That last one is scary. Why would anyone want to advertise their product by insinuating that it will show you dead people? Reminds me of the ad campaign that showed actual people as if they looked like they did in photographs, such as the red-eye baby or the oversized-head dog... Olympus, it was.

Here's the red-eye baby ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWMpc1IxFFU

I'm actually interested in how self-aware the ads are. Granted, they take lightly things that should nbot be (making voyeurism into a jokey "porn is funny" thing is gross, as is the safari/savage composition of the second) but it's offensive in a very postmodern way, the way being ironic about racism and sexism makes people think they've inoculated themselves from it (thereby letting them have their cake and eat it too, letting them enjoy the racism/sexism even while distancing themselves from it). But it's not like the people who made these ads didn't understand what they were doing; they made the lesbian porn picture ad as a cliche of itself (the girls on the bed are clearly posing for their viewers, so it's not voyeurism at all), and the second picture is a similar kind of making fun of the cliche joke (the joke being that the safari guy doesn't see the savages in the bushes, but we do).

Not defending the ads, again, but just observing that they are gross in a much more devious way.

these are definitely strange. sometimes i wonder about what went on in the meetings that led up to ads, and how the decisions were made to go forward with them.

i just found your site via Savage Minds. it's really interesting what you are doing here...keep up the great work.

"Not defending the ads, again, but just observing that they are gross in a much more devious way."

you have a good point.

"Porn Lesbians" (with air quotes) is going to be my new DJ name. Genius.

Those girls look seriously underage. It also makes my wonder when and how we got to the point that the bodies they have would be immediately recognizable by a viewer of this ad as representing 'sexiness' -- they are *extremely* thin.

The second ad could have been made non-offensive by using animal faces in the bushes, but obviously a choice was made by the advertiser to instead reinscribe colonial/racist visual discourse.

The second ad could have been made non-offensive by using animal faces in the bushes, but obviously a choice was made by the advertiser to instead reinscribe colonial/racist visual discourse.

I don't know if that particular example works with the technology, but the point stands. The face finder could pick up people paintballing in camo if they wanted the "sneaky" look, for example ("haha, the guy's about to get toasted from behind by his buddys while he poses for the shot" kind of thing.)

Interesting. I wonder if the technology was adapted from military applications, like spotting hidden snipers. That'd be handy in places where those kinds of things are an issue.

And if I were taking pictures of some porn lesbians, I'd close the curtains. I would certainly have been a little freaked out when my camera found the guy who was actually in the room with us!

The ads seem like a sly way of marketing the feature as something more than a way to get the sharpest focus on the faces of people we want to photograph since the primary subjects in the ads don't exactly need some new tech feature to help the photographer find their faces, and if they are near the center of the shot most cameras would auto-focus on the faces anyway.

Correction: I would've been more annoyed than freaked out about the face in the room since it was just pointed out to me that it looks like a kid, which I'd agree it does after I looked at the full-size version.

"Son, what did I tell you about bothering daddy when he's working?"

Damn feminists trying to be all political like. Get to the kitchen. Problem solved.