american apparel – FAIL

is it just me, or are people just fucking nuts?

i mean, completely out of their heads crazy?

this is the perfect post to follow up our photoshop disasters post. welcome to ‘un-photoshopped disasters’.

i was checking out ‘texts from last night’, the blog i wrote about a couple of days ago. it’s pretty amazing, in fact, it’s such a popular blog that companies pay good money to advertise on it.

while there i came across a rather fancy ad. it’s not just your run of the mill static image with a headline and a logo. oh no, this one is a little more sophisticated. it’s actually a moving advertisement. it’s made up of three separate rotating images. and so first you see the one, then it fades into the next image, and then finally to the last frame which reveals the logo. and then the entire thing repeats. you get my drift?

since i’m a laggard i have no clue how to copy and paste the animated piece, so you’ll have to do with stills and use the part of your imagination that files your taxes, to picture the images rotating. here we go:

FRAME ONE:

FRAME TWO:

and lastly the people who brought you the ad and want you to buy their product:

FRAME THREE:

seriously! really american apparel? really?

what’s up with the tan line? (don’t even get me started on the hooker/model) you went to all that trouble to take the photographs, animate them, and paid good money to buy the advertising space and you couldn’t spend five minutes retouching out her tan line?

did you run out of time? think we wouldn’t notice? not know how to use photoshop? stop to scratch your balls and forget what you were doing? what happened here?

really? dudes at american apparel, hang your heads in shame. you don’t deserve to sell any of your trailer park malibu swimsuit/bodysuits. not one!

if you want to see the ad for yourself, it’s over here, or at least it was at the time this was posted. i can’t guarantee it will still be there when you go look.



7 responses to “american apparel – FAIL”

  1. lisa says:

    I dunno, I kinda like American Apparel ads. I think the models are all employees, real people, no retouching. It has its own appeal, no?

  2. Matt Watts says:

    I think they are going for the trailer trash, retro 80’s kind of look, so I think the tan line is intentional. Got you talking about it, so maybe it worked. It worked for me (not the tan line, but their general approach), I buy their socks and t-shirts. I’m that cool.

  3. Paige says:

    if that’s the case and it’s intentional then i’m the dummy. i completely missed that. i just thought it was sloppy work. shows how much i know.
    Hey i’m all for using real people as models and not retouching them to within an inch of their lives, i just thought this one looked iffy.
    but if that’s what they’re going for then i’m not as cool as either of you for missing it.

  4. Paige says:

    actually, i’m really torn about this, and am still thinking about it (so maybe it did work!). i suppose it all depends on thier intention.
    if their intention is to be real, and make a joke then ha ha, but they should refer to that with a line or something so we know.
    without that kind of reference or context it’s really just sloppy work and a bit jerry springer.

    don’t you think?

  5. Anonymous says:

    I think if they are using real people then surely they should still try to style them a little better? Witness the current ad playing on TFLN – Rachel in her disco pants. But she doesn’t seem to be wearing much, if any, make up, big librarian specs and her hair is dirty. surely if she went to the effort of putting on shiny disco pants and a chiffon blouse (plus sexy bra…) she would have flat ironed (or something) her hair and put her contacts in? Just saying…
    I think I’m a real person and I’d have made a bit more effort.

    Think I’m with Paige (this is the other paige) on the slightly mixed result…

  6. nouk says:

    hmmm wow they used a real looking model..you know one that actually HAS curves.. so when she wears a sexy swimsuit it comes across as well ..in ya face.. you know why? coz its real. not airbrushed. not hanging of skin and bone. 100% real and awesome. perhaps you are misconceiving sexy for trashy coz she actually looks hot. no skin and bone emaciated advertising tricks that usually get females attention by highlighting their insecurities.. no. just plain.. buy the swimsuit hunny.. be real.. and guess what.. you’ll pull it off and god forbid.. you “miss normal” -will look hot! perhaps also you may notice that the tan line highlights the fact that this swimsuit is actually a high cut -perhaps this was intentional? hmmm?

  7. Paige says:

    Heya Nouk, well i never thought about the tan line being there to indicate how high cut it is. that’s an interesting thought.
    i’m a million miles from skinny, so not sure that kind of high cut cozzie is quite my style but nouk i think you’re 100% right about the 100% woman thing. i think the world is turning and woman no longer want to see fake chicks retouched to within an inch of their lives. and if this ad gets us closer to that goal then i’m all for it. but surely there must be a happy medium?
    i think my main point was that it just showed a lack of effort in leaving the tan line in on the part of the advertiser unless as you say, they did it intentionally, in which case i’m the dummy for not picking that up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *