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

171–180 of 274 posts

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

#171

Post by walrus01 »

cgriswald wrote: post #58
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…

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 have a Samsung "smart TV" and have no intention of ever letting it on my LAN. It does not get the wifi password and has no Ethernet cable. It's used as a dumb display hooked up to a home theatre receiver and Xbox one x, home theatre pc, etc.

Do not trust the software on these things.

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

#172

Post by maxxxxx »

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…

I think even a minimum level of honesty in an ad requires that pictures that illustrate what the camera can are taken with this camera. I know lying is common in advertising but we shouldn't accept it and point that out.

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

#173

Post by maxxxxx »

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

This is just plain dishonest. I hope public shaming works.

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

#174

Post by spuz »

runjake wrote: post #33
spuz wrote: post #11

There is a small disclaimer on Samsung's site: > The contents within the screen and images are simulated for illustrative purposes only. I don't really have a problem with Samsung using a higher res DSLR photo for the purposes of illustration of their background blur technology. I will always check review sites to get real sample images to evaluate a phone's camera technology. Edit: I assume this was downvoted becaus…

I think you are being down-voted because, despite the tiny disclaimer, the main content of the page heavily suggests that the images are from the phone camera. This is scummy.

I understand that the disclaimer would be missed be most people but I don't see the background blur photo as communicating "this is what our camera can do". To me it says "Our camera can do background blur and this is an example of a photo with and without background blur". Maybe it's too subtle a difference and in that case, it's fair enough that Samsung would get flack for poor communication.

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

#175

Post by spuz »

TrainedMonkey wrote: post #32
virusduck wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why would they simulate an image if the phone camera can produce the image they need??

It could be because phone/camera software/etc are not ready yet when the marketing content is produced.

Someone else replied to another comment here the most plausible explanation which is that it's much cheaper and quicker to simply photoshop a couple of different stock photos. To go out in the field even with a phone camera requires finding a model, a setting, a photographer and paying them for a day's wages. It's a lot easier to believe this is an instance of cost saving rather than savvy marketing.

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

#176

Post by baroffoos »

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…

What point is there in using the photo if not to trick viewers in to thinking its a photo from the phone. What exactly is it illustrating? Its deceptive and wrong. I have no trust for a company that tries to trick its users like this.

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

#178

Post by forgot-my-pw »

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…

If she wants full control over her work, she should not sell it for stock photo.

I think if I were to buy a stock photo then find out the original photographer publicly complaining / shaming my work, I would be so pissed. I might just complain to Getty to have her removed / banned.

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

#179

Post by dmix »

dawnerd wrote: post #120

Samsung just isn’t a company you can trust. Period. The only consumer product they make that’s even half decent are their SSDs and even those are starting to lose to competitors. Their TVs alone have had so many instances of them injecting ads into the ui, to spying on what you watch in plex, and many more. Last thing I’d want from Samsung is a phone.

I thought Samsung phones were highly regarded by consumers?

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

#180

Post by sazfedjhrgnukc »

mhb wrote: post #12
amatecha wrote: post #2

Ah man, I immediately thought of another recent case of a smartphone manufacturer faking their phone's camera shots[0] (turns out TFA links to it as well). Just a single instance of this kind of fraud is enough for me to write off a brand forever, frankly. If you're lying to my face before I even bought your product, who knows how much else you're lying about. Zero trust for companies like this. [0] https://www.diyph…

Good luck buying a car.

Buying a car has nothing to do with this specific discussion about advertising practices. Besides, none of us would be there when the parent commenter buys a car anyway, so what difference does that make? /s
Post reply on HN