Very little of what you see in adverts is real.
Nokia continues its efforts to defuse the Twitterstorm around its "fake" mobile phone camera ad. The handset maker had uploaded a YouTube video to illustrate the new image stabilisation technology in its Lumia 920, which was announced last week - but the advert was a simulation of the tech using a professional camera rig, and …
I expect when they filmed the ad, there wasn't a working prototype of an actual Lumia 920, but they should have put the disclaimer there at least. Still, all publicity is good publicity, if it creates an interest in the product and they can back up their claims with real footage. Personally, this wouldn't affect my decision to purchase or not - I'm seriously thinking about getting one. Though I do wish they'd put that feature in the 820.
I'm also seriously thinking about getting one and the advert hasn't changed that.
I don't condone misleading ads and think the marketing departments in many companies need to be reeled in a bit (a lot in some cases), but there are much more important things with Nokia and business in general that we need to focus on than whether they should have put a disclaimer on the ad - like jobs getting cut left right and centre, how the workers that aren't being let go are treated, how successful companies use their market position, patents and spurious legal challenges .
this is really just a side show and not important in the great scheme of things. However, I suspect that very few people are really concerned about whether Nokia have been dishonest and many just like the chance to jump on a mistake when they see it, and possibly to kick someone (individuals and entities like Nokia) when they are down.
I watched the whole advert from behind the sofa, cringing in fear: just waiting for them to ride into something big, painful and sudden.
It's what happens if you don't look where you are going on a bike.
And then I realised, they are impossibly well-styled hipsters.
And then I wanted it to happen.
You've clearly never worked in advertising. This isn't good publicity as most people are unlikely to read the back story or smaller details (most punters don't read tech sites). What people are likely to remember from this PR disaster is that Nokia claim they have brilliant image stabilisation technology but they had to lie about using a pro camera in their adverts, so it can't be all that great can it?
Once the public have latched on to an idea it's hard to get them to change their minds. Even if Nokia release a new advert shot with the camera it's likely to be met with scepticism and comments along the lines of "No mobile phone can do that! Clearly they've faked this advert as well."
It's a shame because from what I've seen online the camera tech in these phones is quite impressive.
However, as has been pointed out by the author the kit actually sustains the claims - luckily for our Finnish comprades. The result, deserved or not, is likely to be that (within limits) "there is no such thing as bad publicity". In that sense I am almost tempted to done my tinfoil hat and accuse Nokia of "faking the faking" in order to generate publicity. You can see how it would work. You shoot the ad, get "caught", apologise and then say "oh, by the way we can in fact justify these claims". If I was into wearing the aforementioned headgear.
...it's just a marketing blunder is all. As the article says, the simultaion is pretty similar to the actual product (hence the word 'simulation'), but there's nothing like Twitter to see self-satisfied cries of 'foul' whenever something like this happens. Mind you, I don't recall Apple having this amount of soap-boxery when they got told to make the faster-than-light-speed downloads for the iPhone adverts look something slightly more realistic. Speaking of soap-boxes, go and check out The Verge, having discovered the camera van reflection in the video they're now going on as if they've broken Watergate to the world.
Nope, it won't stop me thinking about getting a new Lumia (especially in the light of EverythingEverywhere's potential Nokia 920/820 4G tie-up announcement tomorrow), but I wish that the 920 had the microSD slot...or the 820 had the fancy camera. Either or would do really.
It's a good call but they keep talking about 'lies' and 'faking', which seems a bit strong. The Verge is hardly an unbiased website...I'm surprised they have time for articles about anything other than Apple in between creaming themselves prior to Wednesday's announcement
And irrelevant in the light of these -
Oh dear. And with Apple beating Android to death with a club made of lawyers, it looks like you'll have to buy an iPhone.
When the Nokia N8 came out the Nokia Conversations blog ran a 'Nokia N8 Camera School' in with some photos taken with a Canon EOS D60 and photoshopped. After commenters discovered it the editor apologised.
After the photos were replaced with real (and photoshopped) N8 photos, the comments were removed:
With or without a 'disclaimer'...
What is damned annoying is that the stabilisation DOES work for the 808 so if they can't engineer it on a windows phone perhaps the message to Elop should be "IDIOT you ditched an OS that works for the hope that someone in Microsoft might decide to reemploy your sorry arse...it ain't going to happen you've ***** several companies, managed to lose the Office division profit and sales and have screwed Nokia up totally... who the hell would employ you again...." (well of course some friend probably will... he could try one of the UK banks... with all his 'experience' they would be gagging to give him a few million in a pension fund and a million or two a year... right up until the government bailout that will ensue.
The footage was probably filmed on a different camera because if it had been filmed on a phone I'm guessing it wouldn't have looked particularly good.
This isn't to say that the phone doesn't have really good camera (for a phone), and that the footage wouldn't have shown that the OIS feature worked really well (for a phone), simply that the recording quality of a phone can't stand up in comparison to professional recording equipment used to record most adverts.
That said, its fairly inexcusable to try and pass off footage in an advert that wasn't recorded using that product without some sort of disclaimer.
Having my tinfoil head on too. It's just too obvious. If they really cared to "fake", there would be no visible van. It's a tech demo with no disclaimer, period. Anyhow, it's advertising. It should not be considered real unless it specifically says so.
Overall, I cannot believe the hype this crap is seeing. The human race is facing some very real and dangerous issues lately. Some niggle about a PHONE is Not. One. Of. Them. I am also sick of "haters" wanting to see Nokia "fail" who obviously have zero clue about how competion is supposed to improve their frickin' existence in this wonderful system we decided to live in. All this stupidity makes me sick to the bone.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019