Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

diyphotography.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 274 posts

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#101

Post by Karunamon »

peterangular wrote: post #71
rococode wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there more trustworthy options for Android smartphones in the US? I was recently shopping for an upgrade from my LG G4 and settled for the S9+. I'm pretty satisfied, actually, but it really felt like I had an extremely limited selection From my understanding, the only flagship-level choices that aren't big hassles to to get are Samsung (Galaxy/Note), Google (Pixel), OnePlus, LG. Of those, LG seems to be the only…

I've been looking into Blackberry (Key2 specifically) because they seem to be putting security first and I don't mind if my platform is a tiny bit behind on the raw system specs. If anyone has experiences to share I am ALL ears!

You could do a lot better than Blackberry from a security standpoint. The URLs tell a pretty scary story all on their own:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/canadian-police-obtained-black...

https://thenextweb.com/asia/2013/07/10/after-a-lengthy-battl...

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/219661-blackberry-ceo-bla...

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#102

Post by noxToken »

covercash wrote: post #82
cgriswald wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Samsung is completely untrustworthy. I might buy another television from them in the future as the screen quality on my Samsung televisions has always been great. But their smart appliances are a joke. Read the reviews for any of the required Samsung "Smart" Apps and you'll find terrible software that doesn't work. Where it does work, at best it technically meets the advertised criteria, but in other cases it seems l…

I keep hoping someone will kickstart a display company that sells just really amazing displays and none of the “smart” garbage. I read that some manufacturers even serve up ads in their latest smart UIs. That’s infuriating!

IF you like a smart TV but not the smart features (but have no dumb alternative), then don't connect it to the Internet. Now it's just a dumb TV.

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#103

Post by neuralRiot »

covercash wrote: post #82
cgriswald wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Samsung is completely untrustworthy. I might buy another television from them in the future as the screen quality on my Samsung televisions has always been great. But their smart appliances are a joke. Read the reviews for any of the required Samsung "Smart" Apps and you'll find terrible software that doesn't work. Where it does work, at best it technically meets the advertised criteria, but in other cases it seems l…

I keep hoping someone will kickstart a display company that sells just really amazing displays and none of the “smart” garbage. I read that some manufacturers even serve up ads in their latest smart UIs. That’s infuriating!

You can get professional displays, they're just big monitors with HDMI, VGA, RGB inputs, those are also supposedly made to whitstand heavier usage but a bigger price tag.

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#104

Post by googlryas »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #95
oh_sigh wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question isn't how many, but the scale of the fuck-up, and what it represents about the company. Maybe 5 people would have known that this ad campaign was using a non-phone-produced photo. Apparently that is enough for you to indict the 300,000+ people who work there.

It's not indicting people (except those directly responsible and those officially accountable); it's indicting an organization . It's what you should do; a corporation responds only to things that impacts its profits; complaining, if it leads to less people giving them money, is a correct way of sending a market signal. That's how capitalism is supposed to work.

Show me an organization of > 100 people where one person has not behaved badly. This isn't a very useful signal if literally every organization of any appreciable size is going to be punished.

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#105

Post by robocat »

ur-whale wrote: post #76
ilamont wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Organizations most definitely have their own cultures including codified practices, management frameworks, and a culture of "X." Patterns of behavior emerge from those cultures, and can lead to success or failure. It's been studied quite extensively - browse HBR.org to see research and theory about this. If you're fortunate, the company you deal with as a customer or employee has a culture that rewards competence and…

This is only true insofar as the company remains small. As soon as it grows, the cultural standards you describe diverge. Google is the perfect example of this, where while they remained at a reasonable size adhered to their cultural standards staunchly. They've grown way past the point where that's sustainable and are now exhibiting the exact same predatory business attitude they swore they wouldn't ever (dragonfly,…

Perhaps it isn't the company size.

Your examples of "predatory business attitude" must all be signed off at the top - and most likely deeper executive involvement than many decisions.

I suspect that at that company size, you need to have a certain predatory attitude to compete - you definitely need to at least defend against your competitors' practices.

Google, Apple, and Microsoft are great examples of the how we do judge a company's culture.

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#106

Post by gowld »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #100

Who cares? They disclose the fact that the photo wasn’t taken with the phone right on the page. It’s for illustrative purposes, not to show the exact quality of the phone’s functions. The author of this blog also just outed a paying client. If they paid, they can use it however they like (within the terms of the licensing agreement). This is a great way for the author to ensure they never sell another photo to a larg…

Anyone cares if they want to know how a phone performs on its advertised function.

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#107

Post by matthewdgreen »

conradev wrote: post #77
reaperducer wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I view this as more of an example of a company's marketing showing their product in the best possible light. But it doesn't show their product in the best possible light. It shows some DSLR company's product in the best possible light. It's like a magazine ad for a Kia, and inside the car photo the dashboard has been replaced with a Tesla's.

Or a commercial for McDonald’s, except instead of using real food, they use fake stuff that looks better.

More like: instead of using fake stuff, they used food from Five Guys.

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#108

Post by TeMPOraL »

googlryas wrote: post #104
TeMPOraL wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not indicting people (except those directly responsible and those officially accountable); it's indicting an organization . It's what you should do; a corporation responds only to things that impacts its profits; complaining, if it leads to less people giving them money, is a correct way of sending a market signal. That's how capitalism is supposed to work.

Show me an organization of > 100 people where one person has not behaved badly. This isn't a very useful signal if literally every organization of any appreciable size is going to be punished.

Organizations are responsible for policing themselves. The only incentive they have for that is that the damage caused by "bad apple" may impact their bottom line. Per a book on risk management I'm currently reading, this actually is (or should be) accounted for in risk evaluation! So if we voluntarily refrain from punishing organizations for misbehavior of their people, we're severing the only feedback loop that keeps them from rotting completely.

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#109

Post by reaperducer »

conradev wrote: post #77
reaperducer wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I view this as more of an example of a company's marketing showing their product in the best possible light. But it doesn't show their product in the best possible light. It shows some DSLR company's product in the best possible light. It's like a magazine ad for a Kia, and inside the car photo the dashboard has been replaced with a Tesla's.

Or a commercial for McDonald’s, except instead of using real food, they use fake stuff that looks better.

It's surprising how much of McDonald's advertising is regional, by the franchise holders, and not from corporate.

In some markets, ads for the breakfast sandwiches are deliberately made to look "messy" with splattered egg and crumbs from the muffin all around so that they look more rustic and authentic.

Re: Samsung used my DSLR photo to fake their phone’s “portrait mode”

#110

Post by dwyerm »

covercash wrote: post #82
cgriswald wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Samsung is completely untrustworthy. I might buy another television from them in the future as the screen quality on my Samsung televisions has always been great. But their smart appliances are a joke. Read the reviews for any of the required Samsung "Smart" Apps and you'll find terrible software that doesn't work. Where it does work, at best it technically meets the advertised criteria, but in other cases it seems l…

I keep hoping someone will kickstart a display company that sells just really amazing displays and none of the “smart” garbage. I read that some manufacturers even serve up ads in their latest smart UIs. That’s infuriating!

Look into "NEC Commercial Displays". They're intended for use as signage and things, but most of them are full TVs with ATSC tuners, remote controls, speakers, and everything. They generally do not have any smart functionality, but often have serial ports or interfaces for adding your own. They are often slightly more expensive than the more encumbered displays, but not by much.

The biggest problem that I've found with them is that they're not available at your local store, so you pretty much have to just buy one sight-unseen and hope it looks good when it arrives.

I got the NEC E554 from Amazon, and left a 3-star review for it there.

Post reply on HN