[HN Gopher] The 2005 Sony Bravia ad
___________________________________________________________________
The 2005 Sony Bravia ad
Author : coloneltcb
Score : 230 points
Date : 2025-03-12 15:12 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.sfgate.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.sfgate.com)
| bananicorn wrote:
| The video in question:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spB4ezsQ6II
| diggan wrote:
| Absolute travesty to view that video via YouTube though, as the
| compression destroys the frames when there are hundreds of
| colorful balls in view.
|
| Anyone know of an alternative source, ideally without the
| typical internet-friendly/heavy compression?
| tantalor wrote:
| Here's a 4k "remaster"
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UXS6DBD6g0
| diggan wrote:
| The problem is not "1080p vs 4K on YouTube" but using
| YouTube at all for quality video. It's always been bad on
| YouTube, but videos like this make it extra obvious. For
| example, this shot: https://i.imgur.com/NRT0AOW.jpeg even
| in 4K it looks horrible, because of the compression YouTube
| does even to 4K.
|
| I've tried finding some better version (not on YouTube) but
| been unable to, maybe it is lost to the passage of time.
| jsheard wrote:
| The description of that higher quality upload says they
| sourced it from a retail demo disk, that's probably the
| best quality version in the wild. Maybe there's a direct
| rip of that disk on archive.org somewhere? Otherwise
| someone could ask them to upload their copy if they still
| have it.
| p1mrx wrote:
| Blu-ray was just getting started in 2005, and Bravia TVs
| were 1366x768[1], so the demo disk is likely a DVD. I
| think someone would have to persuade Sony to remaster
| their original film, or release it to an archivist.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sony_Bravia_tel
| evision...
| diggan wrote:
| > that's probably the best quality version in the wild
|
| Probably not, would be my guess. Uploading the very same
| source video to somewhere else than YouTube (and ideally
| a place that doesn't do heavy compression at all) would
| lead to an higher quality version easily, someone
| somewhere must have done just that.
| jsheard wrote:
| That's what I meant, that the _source_ video for that
| YouTube upload is probably the best version out there, as
| you say the second-hand re-encoded version served by
| YouTube is inferior. I didn 't word that clearly, sorry.
| whycome wrote:
| Try pulling different codec versions from YouTube? Maybe
| it got upped to Vimeo or something before? Also YouTube
| got rid of some resolution options a couple years back
| and that kinda adds to the problem of compression-rot of
| sorts.
| keane wrote:
| There's a 2010 copy taken from iTV on Vimeo:
| https://vimeo.com/14504562
|
| Similar but slightly larger file from henry.tv at
| https://vimeo.com/293364002
|
| The high-quality extended version Sony originally
| published at bravia-
| advert.com/includes/vid/bravia_150_sec_high.mov was
| 700x394 apparently.
| diggan wrote:
| > that kinda adds to the problem of compression-rot of
| sorts
|
| I dunno, when even the 4K version (offered by YouTube)
| shows the very same compression artifacts on a 4K modern
| TV, then I kind of feel like you screwed up. At least
| from the perspective of a viewer, of course from the
| perspective of the business that saves a lot of money
| from it.
| frereubu wrote:
| Something's a bit wrong with the colour on that though - it
| looks really oversaturated.
| whycome wrote:
| The high contrast edges of foliage breaks it too. It
| seems like a release from the original source would be
| very doable. And maybe other versions exist if it was
| considered for (and won) various awards. And the initial
| Sky broadcast may have been high quality too?
| bredren wrote:
| Tagging onto this, curious if anyone has preferred AI-based
| 1080 -> 4k+ upscale workflows.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| The same problem with confetti and snow in videos, due to
| compression:
|
| <https://tensorpix.ai/blog/video-compression-snow-confetti>
|
| Video compression functions best where little of the shot
| changes frame-to-frame. This is also why rapid-cut video
| performs poorly online.
| Synaesthesia wrote:
| I watched it, it's not so bad. Anyway, it's not like TV
| doesn't use compression, and back then it was more primitive
| MPEG-2.
| ginko wrote:
| This was a commercial produced for European television in
| 2005. Barely anyone even had an HDTV back then. I certainly
| saw it in standard definition when it aired.
| Duanemclemore wrote:
| I hadn't thought about this in years. It was absolutely dazzling
| to see at the time, I can't imagine what it was like in person.
| In retrospect I would also probably chalk this up as the first
| truly "internet" moment.
| zusammen wrote:
| I was in San Francisco that week. Ecological issues aside, it was
| the last time San Francisco felt different in a good way rather
| than a bad one. The "negative energy" is now too much for me and,
| when I travel to the Bay Area, I pretty much just stay on-track.
| I wonder if people who lived in San Francisco from 1965-2005
| expected it to last forever.
| realityfactchex wrote:
| What city regions have better energy, are good economically,
| and have natural beauty (ocean, mountain, plants)?
|
| It is easy to find faults with the SF bay area (politics,
| costs, and derivative issues), but is somewhere actually
| better?
|
| EDIT: Thanks for the downvotes. It was an honest question, and
| I badly wanted to be informed, having given the issue in-depth
| consideration over the years. I wasn't being snarky.
| wrs wrote:
| Seattle has those things, IMO. (You didn't mention weather!)
| drewcoo wrote:
| Seattle weather keeps strangers away. And drives sunglasses
| sales.
| testfrequency wrote:
| You're conveniently leaving out how pretentious and
| insufferable many Seattleites are...
|
| It has been far and wide the least welcoming, interesting,
| and lackluster food city I've ever lived in.
|
| Also, the coffee scene there is worse than SF, Chicago,
| LA..rare stop for bands and musicians touring, and
| unpleasant transit.
|
| The only people I know who are genuinely happy there are
| people who moved from Florida, and wealthy white families
| with young children who moved there (from California)
| "because taxes and better education".
|
| Don't even get me started on the lack of diversity and
| casual racism.
|
| SF is far from perfect, but Seattle isn't even in the
| conversation for places I'd ever recommend someone leaving
| SF to shortlist.
| JohnFen wrote:
| > You're conveniently leaving out how pretentious and
| insufferable many Seattleites are
|
| SF isn't any better on that count.
| testfrequency wrote:
| Caught me mid edit..I agree..to a degree.
|
| Seattle is another tier above. SF people I find far more
| interesting and smart vs. the smartest people I
| met/knew/know in Seattle. Seattle is like a pissing
| contest for nerd snipers. At least in SF we drink our own
| pee (at Folsom of course)
| qingcharles wrote:
| This is literally the opposite of my experiences :(
| marssaxman wrote:
| Sorry you're not having a good time here; that hasn't
| been my experience of the city _at all_. There was a
| moment back in the late '90s when I could have moved to
| either Seattle or S.F., and Seattle happened to snag me
| first; I still enjoy visiting SF from time to time, but
| I've never had the slightest regret about settling here
| instead.
|
| For tradition's sake, I feel obligated to give you the
| classic Seattleite response to such complaints:
| "whatever, man; if there's somewhere you like better,
| feel free to go there."
| qingcharles wrote:
| Seattle is awesome and the people are the friendliest I've
| encountered in the USA. Feels Canadian.
|
| The weather kills me, though. The weather is too British.
| api_or_ipa wrote:
| Vancouver, IMO, is a far better developed city than
| Seattle. Vastly better transit, denser, more walkable
| neighbourhoods, and just overall very thoughtfully
| developed.
|
| It's just an enormous shame it's become grossly
| unaffordable-- on an income adjusted basis, it's more
| expensive than the Bay Area. That, and the weather,
| although the summers are perfect IMO.
| bombcar wrote:
| Really depends on what you mean by all those. Some would say
| Sandy Eggo has the beauty, others would contest that Seattle
| has the economy and mountains.
|
| The people left there are those who like what it has become
| or are trapped in someway; others have moved.
| oofbaroomf wrote:
| The Seattle/Bellevue area.
| GuinansEyebrows wrote:
| Ah, Bellevue, for when you want to feel like you live
| inside of a shopping mall.
| toast0 wrote:
| How can you watch Logan's Run and not want to live inside
| a shopping mall??
| GuinansEyebrows wrote:
| Go to Bellevue and find out :)
| throw8404948k wrote:
| SF is good economicaly? Super expensive, high taxes with no
| matching infrastructure, hiring people...
|
| Weather is cold and moisty...
|
| There are thousands better places around the world. I would
| like to hear a pitch, why start company in SF today.
| realityfactchex wrote:
| Yeah, it's good economically in the sense that it's still
| near top of market, due to having a large-ish existing
| economy (even if aspects of said economy seem fundamentally
| whack).
|
| As in: if you want something at decent quality you can
| pretty much get it pretty easily with a bunch of options
| (assuming you can afford it).
|
| Caveat - not necessarily the top of everything for all
| markets is available, but overall stuff is still around --
| even as some things are disappearing from the area.
|
| In contrast, other places are just poor, and you "cannot"
| find as large a variety of lots of goods and services, I
| imagine. But I could be wrong -- I'll check my assumptions.
| Thanks.
| throw8404948k wrote:
| Are services really easily available in SF? I was shocked
| when we went to restaurant at evening without a
| reservation. Server give one hour waiting time for a
| table! At normal city you just drop into nearest good
| restaurant, and if they are full (very unlikely) you go
| to next.
|
| How easy is to get a dentist or masseuse, with a few hour
| notice?!
|
| > In contrast, other places are just poor, and you
| "cannot" find as large a variety of lots of goods and
| services
|
| I think you need reality check on "poor". The place with
| the widest selection of services and products (for
| example types of meat in supermarket, or hand made
| tailored clothes) is Bangkok in Thailand. Places like SF
| just do not have enough people to provide all those
| services.
| realityfactchex wrote:
| > Are services really easily available in SF?
|
| IDK about in the city itself, but in the surrounding
| metro area I would say yes.
|
| > At normal city you just drop into nearest good
| restaurant, and if they are full (very unlikely) you go
| to next.
|
| Right, I was biased toward considering the surrounding
| cities in the SF metro. I think popping into next open
| restaurant with seating applies to the healthy downtowns
| in the area metro area. But the city itself, I wouldn't
| know.
|
| > a dentist...with a few hour notice
|
| I don't think that kind of dental scheduling is typically
| found/done _anywhere_ in the US AFAIK.
|
| > meat in supermarket, or hand made tailored clothes) is
| Bangkok in Thailand
|
| Good counterexample, thank you.
| paradox460 wrote:
| It used to be found in sf, and I've still found it in slc
|
| Back in 2012 I had a raspberry seed work it's way down
| into my gums and not come out. Made an appointment at
| Townsend dental and saw him 3 hours later.
|
| A few weeks ago I had a filling fall out. Called up a
| local dentist here and got it fixed 90 minutes later
| thatfrenchguy wrote:
| Yeah if you're in a culture where everyone gets a
| reservation for a fancy restaurant (just like in Paris),
| you'll need a reservation, that's just how the market
| works.
|
| > How easy is to get a dentist or masseuse, with a few
| hour notice?!
|
| I mean, everyone who lives here is already affiliated
| with a dental office and they'll take you in same day for
| a real emergency. You can get a Thai massage in two hours
| very easily too.
|
| The quality of medical care is also stupidly high
| compared to almost anywhere outside the US. Sure your
| insurance will pay $$$ for it but who cares?
| groby_b wrote:
| Because you meet tons of talented engineers whenever you go
| for lunch, and they just need to cross the street and walk
| in to ask for a job.
|
| Because you're around a ton of people who are interested in
| the same thing as you are. Caveat: If you're not interested
| in the things SF engineers are interested in, that means
| you're surrounded by masses of incredibly boring - to you -
| folks :)
|
| Because that introduction you need to make things pop is
| super-easy compared to other places.
|
| Doesn't mean you _have_ to start in SF, but for certain
| classes of ventures, it's the place that makes it the
| easiest.
| z3phyr wrote:
| Subculture wise, SF is barely represented in computer
| graphics or high performance optimization circles, like
| gamedev or demoscene, arguably a class of field that
| produces top quality software engineers.
| throw8404948k wrote:
| Any remote job listing gets thousands of applications,
| with dozens good candidates. I really doubt I could get
| decent engineer for $80k a year in SF.
|
| > Caveat: If you're not interested ... incredibly boring
|
| Everyone in SF has basically the same correct opinion.
|
| And not just booring, but hostile. People in SF are
| really not that tolerant. Try to say that Dubai is more
| diverse, because it has many cultures, religions, people
| from Africa, India, Philippines... Or someone is not XYZ,
| but mixed race (whiter than me) and you will understand.
| simoncion wrote:
| > I really doubt I could get decent engineer for $80k a
| year in SF.
|
| If you did, they'd be a non-exempt employee, so you'd
| need to track and pay out overtime. A quick look puts the
| minimum non-exempt salary for jobs in California at
| ~$69,000.
|
| Also, honestly? I expect you'd be hard-pressed to find a
| decent programmer for $80k/year in ANY major metro area
| in the US... post 2020, housing prices went NUTS across
| the country and aren't getting any less nuts.
|
| (One of the big reasons I haven't moved out of San
| Francisco is that my ~50% less than "market rate" rent is
| not THAT much more than current rents in most other US
| cities. (Plus, most other US cities don't even pretend to
| have any sort of useful public transportation.))
| indoordin0saur wrote:
| It really is surrounded by amazing natural beauty. However,
| everything to do with humans has slowly morphed into an
| unfixable nightmare and it's heartbreaking. I think it's time
| to throw in the towel, evacuate everyone from the city and
| let it return to nature as a wildlife preserve.
| pj_mukh wrote:
| I'd say Lisbon, Portugal is probably the closest (including
| Weather, which places like Seattle are lacking), especially
| because you didn't mention pre-existing tech industry which
| is probably SF's main differential versus everywhere else. It
| even has a big red bridge?
|
| P.S: I'm sorry Lisboetas..you are already getting swamped by
| Digi Nomads, but it's true.
| fossuser wrote:
| I visited lisbon last year and was kind of shocked how
| similar to SF it was, weather, hills, general feel - that
| it has its own golden gate bridge really just sealed it.
| Clamchop wrote:
| I've grown rather fond of San Diego.
| sekai wrote:
| Munich, Germany. Although, the sea is a bit further away.
| basisword wrote:
| I think this is bigger than just SF. After the great recession
| the generally positive atmosphere in the western world never
| really recovered. Any time it even got close to recovering some
| new horrible event happened.
| deadbabe wrote:
| As the world grows more interconnected, the proliferation of
| news about horrible events happening spreads faster, and even
| if you personally ignore the news, other people don't, and
| this colors the overall mood of society.
|
| There is horror everywhere, and always will be until the end
| of our days.
| basisword wrote:
| I hadn't thought of it in this way. Interesting point.
| LaundroMat wrote:
| Suppose you lived in a village where there was no outside
| news. You'd learn of about two murders and a dozen deadly
| accidents in your lifetime. Imagine how safer you'd feel
| compared to a villager who's getting outside news beamed to
| her face every hour of the day.
|
| I'm not advocating isolation, but our primitive minds are
| not able to really understand that what is projected in
| front of us is not the same as what happens in front of us.
| I don't know how anyone could solve that.
| hinkley wrote:
| And how can you support funding this beautiful park
| proposal when there are children starving in ${country}??
|
| I can't remember where I heard this, but it was someone
| questioning joy and frivolity in a time of war. And the
| answer back was that people need to remember what they are
| fighting for otherwise what's the point?
|
| If you don't allow yourself joy until the problems are
| gone, there will never be joy and the problems will
| multiply for lack of it.
| indigoabstract wrote:
| I was thinking the same thing. It's surprising how many
| people don't get this, arguing that poverty, wars or some
| other pressing matter must be solved first before we can
| go to space or spend money on non essential activities.
|
| It may seem counterintuitive, but that way of thinking
| doesn't actually solve problems, it only perpetuates
| them.
| robcohen wrote:
| While your point has value, there's also value in the
| perspective that people should take more responsibility
| for the damage inflicted on others under their watch. For
| example, it is my perspective that too many people stood
| by idly while the U.S. engaged in war for the
| 90's/00's/10's/20's. Too many people said "I want to go
| make money on wall street/in law/in consulting" instead
| of either changing their political system or serving it.
| There is a fair argument that war, particularly war
| conducted by your own country, is an exceptional thing
| and requires re-prioritizing duties over desires. The
| only other exception I can think of that isn't debateable
| is genocide.
| umeshunni wrote:
| > the U.S. engaged in war for the 90's/00's/10's/20's.
|
| but also in the 40s/50s/60s/70s/80s
| hinkley wrote:
| I started to respond with more depressing historical
| facts and then thought better of it.
|
| Look! Colorful rubber balls bouncing in the sunlight!
| Fun!
| whycome wrote:
| > and this colors the overall mood of society.
|
| Would thousands of colored balls careening down streets
| bouncing off objects and each other and damaging things in
| their path be an okay metaphor for this?
| supportengineer wrote:
| You hit the nail on the head. It's the repeated traumas,
| year-after-year, with no break.
| dkarl wrote:
| Positivity has become politically suspect. It's doubly sad to
| be unhappy about how things are going in the world generally
| and also to be nervous about enjoying when something goes
| right. It's sad that making a positive comment about the
| weather is something I only do with close friends now, and
| not even all of them. There are people I've known for years,
| who know what my politics are, who know who I give money to,
| yet still, if I say something nice about the weather, they
| have to say "too bad climate isn't weather" or "yeah, but you
| know in a few months it's going to be terrible, because
| global warming is real." And none of this drives political
| engagement or moves anybody's mind in the slightest; it's
| just a social fashion that arose spontaneously, for no
| purpose, and which we will enforce zealously until one day it
| doesn't seem important anymore.
| thatfrenchguy wrote:
| I mean, you mean after the 2003-2004 Iraq war, 9/11 in 2001,
| the stolen election of 2000 & the crash of 2000, the Kosovo
| war in 1999? There's always a lot of reasons why the
| atmosphere can be negative every year.
| basisword wrote:
| I do mean after those things. Globally nobody cares about
| most of these after the initial shock. There were
| definitely long periods of good in between those events.
| ianmcgowan wrote:
| I moved to "the city" in 1989 from England, and people were
| complaining then about yuppies and it wasn't the same as the
| good ol' days of the 60's.
|
| SF seems to be a lot more in-flux compared to other cities, so
| if you don't like the scene now just wait a few years and a new
| one will be along :-)
| finnthehuman wrote:
| When I visited in the 90's I remember conversations mentioning
| seeing the signs and trying to delay the inevitable end.
| Whether someone sees that as dooming or prescient is probably a
| matter of if they moved in before or after 2005.
| keoneflick wrote:
| The San Francisco I experience is full of positive energy.
| Sure, maybe if you're visiting and stay in Union Square, that's
| not what you see. But if you live in the residential
| neighborhoods and work somewhere nice (such as in the
| Presidio), there isn't another city in the world I would rather
| be.
| jf wrote:
| It seems to me like working from home has transformed the
| residential neighborhoods. I recently visited Inner Sunset as
| was astonished at how many people were out and about.
| kemiller wrote:
| Things got significantly darker after 9/11.
| nsxwolf wrote:
| How did this ever get through committee?
| basisword wrote:
| It's such a memorable ad. It's like the dream of a child actually
| brought to life.
|
| I've seen this story discussed around the internet over the last
| few days and found it interesting how younger generations seemed
| to only view it negatively (pollution, excess, etc). It's quite
| sad that something that seems like it could be universally
| enjoyed at the isn't now.
| pjc50 wrote:
| General thing of the internet, really. We've all become used to
| being rewarded for negativity and critique.
| Clamchop wrote:
| There's some irony in this comment. It's also a textbook ad
| hominem.
|
| I love the ad and the stunt. I would have been as giddy as a
| child if I'd seen it in person.
|
| It's also rings true to me that it's rather wasteful and
| destructive in service of selling TVs.
|
| Shrug, what's done is done so I'm free to enjoy it guilt-free
| while also thinking we probably shouldn't do stunts like this
| anymore.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| Seems cool enough to me that it should have been done
| independent of selling TVs. I don't think it is wasteful,
| and to the extent it was destructive, it was well worth it.
|
| We should encourage and welcome more of this, not less. How
| it is funded does not diminish this, IMO.
| bondarchuk wrote:
| Advertising is a cancer on society, just 'cause it's sometimes
| nice to look at doesn't really change that. IMHO of course.
| basisword wrote:
| I'm quite certain a fun video for a Sony Bravia TV from 20
| years ago is not comparable to cancer in any way. It's ok to
| be happy from time to time :)
| mostlysimilar wrote:
| Not sure if I'd call the relentless assault on my attention
| to convince me to purchase things "happy", but to each
| their own.
| vincnetas wrote:
| what is your preferred (ideal) way of being informed
| about possible beneficial proposals?
|
| ps i also hate ads and attention economy.
| ok_dad wrote:
| At this point in my life, I've realized that anything
| they advertise that is actually a new thing (not a TV or
| a toaster with slightly better features) is just going to
| be some consumable or gadget that I don't want or need.
| Most advertising I see is just for some soda or
| electronics brand which I already know about and do not
| want to buy. I don't think I could name a single ad that
| I've seen that is for a genuinely new product or service
| that was useful enough to me that I thought, "thank god
| they showed me this ad!"
| foobarian wrote:
| I've actually seen multiple such ads in the past year on
| Youtube. I found myself surprised to actually want to see
| it to the end while hovering over the Skip button. One
| was a bed Heater/Cooler gadget, another an ultrasonic
| cutter. There were also some doozies, like these "model
| v8 engines" that work very hard to hide the fact that
| they are powered by electric motors. We'll see how this
| year goes.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| And for literal centuries, you could flip through
| magazines to look for those neat gadgets when you want to
| look for them, where they usually had a fairly simple ad
| that wasn't trying to trick you or play with your
| emotions or anything. Usually a spec sheet.
|
| When I want to know what kind of neat electronics I can
| play with my raspberry Pi, I don't sit around and wait
| for Youtube to show me ads, I _browse the fucking store_.
|
| When my dad wanted to start a pressure washing business
| in the early 2000s, he didn't wait for an ad on the
| radio, or see a billboard, he _ordered a catalog from
| some pressure washing companies and browsed their
| offerings at his leisure_
|
| In the 60s, if you ran a electronics lab, and you needed
| a new instrument to calibrate your new atomic clock, you
| would order an HP catalog and flip through their
| offerings, which included a basic description, a picture
| sometimes, and some specs.
|
| Notably, the old way primarily required you to start from
| a point of dissatisfaction, intentionally seek out
| information, and purchase a solution to an actual problem
| you have.
|
| The current days, advertising is all about convincing us
| with evolutionary brain tricks that we actually have so
| many problems. I'm tired of it.
| glial wrote:
| Taking your question at face value, I would much prefer
| information be "pulled" rather than "pushed". In other
| words, I don't want to be informed - I want to search
| when I decide to search, get reviews when I decide to get
| reviews, etc. I don't want someone else deciding how my
| attention is diverted or what they would recommend for
| me. A notable exception is that I am happy to take
| unsolicited recommendations from friends and family, but
| that's because there is a critical distinction: they want
| to inform me of something _for me_ , rather than _for the
| product manufacturers._
| sincerely wrote:
| This argument for the theoretical benefit of advertising
| (being informed about products/services) was probably
| true at the point in time when advertising genuinely
| consisted of a dispassionate listing of the features of a
| product, and maybe a picture of it. Take the commercial
| being highlighted here for example. It's 2.5 minutes of a
| very cool visual image of the toy balls bouncing en
| masse. But how does a zillion balls bouncing down a hill
| convey anything meaningful about the television model
| it's an ad for? How do sexy models in a commercial for
| beer, perfume, etc inform the consumer about the product
| in any actual sense?
| otterley wrote:
| It might benefit you to take some marketing courses to
| understand why these sort of ads are effective and
| useful. Just because you don't understand something
| doesn't mean there's no rational explanation for it.
|
| (In general, it's a good rule of thumb to assume that the
| widespread existence of something suggests there's a
| reason for it, and to be inquisitive as to what that
| reason might be.)
| Symbiote wrote:
| Effective and useful for Sony. They are detrimental to
| society as they increase consumption, waste, pollution
| etc.
| jacobgkau wrote:
| He didn't ask how these sorts of ads are effective or
| useful. He asked how they inform consumers, which was the
| point someone else previously brought up as a defense.
| chgs wrote:
| I would opt in.
|
| If adverts were for my benefit I would be able to choose
| them, rather than have to block them.
| andrewinardeer wrote:
| Well, this is a TV add, so no one is forcing you to watch
| it.
|
| Billboards, on the other hand, are awful as your eyes are
| drawn to it as you drive down the freeway.
| jjulius wrote:
| It encourages consumerism for the sake of consumerism and
| enables excessive e-waste. Sony has put forth plenty of
| effort since then to convince you that you've needed _yet
| another_ new and shiny TV to replace the Bravia, and will
| continue to do the same.
|
| I truly don't understand the idea of praising a commercial
| that exists solely to sell you something we could probably,
| reasonably, be making and selling a lot less of. We only
| keep going "because growth". When's enough? This is gross.
|
| Edit: And after watching the video, it's extra jarring to
| me to feel the warm fuzzies it gives you, and then realize,
| "It's not asking me to be a good person or do something
| that's gonna match the feeling this commercial is giving
| me, it just _wants me to buy something it 's gonna want me
| to replace eventually_". Ick. Get the fuck out of my
| emotions like that.
| XenophileJKO wrote:
| I feel like this is a very myopic perspective. It can be
| both art and a commercial at the same time and
| appreciable for either or both. As time progresses, it
| becomes more art than commercial because the commercial
| utility has expired.
|
| Commercials are interesting as they are a way to support
| artists financially. Many artists make a living in
| commercials while also getting a chance to exercise a
| creative profession.
|
| Conceptually it isn't that much different than church
| commissions during the Renaissance.
| jjulius wrote:
| As an artist, with a ton of artist friends, I wrestle
| with this idea very frequently. I understand the
| necessity for those who take that path, and I don't judge
| them for it (huge Jose Gonzalez fan, btw). Yet the ick
| remains.
| scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
| I would confirm the ick with my euro perspective.
|
| It's a pattern I've noticed with Americans, this bundling
| up art with the capitalism. Commercial/Ad work can be a
| lot of fun and a good living for any artist, but it's
| just not fucking art. It's such a cringey pattern - that
| somehow makes commercial work into chivalrous patronage.
|
| That being said - cool ad! Fun to make and probably good
| money! Would love to work on something like that! But.
| Not. Art.
| XenophileJKO wrote:
| So you are going with the "No True Scotsman" argument
| against commercial art?
| jhbadger wrote:
| Or 19th century poster art. Many people collect
| reproductions (or originals if they can afford it) of
| advertising posters by people like Firmin Bouisset. Yes,
| they are ads, but they are also beautiful long after the
| products they were advertising are no longer available.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmin_Bouisset
| Philpax wrote:
| I visited the Mucha museum in Prague and was surprised by
| how many of his works were advertising posters. On one
| hand, I don't care for advertising: on the other hand, it
| brought us these wonderful works that we admire a century
| on, divorced from their original context, so I can't
| really deny their artistic potential.
| fumar wrote:
| Where do you draw the line on consumerism for physical to
| digital experiences? Is it worthwhile to experience the
| web given the high cost to build, maintain, and access
| it?
| basisword wrote:
| See I don't get that at all. I don't find it selling me
| something - it's from TWENTY YEARS AGO. It's just a video
| of 250,000 bouncy balls flying down a hill at 100mph.
| It's a cool sight. It's something that, if I was 10 and
| had access to that many bouncy balls, I'd be plotting
| myself.
| ryandvm wrote:
| OP is not talking about this ad in particular being cancer.
|
| He's talking about a couple million roadside billboards,
| ads on busses, ads in TV services you pay for, drug
| companies spending more on advertising than R&D, political
| machines driven by 24 hours news cycles that are funded
| from ragebait, social media companies that have us
| literally addicted to our screens due to their advertising-
| based revenue models. It goes on... ad infinitum indeed.
|
| It's a fucking cancer and it truly is the root of so many
| of our problems and we are running out of time to start
| thinking clearly about the damage the industrial
| advertising complex causes.
| stickfigure wrote:
| As we speak, there are large groups of people literally
| shooting each other to death. Advertising might be
| annoying, but not even on the top 100 list of major world
| problems.
|
| I hate to say "go touch grass" because it sounds
| condescending. But please, go outside and have some fun!
| The dumb billboard isn't stopping that.
| ziddoap wrote:
| There is war, so nothing else is bad.
|
| > _Advertising might be annoying, but not even on the top
| 100 list of major world problems._
|
| Hard disagree. Advertising, in some form, is likely the
| root or primary facilitator of probably 25 or more of
| those top 100.
|
| > _because it sounds condescending._
|
| Your comment is condescending, yes.
| riohumanbean wrote:
| What is the point here? Don't complain about the
| ramifications of the advertising industry because wars
| exist?
|
| I'd be curious to see this Top 100 list.
| Marsymars wrote:
| > As we speak, there are large groups of people literally
| shooting each other to death. Advertising might be
| annoying, but not even on the top 100 list of major world
| problems.
|
| See, I'd contend that the business models and businesses
| enabled by advertising, and the combined social impact of
| ads plus those business models very much are one of the
| world's top problems.
| thih9 wrote:
| Yes. Then again, there's Banksy's take:
|
| > People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt
| into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then
| disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make
| you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that
| imply you're not sexy enough and that all the fun is
| happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your
| girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most
| sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they
| bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are
| laughing at you. (...)
|
| https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/461383-people-are-taking-
| th...
| amelius wrote:
| +1 IMHO too.
| encoderer wrote:
| Capitalism has saved billions of people from poverty.
|
| Advertising is part of that trade.
|
| I'm happy it exists.
| fracus wrote:
| > Capitalism has saved billions of people from poverty.
|
| Unabated capitalism has more poverty than capitalism with
| social programs. Social programs save people from poverty.
|
| Also, capitalism can exist without advertising.
| encoderer wrote:
| It doesn't need every form of advertising, but you can't
| start a business if you can't reach prospective
| customers, and if you can't start a business then you
| don't have capitalism.
| bdangubic wrote:
| _Capitalism has saved billions of people from poverty._
|
| You meant the EXACT opposite, right? :)
| encoderer wrote:
| No. Poverty is the default state. Capitalism creates
| inequality but it also reduces poverty.
| JohnFen wrote:
| This is the first time I'd ever heard of or seen that ad. I
| guess my efforts to avoid advertising work really well, hooray!
|
| It is visually stunning for sure, but I have to not think too
| hard about the implications of it.
| fckgw wrote:
| It never aired in the US so that could be one reason.
| JohnFen wrote:
| Could be. Although that was well after I stopped watching
| television, so if it didn't appear as an online ad, I
| wouldn't have seen it no matter what.
| II2II wrote:
| Don't get me wrong: as a piece of advertising, this is one of
| the few I would be willing to watch again. On the other hand, I
| am left asking: what is the point? It is not as though there
| were many venues where you could enjoy the vibrance of it. It
| certainly looks better on my modern monitors than on my Bravia
| TV of that era.
|
| As for children, I would be _strongly opposed_ to showing a
| child that commercial. It isn 't hard to imagine them trying to
| haul buckets of bouncy balls to the roof after being ...
| inspired.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| Seems like hyperactive concern to me. I would want my child
| climbing up on the roof with a bucket of bouncy balls. I
| would even buy them.
| jacobgkau wrote:
| Better a child dump a bucket of bouncy balls off the roof
| supervised than unsupervised, right?
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| Sure, depending on the age. 5-6 is prime tree climbing
| age, at which time they should be fine to go up
| themselves.
| xattt wrote:
| Forgot the /s
| pj_mukh wrote:
| "I think our bill was $74,000 on broken windows," said Ranahan.
| "And the crazy thing is, everyone loved it. The people, the
| neighborhood, they still come out to me and talk to me about
| it."
|
| "We want to set City Hall on fire, we want to bump a blimp into
| the Golden Gate Bridge and we want to jump a hook-and-ladder
| truck over Lefty O'Doul Bridge with Roger Moore on it' ... and
| they were seriously like, 'OK.'"
|
| My main question is, where did this San Francisco go? I'd love
| for the city to create more memorable moments because the city
| is special. But today, this ad would've been buried in CEQA
| lawsuits. Hell, parking in the wrong _public_ spot could get
| your car keyed by some irate millionaire[1].
|
| [1]: https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/parking-wars-sf-
| billion...
| kurthr wrote:
| First the dotcom boom pushed the artists out to Oakland by
| 2000, but there were still burners and hipsters in 2005. Then
| the subprime boom/bust took a lot of the hipsters and older
| businesses out, but the tech busses brought the Silicon
| Valley nerds in 2010. Then the rise of Uber startups through
| 2016 pushed the artists into warehouses until the Ghostship
| fire, but there were still techbros and crypto in the
| Mission. When the pandemic finally came for the rest of
| Frisco there was hardly anyone left who cared or they were so
| old they wanted everyone else to just leave. If you remember
| Market street and the Tenderloin from the old days, the tents
| today are kinda quaint.
|
| I'm sure somebody has a similar timeline for NYC.
| Tade0 wrote:
| I would have so much fun doing various kinds of tit-for-tats
| with this guy.
|
| That is until he, inevitably, would shoot me with impunity.
| jjulius wrote:
| >It's quite sad that something that seems like it could be
| universally enjoyed at the isn't now.
|
| This happens frequently for a good many things. Collective
| ignorance gets replaced with the lens of hindsight.
| xattt wrote:
| > Collective ignorance...
|
| ... and there it is. People knew but saw through it all to
| just maybe enjoy the wonder of the event.
| anal_reactor wrote:
| I feel like the current generation will be remembered in
| the history as "the generation of sad fucks". It's
| incredibly difficult to escape the overwhelming sense of
| doom, but sometimes I have moments when I watch the sunset
| and think "this is cool", or listen to the music and feel
| comfy.
| officeplant wrote:
| Just a side point from the article
|
| >When Conner was checking in to his hotel later that night, a
| ball bounced by on the sidewalk. He was 4 or 5 miles away.
|
| I have to assume there was so many they never found just left
| to the ecosystem.
|
| As much as I loved bouncy balls as an 80s kid, anytime I see
| them now it just reminds me of the sheer amount of useless
| plastic/rubber waste we produce. Even if bouncy balls in and of
| themselves are a tiny portion of that overall waste.
|
| For example I live in the South, Mardi Gras is huge here and
| after every parade it looks like a god damn war zone of trash
| and waste left behind for prison labor to clean up as best they
| can. If it was me I would do a ban on plastic beads entirely as
| throwable parade objects.
|
| > It's quite sad that something that seems like it could be
| universally enjoyed at the isn't now.
|
| IMO at some point we all have to look back at the reality of
| past actions and be cognizant of our waste and abuse of the
| planet even if it was a fun time.
| timewizard wrote:
| > As much as I loved bouncy balls as an 80s kid, anytime I
| see them now it just reminds me of the sheer amount of
| useless plastic/rubber waste we produce.
|
| They're not useless. As you've just pointed out you enjoyed
| them as a kid. For a few cents in plastic how many hours of
| enjoyment did you get? What was wasted here?
|
| > after every parade it looks like a god damn war zone
|
| Yea but when you stack up the tax receipts it suddenly looks
| very worthwhile.
|
| > reality of past actions and be cognizant of our waste and
| abuse of the planet even if it was a fun time.
|
| Humans are always going to want to have fun. From my point of
| view have all the plastic beads you want. It's the nuclear
| weapons and daily war that gives me pause.
| officeplant wrote:
| >Yea but when you stack up the tax receipts it suddenly
| looks very worthwhile.
|
| Bleak reminder that I will never jive with the general
| vibes of HN and the VC trash types polluting the world for
| a tax write-off.
| jacobgkau wrote:
| I can understand your sentiment, but to be fair, he
| wasn't talking about write-offs, at least how I read it.
| He was talking about tax _revenue_ generated by the
| production and sale of those "pollutants." Revenue
| generation via people paying taxes on things is kind of
| the opposite of write-offs.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| Exactly, taxes on that fun is what supports food stamps
| and medicine for the poor, to the extent it is available.
| officeplant wrote:
| Ah, I'm thinking of my local understanding that many of
| the Mardi Gras Krewe's have beads and other objects
| donated to them for tax write-offs for businesses, or
| they get the whole float sponsored, etc.
|
| >tax revenue generated by the production and sale of
| those "pollutants."
|
| The other local problem being from 1985 to 2024 Mardi
| Gras beads were sale tax exempt, but we've somewhat
| closed that loophole to more specific circumstances.[1]
|
| [1]https://casetext.com/regulation/louisiana-
| administrative-cod...
| timewizard wrote:
| It's a little bit of both actually. The point is when you
| draw in a massive crowd to a city for an event you
| generate huge amounts of taxes. Airport taxes, hotel
| taxes, sales taxes, they all take an appreciable jump.
| Even without the tax on beads, which as a percentage, was
| never going to be astronomical, it's around $15 million
| in sales tax increases alone.
|
| The total economic value of Mardi Gras to the city as a
| whole is estimated around $800m.
|
| This, by the way, is true for almost any successful
| event. For every $1 you invest you generate at least $2
| in revenue.
| timewizard wrote:
| People aren't buying beads simply because they exist or
| they have some sort of scripp arrangement that forces
| them to buy them. It's demand. You can suggest that your
| moralism requires everyone else to live by an austerity
| that you're comfortable with but this is flatly inhumane.
| There's only one bleak outlook here.
| losvedir wrote:
| Wow, as someone with vivid and fond memories of watching this
| in college, I'm seeing this in this very thread. Kinda wild,
| and really makes me feel old and out of touch. And that
| heartbeats song is a banger and will forever take me back.
| Affric wrote:
| Yeah, it's interesting that they have no motivation to separate
| the art from the commission nor any attempt to understand that
| it was a very different time. Broadcast television and low
| bandwidths.
|
| The idea that advertising is a "cancer upon society"
| fundamentally misunderstands how mass media,
| telecommunications, and modern society works. It's about
| passing and sharing information.
|
| I hate most ads and almost all modern advertising sucks. But
| this ad ain't it. It relies on nostalgia, a dream like element.
| The amount of pollution is, globally, negligible, and they
| largely cleaned them up. We hear stories of people keeping
| balls as mementi [1].
|
| Call me cynical but if we are not meant to enjoy even the
| aesthetically pleasing stuff the neoliberal environmental
| disaster of the last 40 years creates we are in for a bad time.
| May as well go back to hunter gathering of subsistence farming.
|
| [1] I know it's non standard but if "octopi" is cromulent then
| so is "mementi"
| scotty79 wrote:
| When it first came out I just assumed it's cgi. Because that's
| how any sane person would do it.
| jeffbee wrote:
| A dump truck full of bouncy balls sounds a lot easier.
| sammcgrail wrote:
| Does it? Think about the permits, cleanup cost, ball cost
| (lol)
| wrs wrote:
| A million dollars of CGI didn't go as far in 2005 as it
| does now!
| owlninja wrote:
| And we wouldn't be talking about it 20 years later :)
| jerf wrote:
| In 2025 this is something a casual YouTuber could do, or
| could be assigned as a school project. All the pieces are
| there now. You wouldn't even need to pay for anything, I
| don't think. Blender should be able to do everything you
| need, quite comfortably. Getting data from the world back
| into the special effects software has gotten magnitudes
| easier since then.
| bombcar wrote:
| You can avoid two of those easily if you're a bit sneaky.
| And naughty.
| alwa wrote:
| Nothing says sneaky like hilltop mortars firing
| 25,000-bouncey-ball loads a hundred feet in the air...
|
| > _"[The film commissioner] goes, 'Here's two things I
| never want to see in San Francisco again -- air mortars
| and Barry Conner.'"_
| kimos wrote:
| As the article explains, that's because the truck of balls is
| the easy part.
| dekhn wrote:
| only if you externalize all the costs
| adzm wrote:
| The cover of Heartbeats by Jose Gonzalez is truly beautiful as
| well. I can't imagine this video without it.
| macNchz wrote:
| The ad actually sticks out in my mind not only for the visuals
| but because it introduced me to both Jose Gonzalez _and_ The
| Knife.
| kenjackson wrote:
| Totally looks like an AI generated video.
| etrautmann wrote:
| I lived in SF then and picked up a 5 gallon bucket of bouncy
| balls at a garage sale. I didn't realize until now that this is
| where they almost certainly came from.
| tristor wrote:
| This advertisement was the first time I ever saw an ad that made
| me think there could be something more to advertisement than
| being utterly soulless. It literally brings me to tears seeing it
| because of how beautiful the composition is and how well it works
| with the musical arrangement. There have been a few other ads
| throughout the years that are on a similar level, but they are
| few and far between. It's not just an effective advertisement,
| it's a cinematic masterpiece.
| joezydeco wrote:
| The follow up ad was impressive, too. Although I'm not sure what
| why there's a clown in the middle of it.
|
| https://youtu.be/G5tLqb8T5xU
| maaarghk wrote:
| Same guy who made the remaster linked in the article also
| remastered this one -
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MY0bxhbPi3Q - seems he had a
| retail DVD from Sony with a better original source on it
| anigbrowl wrote:
| At the opposite end we have excess CG, like that iPad ad last
| year which everyone hated because it depicted real art tools
| being crushed into a digital substrate.
| tromp wrote:
| Sure beats lava lamps as a source of entropy...
| maartenscholl wrote:
| Not really, the lava lamp's fluid dynamics are very sensitive
| to initial conditions and the fluids behave chaotically,
| whereas the bouncy balls have highly predictable trajectories.
| MisterTea wrote:
| > whereas the bouncy balls have highly predictable
| trajectories.
|
| All we need are chaotic surfaces to bounce the balls on.
| Problem solved :-)
| fractallyte wrote:
| There was this too, for Sony's Bravia:
| https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68904040
|
| "The day explosions of colour painted a Glasgow estate: In 2006,
| Sony set out to create 'Paint', widely regarded as one of the
| most technically complex adverts ever made..."
| vincnetas wrote:
| related ad with exploding paint
|
| https://youtu.be/GdEtZK3CE2k?si=TtUn_VB8vBd7Eif5
|
| better quality
|
| https://youtu.be/G5tLqb8T5xU?si=hOTULgz71ilv2nS9
| n1b0m wrote:
| So many iconic adverts from the 2000s. One of my favourite is the
| Honda Cog: https://youtu.be/bl2U1p3fVRk?si=Z1Oqz8SAMjIAg7Mn
| MobileVet wrote:
| I LOVED the Honda Cog video and the story [1] about how they
| made it along with the purported 100+ takes is craziness. I
| can't imagine resetting it so many times... especially since
| the offending item that kept killing it was so late in the
| chain.
|
| (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cog_%28advertisement%29
| nailer wrote:
| 4K remaster: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UXS6DBD6g0
|
| Looks to be from original sources rather than upscaled.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| No, it's upscaled. The cars have that distinctive smeary look,
| and the "text" on the road signs is nonsense.
| nailer wrote:
| I thought the opposite - the 'lost cat' sign at
| https://youtu.be/2UXS6DBD6g0?t=94 is incredibly legible and
| definitely better than an upscaled 1080p image.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Take a close look at the No Parking sign in the first two
| seconds.
| red369 wrote:
| Also, I took this line in the description to mean that it was
| upscaled: "4K professional remaster and re-grade by Mat Van
| Rhoon from HD to UHD"
| abridgett wrote:
| Their "paint" advert wasn't bad either:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-ut_2GWIm4 though it can't
| compete with the music.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Tango, a British fruit soda, made their own version in Swansea,
| Wales, which is delightfully funny:
|
| https://youtu.be/ac_g4opW-UI
| residentraspber wrote:
| Love that they kept the frog in this one! That part really
| surprised me about the original.
| jahnu wrote:
| They also made one of the greatest British ads of all time:
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=odCBml5TuNI
| alkonaut wrote:
| It's such a simple setup that you could make it in CGI in 2005
| far cheaper than this. The balls barely affect the environment
| and the physics is really simple. I thought for 20 years that it
| was CGI because obviously "who would do that cleanup?". TIL.
| Really cool that they did this in real life.
| dwighttk wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_bx8bnCoiU in case anyone wants
| to see the ad
|
| (I didn't follow all the links, but enough to know it wasn't
| immediately available)
| Nition wrote:
| > "There was not a single bouncy ball in any machine in America
| for a couple months. I felt so bad for the poor children," said
| Fuglsig.
|
| I find it hard to believe that they really went around for months
| buying maybe 100 balls each from random dispensers until they had
| 250,000 - especially considering the design of the balls is
| mostly consistent in the end. Maybe a bit of fanciful
| storytelling?
| Kkoala wrote:
| Yeah, it might also mean that the suppliers just didn't have
| balls to restock into those machines
| Nition wrote:
| Good point, I guess they probably did mean scour the country
| for suppliers, rather than ball machines! Even in context you
| could read it both ways:
|
| > First, they had to scour the country to acquire the 250,000
| bouncy balls needed to create the critical mass. "They bought
| every bouncy ball west of the Mississippi," said Ranahan.
| "There was not a single bouncy ball in any machine in America
| for a couple months. I felt so bad for the poor children,"
| said Fuglsig.
| mortenjorck wrote:
| This is probably a colorful way of saying they bought up a
| couple months' worth of inventory from Wham-O's western-
| division distributors.
| keane wrote:
| A 2010 upload to Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/14504562
|
| Sony's 2005 website for the ad:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20051124203345/http://www.bravia...
|
| Sony's 2005 behind-the-scenes page:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20051028021817/http://www.bravia...
|
| Fallon's (ad agency) materials: https://www.fallon.com/?s=Bravia
|
| One of the making-of videos:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOpq2aD5btA
|
| A resident point of view: https://archive.org/details/BouncyBall
| yazantapuz wrote:
| I had a Bravia 40BX425 (latam model) for several years. I bought
| it used and after many years I had to sell (needed the money). An
| astounding TV, much better than some of the new smart cr*p out
| there.
| ChuckMcM wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_bx8bnCoiU
|
| If you want to watch the ad. A couple of friends of mine lived in
| the city at the time and were watching as they filmed it. We all
| agreed that it was both amazing and insane all at the same time.
| pas wrote:
| there's a 4K remaster too
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UXS6DBD6g0
| thih9 wrote:
| Honorable mention goes to the Old Spice 2010 ad, where a lot was
| done in camera too, including the horse.
|
| The Man Your Man Could Smell Like:
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=owGykVbfgUE
|
| Pitch presentation: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/britton-
| taylor-7829292a_for-y...
|
| Behind the scenes interview:
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VDk9jjdiXJQ&t=11m40s
|
| It was a big success and a series of similar clips followed; this
| one has an actual "behind the scenes" video:
|
| Scent vacation: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PJKAr1r5zlA
|
| Behind the scenes: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=32TZSXG2y7E
| breppp wrote:
| Ads, where excess money made in Capitalism is ritually burned
| MobileVet wrote:
| While I also detest commercials as a whole, I think it is worth
| stepping back and viewing this as art. The concept, the visuals,
| the original song (not the one you find on most videos due to
| licensing)... it is beautiful and should evoke childhood joy and
| wonder. Yes it was wasteful, but if we only do things because
| they are efficient, I think our humanity suffers.
|
| They made at least one more commercial [1] during the same time
| period and it was also inspired by awe and wonder. While it did
| waste paint and likely pollute the local groundwater temporarily,
| it was conducted in a building that was scheduled for demolition.
|
| Paint
|
| (1) https://youtu.be/GURvHJNmGrc?si=syS1ImP0Z2oM1btO
| stavros wrote:
| Does anyone have a link to the ad? I couldn't find one in the
| article, which is a huge shame.
| kylecazar wrote:
| First thing I thought of was the Balloonfest '86 fiasco.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balloonfest_%2786
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-03-12 23:01 UTC)