Advertising versus reality
Aug. 18th, 2008 06:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
This German website, when you click one or another spot on the main image, shows you both the inside and the outside of a package of food — that is, the difference between the “artist’s impression” / “serving suggestion” of a package, and what the contents really look like when you open the package and/or prepare them.
Some really frightening contrasts here and there. This one, for example. Normally I really like Zurcher geschnetzletes. It’s a Swiss dish, native to Zurich: the second word in the name comes from a word meaning to cut something into strips or thin slices. It normally involves strips of veal in a cream sauce with mushrooms (morels if you’re lucky), and it’s served with spaetzli (or other noodles) or rösti. But after seeing this stuff — ewwwww. I think I’m off the ‘schnetzli for a while.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 05:40 pm (UTC)and some i'd love to try. going to have to pay a visit to the german market i think.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 05:45 pm (UTC)If you haven't read it yet, I highly recommend The Gallery of Regrettable Food (http://www.lileks.com/institute/gallery/) for a good laugh.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 05:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 05:59 pm (UTC)XWA
no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 07:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 07:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 06:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 07:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 07:34 pm (UTC)*tries to stiffle the gag reflex*
no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 08:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 05:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 05:57 pm (UTC)XWA
no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 06:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 06:33 pm (UTC)First, the good pic. Look at the camera elevation. The good shot is from a low angle. The product is also put into a smaller and deeper bowl/plate that looks more nearly filled, giving the impression of an over-filled bowl, one that makes the solids pile up higher, which we find more attractive than a lot of sauce. Also the solids have been arranged to look better, with the unattractive bits moved, and a little green garnish sprinkled on top. The lighting is better too, using a much warmer color temp. The main light is coming from the upper left to back-light the noodles on the fork, making them look translucent. Then there is the added steam wisp that makes one believe it's fresh from the stove.
The bad pic was taken from a higher elevation, with the product in an over-size bowl with more exposed lip making it look skimpy. The shallower depth makes the sauce more prominent. Then the lighting is bad, coming from the right with little 'fill' light from the left and using a blue-ish cast, making the product look cold and dense. Also the contrast is set to the weak side and possibly the gamma has been tweaked to make it look as bland as possible.
I think both pictures have been designed to show the the best and the worst, just like TV's before-and-after shots of people's faces and bodies. It's difficult to standardize how product photos should be taken for advertizing, since it's entirely possible the customer may actually prepare and serve the product in the same way the advertizing shows. Not likely, but possible. Many fine chefs and restaurants owe their fame and success to how well they present the final product rather than the rather limited ways they prepare the dishes.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 08:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-19 01:01 am (UTC)Thoughts
Date: 2008-08-19 04:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-20 04:07 pm (UTC)