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

161–170 of 274 posts

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

#161

Post by megy »

gnopgnip wrote: post #31
lostlogin wrote: post #4

The crazy thing is, their phones take amazing photos. Why do they need to fake it?

These ads are made months before the product is released, and often the team making the ad does not have physical access to the product. Even if they could get access it is standard to use stock photography to keep cost down and get the ads turned around quickly. For the same reason restaurants use stock photography instead of taking their food to a studio or any other type of marketing

I like the idea that it takes longer to make the ad than to make the actual device, so they need to fake it.

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

#162

Post by ip26 »

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.

Probably more analogous to, instead of showing you a McDonald's hamburger, they show you a steak burger from a four star restaurant.

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

#163

Post by paranoidrobot »

scarejunba wrote: post #66
mattnewton wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can confirm at least that it can be done better than this. I used to work at Apple and you better believe they cared about details like this all the way up the chain. Every photo we used had to come from a marketing-blessed source, all modifications were auditable in source control, and the end result was blessed again by marketing.

What source control software did you use for the pictures?

Adobe has/had a version control software for their products.

i.e you could check out a version of a Photoshop file, make some changes, commit it back. My understanding was the it was aware of layers/etc, so you could diff changes somehow.

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

#164

Post by npunt »

jscissr wrote: post #132
jonas21 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really cool! Here's a video with more details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnBC5bwV5y0

I noticed the CGI cars in this clip don't have drivers in them. How would they add a driver for an actual ad? I think cars are much easier than humans to do photo-realistically in CGI. Or do they just show the car in a way such that you can't see that there's no driver?

I'd assume they'd just use window tint if they're cheap, or the same stuff used in movies to drop actors in if they're not.

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

#165

Post by microcolonel »

Wow, I must say I am surprised that something this seemingly-fraudulent managed to make it to the public website. I'm interested to see what Samsung has to say about this, hard to give them the benefit of the doubt, even if it's possible it's just a "marketer went too far" or "The images went from the mockup to the live site before engineering sent the samples".

If this feature works even remotely as advertised, they could have gotten at least a couple shots (and saved the intermediate images, I guess, to do the before/after).

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

#166

Post by westmeal »

Angostura wrote: post #137
peterangular wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep - zero trust is exactly right... I bought a Samsung smart watch for Black Friday for $280-ish. Figured "hey - this will probably have better calendar/application support than my Garmin watch!" Nope. Literally can't get it to vibrate/alert when a notification comes through unless it's through Samsung's SPECIFIC applications. So my HipChat messages, Gmail inbox, etc have ZERO notifications even though it WILL show…

I bought a new Samsung Android tablet for the kid in September 2016. It came with Android 4.4.4 and assumed that it could be updated to at least 5.1 or possibly 6.x since it was a device that was shipping new from the company. E-mail from Samsung support (I'm in the UK) simply said > please be advised that updates are released in batches, release dates can also vary by region, network and device. As of the moment, if…

Was it the SM-T230NU? I think its called the Samsung Tab 7 inch?

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

#167

Post by asveikau »

Angostura wrote: post #137
peterangular wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep - zero trust is exactly right... I bought a Samsung smart watch for Black Friday for $280-ish. Figured "hey - this will probably have better calendar/application support than my Garmin watch!" Nope. Literally can't get it to vibrate/alert when a notification comes through unless it's through Samsung's SPECIFIC applications. So my HipChat messages, Gmail inbox, etc have ZERO notifications even though it WILL show…

I bought a new Samsung Android tablet for the kid in September 2016. It came with Android 4.4.4 and assumed that it could be updated to at least 5.1 or possibly 6.x since it was a device that was shipping new from the company. E-mail from Samsung support (I'm in the UK) simply said > please be advised that updates are released in batches, release dates can also vary by region, network and device. As of the moment, if…

Looked into lineage at all? I have a Samsung tablet that works well with that and I am happy.

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

#168

Post by acdha »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #145
acdha wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They hide the note in very small text a long way down the page – way past all of the big, attention grabbing pictures, knowing that most people aren’t going to read down that far and consciously discount everything they saw. Do you have a citation for the assertion that this was a paying client? She clearly says the opposite in the post.

She put the photo up for sale on a stock photo site and Samsung apparently bought it and used it. Where are you seeing her state otherwise?

The article says nothing about being paid but does say this at the end:

“Since I’d made my first sale on EyeEm and saw the image on Samsung Malaysia’s website right after that, I didn’t even assume that they’d stolen the image. I mean, why would they? It’s not expensive for a huge company like that to buy one stock photo. Although, to be honest, I think that they should have paid more for a better retoucher. But just to make sure, I got in touch with EyeEm, asking whether Samsung bought the image from them.

A wonderful lady from customer support told me that the sale wasn’t registered on EyeEm yet. However, she explained that sometimes buyers have subscriptions with Getty Images, meaning that they will be billed later for their photos. “Photos can be used months before we get sales data for the photo,” she added, and promised to keep me updated.

After this, I contacted Getty to check whether the sale was made through their website. I never got a reply.”

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

#169

Post by baroffoos »

noxToken wrote: post #102
covercash wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The smart TVs still have a slow and clunky UI before you connect them to the internet.

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

#170

Post by peterangular »

tooltalk wrote: post #121
peterangular wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep - zero trust is exactly right... I bought a Samsung smart watch for Black Friday for $280-ish. Figured "hey - this will probably have better calendar/application support than my Garmin watch!" Nope. Literally can't get it to vibrate/alert when a notification comes through unless it's through Samsung's SPECIFIC applications. So my HipChat messages, Gmail inbox, etc have ZERO notifications even though it WILL show…

Well, did Samsung promise this notification feature in their marketing campaign? I considered buying one for this exact feature, but decided not to buy it after TMobile sales folks confirmed that notification worked with Samsung apps only. I don't think however Samsung deliberately misled or lied. Now that isn't to say Samsung support is wonderful -- I personally wouldn't recommend buying anything other than TVs from…

> Well, did Samsung promise this notification feature in their marketing campaign?

Nope - but it's something I would expect any smartwatch to do. It's just a dark pattern and they don't GAF for any actual use-case.

> I don't think however Samsung deliberately misled

Yea this is where we disagree. It's a dark pattern to force users to use their ecosystem fully. What about my corp. Outlook, HipChat, G-suite products, etc etc!? If it shows a notification on the phone - it should show a notification on the watch like my Garmin. Period.

Post reply on HN