Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think this is more of just a pigheaded move by the advertising team.

Nokia camera's have been good in the past and I have no doubt this is probably a good one.

One ad campaign is short lived, the photos taken by consumers who buy the phone on the other hand will continue to trickle in. It doesn't make too much sense for them to rely on this fact.

What the whole brouhaha is that they probably thought 'It's just an ad, everyone does it, every knows how ice cream in ice cream ads is not real ice cream. And the delicious burger never looks the same in real life either.'

Here's an interesting video from McDonalds on how they make their burgers look great. They admit the shortcomings of a real burger in the looks department and how they make it look so good.

http://youtu.be/oSd0keSj2W8



In most markets the ice cream in an ice cream ad has to be ice cream. The ice cream in non-ice cream ads, on the other hand, can be anything.


actually, i read some where regarding tips in food photography.. where they dont actually use ice cream.. let me find you the link.. it is more of an advertising thing..


The gist is that the item being advertised has to be the actual item as offered to the consumer. So in a cereal ad, the cereal featured has to be the actual cereal (even though they may go through hundreds of boxes picking out the perfect corn flakes to use). However, since they're not actually selling the milk that goes with the cereal, they're free to use glue or some other liquid that will let the cereal maintain it's crunch or otherwise enhance photography.


So they are selling real flakes and a fraudulent crunch. Still fraud.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: