Can we have god-tier advertisement photography thread? Why the

File: 9261321808_d344b68e62_b.jpg (663KB, 864x1024px) Image search: [Google]

663KB, 864x1024px

>>2998866
i love this one, been trying to recreate the colours and feel of it ever since i saw it here on /p/

>>2998874
I remember there was some talented lore pasta behind it

>>2998874
that is fucking incredible

I miss the 80s

>>2998874
God that's good. I wish I knew of some other good advertising to contribute.

File: National_September_1971.jpg (281KB, 931x708px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 931x708px

Photo for a flashgun advertisement taken by /p/s fav rock star Hiromichi Moriyama

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	931
Image Height	708

>>2998874
>>2998875
>>2998964
nah, c'mon faggets, that's a really poor picture. it's actually eye cancer.
>oversaturated af
>blue shirt on blue wall
>red product on red table
>harsh single light source
>guy's face dull, non-filled
>no object isolation
>flat af
>poor composition, everything centered
>rediculous typo/font for slogan
>on white box which touchs image border (wtf)
Not to speak of the weak advertisement message. What shall this even mean? When you buy this product you look like a dandy in a bad mood looking on a disinterested ugly chick who leans away from your alcoholic stinking breath?

Certainly one of the worst advertisements ever made.

But, yeah, it's """"incredible"""". Idiots.

>>2998981
t. Graphic design major

>>2998981
I think we are all referring to the colors someone was able to capture on film not how good of advertisement it was....Its also nostalgia for people that are not know it all cancerous children....

>>2998874
so, if anyone know the photographer behind this, know of other photographers with this type of style, knows what makes it look that way, im really grateful if you speak up, even if only to share that long ass story someone on here fabricated about it.

i think it looks like its sort-of underexposed slide film? or at least exposed for his white shirt..?

>>2998972
this is exactly the only reason you like this picture. "uhhhh, it is so 80s, which means so analog, so film. so cool. lets suck dick. I recognized it immediately that is film. therefore it's an epiphany."

you're disgusting hipsters.

>>2998985
ok, I can live with this statement.

File: 1GNkuPT.jpg (36KB, 520x307px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 520x307px

>>2998989

>>2998991
nothing personel

File: IMG_3491.jpg (75KB, 553x701px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 553x701px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	553
Image Height	701
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: IMG_3492.jpg (665KB, 800x1145px) Image search: [Google]

665KB, 800x1145px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	1145
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2998993
a way better picture than that red&blue shit.

File: IMG_3493.jpg (697KB, 1022x1024px) Image search: [Google]

697KB, 1022x1024px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1022
Image Height	1024
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2998998
*sigh*

>>2998981
was sonst means what else in german, there is no question mark, its a confident statement, like everything else in the picture.
the guy confidently admiring her, she confident enough to enjoy his gaze, the bold colours. the photographer unapologetically letting the guys face be in the shadow. the strict blocky composition.

good advertising doesnt scream its mesage in the audiences face, it works more subtly than that.

>>2999003
hehe, wow this is the worst image interpretation I ever read. when you try to talk the academic shittery, then please get a little bit knowledge and vocabulary, not to speak of actual content and consistent statements.

you always can try to turn a negative aspect or a fault in a positive which was planned. but when you do it like you did, it is unfortunately too obvious you're just contradicting for the sake of it.

>>2998989
Go fuck your mother you patronising twat. What about the fucking maxell ad right above it. When the fuck was that shot shit for brains?

>>2999017
yeah ... what about it? ... what has the one to do with the other? ... how recent was it you learned to walk errectly?

>>2999021
You're a posturing faggot - please continue to fuck right off

>>2999020
good one. .. wasn't it ucob who also made thos ads with simply shocking pictures with no relation to the product at all?

>>2999023
ah, now I get it. you could have said this in the first place.

File: IMG_0822.jpg (224KB, 1200x790px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1200x790px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1200
Image Height	790
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2999009
why are you so mad someone likes something you don´t care for?

>>2999024
Doing a search...it's ringing some kind of bell but my memory's not what it was

>>2998866
Had this on my dorm wall along with a Dali and Ralph Steadman poster.

edgy

>>2999028
I'm not not liking the fact he likes something I don't like. I don't like the way he tries to defend why he likes what he likes. counterfactual reasoning is not sufficient et est sicut est. I expect some consistent structure. at least something like 'making the faults as regarded from the craft of the disciplin is the purpose on deconstructing its borders.' or somethung cheap like that. at least.

>>2998866
are you subscribed to a youtuber named Techmoan by any chance?

>>2999035
as far as I remember they had for example starving kids and stuff like that .. not sure tho.

>>2999039
no
why would i?

File: 06053C02-BCFA-48EB-8289-E2AFC6711C7E-1540-0000015B533E6812_tmp.jpg (757KB, 1400x928px) Image search: [Google]

757KB, 1400x928px

>>2999024
Here we go

File: 3148778D-B226-441E-87B9-D6F2259808EA-1540-0000015C71F1BA42_tmp.jpg (239KB, 1132x732px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1132x732px

>>2999042

File: giphy.gif (489KB, 270x148px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 270x148px

>>2999044
hehe

>>2999038
>i get mad if an opinion isnt formulated in like a contrived tweedwearing highschooler wouldve formulated it.
>Author-intention has any relevance anytime ever.

>>2999045
riiiight, cool that you researched it. so I remembered correctly (as well as you).

>>2999047
nooo, you ape. I was unsatisfied with the /content/. not the form. be pricise in your shit throwing. right?

File: F0709976-99D2-4AF6-9159-BFA97F8C233F-1540-0000015E78B6AABF_tmp.jpg (222KB, 1600x1051px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1600x1051px

>>2999048
1 more & some sauce

https://innovativedesignhistory.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/the-united-colors-of-benetton-campaign-history/

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1051

>>2999057
you're one cool guy. one cool guy indeed.

>>2999060
NP m8, I think Toscani should get the credit though :)

>>2999020
>>2999044
>>2999045
>>2999057
Neat

>>2999038
>I don't like the way he tries to defend why he likes what he likes
lmao you have actual autism

>>3000681
ok

this thread is the living example of why you dont reply to contrarian autists.

>>2998981
>t. anon with a shitty cheap screen that cannot distinguish subtle colour variations

>>3000715
please tell me more about muh tones.

>>3000729
>tell me more about muh tones.

they are everything.

>>2998989
>"Wouldn't it be weird if people who actually experienced the 1980s browsed 4chan?"
>"Ha! That'll never happen."

>>2999027

f-fake news