[deleted]
Nokia faked the still photos too
111–120 of 124 posts
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#112This would take a direct hit on their reputation!
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought the backdrop looked familiar. The first and third photos were taken next to the Sokos Hotel Vaakuna (located across the rail depot), where I stayed when I was in Helsinki in late June, at the time of the summer solstice (20+ hours of light). I'm no photography expert like anovikov, but I can attest that the street lighting was nowhere near as bright as depicted in these photos, even at 2am when it was darke…
The lighting was artificial[1]. I don't mind that part as much though, it's the professional camera that's more disingenuous. [1] https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/578446_101510870...
Files from a larger chip go into print collateral alot better... This is pretty much to be expected. File would be PS'd as well, that's one of the reasons they do this, as the colour-space transitions to CMYK etc can be damaging. They do need to have better disclosure though. Starburst is telltale DSLR.
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#114"Professional driver on closed course." "Screen image is simulated." "Product enlarged to show detail." etc. etc. Yes, yes, we like "truth" and all. Especially when they're selling a camera after all, but getting a great cameraphone image and getting an image that will work on tv are two different things. No real surprise. Maybe disappointment, but no suprise.
Wait, does this mean that the Eggo Nutri-Grain waffles are not healthy for my kids? But what if I add "farm fresh" butter and "fat free" syrup? My world is spinning out of control.
I must be missing something because I don't see what's unhealthy about those waffles. They're primarily made of flour, not issue there, and they're not particularly high in fat. It's not like they're sugar-glazed cereal.
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. They should have small disclaimer text at the bottom. And that's what everyone should be up in arms about, not that they faked it in the first place. I know there are rules for food advertising, but don't know about other types of products... There's not a safety liability issue like with cars, but.
Also these images are nothing like the images the camera would take. That is like advertising a totally different car than the one you are selling.
[deleted]
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#116Faking images for a product rollout appears to be common mobile-electronics industry practice. Apple faked a video still from Star Trek and made a fake video of the New York Times for their iPad introduction. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Apple-Exposed-As-Liars-in-Fak... http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/22/apples-ipad-nytimes-prom... I wonder if Nokia cross-licensed Apple's patent.
That's not faking device capabilities. It's just faking what a particular movie looks like. Nokia's doing something on an entirely different level.
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#117https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/578446_101510870... A friend of mine shot this in Helsinki. Low lighting conditions, Nokia style.
The internet is amazing.
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've heard[0] that ‘big’ camera makes like Canon or Nikon regularly advertise their products using photos made with completely different equipment. It would be more surprising if Nokia used actual photos made with Lumia in promotion materials, I guess. [0] http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3/h3d-1.htm : “For those of us in the press (Ken), we laughed when we looked at the EXIF data of Nikon's PR photos of the D3. The…
Rockwell is a noted self-publicist with a politician's reputation for truth and accuracy. Nikon can take their PR shots with whatever is best, should P&S publicity shots be taken with that P&S model? Of course not. If on the other they take photos with professional equipment and claim or imply that it was taken with a mobile phone then that is deceitful.
Yes, I probably had confused shots of the camera vs. shots made with the camera. This was ignorant of me.
Though will we consider a deceit if the camera used is the same P&S model, but lighting is set up? And then there's extensive post-processing, which is possible and may alter shots significantly.
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
The comparisons do make you wonder if they fiddled with the lighting artificially though, some of the differences are surprisingly drastic.
I doubt it. The camera seems to have HDRI. That, a looong exposure time, and a tripod can do amazing things. Plus, it's compared to a photo they took with "a competitor's phone". Even I can take an amazingly crap photo with my camera-phone, it's not hard.
I was actually wondering about this, maybe you can enlighten us.
Could they not have used external ligthing for the Nokia shot, and none for the competitor shot? How do we know they used the same lighting conditions?
Not trying to feed the anti-Nokia, I've always been curious of these types of things.
Re: Nokia faked the still photos too
#120When I have a look on the photo, I think that the depth has to be remarkably long. That is because the sign "RESTAURANT" looks very clear. In other words small aperture and short exposure time. This is not taken by Lumia camera shot.