David Hachez (tx for the picture) reports on a campaign by Sloggi in Belgium, and I agree with his critical view. I would even go further, it SUCKS.The billboards may attract some attention, but I've seen it so many times now that I started noticing how much the picture has been photoshopped. I thought we had arrived in the age of 'real natural beauty', and that Sloggi was about no-nonsense cute but especially comfortable underwear. The four models seem to have identical bodies with identical skin color ... they look as if they just fell out of a cloning machine.
Then the site ... it's boring, the process is time consuming, the idea is not original and the result is not interesting. The campaign has no reference to the local market, it would have been so easy to see the result of your photo shoot on a Brussels background rather then some US city. Oh and euh, photoshop doesn't work on video :)
And indeed David, you can for sure motivate quite some men to go play with female flesh, but very few women ... who are the main target group here (I assume).
Lesson: New interactive marketing is not about simply plugging a microsite in your billboard campaign.
4 comments:
Hi Bert,
Photoshopping: yes or no? .. pls realise that 99,99% of what the marketing business (the business you're in..) publishes is photoshopped! Even the pictures of "natural" beauty! From people over cars to food. Don't shop it, and it won't be bought! Did you never photoshop any picture? As for "is it the correct target group", I would say yes. It is creative to attract men to show how nice Sloggy can be and advice their partner to buy Sloggy. I think that's perfect marketing, or can't we be creative anymore? (and don't get me wrong, I don't buy Sloggy, I just assess their campaign as being ok).
Agree with your view on Photoshopping or not. Of course pictures can be corrected/improved. But in this case it looks more like cloning.
The result is that the image does not 'speak' anymore, it's just another image like all the others. It doesn't catch my eye, it doesn't engage me.
As for creativity, of course we must all be creative, especially in advertising. But we need to take it a step further then this 'ok' campaign.
Hi Bert,
I agree, the image could attract or trigger more than it does now. I noticed the billboard once, but never made it to their web site. I did it only now after I read your post. However, 'des gouts et des couleurs..'. I do find the fun part ok where you can select a woman, ask her to do something, make picture and send it. Though, this is deja-vu. All the basics of pulling the target into the action by personalizing it, making it +/- viral and stuff is ok. And, PS: I think they were not photoshopped, also on the website they look unreal ;)). Maybe they should redo it with the Dove models and compare some marketing stats in terms of visitors to their site. That's an opportunity Sloggy missed. Could be interesting input for their fashion design team.. ;) -B-
Gentlemen, can I add a little something to this conversation?
I agree with both of you that the image is not catchy. It is completely deja-vu. Even more, the whole concept of this strategy is almost completely copy-catted from a surf brand: REEF.
Although REEF does not sell any bikinis or underwear, the theme of using sexy 'booties' is what they've used for years. Like Sloggy did, REEF also held national - and even international - castings to find the nicest bums.
So, personally the whole Sloggy campaign and roll-out of the concept didn't attract me. Like B. pointed out, it's an 'ok' campaign, but nothing more than just 'ok'.
As for the photography it isn't winning material. And the photoshop hour(s) that were put into it, didn't make it any better.
From my point of view as a photographer - and marketeer in a previous life - both the concept and image can use some fine tuning.
Post a Comment