|
Darin Heinz first
asked:
And Michael Hughes replied:
Which prompted Guy Glorieux
to state the following:
And yet, Michael, you really
should...
What we have here is a fine
example of "product packaging for maximum selling impact" where the viewer has
no option but to agree with Darin. It works at two
levels.
(1) First, the film states
bluntly that as a "human being", the young lady does NOT
exist. She is an object which, in itself, has absolutely no
"Value", except insofar as "it" (she) can become the support for
the making of a "concept", an ideation of what the consumer of the product (for
which "it/she" serves as an advertisement banner) is being told will see
happening in his life.
We are surrounded by these ideations in
everything that we do or encounter. Whether we like it or not, we fall in
the majority of these traps, for the greater benefit of those behind these
creations. In due
course, we realize that the ideation did not materialize, even when we
purchased the product several times. So the
market quickly brings forth a new "improved, redesigned,
technologically advanced" product that is certified to bring the
ideation to life. On and on...
(2) But then, the film itself is
an ideation. If you look carefully, you will see that the opening picture
of the young lady is carefully constructed by the filmmaker so that she is shown
to look at the very extreme opposite of what she will be turned into during the
length of film (49 seconds...). Well done! Given the oversupply of
would-be models, it seems unlikely IMHO that any real-life art
director would want to hire a model whose "starting-point" image was
so far off from the final image on the billboard.
Oh, what puppets we are in the
face those who pull (or so they beleive...) the strings of our lifes.
As someone said...
Good night (and good luck...)
PF friends. -:)
Guy
BTW, there is a very instructive set of
Photoshopped images created from a different "woman-marketing object" at the
following URL
I'm sure that the same can be found in
the class of "men-maketing object" or "kid-marketing object". The very sad part is that the age targets are
lowered year after year despite legislative efforts to protect the younger
generation from these ideations.
PS: This is not Off Topic.
As photographers, we contribute (albeit much less in these days of animated
messages than perhaps some years ago) to the direct creation of these
ideations. (This brings us back to an earlier discussion, I'm
afraid).
|
