Shelby got caught using a manipulated picture showing their new car and puts ALL the blame on the photographer. What photographer would take it upon him/herself to do this type of manipulation without being told by some minion of the company to do so.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2012/03/shelby-1000-carroll-shelby-fake-photos-shots/1

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

Agreed, someone at the Shelby art department wanted that shot and that is what they got. At the very least, someone at Shelby approved that image. It is a cool image; it adds excitement to the release but its an altered photo.

Too bad the photographer got the blame; and it probably is true that the spokesperson doesn't know the reason (or who approved the shot) but then ignorance is bliss. (Take responsibility for crying out loud! If you're in charge, take charge and take responsibility!)


Anthony

The Moderator Page and My Gallery
The important things in life are simple; the simple things are hard.

It is PR spin and they did not even spin the rear wheels of the car.

It is also easier to blame the contract photographer than their pet employee.

Should the photographer refused or quit the job?

When on considers the Detroit job outlook and economic situation, it is easy to see why the photographer would not refuse or quit the job.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

I'd blame the photographer. If the photographer produces a photo that's unrealistic enough to be "outed" and ridiculed it's a bad job. The Shelby marketing people (or whoever approved the photo) should also be blamed. The photographer should be blamed for bad photography and the marketing people should be blamed for bad marketing.

...Mike

My website | My Nikonians gallery

>I'd blame the photographer.

I disagree with this. Manipulation in advertising is not new and the photographer probably did as he was told. I can see it now...the art direction probably said..."hey can we lift the front off the ground?" with the photographer saying "I can do that". I do not know a photographer who would say "no I am not doing this". The person who instructed him to do this probably did not "think" about the ramifications of having this done and I doubt the photographer thought about it either. The photographer's focus is to please the client. The focus was to have a cool looking shot.

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

>>I'd blame the photographer.
>
>I disagree with this. Manipulation in advertising is not new
>and the photographer probably did as he was told. I can see
>it now...the art direction probably said..."hey can we
>lift the front off the ground?" with the photographer
>saying "I can do that". I do not know a
>photographer who would say "no I am not doing this".
> The person who instructed him to do this probably did not
>"think" about the ramifications of having this done
>and I doubt the photographer thought about it either. The
>photographer's focus is to please the client. The focus was
>to have a cool looking shot.

I have no problem with the fact the post processing was done (I imagine PP is routine in advertising). My problem with the photographer is that he/she submitted a bad image. It looks fake to me and the apparent fakeness caused embarrassment . The Shelby spokesman's response (shocked to find there's gambling going on) is kind of naive too.

edit add: My position rest on the statement "the manipulation was done by the photographer" being true.

My website | My Nikonians gallery

>> My position rest on the statement "the manipulation was done by the photographer" being true.

"the manipulation was done by the photographer" is not at all inconsistent with the idea that he/she may have been asked to do so . Call me cynical

I think it defies credulity that no questions were asked about the integrity of the image before it was published in official company PR. Assuming the company had image integrity in mind, of course... but if they didn't then a "see no evil hear no evil, don't tell me about no evil" strategy is just thinly veiled plausible denial.

_________________________________
Neil
Nikonians Team
My Gallery

Blame the driver, it's probably David Blaine in there behind the wheel.

Ernesto Santos

esartprints.com Ernesto Santos Photography
Now offering fine art print services and ICC printer profiling.
Great service - at a great price!

Gee, imagine that, advertising that isn't 100% reflective of reality. Next thing we'll find out is that our politicians don't always tell the truth.

Seems to be Shelby handled this badly and the photographer just did what he was asked to do. Maybe they could do a shot of him thrown under the bus.

Now, where's that cologne ad, I need to find that girl is it that will find me irrestible.


Mick
http://www.mickklassphoto.com
or
Visit my nikonians gallery

I'm more than a little bewildered by this.

Is there a standard expectation that publicity shots adhere to some standard of journalistic realism? If so, I can think of entire industries (eg, women't fashion) that are in big trouble.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

There's an expectation that images distributed with a press release are done to the same journalistic standards as the newspapers own news photographers would produce. This is absolutely standard in PR.

M A R T I N • T U R N E R
http://art.martinturner.org.uk
http://www.martinturner.org.uk

Nikonians membership: my most important photographic investment, after the camera

My Nikonians blog, Learning from the Portrait Masters, http://blog.nikonians.org/martin_turner/

Really?

We expect that product photos are un-retouched? Compared to product photos, no one's skin is that smooth, no one's paintwork is that flawless, no one's lingerie is that perfect-fitting.

Maybe the "tires off the ground" shot crossed a bright-line that I'm not aware of, but my layman's understanding has always been that product presentation (including imagery) is idealized.

Learn something new every day, I suppose...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Well when it comes to cars, you can shoot using journalistic standards and still have an image that is misleading. Think of shooting with a wide angle lens? This can distort or mislead with regards to the true lines of a car but it is done all the time.

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

Don't hold your breath waiting for top executives to take the blame--when it comes to upper management, the GOLDEN RULE always applies. "Those who have the gold make the rules." Some poor schmuck will always take the fall. Corporate executives will let this photographer twist in the wind, and run away from him as fast as possible.

James

Off topic as related to the blame for the image in question, but I can't believe a 950 hp plastic and lightweight construction materials automobile can't do as the photo suggests without making it "raceworthy".
Thinking back to my high school hot rodding days, my "pet" was a 65 mustang with a built up 390 shoehorned into it, turning out 450 h.p. (dyno'd) that'd turn high 11's in the quarter and with outdated bias belt street tires I could regularly lift the front end enough to hop a soda bottle. (You old timers may well remember this challenge)

For pure power, gimme a high compression carbureted high octane burning v-8 anytime.
Want traction? just soak them rears good in clorox and the tread gets nice and soft and sticky.

____________________________________________________________________
When no one is looking, Pigs can walk on they're hind legs

>For pure power, gimme a high compression carbureted high
>octane burning v-8 anytime.
>Want traction? just soak them rears good in clorox and the
>tread gets nice and soft and sticky.

Hey dude....I wouldn't dispute you. I do not have a single gearhead bone in my body .

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

It's a dumb editing move in the first place, whoever ordered it or did it. If the front end of a vehicle is lifting off under hard acceleration, the geometry/balance of the vehicle is unstable. You can steer a car when the front end has lifted off. I'm not impressed by a classic muscle car that can't keep its front end on the deck. That screams design error. 950 HP indeed. I'd be more impressed by the torque curve. The photo edit/retouch was a really dumb move all around.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

>> I'm not impressed by a classic muscle car that can't keep its front end on the deck. That screams design error

Howard, in that case I suspect you are not their target market

(plus, the ability to pop a wheelie does not imply it can't avoid doing so... let's call that a 'design parameter" not a "design error" )

Watching gas push $4/gal it's not a design parameter I really need either

_________________________________
Neil
Nikonians Team
My Gallery

>>> I'm not impressed by a classic muscle car that can't

>Watching gas push $4/gal it's not a design parameter I really
>need either

Four bucks a gallon? THAT'S ALL??!?

After accounting for the smaller U.S. gallon (compared to the Imperial gallon), try $5.60 a gallon in Toronto today. Bunch of thieves, highwaymen and brigands.

Anyway, I'm out of the gasoline engine merry-go-round now. 2.0 litre TDI clean diesel these days. 975 kilometers on a 55 litre tank of low sulphur fuel. Torque forever. 2012 VW Jetta Highline. Very nice.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

>It's a dumb editing move in the first place, whoever ordered
>it or did it.

I hear you but it could be a case that both the art director and the photographer aren't gearheads. I wouldn't know that such a thing is implausible.

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

>I hear you but it could be a case that both the art director
>and the photographer aren't gearheads. I wouldn't know that
>such a thing is implausible.

For sure Mel. I think editorial license extends too far though, which I think is also why there was a fuss about this in the first place.

. . . sort of . . .

This isn't the first time a car has been retouched into a fake wheelie for a mag, poster or what-have-you.

No question either (as another poster implied) that uber-thin models who are further (and pointlessly) thinned by retouchers have for decades driven far too many kids to pattern themselves into anorexia, bulimia and other serious and sometime fatal problems. Similarly, (and as Neil kind of implied) I also wonder how many guys are going to look at that Shelby photo and think to themselves, "Mmmm, wheelie. Me like. Want car." Don't want to be next to that guy at a stoplight when he decides to try a wheelie himself.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com