposely out of focus. Then show how great my brand Y is by changing batteries and refocus. Yes, photo #2 was taken with my batteries, but they were not responsible for the improvement.
03-03-2015, 02:19 PM - 1 Like   #18
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by BrianR Quote
Do you agree they're trying to make people think some change in the subjects body has occurred between photos? If so, we must have different definitions of the word 'fake'. If not, we have different views of what these advertisements are trying to do.
The text also mentioned that they often don't say "before and after", they just place them side by side. They are basically using your brains capacity to paint a scenario from limited information to make you draw the wrong conclusions without them really explicitly telling you a scenario. It's the same as when they place a girl leaning on a sports car, your brain will think that you want the girl and if you get the car you will get the girl.

That is how marketing often work and it may be misleading in one way but the different parts of information they provide you with is "true".
Is the first or the second photo that is the the true you?
Are both of them true but how different sides of you?
Is it them or your brain that is lying?
This is the enigma that creates such room for marketing methods, even though they might be shady. It's simply hard to call them fake when it's our brains painting up the wrong scenario.
03-03-2015, 02:30 PM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,209
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
It's simply hard to call them fake when it's our brains painting up the wrong scenario.
Not for me it isn't. It's deliberately misleading, they're trying to imply some sort of result that did not occur. To me, this fits the word 'fake', your usage of the word may differ.

03-03-2015, 04:23 PM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
sherrvonne's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,950
QuoteOriginally posted by DeadJohn Quote
Before and after photos are often "fake" in that they are intentionally misleading. Is the product being advertised responsible for the difference? If they were advertising spray tans and studio lights, then the before-after comparison would be truthful.

Imagine if something similar was done in a photography related ad. Let's say I'm advertising batteries. Stick brand X batteries into a camera and take a photo that is purposely out of focus. Then show how great my brand Y is by changing batteries and refocus. Yes, photo #2 was taken with my batteries, but they were not responsible for the improvement.
Ha ha ha, I justhad a mental image of a Protein Muscle Powder product advertisement selling their bottle of product along with a Speedlight and crate of Pam. Also an instruction booklet for the Speedlight, acquiring a flash and compatible camera... Oh and instructions for learning Photoshop!
03-03-2015, 04:36 PM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,597
Before photos are always taken with slovenly clothing and direct flash, while after photos are taken with the sort of lighting that professionals know will help people to look their best. I don't personally think it is any more misleading than having beautiful (and quite thin) people drinking a soft drink. It is more of a halo effect than anything else. If the cool and beautiful people use this and I use it too, maybe I will be like them.

Most people with any common sense see through it pretty quickly.
03-03-2015, 04:57 PM   #22
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Before photos are always taken with slovenly clothing and direct flash, while after photos are taken with the sort of lighting that professionals know will help people to look their best. I don't personally think it is any more misleading than having beautiful (and quite thin) people drinking a soft drink. It is more of a halo effect than anything else. If the cool and beautiful people use this and I use it too, maybe I will be like them.

Most people with any common sense see through it pretty quickly.
Exactly, it makes as much sense as calling the model girls at a car show fake or the man with that Rolex watch on the billboard fake. They aren't fake, they just cater to our reptile brain making up connections that aren't there in reality.
03-03-2015, 10:52 PM   #23
Veteran Member
Scootatheschool1990's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Boise Idaho
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 466
QuoteOriginally posted by mrNewt Quote
Never trust photographers
The irony!!!

03-04-2015, 01:41 AM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoek van Holland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,284
QuoteOriginally posted by BrianR Quote
Do you agree they're trying to make people think some change in the subjects body has occurred between photos? If so, we must have different definitions of the word 'fake'. If not, we have different views of what these advertisements are trying to do.
Actually, a change has occured in the subjects body. Not as such, but how it is shown. It is still the same body, but shown differently.

It is the same with fashion photo's of everyday people. First shot is a photo of them in their everyday clothes. The next one is the photo where they have had a makeover. Look at the photo's, first one, they never smile and have a bad posture. second one, they smile and have a good posture. And it will look like they have had a mega makeover. Eventhough all they did was change a bit of clothing and posture for the photo. What is then fake?
03-04-2015, 06:33 AM   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,209
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
Actually, a change has occured in the subjects body. Not as such, but how it is shown. It is still the same body, but shown differently.
But not as a result of the product or program being pushed. Either photo on it's own is a clever trick of lighting and posture and is something you can claim actually happened. Pairing them up and implying, even silently to comply with advertising rules, that your product did this is what I call a "fake", a "sham", "not real", "something that never happened".

QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
It is the same with fashion photo's of everyday people. First shot is a photo of them in their everyday clothes. The next one is the photo where they have had a makeover. Look at the photo's, first one, they never smile and have a bad posture. second one, they smile and have a good posture. And it will look like they have had a mega makeover. Eventhough all they did was change a bit of clothing and posture for the photo. What is then fake?
Fashion makeover before and afters taken hours apart are somewhat different than the fitness/health versions taken hours apart. Yes, they're still doing everything they can to exaggerate the differences, but the differences they're trying to highlight actually occurred- the subject did put on a shiny new dress, had makeup professionally applied, and was coached in their attitude. There's an intent in the presentation that makes a pretty large difference to me, and whether what you're depicting can reasonably be argued to have occurred.

Where is the line crossed between fake and reality? I'm not sure, but doing fitness before and after shots on the same day would most definitely cross it for me.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
art, photography, pictures, truth
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Landscape Before and After agsy Photo Critique 20 04-06-2014 06:18 AM
Before and After Photoshop interested_observer Photographic Technique 5 01-14-2014 06:41 AM
Landscape Before and After slowpez Photo Critique 24 03-18-2013 10:34 AM
Nature The wrath of Irene--before and after. charliezap Post Your Photos! 3 09-04-2011 04:29 AM
The Power of Raw (Before and After) Alex00 Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 7 02-10-2010 06:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:08 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top