Huawei again accused of passing off DSLR photos as smartphone shots

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 47
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,067member
    This is a 'controversy'. Seriously? Appleinsider has gone all in with poutrage. 
  • Reply 22 of 47
    ivanh said:
    Gal Gadot should not renew her contract with Huawei.
    Um... really? That’s your major takeaway? Is that before or after she knew the client was Huawei?
  • Reply 23 of 47
    JFC_PAJFC_PA Posts: 325member
    SAD!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 47
    anomeanome Posts: 1,272member

    The main reason I can see for using a DSLR rather than the product for the shot is the ability to live-feed at full quality to the director and DP for review, framing, etc.

    Although, there are ways to do that using the phone, surely? Even if you needed to jailbreak it, and load specialist software, it should be doable. After all, haven't films been shot on iPhones? And other advertising campaigns?

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 47
    anome said:

    Although, there are ways to do that using the phone, surely?

    We see that during keynotes quite a bit. They’re demoing some new iOS feature, the presenter is using an iPhone and the audience sees what’s happening on the big screen. Seems like it would be possible to do what you mention. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 47
    chasmchasm Posts: 1,545member
    Why would anyone in their right mind trust a company that’s been caught lying to its customers multiple times? ... looking at you too, Google ...
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 47
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,627member
    No different than Apple passing of iPhone shots as DSLR photos.
    Really?  Apple tried to pass off an iPhone photo as One taken with a DSLR? 

    *yawn*. You can’t even troll well.
    watto_cobratmay
  • Reply 28 of 47
    sflocal said:
    Here's the smoking gun shot that was posted by the actress in the video.  I put iKnockoff shops like Huawei and Samsung in the same boat of shame.  They will literally lie through the teeth to push their agenda.


    huawei should've flipped this around saying this is actually what it's like taking a selfie on their new phone. complete with cameraman and tripod. in for a penny, in for a pound as they say. 
  • Reply 29 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,800member
    adm1 said:
    sflocal said:
    Here's the smoking gun shot that was posted by the actress in the video.  I put iKnockoff shops like Huawei and Samsung in the same boat of shame.  They will literally lie through the teeth to push their agenda.


    huawei should've flipped this around saying this is actually what it's like taking a selfie on their new phone. complete with cameraman and tripod. in for a penny, in for a pound as they say. 
    Ha!

    Brilliant!

    Almost a 'studio in your pocket' or 'studio quality' ;-)

    https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/apple--uk--ltd-a18-445104.html

    It worked for Apple and as the guy isn't even holding a phone, no one could say  that wasn't the idea from the get go!

    Joking aside, this is what normally appears when the screen content (camera or otherwise) isn't taken from the phone itself:

    "Product pictures and display contents on the foregoing pages are provided for reference only. Actual product features and specifications (including but not limited to appearance, colour, and size), as well as actual display contents (including but not limited to backgrounds, UI, and icons) may vary."

    That is from Huawei's own Nova 3 product page. On print media and where necessary, they normally include something shorter and to the point like 'photo content not taken with the phone camera, for reference only'.

    In other cases they normally explicitly say the image was taken with the camera, like this one, the largest print ever taken from a phone camera:

    http://www.europapress.es/madrid/noticia-mayor-fotografia-captada-telefono-movil-expone-edificio-espana-15-junio-20180602164616.html

    (In Spanish)

    http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-06/13/c_137250571.htm





  • Reply 30 of 47
    Why oh why would they do that? Unless within the next few hours they respond with another video showing that they just had a pro photographer there doing test shots with the SLR but that seems unlikely. If anything, they should have just post processed the shots, which would have been more than good enough for 90% of the people they are targetting, considering by all accounts it's actually a very good camera.
  • Reply 31 of 47
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    edited August 2018
  • Reply 32 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,800member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
  • Reply 33 of 47
    Posters on Ars Technica are defending this claiming the ad was about Huawei’s AI software not the camera. Right....because people take selfies with DSLRs.
  • Reply 34 of 47
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
  • Reply 35 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,800member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    muthuk_vanalingamgatorguy
  • Reply 36 of 47
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
  • Reply 37 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,800member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
  • Reply 38 of 47
    horvatichorvatic Posts: 128member
    Samsung makes those commercials making fun of Apple. Well the joke is on them because they can't even take pictures using there own products to promote them with. Have to lie to the public and cheat to sell there products which will never be better than Apple's.
  • Reply 39 of 47
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
    The P20 Pro is so acclaimed that most of the people, like yourself that are pushing it, find it too expensive to own, but I'm willing to look at accurate sales data for the P20 Pro, if it exists.

    Meanwhile, I'm guessing that somewhere in the neighborhood of 175 million iPhones with dual cameras, 8's and X plus the upcoming new models will be sold in 2018.

    As for the selfie test, not impressed with the marginal benefits of the 24 MP dual camera of selfies, but the AI helps, again, marginally over the iPhone X.
    edited August 2018
  • Reply 40 of 47
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
    The P20 Pro is so acclaimed that most of the people, like yourself that are pushing it, find it too expensive to own, but I'm willing to look at accurate sales data for the P20 Pro, if it exists.

    Meanwhile, I'm guessing that somewhere in the neighborhood of 175 million iPhones with dual cameras, 8's and X plus the upcoming new models will be sold in 2018.

    As for the selfie test, not impressed with the marginal benefits of the 24 MP dual camera of selfies, but the AI helps, again, marginally over the iPhone X.
    Credit where due - The Huawei P20 Pro camera has been praised by almost all websites for extra-ordinary low-light photography, which is simply NOT possible in ALL other smartphones till date (including iPhone X, 8 plus, Samsung Galaxy S9/Note 9 etc)..
    gatorguy
Sign In or Register to comment.