What's wrong with this picture - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  What's wrong with this picture

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   What's wrong with this picture

Blackeagle posted 05-10-2001 01:20 PM ET (US)
At first I thought I was going nuts, but there's something strange about one of the pics on the whaler.com site. I had a feeling there was something wrong with the picture of the 22' Dauntless ( http://www.whaler.com/2000Product/boat_pic_detail.asp?ModID=12 ) but it took me a while to figure out what. If you look at just the boat, it is a nicely lit, probably a late afternoon/close to sunset shot, with the sun perhaps a small bit aft of the starboard beam. Now look at the people on the seat. They seem to be lit with a much harsher midday sun coming from almost dead aft. Parts of their bodies are in shadow, even though there is nothing on the boat to block the light.
It looks like someone dropped the people in with Photoshop or somesuch. Not a big point, but it makes be wonder, what was wrong with the person who was originally driving the boat?
george nagy posted 05-10-2001 01:39 PM ET (US)
Yes indeed it does look very strange. I would agree that there seems to be two light sources. I think there is another interesting point emerging here, that is, that the older brochures circa late 80's have more pictures of whalers and seem to be more informative. I enjoy my older whaler brochures I even went nuts and spent $51 bucks on a 1978 brochure listed on e-bay (High Tom!)which was only a few pages but had more pictures than the 2000 catalog. All of the pictures in the older brochures are of a better quality they are closer up and in better focus. I even think that the subject matter is much better too! Well I would be interested in reading some other opinions. Sorry blackeagle if I jumped in and stole your post, I didn't mean to dilute it.
Blackeagle posted 05-10-2001 01:46 PM ET (US)
No at all, George.
Acutally, I had been wondering a bit about the old Whaler brochures. When I type in Boston Whaler on e-bay it comes up with as many brochures as it does boats, so I figured they must be pretty good if people were willing to pay for them. BTW: I do think the BW site needs more pictures. One pic of the boat with one or two closeups is just not enough (especially when I'm a long way from being able to purchase a whaler of my own). Sigh.
dreid posted 05-10-2001 02:31 PM ET (US)
Blackeagle, "new" is a relative term, so you may be a lot closer to your new Whaler than you think. Just start considering classic Whaler options and you may quickly decide you can afford an 80's vintage Whaler. Nothing against the Brunswick hulls, just facing the fact that they weed out a lot of us with their pricing.
Blackeagle posted 05-10-2001 02:46 PM ET (US)
I am considering some of the classics, not just a new hull. They are a little hard to find around here (Arizona doesn't really seem to be Whaler country). However, I can't afford either right now as I am merely a poor college student. I figure I need to a paying job before I can think about getting a Whaler.
Tom W Clark posted 05-10-2001 09:05 PM ET (US)
Yep, that's a crappy photo editing job. Not to offend any of the newer Whaler owners but I think the photo is kinda' indicative of the new Whalers quality. I don't feel they (Brunswick) gives a damn about the little details the way Dick Fisher, or David Loveless for that matter, did. The Boston Whaler I knew and loved died a while back.
George, you're right, the newer catalogs just aren't as interesting and infromative as the old ones. By the way, I hope you're enjoying your '78 catalog as much as the guy in Germany who bought my '84 parts and accessories catalog. He paid $56 for his.
Tom W Clark posted 05-10-2001 09:07 PM ET (US)
P.S. George, I hope you were merely sending your greetings and not suggesting that I'm a stoner.
maverick posted 05-10-2001 09:45 PM ET (US)
Fellas, what you are you talking about? I think the pic looks fine - no, great! You wrote, "Now look at the people on the seat. They seem to be lit with a much harsher midday sun coming from almost dead aft." Huh? You ain't got nuthin' better to do than to study people shadows? Helll-ohhh. I think it's a great shot, and great hole shot, too. Nice looking boat - I'd love to be in that "fake" photo (I think the photo is largely untouched) ...those comments from a "classic" owner. Mav
whalernut posted 05-10-2001 09:52 PM ET (US)
Dito to Tom Clark`s comments on Whaler then and now, not the same quality company and has left the diehard Classic Whaler guys behind. Their brochures are lower quality now as are the boats in my opinion but still respect the new Whaler owners for their choice on buying one. So be it then and long live the Classics! Regards-Jack Graner.
Dick posted 05-10-2001 10:06 PM ET (US)
Tom
Your comment about new Whaler quality is BS.
I will put the quality of my 1999 up against any Montauk ever produced. If it weren't for Brunswick there would be NO Whalers today. Boston Whaler, as good as they were, couldn't survive on their own. They went through several bad ownerships and Brunswick rescued them, we now have Boston Whaler still in production and the quality is as good as ever.
There have been style changes to meet the current market demand, there have been price increases to keep up with manufacturing costs.
The bottom line is that we still have Boston Whalers built to the highest standards in the industry. In most cases the improvements have equated into better boats. Sorry the 13 & 15 classics had to go though.
Dick
Tsuriki BW posted 05-10-2001 11:05 PM ET (US)
Will this pissing match ever end????
The Whalers that are built today may not be the same whalers that were built 29-30 years ago... So... What product is???
What percentage of your salary 20 -30 years ago would have bough you a whaler? What percentage will buy a whaler today? Same with engines...Same with elecronics..
Get on with it... Just because you don't like the parent company, their direction, why stick your anchor in the rocks and just bitch....
Come to our get - together and talk to those of us that have whalers and ride in them and talk to us about our experience with them and listen to what we have to say about our whalers.
Then, if you still have to vent your spleen about about the way "whalers used to be" so be it.
For me, I am going to enjoy my Whaler despite you... And even your dislike about a friggin brouchure...

Tsuriki
OutrageMan posted 05-10-2001 11:13 PM ET (US)
I have to side with the classics on this one.
At one time, Whalers were THE boat in their class. Not anymore.
1) They are way over priced
2) Workmanship does not even compare to Grady White, Intrepid, Jupiter etc.
3) Their 10 year pro-rated warranty doesn't even compete.
Just my opinion that is sure to fan the flames.
Tom W Clark posted 05-10-2001 11:35 PM ET (US)
Greg & Dick,
I'd like to apologize if I've upset you. Like I said, I don't mean to offend anybody, but I'm entitled to my opinions like anybody else. What I said was "I don't feel they (Brunswick) gives a damn about the little details the way Dick Fisher, or David Loveless for that matter, did." This is the only thing negative I've every said here about the Brunswick and the new boats and I'll stand by it. I don't think I'm "venting my spleen" nor do I think I'm doing nothing but "bitch" (though I love your phrase "stick your anchor in the rocks"). This is a forum, Classic Whaler Forum to be exact, and forums are where people come together to express their opinions whether they agree with each other or not. That's the whole idea! At no time did I, or do I, not want you to enjoy your whaler. I do hope you enjoy it, and I'm sure you will. As to the question of this pissing match ever ending, the answer is no, of course it won't. Why should it? That's why we're here. As to your get together, I've already explained to Dick that I am without a Whaler at present so I didn't feel I qualified, but I'd be happy to attend if I can ride with you Greg.
Oh God, now I'm about to be scolded by bigz for posting off topic!
Tsuriki BW posted 05-10-2001 11:37 PM ET (US)
Outrageman..
And, of course your opinion is based on actual on the water (open minded) tests by you of each and every model (hey you gave a general over all opinion), You have checked all the current specs, visited the factory... (and the quality of production)
Can you tell us what specific year and which specific model is no longer a "true Whaler"?
Checkout counter magazine readers want to know!
triblet posted 05-10-2001 11:37 PM ET (US)
I've been doing digital imaging since 1973.
That's what IBM originally hired me to do.
I took the picture in question into
Photoshop 6.01 and blew it up 5x.
Interestingly, there's more detail at 1x
in Photoshop than in Netscape (don't blame
Netscape, I suspect they are just using the
vanilla Windows renderer while Photoshop has
it's own renderer.).
It's clear that on most of the boat, the sun
very low on the horizon and about 10 degrees
aft of the starboard beam. Giveaways are
the long shadows (low sun) and the direction
of the shadows of the starboard fishing rod,
the aft end of the aft starboard rail, and
the starboard console rail. I agree that
the lighting on the people isn't quite right,
but if it's a PhotoShop job, the guy who did
it was REAL good. Better than me.
There are zero edge
artifacts. I can't quite believe that
someone that good would use people who are
lighted all wrong. I suspect they just
punched up the people by dodging (making
lighter) their backs.
Chuck
Tsuriki BW posted 05-10-2001 11:46 PM ET (US)
Tom,
You are more than welcome to ride with me . I'm sure we all will enjoy your company and knowledge of, among things, Whalers.
Just keep our comments about my Non-true Dauntless 14 Boston Whaler to yourself. (at least while you are on board LOL)
We would really like to have to attend.
Greg
(Tsuriki)
Tom W Clark posted 05-10-2001 11:49 PM ET (US)
O.K. Greg, your on. I'll bring the duct tape so you can tape my mouth shut.
Blackeagle posted 05-10-2001 11:57 PM ET (US)
Thanks triblet. That's more along the lines of what I was looking for than starting a classic vs current whaler debate.
Tsuriki BW posted 05-10-2001 11:59 PM ET (US)
Tom, Great!!
We should have a great time.
Lets talk more via e.mail about the details. Especially about the fishing "T". Where to go, what to fish for etc.
Looking forward to meeting and talking to you more..
Greg
(Tsuriki)
kgregc@yahoo.com
Tom W Clark posted 05-11-2001 12:10 AM ET (US)
Chuck,
So what you're saying is that it's not a crappy photo editing job at all but rather a technically good one?
If the backs are "punched up" wouldn't the shoulders facing starboard have to have been darkened as well? Clearly the light on the starboard side of the console is much brighter than the light onthe shoulder.
Why would they have gone to this trouble? I wonder if it's a very clever trick of the trade to get a viewer to do a double take and examine a promotional ad a little longer. If that's it then they are successful. Here we are all talking about it. Brunswick = marketing genius!
jimh posted 05-11-2001 12:40 AM ET (US)
Regarding the image in the BW website:
I don't think the people are dropped into the boat from another image. There may have been some exposure corrections on them separate from the rest of the scene.
By the way, virtually every image in CETACEA is tweaked in Photoshop by yours truly. So manipulation of images is no sin.
In many catalogue shots I have seen involving two boats they are often composited together, especially when the boats are shown close abeam and running at speed.
lhg posted 05-11-2001 12:57 AM ET (US)
Someone needs to come to Tom W Clark's defense here, having unwittingly stumbled into mostly forgotten, and forgiven, arguments about the pre 1991 vs post 1991 Whalers. As many of us recall, these things got so bad, that many left this, and prior, Forums in anger never to return, and JimH had to go in and delete whole threads. The same issues caused Boston Whaler to completely remove what I believe was the Original Whaler Forum from their whaler.com website, several years ago. I also note that most of those earlier discussions preceded Tom's 2/12/01 arrival here.
I, for one, have been very impressed with Tom's amazing technical & detailed knowledge of Classic Whalers, boats in general, good boating practices, and excellent ability to put it in writing. For a young guy (compared to me), he knows his stuff! At least to the Classic owners here, he is a welcome and valuable addition, and I enjoy reading what he has posted.
Some degree of personal opinion must be tolerated here, by everyone, I think. And I think Tom is entitled to his. A bunch of wishy-washy yes men is not what we want if the opinions, suggestions and ideas are to be worth anything. We should be able to realize that not everyone will think our PARTICULAR model of Boston Whaler is the greatest, even though WE do.
I like Mercury outboards (and not because they own Whaler), but there are others here who ABSOLUTLEY HATE THEM, WOULD NOT EVER HAVE ONE, and will say it right here. Big deal. We can all take others not liking our engine choice! Same thing goes for all of the other highly personal boating accessories that get tossed around here.
I think some of the recent disclosures here about boats/motors, age, experience, trucks, where we live, where we boat, what we like, etc., add to the interpretive value of a given person's comments. It helps us make OUR OWN decision as to the validity or knowledge of the opinion being expressed by that person. I am continually impressed about much of the information, some highly technical, that shows up here from the contributors, and when it is often least expected. Other comments I take with a grain of sand! Many contributors have really surprised me about how much they know, often in other fields. Says a lot about the people who buy Boston Whalers, old and new. As far as I know, no other boat brand has a website following like this.
So everybody, especially JimH, keep up the good work and have a thick skin!
lhg posted 05-11-2001 01:01 AM ET (US)
Incidentally, JimH, speaking of Photoshop, I wanted to ask you about the picture of the bracketed engines on my 25, in the Reference section, that looks like the boat is in Earth orbit!!!
OutrageMan posted 05-11-2001 08:58 AM ET (US)
Greg,
I never used the term "true Whaler" or anything like it.
I was just expressing my opinion. I did not intend to insult you personally.
Whaletosh posted 05-11-2001 09:04 AM ET (US)
Larry makes an excellent point. As some on this forum know I am getting ready to buy a new boat.
I was considering a 1987 Newport, but after looking at it I decided it needs more work than I am willing to put into it. The boat is in pretty good shape but needs some work here and there. I don't want qa project boat so I passed.
I also did some real soul searching and came to the conclusion that not only was my definition of offshore wrong, but that I never would be using my boat offshore.
So I have decided to pursue a new 2000 Dauntless 14 with a new 2001 60 HP Mercury 4-stroke motor. I belive that this is the best overall boat for my desires. To echo Larry's point, some of you may disagree, but this decision is right by me. I am quite sure I will love this boat.
Sean
george nagy posted 05-11-2001 10:13 AM ET (US)
Hey Tom, I was just saying hello!
To everyone, I still think the old BROCHURES are GREAT! I would love to see some 80-84 brochures, perhaps even buy one. (Hey Tom)
I sometimes think that I have enjoyed my brochures more than I have my Whalers!
Tsuriki BW posted 05-11-2001 10:25 AM ET (US)
Outrageman...
Sorry, my post was out of line. Bad day, bad time, touchy subject.
Best regards
Tsuriki
bigz posted 05-11-2001 10:35 AM ET (US)
My oh my now how in tar-nation do we get from a lousy photo editing job into this mess again. Gee whiz I read the original post the afternoon of the 10th and shrugged it off I pull this up this morning and said why all the threads on a post about a lousy photo!!
Look fellows, Whaler doesn't need a lot or even good promo material they are selling all the boats they can -- so why spend the money?? Don't start with the "image" crap it just doesn't fly -- they have the image and time has proven the new designs sell and they sell well --- that is the bottom line ---
I can believe me nit pick the old designs and the many flaws to pieces but what's the sense = NONE --- just as this (won't even call it a discussion) mish mash thread has developed from an original subject that frankly could have been explained away as poor advertising judgement. Since it is apparent they didn't have the photo so they fabricated one --- no big deal ---
I strongly suggest we lay this thread to rest because it frankly isn't productive and only causes hard feelings --
Tom
OutrageMan posted 05-11-2001 11:05 AM ET (US)
Greg,
Don't worry about it. I respect your boat. I even thought about getting one in 1999.
Brian
hooter posted 05-11-2001 02:40 PM ET (US)
Jus 'bout wore ya'sefs out agin, huh? "BURR-RUP!" 'Scuse me, fellas... mus be about Miller time fo' dis thread. Happy fishin' dis weekend.

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: What's wrong with this picture
Blackeagle	posted 05-10-2001 01:20 PM ET (US) At first I thought I was going nuts, but there's something strange about one of the pics on the whaler.com site. I had a feeling there was something wrong with the picture of the 22' Dauntless ( http://www.whaler.com/2000Product/boat_pic_detail.asp?ModID=12 ) but it took me a while to figure out what. If you look at just the boat, it is a nicely lit, probably a late afternoon/close to sunset shot, with the sun perhaps a small bit aft of the starboard beam. Now look at the people on the seat. They seem to be lit with a much harsher midday sun coming from almost dead aft. Parts of their bodies are in shadow, even though there is nothing on the boat to block the light. It looks like someone dropped the people in with Photoshop or somesuch. Not a big point, but it makes be wonder, what was wrong with the person who was originally driving the boat?
george nagy	posted 05-10-2001 01:39 PM ET (US) Yes indeed it does look very strange. I would agree that there seems to be two light sources. I think there is another interesting point emerging here, that is, that the older brochures circa late 80's have more pictures of whalers and seem to be more informative. I enjoy my older whaler brochures I even went nuts and spent $51 bucks on a 1978 brochure listed on e-bay (High Tom!)which was only a few pages but had more pictures than the 2000 catalog. All of the pictures in the older brochures are of a better quality they are closer up and in better focus. I even think that the subject matter is much better too! Well I would be interested in reading some other opinions. Sorry blackeagle if I jumped in and stole your post, I didn't mean to dilute it.
Blackeagle	posted 05-10-2001 01:46 PM ET (US) No at all, George. Acutally, I had been wondering a bit about the old Whaler brochures. When I type in Boston Whaler on e-bay it comes up with as many brochures as it does boats, so I figured they must be pretty good if people were willing to pay for them. BTW: I do think the BW site needs more pictures. One pic of the boat with one or two closeups is just not enough (especially when I'm a long way from being able to purchase a whaler of my own). Sigh.
dreid	posted 05-10-2001 02:31 PM ET (US) Blackeagle, "new" is a relative term, so you may be a lot closer to your new Whaler than you think. Just start considering classic Whaler options and you may quickly decide you can afford an 80's vintage Whaler. Nothing against the Brunswick hulls, just facing the fact that they weed out a lot of us with their pricing.
Blackeagle	posted 05-10-2001 02:46 PM ET (US) I am considering some of the classics, not just a new hull. They are a little hard to find around here (Arizona doesn't really seem to be Whaler country). However, I can't afford either right now as I am merely a poor college student. I figure I need to a paying job before I can think about getting a Whaler.
Tom W Clark	posted 05-10-2001 09:05 PM ET (US) Yep, that's a crappy photo editing job. Not to offend any of the newer Whaler owners but I think the photo is kinda' indicative of the new Whalers quality. I don't feel they (Brunswick) gives a damn about the little details the way Dick Fisher, or David Loveless for that matter, did. The Boston Whaler I knew and loved died a while back. George, you're right, the newer catalogs just aren't as interesting and infromative as the old ones. By the way, I hope you're enjoying your '78 catalog as much as the guy in Germany who bought my '84 parts and accessories catalog. He paid $56 for his.
Tom W Clark	posted 05-10-2001 09:07 PM ET (US) P.S. George, I hope you were merely sending your greetings and not suggesting that I'm a stoner.
maverick	posted 05-10-2001 09:45 PM ET (US) Fellas, what you are you talking about? I think the pic looks fine - no, great! You wrote, "Now look at the people on the seat. They seem to be lit with a much harsher midday sun coming from almost dead aft." Huh? You ain't got nuthin' better to do than to study people shadows? Helll-ohhh. I think it's a great shot, and great hole shot, too. Nice looking boat - I'd love to be in that "fake" photo (I think the photo is largely untouched) ...those comments from a "classic" owner. Mav
whalernut	posted 05-10-2001 09:52 PM ET (US) Dito to Tom Clark`s comments on Whaler then and now, not the same quality company and has left the diehard Classic Whaler guys behind. Their brochures are lower quality now as are the boats in my opinion but still respect the new Whaler owners for their choice on buying one. So be it then and long live the Classics! Regards-Jack Graner.
Dick	posted 05-10-2001 10:06 PM ET (US) Tom Your comment about new Whaler quality is BS. I will put the quality of my 1999 up against any Montauk ever produced. If it weren't for Brunswick there would be NO Whalers today. Boston Whaler, as good as they were, couldn't survive on their own. They went through several bad ownerships and Brunswick rescued them, we now have Boston Whaler still in production and the quality is as good as ever. There have been style changes to meet the current market demand, there have been price increases to keep up with manufacturing costs. The bottom line is that we still have Boston Whalers built to the highest standards in the industry. In most cases the improvements have equated into better boats. Sorry the 13 & 15 classics had to go though. Dick
Tsuriki BW	posted 05-10-2001 11:05 PM ET (US) Will this pissing match ever end???? The Whalers that are built today may not be the same whalers that were built 29-30 years ago... So... What product is??? What percentage of your salary 20 -30 years ago would have bough you a whaler? What percentage will buy a whaler today? Same with engines...Same with elecronics.. Get on with it... Just because you don't like the parent company, their direction, why stick your anchor in the rocks and just bitch.... Come to our get - together and talk to those of us that have whalers and ride in them and talk to us about our experience with them and listen to what we have to say about our whalers. Then, if you still have to vent your spleen about about the way "whalers used to be" so be it. For me, I am going to enjoy my Whaler despite you... And even your dislike about a friggin brouchure... Tsuriki
OutrageMan	posted 05-10-2001 11:13 PM ET (US) I have to side with the classics on this one. At one time, Whalers were THE boat in their class. Not anymore. 1) They are way over priced 2) Workmanship does not even compare to Grady White, Intrepid, Jupiter etc. 3) Their 10 year pro-rated warranty doesn't even compete. Just my opinion that is sure to fan the flames.
Tom W Clark	posted 05-10-2001 11:35 PM ET (US) Greg & Dick, I'd like to apologize if I've upset you. Like I said, I don't mean to offend anybody, but I'm entitled to my opinions like anybody else. What I said was "I don't feel they (Brunswick) gives a damn about the little details the way Dick Fisher, or David Loveless for that matter, did." This is the only thing negative I've every said here about the Brunswick and the new boats and I'll stand by it. I don't think I'm "venting my spleen" nor do I think I'm doing nothing but "bitch" (though I love your phrase "stick your anchor in the rocks"). This is a forum, Classic Whaler Forum to be exact, and forums are where people come together to express their opinions whether they agree with each other or not. That's the whole idea! At no time did I, or do I, not want you to enjoy your whaler. I do hope you enjoy it, and I'm sure you will. As to the question of this pissing match ever ending, the answer is no, of course it won't. Why should it? That's why we're here. As to your get together, I've already explained to Dick that I am without a Whaler at present so I didn't feel I qualified, but I'd be happy to attend if I can ride with you Greg. Oh God, now I'm about to be scolded by bigz for posting off topic!
Tsuriki BW	posted 05-10-2001 11:37 PM ET (US) Outrageman.. And, of course your opinion is based on actual on the water (open minded) tests by you of each and every model (hey you gave a general over all opinion), You have checked all the current specs, visited the factory... (and the quality of production) Can you tell us what specific year and which specific model is no longer a "true Whaler"? Checkout counter magazine readers want to know!
triblet	posted 05-10-2001 11:37 PM ET (US) I've been doing digital imaging since 1973. That's what IBM originally hired me to do. I took the picture in question into Photoshop 6.01 and blew it up 5x. Interestingly, there's more detail at 1x in Photoshop than in Netscape (don't blame Netscape, I suspect they are just using the vanilla Windows renderer while Photoshop has it's own renderer.). It's clear that on most of the boat, the sun very low on the horizon and about 10 degrees aft of the starboard beam. Giveaways are the long shadows (low sun) and the direction of the shadows of the starboard fishing rod, the aft end of the aft starboard rail, and the starboard console rail. I agree that the lighting on the people isn't quite right, but if it's a PhotoShop job, the guy who did it was REAL good. Better than me. There are zero edge artifacts. I can't quite believe that someone that good would use people who are lighted all wrong. I suspect they just punched up the people by dodging (making lighter) their backs. Chuck
Tsuriki BW	posted 05-10-2001 11:46 PM ET (US) Tom, You are more than welcome to ride with me . I'm sure we all will enjoy your company and knowledge of, among things, Whalers. Just keep our comments about my Non-true Dauntless 14 Boston Whaler to yourself. (at least while you are on board LOL) We would really like to have to attend. Greg (Tsuriki)
Tom W Clark	posted 05-10-2001 11:49 PM ET (US) O.K. Greg, your on. I'll bring the duct tape so you can tape my mouth shut.
Blackeagle	posted 05-10-2001 11:57 PM ET (US) Thanks triblet. That's more along the lines of what I was looking for than starting a classic vs current whaler debate.
Tsuriki BW	posted 05-10-2001 11:59 PM ET (US) Tom, Great!! We should have a great time. Lets talk more via e.mail about the details. Especially about the fishing "T". Where to go, what to fish for etc. Looking forward to meeting and talking to you more.. Greg (Tsuriki) kgregc@yahoo.com
Tom W Clark	posted 05-11-2001 12:10 AM ET (US) Chuck, So what you're saying is that it's not a crappy photo editing job at all but rather a technically good one? If the backs are "punched up" wouldn't the shoulders facing starboard have to have been darkened as well? Clearly the light on the starboard side of the console is much brighter than the light onthe shoulder. Why would they have gone to this trouble? I wonder if it's a very clever trick of the trade to get a viewer to do a double take and examine a promotional ad a little longer. If that's it then they are successful. Here we are all talking about it. Brunswick = marketing genius!
jimh	posted 05-11-2001 12:40 AM ET (US) Regarding the image in the BW website: I don't think the people are dropped into the boat from another image. There may have been some exposure corrections on them separate from the rest of the scene. By the way, virtually every image in CETACEA is tweaked in Photoshop by yours truly. So manipulation of images is no sin. In many catalogue shots I have seen involving two boats they are often composited together, especially when the boats are shown close abeam and running at speed.
lhg	posted 05-11-2001 12:57 AM ET (US) Someone needs to come to Tom W Clark's defense here, having unwittingly stumbled into mostly forgotten, and forgiven, arguments about the pre 1991 vs post 1991 Whalers. As many of us recall, these things got so bad, that many left this, and prior, Forums in anger never to return, and JimH had to go in and delete whole threads. The same issues caused Boston Whaler to completely remove what I believe was the Original Whaler Forum from their whaler.com website, several years ago. I also note that most of those earlier discussions preceded Tom's 2/12/01 arrival here. I, for one, have been very impressed with Tom's amazing technical & detailed knowledge of Classic Whalers, boats in general, good boating practices, and excellent ability to put it in writing. For a young guy (compared to me), he knows his stuff! At least to the Classic owners here, he is a welcome and valuable addition, and I enjoy reading what he has posted. Some degree of personal opinion must be tolerated here, by everyone, I think. And I think Tom is entitled to his. A bunch of wishy-washy yes men is not what we want if the opinions, suggestions and ideas are to be worth anything. We should be able to realize that not everyone will think our PARTICULAR model of Boston Whaler is the greatest, even though WE do. I like Mercury outboards (and not because they own Whaler), but there are others here who ABSOLUTLEY HATE THEM, WOULD NOT EVER HAVE ONE, and will say it right here. Big deal. We can all take others not liking our engine choice! Same thing goes for all of the other highly personal boating accessories that get tossed around here. I think some of the recent disclosures here about boats/motors, age, experience, trucks, where we live, where we boat, what we like, etc., add to the interpretive value of a given person's comments. It helps us make OUR OWN decision as to the validity or knowledge of the opinion being expressed by that person. I am continually impressed about much of the information, some highly technical, that shows up here from the contributors, and when it is often least expected. Other comments I take with a grain of sand! Many contributors have really surprised me about how much they know, often in other fields. Says a lot about the people who buy Boston Whalers, old and new. As far as I know, no other boat brand has a website following like this. So everybody, especially JimH, keep up the good work and have a thick skin!
lhg	posted 05-11-2001 01:01 AM ET (US) Incidentally, JimH, speaking of Photoshop, I wanted to ask you about the picture of the bracketed engines on my 25, in the Reference section, that looks like the boat is in Earth orbit!!!
OutrageMan	posted 05-11-2001 08:58 AM ET (US) Greg, I never used the term "true Whaler" or anything like it. I was just expressing my opinion. I did not intend to insult you personally.
Whaletosh	posted 05-11-2001 09:04 AM ET (US) Larry makes an excellent point. As some on this forum know I am getting ready to buy a new boat. I was considering a 1987 Newport, but after looking at it I decided it needs more work than I am willing to put into it. The boat is in pretty good shape but needs some work here and there. I don't want qa project boat so I passed. I also did some real soul searching and came to the conclusion that not only was my definition of offshore wrong, but that I never would be using my boat offshore. So I have decided to pursue a new 2000 Dauntless 14 with a new 2001 60 HP Mercury 4-stroke motor. I belive that this is the best overall boat for my desires. To echo Larry's point, some of you may disagree, but this decision is right by me. I am quite sure I will love this boat. Sean
george nagy	posted 05-11-2001 10:13 AM ET (US) Hey Tom, I was just saying hello! To everyone, I still think the old BROCHURES are GREAT! I would love to see some 80-84 brochures, perhaps even buy one. (Hey Tom) I sometimes think that I have enjoyed my brochures more than I have my Whalers!
Tsuriki BW	posted 05-11-2001 10:25 AM ET (US) Outrageman... Sorry, my post was out of line. Bad day, bad time, touchy subject. Best regards Tsuriki
bigz	posted 05-11-2001 10:35 AM ET (US) My oh my now how in tar-nation do we get from a lousy photo editing job into this mess again. Gee whiz I read the original post the afternoon of the 10th and shrugged it off I pull this up this morning and said why all the threads on a post about a lousy photo!! Look fellows, Whaler doesn't need a lot or even good promo material they are selling all the boats they can -- so why spend the money?? Don't start with the "image" crap it just doesn't fly -- they have the image and time has proven the new designs sell and they sell well --- that is the bottom line --- I can believe me nit pick the old designs and the many flaws to pieces but what's the sense = NONE --- just as this (won't even call it a discussion) mish mash thread has developed from an original subject that frankly could have been explained away as poor advertising judgement. Since it is apparent they didn't have the photo so they fabricated one --- no big deal --- I strongly suggest we lay this thread to rest because it frankly isn't productive and only causes hard feelings -- Tom
OutrageMan	posted 05-11-2001 11:05 AM ET (US) Greg, Don't worry about it. I respect your boat. I even thought about getting one in 1999. Brian
hooter	posted 05-11-2001 02:40 PM ET (US) Jus 'bout wore ya'sefs out agin, huh? "BURR-RUP!" 'Scuse me, fellas... mus be about Miller time fo' dis thread. Happy fishin' dis weekend.