Is watch photography too good - to the point of being deceitful?
A few years ago Adrian Barker made a comment about watch photography not being good enough. Brands were underselling themselves, he said, and he's made that remark about GS in particular more than once. They should take much better photos that made their watches look fantastic.
At the time I was a novice in our hobby. I'd been a one watch guy, and had bought a Tag Aquaracer Quartz, which I loved. But I was puzzled by all the hate Tag got. So I delved deeper and began to be interested in automatics.
I began looking in at the all the ADs in the mall nearest to me in Kuala Lumpur, and one watch really stood out for me: the Rolex submariner. They didn't have any in the store, but they had a massive poster of the submariner outside.
It appeared amazing: super sharp, super sparkling, elegant, yet sporty and functional - who on earth wouldn't want such a stunning looking watch?
A while later I actually saw one in the metal at a secondary dealer. Crikey, is that it? was my reaction. Outside of the studio light it seemed dull and chunky, and not at all like the watch on the Rolex poster. A huge let down. Since then I've seen other friends wearing the sub, and I can't help feeling: is this what all the fuss is about?
This is not to dunk on the sub at all - clearly it's a great watch. (And I make no claims for my photo of my Mark XX above. I just wanted to put a pic up.)
But am I alone in feeling that watch brands post photos of their models that look amazing - and then being very disappointed when I actually see them?
It's not just Rolex. Tissot Seastar looks very appealing on billboards - very out of proportion in the metal to me. Likewise I watched so many videos on the Hamilton Khaki Mechanical that I was ready to ask for it as a birthday present. Then I tried it on... and it didn't do it for me at all. (Apologies to Hammy fans.)
Anyone else feel the same?
Welcome to my WatchCrunch profile.
More from SBKualaLumpur
At times it’s best to see the product in person before purchasing… and if not possible always know the return policy 😁… also it’s very subjective …
I’m the opposite I always think watches look better on wrist and In person. Seeing the submariner on a billboard but seeing it hovering above your crocs in all of its glory is a whole other experience
don't listen to anyone. start figuring it out yourself. Tag Heuer Caliber S is an incredibly good movement. In short, you don’t need to be a victim of hype and advertising.
I’m the opposite I always think watches look better on wrist and In person. Seeing the submariner on a billboard but seeing it hovering above your crocs in all of its glory is a whole other experience
Your Kermit looks great! Can I reserve judgement on the crocs, please?!
I’m the opposite I always think watches look better on wrist and In person. Seeing the submariner on a billboard but seeing it hovering above your crocs in all of its glory is a whole other experience
Dude love this photo!! But time for new one hahaha!!
How about with a flip flop…
don't listen to anyone. start figuring it out yourself. Tag Heuer Caliber S is an incredibly good movement. In short, you don’t need to be a victim of hype and advertising.
Of course you're right. My point is that there's often a deep disparity between what these watches actually look like and what they do in advertising campaigns, and I do find that rather disappointing. But I never buy without trying on, so I know what I'm getting. I may be slow, sorry, but what have you outlined in green above?
Allow me to recommend the Seastar in 36mm. Personally I find the proportions more appealing than the larger models.
Of course you're right. My point is that there's often a deep disparity between what these watches actually look like and what they do in advertising campaigns, and I do find that rather disappointing. But I never buy without trying on, so I know what I'm getting. I may be slow, sorry, but what have you outlined in green above?
it's just a goose. I wanted you to smile :) p.s. now you will always see him
I agree completely with your statement. You are 100% sold a lie. But that is commerce for you. Watch product photography/ads are no different from other products. They're shot on good equipment, well lit out, set dressed and when using models, dressed, styled and professionally made up by make-up artists. Or some don't bother at all and just use the render. They are edited in professional software and increasingly AI plays a part as well. Be it an corrective algorithm or used to generate part or complete images. So it should not be a surprise that the real thing seems off when compared to the ad.
The whole point of marketing materials is to present your product in the most appealing way possible. With all marketing photos, they are taken at an angle and distance that makes the product look its absolute best, while hiding any unflattering angles or sides.
A perfect example is the Chrysler Crossfire.
The marketing material.
The unflattering angle.
This is why hands-on video reviews are more useful than still images. A person handling a watch and moving it around more clearly shows the watches proportions, as well as less flattering angles. Getting hands-on is obviously always the best option, but not always possible, so videos have to fill in the gaps at times.
Allow me to recommend the Seastar in 36mm. Personally I find the proportions more appealing than the larger models.
The 43mm varient wears large for sure - 36mm for that case design and dial looks and wears a lot better.
Funny to see this post cause i was just thinking about that.
I was looking to my Casio Royale and thinking that its a great looking Watch, and the Stock images of him doesnt make justice.
I actually posted a photo wearing it today in good natural light and no edit at all, witch is all i ask when looking for a New Watch that i cant really see in person.
The whole point of marketing materials is to present your product in the most appealing way possible. With all marketing photos, they are taken at an angle and distance that makes the product look its absolute best, while hiding any unflattering angles or sides.
A perfect example is the Chrysler Crossfire.
The marketing material.
The unflattering angle.
This is why hands-on video reviews are more useful than still images. A person handling a watch and moving it around more clearly shows the watches proportions, as well as less flattering angles. Getting hands-on is obviously always the best option, but not always possible, so videos have to fill in the gaps at times.
Wonder how GM advertised the Aztec……
If you want a more accurate idea of how a watch looks check out the WURW section with a few notable exceptions the majority of our photos are not billboard of photoshoot ready, I'm just happy if mine are in focus 😄. Agree that some watchs are a disappointment when seen in the metal, where possible it's also hopefull to see what the watch looks like outside or by the window in the shop out of the glare of the spotlights on the display. It's also very easy to dismiss a watch depending on what else is in the display, or vicinity.
Wonder how GM advertised the Aztec……
Breaking bad, you too can make Meth
I’m the opposite I always think watches look better on wrist and In person. Seeing the submariner on a billboard but seeing it hovering above your crocs in all of its glory is a whole other experience
Aligator green with “ croc’s” quite fitting actually:)
That now can’t be unseen 😂
Dude love this photo!! But time for new one hahaha!!
How about with a flip flop…
OR all trendy with tobacco birkenstocks 😂
I agree completely with your statement. You are 100% sold a lie. But that is commerce for you. Watch product photography/ads are no different from other products. They're shot on good equipment, well lit out, set dressed and when using models, dressed, styled and professionally made up by make-up artists. Or some don't bother at all and just use the render. They are edited in professional software and increasingly AI plays a part as well. Be it an corrective algorithm or used to generate part or complete images. So it should not be a surprise that the real thing seems off when compared to the ad.
Adinkra codes keep getting better witg AI also
Funny to see this post cause i was just thinking about that.
I was looking to my Casio Royale and thinking that its a great looking Watch, and the Stock images of him doesnt make justice.
I actually posted a photo wearing it today in good natural light and no edit at all, witch is all i ask when looking for a New Watch that i cant really see in person.
Which
The thing that gets me is when watch companies and watch reviewers show renders of new watches. Hard pass. The real thing will look nothing like the render.
If you don’t have the watch in hand, and you post a video “review”, that’s just free marketing for the watch brand.
Looks good, very good 👍🏻
It’s a great point!
And too funny - for me it was the sub as well!
Between posters, advertising, hype, and prices 2x retail… I was thrilled when I realized a colleague owned the epic Rolex Submariner. A watch to crush all comers!
And then I tried not to look sad when I was holding it and trying on 😂
GS is often the reverse, for me. pics on website are ‘meh’ … but glinting like crazy IRL on wrist ✨🤩
I think lots of brands have average to poor pictures on their websites and you’ll never know till you see it up close what a watch is really like.
The thing that gets me is when watch companies and watch reviewers show renders of new watches. Hard pass. The real thing will look nothing like the render.
If you don’t have the watch in hand, and you post a video “review”, that’s just free marketing for the watch brand.
Yes!! I’ve run into this before.
Fall in love with a CG render, and real life is ‘identical’… but sooooo different!!