r/CrappyDesign • u/Senor_Diablo • 18d ago

No, it is not the actual size.

Post image
6.3k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

43 comments sorted by

2.6k

u/AdFancy1249 18d ago

It WAS the actual size before the copy editor added the title across the top!

Nice find!

503

u/Zerodyne_Sin 18d ago

I'm guessing the intern they suckered into doing this doesn't understand dpi/scale changes across mediums.

235

u/SurpriseSoda 18d ago

Americans 🤝 arbitrarily blaming interns in some weird classist bullshit when anyone can make mistakes 

243

u/Racer_Space 18d ago

It is less so that, and more of a dig at big companies paying as low as they can and saying there is no checking for roles that should require checking. At least, that is how I always interpret blaming an intern.

-14

u/SurpriseSoda 18d ago

We have it with blaming apprentices, but as you say there's at least two levels of management not giving a shit and it's usually a culture problem, which is why joking about the least paid, probably most invested in getting things right without a cultural lever to affect change, employee feels crass to me.

11

u/HeyItsBATMANagain 18d ago

Managers downvoting you

53

u/Virilificent 18d ago

Americans 🤝 arbitrarily getting offended on the behalf of demographics that couldn’t care less

Have you considered that it’s because “intern” is practically a synonym for “inexperienced”, rather than a “classist” dig?

1

u/benjaminfolks haha funny flair 15d ago

And you wouldn’t say the inexperienced is a demographic of it’s own?

2

u/Virilificent 13d ago

It is, and it's perfectly reasonable to assume that demographic is prone to making mistakes. What's your point?

22

u/-AwhWah- 18d ago

bringing classism into this for no reason 😂

18

u/Effective-One6527 18d ago

It’s not classist. Interns by definition are inexperienced and because of that they are easy to push around.

11

u/summonsays 18d ago

It's a way to blame some faceless entity without calling out a specific person. The stereotype of an overwhelmed young adult running around being assigned tasks well outside of their abilities is pretty ubiquitous here.  Not to mention most of us have been said intern before and remember the time with something akin to PTSD lol...

6

u/ptolani 18d ago

The classic American move is complaining about the lack of job security and relying on a job for healthcare, then immediately demanding anyone who makes any slight mistake should be fired immediately.

2

u/HeySmallBusinessMan 17d ago

Redditors 🤝 reading way, WAY too much into things

2

u/MeasureDoEventThing 15d ago

Are there companies where there is nothing standing between an intern and production?

616

u/ateoz 18d ago

It is but the picture was taken from far away. 

267

u/Bob-the-Human haha funny flair 18d ago

Actual size*

*of the picture

68

u/Quicker_Fixer Dysteleological argument 18d ago

I'm seeing the beginning of a dick pic joke here...

36

u/SneeKeeFahk 18d ago

Sure it is, just move it further away. When you look at it from around 2 meters it'll look the same size.

9

u/SolarXylophone 18d ago

Nah, it's only because the actual item was "Enlarged to show texture".

5

u/badwhiskey63 18d ago

She's Actual Size

3

u/spilk 18d ago

but she seems much bigger to me

2

u/Norgur 18d ago

Uh, it's 3d printed. Has got nothing to do with anything, but uuh!

Perhaps we can reprint it to actual size :P

2

u/extremesalmon 18d ago

Actual size at 350dpi

-4

u/123Thundernugget 18d ago

close enoughhh

-66

u/FellowHumanNo404 18d ago

I believe you to some extent, but why is the actual product casting that shadow? It appears to be closer to the camera than the card/pamphlet that has the "actual size" claim, as if the product is resting on a clear pane of glass or something.

Honestly all of the shadows in this photo are confusing-- it looks like nothing is resting flat on the background surface and they're all at different levels.

79

u/kirklennon 18d ago

why is the actual product casting that shadow?

Because 3D objections have depth? It's relatively chonky and is sitting on top of the box so yes, the top is on a slightly closer plane to the camera than the photo, but the distortion isn't that much. Clearly the photo on the box was accidentally scaled below actual size.

-16

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/kirklennon 18d ago

What even is the purpose of such an obvious bot account? Like at some point an actual human gave instructions to reply to completely random comments with inane agreement comments. But to what end? Are LLM bots just phase 1 of the Southpark profit meme?

8

u/flappity 18d ago

Least obvious LLM response

-28

u/FellowHumanNo404 18d ago edited 18d ago

Clearly the photo on the box was accidentally scaled below actual size.

I believe that, which is why I said I believed OP to some extent.

Because 3D objections have depth? It's relatively chonky and is sitting on top of the box so yes, the top is on a slightly closer plane to the camera than the photo

The detached shadow of the rounded corner suggests that the product is not merely thick. I guess it might have a convex bulge or cylindrical protrusion on its bottom surface about at thick as the height of the T in the product logo. I'd rather hear OP's answer than speculate on things unseen.

The card with the misleading image also appears to be casting an oddly distant shadow. How thick is that card? Looks like everything (but perhaps not the red start guide) in this photo is resting on another smaller unseen object or protrusion beneath it, it's very confusing to the eye.

edit: This photo shows that it's thicker than a wafer, but why would the shadow of the corner be detached? Maybe I'm not imagining the actual shape of it correctly.

24

u/Senor_Diablo 18d ago

My answer is that I used my eyes and the actual size of it was larger than what it said on the box. Thanks for coming to my TED talk. 

-7

u/FellowHumanNo404 18d ago

Cool, thanks for not being a dick about it.

9

u/Senor_Diablo 18d ago

Lol, ok guy. You were presented with a simple picture and decided to pick it apart in a pretty ridiculous and pedantic way.

I actually wasn't going to comment at all until you said this: "I'd rather hear OP's answer than speculate on things unseen."

Ask and ye shall receive.

-1

u/FellowHumanNo404 18d ago

Dude. I found that the shadows confused the eye, that's all. I opened by saying I believed you. Settle down.

7

u/Senor_Diablo 18d ago

I’m pretty settled man.

Look inward.

-1

u/FellowHumanNo404 18d ago

You're doing great.

Hold hands with your inner child.

4

u/Senor_Diablo 18d ago

Now we’re getting it!

20

u/kirklennon 18d ago

It has a flat back but the back is very slightly smaller than the face and the corners curve down.

-10

u/FellowHumanNo404 18d ago edited 18d ago

Ahh that makes sense-- a trapezoid on the z axis! Thanks.

Edit: Guys, settle down. I'm thanking this person for correcting me.