Showing posts with label advertising. Show all posts
Showing posts with label advertising. Show all posts

2014-02-18

Canon G1x Mark II Press Release


Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: I don't even mention the Advanced Star Mode.

The Long Version: In the same way that movie trailers are an art all to themselves – and are often better than the movies that they foreshadow – I have a fondness for camera press releases. I wanted to share my thoughts on the newly-announced G1X Mark II announcement, but fair warning: this may turn into one of those "I read it so that you don't have to" series.

Being Canadian I'll be quoting the release as it appears on canon.ca; it's also published on the American site and on DPreview. All of the product images are from the Canon press kit as I haven't yet had a chance to photograph the camera myself, although I am genuinely looking forward to the opportunity.


We begin: Building upon the success of the PowerShot G1 X digital camera…

This press release comes out swinging right from the opening sentence. The original G1X was a dud, an uncommonly lousy camera, slow and with none of the G-series charm. It never lived up to its expectations, either photographically or in market appeal. I suppose it's possible to build on the success of a failure, but it's setting the bar fairly low. Still, full points to Canon for their shameless revisionist hype.

Boasting a sensor that is 4.5x larger than a 1/1.7” sensor found in professional level point-and-shoot cameras…

I'm not sure what's more alarming: that Canon still thinks that a 1/1.7” sensor is the benchmark for an advanced compact, which suggests that they've never heard of Sony or Fujifilm, or that they think that there's such a thing as a "professional level point-and-shoot camera". But now we know that the new G1X model is 4.5x better than a pro point-and-shoot, which simply boggles the imagination with all of the possibilities that must entail.

Incidentally, having a paid and accredited Canon Professional Services membership isn't grounds for getting a discount when buying the EOS 5D Mark III, so I can only conclude that Canon doesn't consider anything below the 1D-series to be a professional camera when it's their own money on the line.

This sensor, combined with the DIGIC 6 Image Processor, comprises the Canon HS SYSTEM resulting in faster autofocusing speeds over the PowerShot G1 X camera…

We're still in the second paragraph and we've already reached the inevitable "It doesn't suck as much as the _________" part of the press release; in this case the G1X2 is triumphing over the camera that was called a 'success' just one paragraph ago. For what it's worth, the HS SYSTEM that's presented as the saviour of the G1X2 is a Meaningless Marketing TERM™ that was also included with the now-admittedly-inferior original G1X.

Featuring a newly-developed f/2.0 – f/3.9, 5x optical zoom lens (equivalent 24-120mm zoom range)…

Typically for a compact camera announcement from Canon, at no point in the press release do they say what the actual focal length of the lens is. Thankfully it's printed right on the front of the camera: 12.5-62.5mm. Carefully parsing the numbers shows that the G1XII actually has a slightly smaller effective sensor area than the G1XI, although it turns out that there's a really good reason for this.

For those keeping score, 62.5/3.9 = 16.025 and 62.5/4 = 15.625. I applaud the tireless and diligent efforts of the engineers who fought to attain that extra 0.4mm difference between f/3.9 and f/4 at 62.5mm. Sure, the practical gain is probably less than the light that's lost to the extra glass needed for the in-lens IS system, but it keeps the G1XII from admitting to a sales-killing f/4.0 aperture at the long end.


… advanced wireless capabilities such as NFC and enhanced low-light shooting and autofocusing…

There's that autofocus improvement being touted again. On the other hand, better autofocus and low-light shooting are two of the many improvements that have been claimed for nearly every digital camera released in the past decade. Similarly, wifi is the new mandatory standard feature, so a passing reference here doesn't hurt.

I do have to admire the restraint that stopped the G1X2 press release from claiming that it has the World's Fastest Autofocus, a title that has recently been self-awarded to the Olympus E-M10, Sony A6000, and the Fujifilms XQ1, XE2, X100s, and F1000EXR. Sure, The World's Whateverest™ is a moving target with ample sub-categories, but come on now. Even the people at derpreview are starting to notice.

… the G1 X Mark II is a well-rounded professional-level camera that allows photographers to get creative.

This is my favourite part of every new camera press release: buy it because it contains creativity!

To be fair this press release is considerably more modest than the Built-In Art claims of many point-and-shoots, but remember that this is a professional camera – the press release says so six times – so it needs to have a certain gravitas.

… equipped with a new type of Canon-made, 1.5-inch CMOS sensor to help achieve optimal performance from low to high ISO speeds.

Canon mentions that they made the sensor in the G1XII in two different paragraphs, just in case someone reviewing the press release skips it the first time. A bespoke sensor shows off their impressive manufacturing prowess but says nothing about its quality. The good news is that this new sensor is optimized for the entire amplification range without any weakness anywhere.

It has a default aspect ratio of 3:2 which is the same ratio the advanced user has come to expect…

This would be a dig at Micro Four Thirds, which started the whole 'mirrorless' thing that the original G1X was begrudgingly and belatedly intended to compete against. Canon hates all mirrorless interchangeable-lens format cameras, and does everything it can to avoid making them. The original G1X, incidentally, has a 4:3 aspect ratio.

If the photographer wants to switch to a 4:3 ratio, it can be done without impacting the field of view.

And this is called "burying the lede". Having a multi-aspect sensor is a first for Canon, and might be the most remarkable thing about the camera, but it's hidden in the fifth paragraph in the press release. Nobody voluntarily reads that far in; it's the press kit equivalent of releasing a Parliamentary Committee report at 5:30 on a Friday afternoon. But this multi-aspect feature is the reason why the G1X2's effective sensor size is a bit smaller than the G1X1, and personally I approve. It's too bad that they didn't do the full Panasonic and include a native 16:9 ratio as well, but clearly we can't have everything.


The new PowerShot G1 X Mark II camera uses 31 Auto Focus (AF) points, compared to the PowerShot G1 X camera that uses nine AF points, resulting in improved autofocus capabilities…

Not to sound like a broken record on this one – funny how that expression outlasted skipping CDs – but is anyone getting the impression that autofocus wasn't a strength for the G1X?

It's worth noting that the G1X2's press release makes absolutely no mention of the new camera's close-focusing performance, which was another significant non-strength of the G1X1. The early word is that this has improved significantly, and while it could hardly get any worse than the original, if it really is as good as those reports say then it deserves to be mentioned. Perhaps the memory of the G1X "macro mode" is still too painful for Canon to bear?

Utilizing the bright, capacitive touch, three-inch tilt LCD on the PowerShot G1 X Mark II camera helps provide flexibility in shooting by tilting 180 degrees up and 45 degrees down.

A well-written release will only talk about what has been added, leaving us to decipher what was taken away. The tilting screen is a downgrade from the flip-out screen that the G1X and other G-series cameras have used in the past, although this new style matches the Sony RX100M2 and many others. Not that Canon considers them to be 'competition', of course, but it proves what the market is willing to accept.

The PowerShot G1 X Mark II camera is also compatible with Canon’s new optional electronic viewfinder that mounts to the hot shoe.

The optical viewfinder has always been a staple of the G-series, making the G1XII the first one in over a decade to omit it. That said their OVFs are pretty bad, and always have been – more of an aiming device than a compositional tool. Removing it lets the camera be smaller, and removing most of the top-deck dials and physical controls in favour of the Dual Control Rings pushes it even farther from the G-Family. I'm actually waiting for people to realize that the G1X2 is really a big-sensor S-series rather than a Super-G.

I do like the way the phrasing here makes it sound as if the EVF will work across multiple cameras, rather than being a $300 dedicated accessory; perhaps other cameras will use it in the future, but other brands have shown that these expensive devices can have remarkably short life cycles.

… the camera’s Background Defocus mode softens the background behind a subject to help users create professional-looking portraits.

Yet elsewhere the press release says "With this wide of an aperture, photographers have the ability to isolate their subjects by separating them from a background that is blurred.… The new lens also features a nine-blade aperture to provide beautiful, blurred backgrounds even at full-zoom range." Safety through redundancy, in the belt-and-suspenders style? Regardless, it's nice to know that there's a Professional-Looking Portraits mode built in, which is vitally important in a professional-level point-and-shoot.

And yes, the release mentions other whizbang modes and scene innovations, but even I eventually exceed my tolerance threshold and need to skip to the end.

The PowerShot G1 X Mark II digital camera will be available starting in April for a retail price of $849.99.

That $850 MSRP (dealers may sell for less) happens to be the street price of a Rebel T5i with an 18-135 STM lens. There's a massive premium for petite cameras these days – a 'petimium'? – and the market is far from proven. We're six weeks away from the G1X2's arrival, so there's still time for the camera market to completely change, but as it stands the X2 won't help Canon's reputation for pricing their cameras above their (frequently more capable) competition.


last updated 18 feb 2014

2012-05-07

Canon 5D Mark III: The Ultimate DSLR


Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 1 out of 5
Yeah, but: Inconceivable!

The Long Version: It's official. Canon has ceded the high-end SLR market to Nikon. It's not surprising, given the seven-month-and-counting wait for the thrice-delayed 1Dx flagship, and the tepid market response to their modest 5D refresh effort, but I still would never have expected their concession announcement to take the form of a poster in a marketing campaign.

Ultimate: last, furthest or farthest, ending a process or series; being last in a series, process, or progression; final.

It's sad to see the quarter-century EOS legacy end this way, but like I always say: "ah, well." Nikon makes good cameras, and hopefully they'll continue to innovate and push forward even without the major-brand competition. And for those of you with a good investment in Canon lenses, don't worry, it looks like the Rebel line will still continue.


last updated 7 may 2012

2011-10-31

"Info Pillar" Sidewalk Billboards


Concept: 0 out of 5
Execution: 0 out of 5
Yeah, but: Aren't pillars usually round and narrow?

The Long Version: It's not commonly known, but Toronto's current mayor is a shy, considerate, and intellectual man. He's even a published and award-winning poet, but writes under a pseudonym for the sake of modesty. So it's no surprise that when there's a sensitive flourish that improves our city's civic life, he's the first person that I think to thank. This latest improvement in Toronto's streetscape certainly shows his signature thoughtfulness.


This city-building project is designed to address the appalling lack of corporate participation in our public space. Crews have carefully used jackhammers, backhoes, and concrete to lovingly install a large freestanding advertising-support structure across broad portions of the otherwise uninteresting sidewalk. This neglected square footage previously served only the pedestrians and shopkeepers who make up the local community. Under the control of these short-sighted groups there was absolutely nobody looking out for the bigger picture, which is where our city government excels. Toronto's vibrant community of airbrush artists and the Idle Hands Youth Chorus are already planning their events in celebration, and I genuinely wish them well.


It's a sign of our mayor's benevolent nature and his deep love of the downtown core that these prominent billboards also consider the needs of transient visitors, a group that pays no property tax and has an even lower voter turnout rate than the city's own residents. The narrow end of this modernist edifice is used to provide tourist information to proximate passers-by. It announces itself with the large "i" symbol at the top of the post, to ensure that everyone knows that this is something useful, and proudly wears our fine city's hospitality excellence initiative program's slogan down the side. We've Been Expecting You, it boldly declares, which is far less stogy than Toronto's actual but inappropriate motto, Diversity Our Strength.


And so here's the public service announcement that demonstrates the altruistic nature of this endeavour. At the very bottom of the pillar – conveniently located at eye-level for assistance dogs – people who are new to the city will see a web site address and an exotic non-standard three-digit phone number. There's even the municipal address for the tourist information kiosk that's two kilometers away, on a different street, clear across the downtown core. The lack of directions, a map, or even operating hours provides visitors with a new opportunity to interact with the city around them and its friendly, happy inhabitants.

It's hard to put a price on this kind of civic improvement.


Part Two, added december 2011: These 'info' pillars continue to appear throughout the downtown core. Some of them now include actual maps and guides – on the end, where it doesn't distract from the forty-eight square feet of advertising display – which is an improvement over the useless information that they provided previously. On the negative side, the entire structure continues to exist. Here's an example of how they contribute to the city's streetscape and culture, shown with Mayor Rob Ford for scale:


While it's not particularly obvious, Toronto does have a "Vibrant Streets" policy, which is available as a PDF document. Section 8, 'Street Furniture and Advertising', begins with a heartwarming Guiding Principle: "Balance the quantity, size and quality of advertising with the needs of the public by integrating it into the design of street furniture elements." Some could argue that these fixtures comply with this, because they do put a pretty little frame around the billboard. However, Section eight goes on to say, quite prominently:

"The design of new street furniture must demonstrate appropriateness for its intended use, not as a venue for advertising. This means the public must be able to recognize the functionality and use of the elements. The size and scale of amenities should not be increased in order to accommodate larger advertising faces."

I can't even begin to see how these "Information Pillars" – two euphemisms for the price of one –comply with this.


This review features the ad installation on Queen Street West at Spadina, and that fixture was removed shortly after it was published. (Correlation does not imply causation: one of my favourite XKCD comics.) The new concrete slab and anchor points serves as a reminder of just how big the billboard's footprint was, and watching people walk through its ghost makes the wrongness of its location even more apparent.

But rather than seeing this removal as a victory, I think it shows that the powers behind choosing locations could be intentionally pushing far beyond the limits of what's acceptable. And setting aside the advice to never attribute anything to malice that could be explained by stupidity, if this is their policy then it's brilliant. Otherwise, how will they know what restrictions will actually be enforced?

Compared to the outrageous, the merely objectionable doesn't seem so unreasonable; by removing the atrocious, they can honestly say that they accommodate most of the public's complaints. Meanwhile, they wear down the energy of the engaged citizens and city councillors that oppose them. It's a win-win situation, and a spectacularly one-sided one at that.

Negotiations, remediation, and compromise accept the underlying assumption that these billboards have some right to exist in the first place. They don't.


last updated 16 dec 2011

2011-08-26

Kelloggs Vector


Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: This isn't a review, it's a Marketing Replacement.

The Long Version: I fell in love with Kelloggs Vector the very first time I heard an ad for it. "It's not a cereal, it's a meal replacement."

A meal replacement that you eat from a bowl, with a spoon, in milk.

A replacement for breakfast, perhaps?

Penny recently brought home a couple of free sample boxes from a fitness expo she went to. I was thrilled to see that they're still sticking with the "Meal Replacement" marketing efforts, printing that audacious slogan right on top of the photo showing cereal-like flakes in a bowl with milk. Awesome.

So after all these years of my adoration of this product, I've finally been able to actually eat some. In the morning. Instead of breakfast. And you know what? It tasted a lot like cereal.


last updated 26 aug 2011

2011-01-12

Ultra Fleecy Fabric Softener


Concept:  3 out of 5
Execution:  1 out of 5
Yeah, but:  It's so fluffy!

The Long Version: Perhaps I shouldn't be so surprised at how hard it is to find decent information about fabric softener. After all, it's an industry worth a huge amount of money that involves complex chemicals and heavy perfumes. On one side of the information chasm we have the manufacturers whose only advice is how to use more of their product, while their adversaries love the cliché "chemical-laden". That's a scary phrase that's completely meaningless, as even a glass of pure distilled water is laden with hydrogen and oxygen, which are combustible, reactive, and/or poisonous chemicals that can kill you if not handled correctly.

The foundation of most softeners, ditallow dimethyl ammonium chloride (DTDMAC) (pdf) certainly isn't something I'd want to drink. Norway has it on their list of priority substances to reduce, a list that include[s] substances that are persistent and bioaccumulative, that have serious long-term health effects, or that show high ecotoxicity. The additional additives and other ingredients almost certainly don't improve matters; there's no doubt in my mind that this isn't something I should enjoy pouring down the drain. I compensate for that by adding it only when it will actually be useful - I wash my shirts separately from my jeans in the world's smallest front-load washer - and by using about a fifth of the recommended amount. Even with that level of moderation it still takes care of the static electricity that's endemic in winter.


But in a market filled with dubious information and spin, sometimes companies rise to the level of art. All bottles of fabric softener have this handy disclaimer on their backs. Essentially, fabric softeners increase fluffiness and flammability, so it should not be used on inherently fluffy fabrics like fleece and terry cloth, or on anything that needs to be treated for flame-resistance, such as "children's sleepwear". Yet the photo on the front of the bottle that I bought looks like a scary aryan robo-baby wrapped up in a fluffy fleece blanket. I have to admit that this absurdity is the only reason why I picked this particular brand out of the noise of indistinguishable products.

WTF, Ultra Fleecy?


last updated 12 jan 2011

2010-08-05

Gary Fong Collapsible Lightsphere Packaging


Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 0 out of 5
Yeah, but: Just the wrap, man, just the wrap.


The Long Version: Gary Fong is the Ken Rockwell of lighting modifiers. And that's fine - this review doesn't have anything to do with either one of them, or even the actual product that's in the Gary Fong Lightsphere® Collapsible™ box. It's not even about how the hell someone managed to trademark the word 'Collapsible™'. And for the record, yes, the Gary Fong Lightsphere® Collapsible™ does what it says it does. Two ping-pong balls taped to the top of your flash would also do what the Gary Fong Lightsphere® Collapsible™ does, but that's not the point. This review is just about the package that it comes in.




The box itself is thin black cardboard with a sticker that carries all of the text, graphics, and photos. This is a cost-effective way to create the multi-lingual packaging that's needed for international sales, and the box follows the current trend of keeping it as small as possible. It does fall down a bit by having plastic shrink-wrap around it, but that may add enough integrity to let them use a lighter grade of boxboard. There are also some style points involved by having the actual Lightsphere® Collapsible™ wrapped in coloured tissue paper instead of more unnecessary plastics. But that's hardly enough to motivate a review: the photos are where things start to get interesting.




We see an attractive model in the advertising version of the classic Comedy / Tragedy masks, known as the 'before' and 'after' photo. The one labeled "Without" shows a woman who's rehearsing for her passport photo, while the "With" looks like she's just heard a funny joke from a good friend. Sure, it's a blatant and obvious attempt to manipulate the viewer, but it's so clumsily done that it's impossible to take offense. Besides, given what these things look like when they're stuffed on top of a speedlight, I'm sure that lots of people really do laugh and smile when they see them. But let's look closer, shall we?




Here's the "Without / Sans" photo. It's a pretty standard straight-blast flash photo: the hallmark of novice camera users and really abysmal wedding photography. Nothing too remarkable here, so let's move on to the "With / Avec" image.




It's a huge improvement, verging on school portrait quality. It's so good, it's almost impossible to believe that a single on-camera flash could possibly create these results. Take a good look at the catchlights in her eyes in this photo, and compare them to the "Without / Sans" image. It really is impossible to believe that this was taken using a single on-camera light source, no matter how artfully it's bounced. In fact, the soft caressing shadows look even better than in the similar images on the Gary Fong Product Page, where our attractive model has only one catchlight reflected in her eyes.


Fancy that.

2009-08-08

"Running Longer" TTC Advertisement



Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 1 out of 5
Yeah, but: If it was creative, it would stand out too much.


The Long Version: The ad headline reads: "TTC buses and streetcars are running longer than before. We're staying up later for you."


Nobody has ever used longer in that context before. The vehicles are the same size; there's no wholesale fleet replacement with articulated buses and ALRV's. The right word to describe something that happens at a time that's past the time when it used to happen is later.


But the Toronto Transit Commission can't say that it's service is running later than before. People might laugh.



And so the TTC misses another chance to be hip, edgy, funny, self-depreciating, clever, memorable, and interesting. Coupled with their uninspiring text, they've gone with the ever-popular clock image to illustrate the idea of Time. After all, it's hard to have banal without the cliché.


'It could have been—a bird out of season, dropping bright-feathered on my shoulder... I was prepared. But it's this, is it? No enigma, no dignity, nothing classical, portentous, only this.'




contact me...

You can click here for Matthew's e-mail address.