Dude why did you photoshop your pictures to make it look darker/duller than in reality?
Kiesel --- Never Again!
- Thread starter MetalHead40
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
Dude why did you photoshop your pictures to make it look darker/duller than in reality?
narad
Progressive metal and politics
It's not bad, it's just super dark compared to the picture they took. When I placed the order back in May, I was looking for a blue closer to the picture they sent me. Aurora blue though was very new at the time so there weren't many pictures of it. It was a risk, and sadly it didn't work out. No big deal to me since I have another guitar being built right now which should be done next week.
It's like it's not even the same guitar. I tried putting as much light as I could on it and I could never get close to their picture. I was expecting it to look bright just like the picture, but sadly it was very dark. Again that's not the only reason why I returned.
Honestly that looks pretty fair -- that's just the showroom lighting effect. You can't expect them to take their presentation photos in sub-par lighting like the kind most of us have in our homes. And could be a longer shutter time. I love to hate on Kiesel but I don't see much misrepresentation here.
MatiasTolkki
Burn In Agony
Maybe not misrepresentation, but definitely a let down for people who are buying them. they expect something and they dont get it. Photoshopping or using pro lighting like that will only make people disappointed in what they receive.
This site may earn a commission from merchant links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
Well, to be fair, Tyler is probably in a higher pricing tier, so not exactly an apples to apples comparison. And part of this is personal preference—I'm not a fan of Suhr's typically narrow nut width or neck profiles. But I just think there's a higher level of design, finishing, originality, and attention to detail with Tyler.
Tyler necks are the most incredible I've ever touched. The fretboard edges are so rounded that they actually look scalloped when you look down from a playing position. They're just the best playing bolt-ons I've ever used. Those Schmear finishes are ridiculous in person too, so much more depth and just overall better execution than the similar Suhrs. Here's a picture of a friend of mine's that I'm probably going to buy sooner than later. I think this shows it off pretty well, but much cooler in real life.
I think the designs are a lot more original too. They're all different takes on the Super Strat when it comes down to it, but I appreciate the Tyler as more of it's own thing. The headstock is obviously polarizing. I love it personally, a lot hate it, but from a graphic design standpoint I think there's a lot to appreciate even if you're not a fan. The way the logo graphics play off the shape and wrap around is just a different level of detail that Suhr doesn't have.
At the end of the day, I base this opinion just from experience. I've owned a few Suhrs and played a handful more, and never understood why they're held is such high regard. Maybe I've just gotten unlucky and played nothing but duds, but of them have sounded very good, which is objective—fair enough. More importantly they haven't even played very good either. I'm not a big bolt-on fan, but I'd take Tylers and Charvel Custom Shops all day over Suhr.
Sorry this got so far off topic for the thread, just wanted to answer your question.
Albake21
Ibanez Nerd
If I can't get anywhere close to their photo even when putting a shit ton of light on it, we have a serous problem.... I love Kiesel and I will defend them with pretty much everything, but that is absolute bullshit to think that. I'm not saying it should look exactly like their photos by any mean, but come on man.... I couldn't get close no matter what I did. I put SO much lighting on it, still didn't come close. I'm not talking about natural lighting.... I fucking put two lamps in my super bright bathroom and still nothing.
narad
Progressive metal and politics
If it's post-processed, I'm there with you. I think they just know how to shoot their own guitars.
I mean, do you go on Tinder, take a photo of you at work with one eye half shut taken with your webcam and put it on there, or do you take all the ones where you have a great smile, from a good angle, and the lighting was perfect, looking suave AF? They're advertising their guitars -- they're going to present the best reality. The key here being that it should be *a* reality.
You should see my Hartung photos. The thing I ordered: tigers-eye. The photo he sent: cherry sunburst. What I got: maybe tea-burst. Hartung's a good bit above Kiesel on the price and quality ladder and the guy can't even send me photos that would pass as the same guitar.
Ordacleaphobia
Shameless Contrarian
Buuuuuut if you hit up some chick on Tinder and only find out once you get to the date that she's actually a solid 100lbs bigger than what you signed up for, you're probably going to be a bit put off.
I get what you're saying, marketing has it's place and people need to sell their product, but as a consumer wouldn't we prefer to just see what we're getting? The fact that Kiesel doesn't do this confuses me, because like I've said, they make some awesome looking guitars. In my opinion, they don't even need overexposed, pristine lighting marketing photos. Just looking at the shots he posted himself, I'd still totally buy that guitar. The difference is that if I didn't see those photos and I bought it based off of the nice stock shot, I'd still enjoy the guitar, but there'd always be that nagging, back-of-my-mind feeling of "but it could be better," where if I bought the guitar based off of the photos he posted himself and never saw the in stock one, I wouldn't know any better, and would be too busy shredding to care.
It's like when you buy something like a nice TV and you feel you got a good deal, but then two weeks later you're back at the store and you see it on sale for $400 less than you paid somewhere else. Like yeah, it's still a good TV and I'm glad I bought it, but damn dude I could have saved 400 bucks.
Albake21
Ibanez Nerd
Couldn't have said it any better myself.
Yeah, I'm sure that's part of it. As we all know, a good setup can be a difference maker for pretty much any half-decent guitar. But more-so than just my preferences, I've played more than one new Suhr that I'd objectively say wasn't set up to anyone's preferences—just bad fretting out and buzz everywhere. Could have ultimately been the dealers' faults, but I've played enough Suhrs I've been unimpressed with that I've just accepted that they're not for me.
narad
Progressive metal and politics
Humor aside, it kind of missed my last point: the pic captured a reality (assuming no doctoring). Just because your lighting at home is less than that ideal, doesnt make kiesel the bad guy. Are we going to require every guitar manufacturer to take photos in natural lighting with last year's iPhone so we know what it's going to look like at home? Is there *any* precedent for intentionally taking worse photos than the team is capable of?
Seabeast2000
Deathcult® NPC
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2018
- Messages
- 6,120
- Reaction score
- 7,488
I like DCGL's method, just shoot all of them in the parking lot in sunlight. Not in some boudoir by a guy wearing a beret.
Ordacleaphobia
Shameless Contrarian
I think we're juuuust missing each other here, because I see what you're saying.
What I'm saying is that I just wish that all of the photos coming from the shop weren't exceptionally well done photographs, set up for maximum effect with the best possible lighting, etc; and they were just a bit closer to reality. Like when Jeff had that phase were he would snap a photo of the guitar right after finishing with his phone like...on the workshop floor. I'm not saying I want them to take the guitar to a poorly lit room with a shitty camera and take a 480p picture of it; but just something less....trade show-ey..
And I understand that they won't do this, because marketing moves product. To circle back to the TV example, when I check specs for a refresh rate, I want to see the refresh rate, not a 240hz motion rate!! when it's actually just a 60hz panel, because I know that's just marketing. I'm not saying they're "the bad guy," just that marketing bullshit is obnoxious as a consumer and when the product is more than capable of standing on it's own, I personally really don't understand the need.
I like Cliff at Fractal. His whole tagline is "I don't make things to be cheap, I make them to be good," and they are. So they sell.
But you ordered it though, right? Isn't this more that they got the color too dark, or you ordered it too dark? You didn't buy it based on the photo if I'm not mistaken.
Also, I don't say this to be rude, but "putting so much lighting" on something isn't necessarily the way you get those results.
You weren't happy with it and they took it back, that's all that matters. I think Kiesel has worse offenses than this though, including the majority of its designs.
Albake21
Ibanez Nerd
Oh of course, hell it wasn't even the main reason I returned it. I'm not mad at my case specifically, just as a whole with how they take their pictures.
I'm not mad at all how it came out, it's Aurora blue, it's what I ordered. In May when I ordered, they only had a couple examples of Aurora blue which looked a lot brighter than this. Not as bright as mine in the photo, but way brighter than what I got. I knew it was a risk, but I took it in hopes of getting a bright blue. Sadly what I got though was not that.
I learned my lesson and now know that their pictures are way brighter and more colorful than the final product. Some of you guys sound like I should know this already.... I don't know shit about photography, and as a guitar player, why should I?
Again, I'm not upset in my case at all. They returned it super easy, no hassle at all. I'm upset because I now know the truth about their photos being a completely different (looking wise, not literally) guitar than what you get. I get they have to show their guitars in good light and make them marketable, but my god that's a completely different guitar...
spudmunkey
Well-Known Member
So...I don't know of a way to describe something without sounding like some sort of condescending know-it-all, or is somehow defending Kiesel because as I've said, their photos are unrealistic.
But...that comment above, you mentioned bathroom lighting and lamps. I think, and you'll probably scoff at this, but I think the KIND of light is more important than you think.
What I can say is that bright light isn't all created equal. In their showroom, they have incredibly high CRI spots, while keeping with a relatively warmish color temperature compared to sunlight and the color of lighting you likely have in your bathroom. The tyle of lighting they have in their showroom is basically the exact type of lighting you'd find in a jewelry display case. Take a diamond out of the case, and the crazy bright, saturated, refracted colors suddenly become muted and effectively grayscale. You won't notice much of a difference with solid paint, but transparent paints with wood figuring is really reactive to different lighting.
Again, I'm not saying that their photo is representative of what it will look like in your lap, but looking at your and their photo, I can see why it's like it is, with minimal processing:
1) the glossy finish in your photo is reflecting a white ceiling or wall. That's a depth/contrast killer. Everything light-ish gets washed out.
2) The showroom photo has a narrow-focused, very directional light. Even a table/floor lamp that has a normal "bulb" has it's light going in all sorts of directions. By having a narrow, directional "beam", you get the super saturated colors, highlights and lowlights, and the way that it's illuminated is a way that prevents it from reflecting anything other than black.
2) A very very high-quality, high CRI light.
This, with very directional, high CRI lighting, and zero processing (other than saving the RAW file directly to a JPG with no adjustments):
Is the same guitar as this, in a room with a super super bright (but somewhat warm-colored) overhead light (I had to turn the exposure down a bit to avoid blown-out whites):
And did you see that black one on the right in the image above?
That's this one, which is in direct sunlight, but still looks washed out because it's reflecting the sun-lit concrete...
While this one is still reflecting a light-colored ceiling, but at least it's not being illuminated by an area bulb in the room. The only light source is the light coming in from the side. Compare the upper bouts above the pickup switch...in the outdoor-lit photo, there's barely any flames in the area, but in the image below, it's super clear and defined.
So again, to be clear, I'm not saying there's no reason to not think their photography is a bit dishonest, because at best it's hot helpful, and at worst it's way more unrealistic than almost every other company's photography... but I can honestly say that it's plausible (and in my mind actually more likely) that the lighting is the culprit, rather than editing....which I do know they've also done sometimes (to be clear, most of the super obvious HDR ones that come up in google image searches are images other people have re-uploaded to pinterest after editing themselves. There's even one guy who posts pictures of his guitar with all sorts of brightly colored green and fuscia lighting and it wows people every time, and they ask "What's the finish on that?". All he ever says is the paint colors, but makes no mention of the fact that it's under colored lighting. When you see the same guitar in video in normal lighting, it's darker, and more drab, and way less bright.
The "factory walk-through" photos are generally better than the showroom or official staged photographs with the black background, if that's helpful at all.
The same guitars in that photo above hanging on the wall are in a room with nearly 400w equivalent lighting, are the same guitars in the image below, with less, but higher-quality and directional (with the use of a honeycomb light filter thing) studio lighting, in an otherwise dark room. Again, zero processing:
Even just look at the headstocks of the two electrics, which don't have the spotlights shining directly on them in this photo. They are way way darker.
Probably the best chance of simulating the "showroom" experience would be if you had a recessed light, especially in a hallway. If you put the guitar directly under it, and lower the rest of the lighting in the house, especially in any areas that would be reflecting in the top....but even then, the type of light in that can will also play a large part.
Last edited:
Albake21
Ibanez Nerd
While I appreciate the well thought out post I'll only say it one more time. I'm a guitar player, not a photographer. I don't know anything about lighting, why should I? That's my point here. Kiesel customers are guitar players, the average person does not know this and they shouldn't need to.So...I don't know of a way to describe something without sounding like some sort of condescending know-it-all, or is somehow defending Kiesel because as I've said, their photos are unrealistic.
But...that comment above, you mentioned bathroom lighting and lamps. I think, and you'll probably scoff at this, but I think the KIND of light is more important than you think.
What I can say is that bright light isn't all created equal. In their showroom, they have incredibly high CRI spots, while keeping with a relatively warmish color temperature compared to sunlight and the color of lighting you likely have in your bathroom. The tyle of lighting they have in their showroom is basically the exact type of lighting you'd find in a jewelry display case. Take a diamond out of the case, and the crazy bright, saturated, refracted colors suddenly become muted and effectively grayscale. You won't notice much of a difference with solid paint, but transparent paints with wood figuring is really reactive to different lighting.
Again, I'm not saying that their photo is representative of what it will look like in your lap, but looking at your and their photo, I can see why it's like it is, with minimal processing:
1) the glossy finish in your photo is reflecting a white ceiling or wall. That's a depth/contrast killer. Everything light-ish gets washed out.
2) The showroom photo has a narrow-focused, very directional light. Even a table/floor lamp that has a normal "bulb" has it's light going in all sorts of directions. By having a narrow, directional "beam", you get the super saturated colors, highlights and lowlights, and the way that it's illuminated is a way that prevents it from reflecting anything other than black.
2) A very very high-quality, high CRI light.
This, with very directional, high CRI lighting, and zero processing (other than saving the RAW file directly to a JPG with no adjustments):
Is the same guitar as this, in a room with a super super bright (but somewhat warm-colored) overhead light (I had to turn the exposure down a bit to avoid blown-out whites):
And did you see that black one on the right in the image above?
That's this one, which is in direct sunlight, but still looks washed out because it's reflecting the sun-lit concrete...
While this one is still reflecting a light-colored ceiling, but at least it's not being illuminated by an area bulb in the room. The only light source is the light coming in from the side. Compare the upper bouts above the pickup switch...in the outdoor-lit photo, there's barely any flames in the area, but in the image below, it's super clear and defined.
So again, to be clear, I'm not saying there's no reason to not think their photography is a bit dishonest, because at best it's hot helpful, and at worst it's way more unrealistic than almost every other company's photography... but I can honestly say that it's plausible (and in my mind actually more likely) that the lighting is the culprit, rather than editing....which I do know they've also done sometimes (to be clear, most of the super obvious HDR ones that come up in google image searches are images other people have re-uploaded to pinterest after editing themselves. There's even one guy who posts pictures of his guitar with all sorts of brightly colored green and fuscia lighting and it wows people every time, and they ask "What's the finish on that?". All he ever says is the paint colors, but makes no mention of the fact that it's under colored lighting. When you see the same guitar in video in normal lighting, it's darker, and more drab, and way less bright.
The "factory walk-through" photos are generally better than the showroom or official staged photographs with the black background, if that's helpful at all.
The same guitars in that photo above hanging on the wall are in a room with nearly 400w equivalent lighting, are the same guitars in the image below, with less, but higher-quality and directional (with the use of a honeycomb light filter thing) studio lighting, in an otherwise dark room. Again, zero processing:
Even just look at the headstocks of the two electrics, which don't have the spotlights shining directly on them in this photo. They are way way darker.
Probably the best chance of simulating the "showroom" experience would be if you had a recessed light, especially in a hallway. If you put the guitar directly under it, and lower the rest of the lighting in the house, especially in any areas that would be reflecting in the top....but even then, the type of light in that can will also play a large part.
I wonder if they have a color that does look more like that? It almost looks more like a shade of green to me. It really did look like a great color in the picture. I don't know if you've ever seen it, but it immediately reminded me of the finish on this 7 string Demon from a while back that I really liked.
Albake21
Ibanez Nerd
Damn... yeah that's pretty sweet. I'd prefer it to be more lighter blue than green, but I'd happily take that!I wonder if they have a color that does look more like that? It almost looks more like a shade of green to me. It really did look like a great color in the picture. I don't know if you've ever seen it, but it immediately reminded me of the finish on this 7 string Demon from a while back that I really liked.
All in all, I'm not upset at Kiesel about my build in any way and I plan on putting in another build in the future. It will probably be a pearl white, no more messing with colors haha.
A lot of cork-sniffing going on in this thread. What has our society come to, that a custom company builds you a high quality instrument, specially for you at a really affordable price, with the specs you request, and you get upset about it not being the right shade of green. Give me a break. Play the damn thing.
