HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >

Website showing Ads Vs. Real Fast Food

Phaedrus Apr 20, 2007 06:27 AM

http://www.thewvsr.com/adsvsreality.htm

I don't really know where this would fall in the topic areas. A buddy sent me this web site with pictures of the advertising shot of the specific food versus the real product as you would buy the stuff.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. Carrie 218 RE: Phaedrus Apr 20, 2007 06:34 AM

    The absurdity lies in the statement, "This is an ongoing Pulitzer-caliber project."

    Puleeeeeeze. It all looks bad and validates why I never eat fast food.

    1. g
      Got Cake RE: Phaedrus Apr 20, 2007 11:54 AM

      I have worked as an assistant food stylist on national food ads. By law you must use the real company product, with nothing else to enhance it. So we would get boxes of frozen "Burger King" french fries, buns, burgers, pickles etc. In the case of the fries we would then fry them in small batches and hand select the most perfect ones. Then use medical tweezers placing them to create the most perfect bag of fries, that had to be the same amount of ounces as in the serving size at the restaurant. Same with each item.
      One ad could take a group of ten people 12 hours to shoot.

      If it was a cookbook or editorial photo then you get to play with the food more. Add things, use non food items to gloss them up etc. It was interesing to say the least.

      1 Reply
      1. re: Got Cake
        sku RE: Got Cake Apr 20, 2007 03:14 PM

        Wow, really fascinating. You should write an article about it.

      2. j
        julesrules RE: Phaedrus Apr 20, 2007 11:58 AM

        The McMuffin bottom is bigger than its top.

        4 Replies
        1. re: julesrules
          k
          kindofabigdeal RE: julesrules Apr 23, 2007 11:13 AM

          Yeah, the real McMuffin may look better. The ad one just looks odd.

          1. re: kindofabigdeal
            RC51Mike RE: kindofabigdeal Apr 25, 2007 08:46 AM

            Not surprising but still funny seeing them juxtaposed. Appears that the filet-o-fish wins the prize for looking most like its ad counterpart.

            1. re: RC51Mike
              k
              kindofabigdeal RE: RC51Mike Apr 25, 2007 07:37 PM

              true. the filet-o-fish is one food I have never even thought of putting in my mouth. I would love to try a good durian someday, but don't put a filet-o-fish anywhere near me. actually... i don't think i've ever seen one in real life.

              1. re: kindofabigdeal
                s
                Sharuf RE: kindofabigdeal Apr 26, 2007 04:06 AM

                Filet-o-fish is one of the few things at McD's that I like.

        2. f
          fatboy44 RE: Phaedrus Apr 25, 2007 09:41 AM

          I don't know about this website. Granted, the Arby product did not stand up well, however, most of the other stuff seems to me is a photography issue. Professional pics against bad cell phone pics. Who would take any of this as a serious quality issue. If you grill a good cut of Angus strip loin to medium rare, take a picture, then wrap it in tin foil, wait 15 minutes, unwrap it, take another picture, you will see 2 different things. Besides looks, you will have a steak that is not medium rare any more but will be closer to medium. Food keeps cooking and changes in presentation once wrapped up. It doesn't matter whether it's fast food or if it's a take out meal from the French Laundry. (If they would do take out :) JMO.

          2 Replies
          1. re: fatboy44
            k
            kindofabigdeal RE: fatboy44 Apr 25, 2007 07:39 PM

            You're definitely right, but I don't think the continuation of the cooking was an issue in these... and it's probably safe to assume that they never looked qutie like the picture.

            1. re: kindofabigdeal
              f
              fatboy44 RE: kindofabigdeal Apr 26, 2007 06:33 AM

              Sure, food stylists using a blow torch to brown the meat and varnish to give the bun a glossy appearance, studios, etc. etc. etc. The point I tried to make was that, you can't judge a product by a picture, good or bad. Anyways, we shouldn't be eating most of that junk regardless how good it looks:(

          2. ccbweb RE: Phaedrus Apr 25, 2007 07:23 PM

            Well, the items I liked to begin with look fine in the real world pictures. I wouldn't want a bun that stayed all puffed up all the time anyhow.

            1. ElsieDee RE: Phaedrus Apr 27, 2007 02:34 AM

              In the final photo-set on the page, of the sausage and egg McMuffin, in the "advertising" photograph, it looks like the top and bottom portions of the English muffin are from two different muffins - the bottom portion is significantly larger than the top.

              1 Reply
              1. re: ElsieDee
                j
                julesrules RE: ElsieDee Apr 27, 2007 07:02 AM

                Yes I mentionned that above... and later reflected that I probably noticed/was bothered because I too am bottom-heavy ;-p

                I also used to get stressed out whenever an Aussie friend used "it's all gone pear-shaped" to express the idea that something was going wrong.

                I'm sure your own proportions are lovely though :)

              2. jfood RE: Phaedrus Apr 27, 2007 05:41 AM

                One day for a hoot jfood is going to take a picture from Blimpies, Quizno's or Subway and walk into the store and say "I want one that looks like that." Would love to see the reaction.

                Show Hidden Posts