A photographer's Eye....

Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
So I was waiting at McDonalds drive through this weekend and saw they have a big cardboard cutout of a picture of their Mocha/Latte...whatever you call them. It's probably about 4 feet high by a couple feet wide. Anyway, without even looking for it I noticed....."hey, I can see the refelctions of florescent lights all over the chocolate on the top the mocha in the picture."

Anyway, I thought it was funny to see and honestly shocking to see that the photograph for such a large scale and company wasn't done better than that to prevent those reflections.

Anybody else ever see things like that, where someone that isn't into photography would probably never pick up on it?

Oh, and check the picture out next time you're at McD's and see if you can see the same cutout.
 
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
1,516
Location
Georgia
I shoot a lot of black and white film stuff, and now I swear I could do a jigsaw puzzle no problems. I notice shapes, light intensity, and contrast a lot more than I used to. And i am only just beginning this. I pick up my FE and my BW powers activate. It is crazy.

so yeah, im with you on this one!

Daniel
 
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
5,262
Location
NJ
Anyway, I thought it was funny to see and honestly shocking to see that the photograph for such a large scale and company wasn't done better than that to prevent those reflections.

Anybody else ever see things like that, where someone that isn't into photography would probably never pick up on it?
That's part of your answer - why make a shoot twice as expensive for a detail that only a few will spot?

For amateurs it's easy to achieve perfection. For professionals it's a lot harder - all the customer cares about and is willing to pay for is "good enough". That's why those penny stock photos are so popular. Sure, it might not be as good as the old fashioned high quality stock photography, but who cares if all you're looking for is a sidebar image in an email?

In this case it's for a cutout that virtually no one will glance at for longer than 2 seconds - I'm sure there are other cases where MCD will care about such details (and is willing to pay for it).
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2009
Messages
120
Location
northwest
I agree I have noticed some photos like the one you saw at McDonald's. If you can... try to find a picture of the Latte image you are talking about.

Maybe this can become a thread full of images that are out there representing companies everyone knows but seem to be taken by the owners 11 year old nephew
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
6,374
Location
Alabama
Before I got into photography, I didn't notice little things like that. Was this laziness on the part of the photographer?

Or does it matter because the restaurants the latte's will be in will have overhead fluorescent lights and the photographer/McDonald's thought it wasn't important?
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
2,038
Location
SW Ohio
That's part of your answer - why make a shoot twice as expensive for a detail that only a few will spot?

For amateurs it's easy to achieve perfection. For professionals it's a lot harder - all the customer cares about and is willing to pay for is "good enough". That's why those penny stock photos are so popular. Sure, it might not be as good as the old fashioned high quality stock photography, but who cares if all you're looking for is a sidebar image in an email?

In this case it's for a cutout that virtually no one will glance at for longer than 2 seconds - I'm sure there are other cases where MCD will care about such details (and is willing to pay for it).
I agree with this wholeheartedly. It even extends into wedding photography and portraiture as Im sure we are all aware here. It really manifested itself to me this weekend as we were looking at homes to buy and as curiousity got the best of me on a few walk throughs. I was curious to see what the soon to be possible local competition is putting out, and I was a bit appalled. Families almost completely out of foucs with the trees and ducks behind them in focus and these are 16X20's hanging in the main family room(more than one house). So Id say the layman dont care much even when they pay for it and hang it in there own home.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
I agree I have noticed some photos like the one you saw at McDonald's. If you can... try to find a picture of the Latte image you are talking about.

Maybe this can become a thread full of images that are out there representing companies everyone knows but seem to be taken by the owners 11 year old nephew
Maybe I'll use this as an excuse to get another one of their new Mushroom and Swiss angus burgers and snap a photo tonight.

In the meantime. The photo in the picture below looks to be very similar to the cutout I saw. Look at the chocolate on top and you can see the reflection of florescent lights all over the place.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jdong/3718864205/
 

McQ

Just your average, everyday moderator.
Moderator
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
8,672
Location
Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Real Name
Glenn
That's part of your answer - why make a shoot twice as expensive for a detail that only a few will spot?

For amateurs it's easy to achieve perfection. For professionals it's a lot harder - all the customer cares about and is willing to pay for is "good enough". That's why those penny stock photos are so popular. Sure, it might not be as good as the old fashioned high quality stock photography, but who cares if all you're looking for is a sidebar image in an email?

In this case it's for a cutout that virtually no one will glance at for longer than 2 seconds - I'm sure there are other cases where MCD will care about such details (and is willing to pay for it).
+1.

Sad, isn't it? This happens all over, too, in every type of photography.
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
7,873
Location
Paris, France
I'm not sure at all that this is a default in the photo, much less the overhead lights. The liquid chocolates surface isn't plain so it's bound to reflect some light here and there even if shot through an umbrella or some other modifier.

You obviously could clone those reflections out but it would look weird, as if there wasn't any depth to the matter, like a 2D object.

At least that's the way I see it from your flickr photo. Nothing shocks me at all in this particular photo.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
I'm not sure at all that this is a default in the photo, much less the overhead lights. The liquid chocolates surface isn't plain so it's bound to reflect some light here and there even if shot through an umbrella or some other modifier.

You obviously could clone those reflections out but it would look weird, as if there wasn't any depth to the matter, like a 2D object.

At least that's the way I see it from your flickr photo. Nothing shocks me at all in this particular photo.
Seen up close (not on flickr), I could actually see detail in the florescent lights....as in I could see the casing, etc.... That is bad to have it so visible that you can actually see the detail in the lights themselves. It could have been done without those reflections....may not have been easy, but it could have been done.
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
7,873
Location
Paris, France
Seen up close (not on flickr), I could actually see detail in the florescent lights....as in I could see the casing, etc.... That is bad to have it so visible that you can actually see the detail in the lights themselves. It could have been done without those reflections....may not have been easy, but it could have been done.
Right, then in that case that something else if you could clearly see the details in the print :tongue:

That's what light tents are for.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom