Sony catching flack

HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
edited December 8, 2007 in The Big Picture
Hi Y'all,

Sony has been catching some flack over their use of a shot apparantly not taken with a Sony camera in one of their ads. IMHO its advertising an area where ethics has never been known to reside. Any thoughts?
Harry
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"

Comments

  • PupatorPupator Registered Users Posts: 2,322 Major grins
    edited December 5, 2007
    Harryb wrote:
    Hi Y'all,

    Sony has been catching some flack over their use of a shot apparantly not taken with a Sony camera in one of their ads. IMHO its advertising an area where ethics has never been known to reside. Any thoughts?

    I'm okay with it because the photo is 42 years old and is already widely recognized by many as a "great photograph." It's not like they shot something with a Nikon last week and tried to pass it off as Sony. I saw it as implying that timing is essential to taking great pictures (like this one) and this camera helps with great timing. I suppose you could see it as "use this camera to take this picture," but I didn't.

    Maybe I'm the odd one, but I don't see the big deal.
  • TravisTravis Registered Users Posts: 1,472 Major grins
    edited December 5, 2007
    I saw the advertisement also but I took a different interpretation of it - the photo was NOT taken by a Sony and therefore the photographer missed the timing of the shot. Had he been using the a700, he would have nailed it (implied assumption).

    I don't see it is a case where Sony used poor ethics in advertising. Instead it is more that Sony used poor judgement in assuming that the end consumer would understand a message that wasn't all to clear.
    Travis Owney Photography
    My Images | My Lessons Learned and Other Adventures
  • BeachBillBeachBill Registered Users Posts: 1,311 Major grins
    edited December 5, 2007
    And if you read the comments attached to the article, you will see that the author of the article totally misunderstood the intent of the ad. Sony isn't claiming the photograph in question was shot with Sony equipment. They are claiming just the opposite. The photograph is an example of bad timing.

    More about Sony's intent is here.
    Bill Gerrard Photography - Facebook - Interview - SmugRoom: Useful Tools for SmugMug
  • PupatorPupator Registered Users Posts: 2,322 Major grins
    edited December 5, 2007
    BeachBill wrote:
    And if you read the comments attached to the article, you will see that the author of the article totally misunderstood the intent of the ad. Sony isn't claiming the photograph in question was shot with Sony equipment. They are claiming just the opposite. The photograph is an example of bad timing.

    More about Sony's intent is here.

    Ahh. This makes perfect sense. I think the problem is that unlike the referee example, it isn't so obvious that this is a bad picture.
  • LittleLewLittleLew Registered Users Posts: 368 Major grins
    edited December 5, 2007
    It's not that clear that this is terrible.
    Compared to all my animal shots it is great.
    New pictures at LewLortonphoto.com
  • bhambham Registered Users Posts: 1,303 Major grins
    edited December 5, 2007
    To the general public the message in this ad could be lost and misunderstood, but to photographers, who is obviously the targeted audience, this ad and similar ads, is understood. Who else is gonna recognize that photograph and realize their was a better one just a millisecond before it. Sure not the general public. The Brandi Chastain photo would be more widely understood.

    The guys blog is titled what's hot and what's not in enterprise computing. Now how is photography adverstising related to that topic.
    BeachBill wrote:
    And if you read the comments attached to the article, you will see that the author of the article totally misunderstood the intent of the ad. Sony isn't claiming the photograph in question was shot with Sony equipment. They are claiming just the opposite. The photograph is an example of bad timing.

    More about Sony's intent is here.
    "A photo is like a hamburger. You can get one from McDonalds for $1, one from Chili's for $5, or one from Ruth's Chris for $15. You usually get what you pay for, but don't expect a Ruth's Chris burger at a McDonalds price, if you want that, go cook it yourself." - me
  • MarkRMarkR Registered Users Posts: 2,099 Major grins
    edited December 6, 2007
    Harryb wrote:
    Hi Y'all,

    Sony has been catching some flack over their use of a shot apparantly not taken with a Sony camera in one of their ads. IMHO its advertising an area where ethics has never been known to reside. Any thoughts?

    CNet has some, um, interesting people working for them.

    I remember a few years back one of their editors/bloggers/whatever-they're-calling-them-now tried comparing video frame rates two completely different PCs with completely different video cards in order to determine whether Athlon or Intel had the faster CPU. eek7.gif When I called him out on it on the message board I got an angry e-mail back which said, in essence, that I didn't know anything and should keep my big mouth shut. Classy, that.

    Their editorial reviews (hardware/software) are often out of touch with reality and useless. Luckily they link to user reviews which give a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the products.

    It's a strange group of people, for sure.

    EDIT: removed unnecessarily harsh language.
  • PupatorPupator Registered Users Posts: 2,322 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2007
    The Hobbyist wrote:
    CNet has some, um, interesting people working for them.

    I remember a few years back one of their editors/bloggers/whatever-they're-calling-them-now tried comparing video frame rates two completely different PCs with completely different video cards in order to determine whether Athlon or Intel had the faster CPU. eek7.gif When I called him out on it on the message board I got an angry e-mail back which said, in essence, that I didn't know anything and should keep my big mouth shut. Classy, that.

    Their editorial reviews (hardware/software) are often out of touch with reality and useless. Luckily they link to user reviews which give a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the products.

    It's a strange group of people, for sure.

    EDIT: removed unnecessarily harsh language.


    That's funny! I wrote this about 20 seconds before I came back to this thread and found your post.
  • PhyxiusPhyxius Registered Users Posts: 1,396 Major grins
    edited December 8, 2007
    I'm not commenting on the use of non-Sony cameras for the ad campaign, but I wanted to link to the ads so other dgrinners would know what the images are :

    There are actually three that I know of in the series. They're all showing images that were taken at the wrong time.


    Construction Workers


    Cheetah vs Baboon, mentioned here


    Brandi Chastain blocked by referee

    The famous Cheetah vs Baboon shot is Here
    Christina Dale
    SmugMug Support Specialist - www.help.smugmug.com

    http://www.phyxiusphotos.com
    Equine Photography in Maryland - Dressage, Eventing, Hunters, Jumpers
Sign In or Register to comment.