Photoshopped Brochures

[ew101]

I keep getting printed materials in the mail from Cunard with beautiful ship photographs.  None show any smoke from the stack.  Unless one is very lucky with wind and lighting a cruise ship underway always has a few diesels online and there is smoke.

 In the US we have a law- the Lanham Act- that prohibits false advertising claims.  

If you have an LNG powered ship- no black smoke.  

[Host Hattie]

You might be a bit disappointed if you expect the passengers to look like the brochure models as well !

[Colin_Cameron]

Just had a check through some of my own photos. Very few  show any smoke at all never mind black smoke. Mostly just a sort of heat shimmer which is invisible except against the clearest of blue skies.

 

The only time I remember seeing black smoke is as the diesels are fired-up, usually just before leaving port.

[Colin_Cameron]

Hattie, I have friends who had their picture taken out on deck and were amazed when it appeared in the following year's brochure. The photographer had told them what it was for at the time but they thought he was joking.

 

I've also spotted a few other faces over the years that I recognise, but not recently.

[Host Hattie]

These are my unedited photographs from July this year, one of Queen Victoria passing QM2 in Southampton and 2 of QM2 leaving Liverpool. 

The only one with any sign of smoke is the first one of QM2.

[Solent Richard]

5 hours ago, ew101 said:

I keep getting printed materials in the mail from Cunard with beautiful ship photographs.  None show any smoke from the stack.  Unless one is very lucky with wind and lighting a cruise ship underway always has a few diesels online and there is smoke.

 In the US we have a law- the Lanham Act- that prohibits false advertising claims.  

If you have an LNG powered ship- no black smoke.  

 

 

Hmnnn.

 

You are of course correct on the Photoshopping.

 

I've yet to see a brochure / newspaper photograph of Queen Mary 2 and the Statue of Liberty that hasn't been photoshopped or Affintised.

[Lakesregion]

8 hours ago, ew101 said:

I keep getting printed materials in the mail from Cunard with beautiful ship photographs.  None show any smoke from the stack.  Unless one is very lucky with wind and lighting a cruise ship underway always has a few diesels online and there is smoke.

 In the US we have a law- the Lanham Act- that prohibits false advertising claims.  

If you have an LNG powered ship- no black smoke.  

And this is a problem?

[newjoisey]

8 hours ago, ew101 said:

I keep getting printed materials in the mail from Cunard with beautiful ship photographs.  None show any smoke from the stack.  Unless one is very lucky with wind and lighting a cruise ship underway always has a few diesels online and there is smoke.

 In the US we have a law- the Lanham Act- that prohibits false advertising claims.  

If you have an LNG powered ship- no black smoke.  

are you thinking of taking legal action ? 

[Victoria2]

8 hours ago, Host Hattie said:

You might be a bit disappointed if you expect the passengers to look like the brochure models as well !

Cunard were having an intense photography session on Victoria on the 6th Sept Med. cruise. They utilised deck 11 and 12 on quite a few occasions and I recall admiring the gold Fortuny style dress on one of the models. As we were talking she said ''this? It's out of wardrobe''!

 

So, for all those who wish to emulate the elegance of Cunard passengers in the glossy brochure, head to ''wardrobe'' and for those who say ''look at the brochure for guidance'', ask them which wardrobe they should head for!

Edited November 13, 2019 by Victoria2

[newjoisey]

but they all look ssssoooo happy drinking the room supplied champagne pol yuk .......surely that is real lol  

[Victoria2]

22 minutes ago, newjoisey said:

but they all look ssssoooo happy drinking the room supplied champagne pol yuk .......surely that is real lol  

On one of the shoots on deck 11 overlooking 10, two models [not too young or glam but definitely elegant] were carefully lounging on their steamers and in the background was a tiered stand with seafood on it. The ''lobster'' looked very real but in that heat, and it was hot, I'd definitely have given it a miss!

 

I have enough photos of the shoot, to start my own alternative brochure!

Edited November 13, 2019 by Victoria2

[ew101]

There is no doubt the passengers aboard match or are more attractive than the models -Hattie is correct.

 

The issue is environmental impact.  There needs to be less of it from our hobby here.  A few of the lines are paying attention.    Others are not.  

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/flygskam-anti-flying-flight-shaming-sweden-greta-thornberg-environment-air-travel-train-brag-a8945196.html

[BlueRiband]

Your posting history shows you to be quite an active cruiser.  You recently posted about Bahamas Paradise Cruise Line and Pullmantur. How do you reconcile that activity with your worries about environmental impact?  You could do your part by restricting your own sailing to sail boats or only using ships for legitimate A-B transportation. 

 

I belong to a religion that sometimes gets rightly or wrongly accused of trying to "impose" its moral standards on others.  Yet isn't that precisely what the "Church of Climate Change" is trying to do?  We don't have the power to destroy this planet even if we set out to try to do just that.  Nature is far too vast and powerful. 

 

I'll stop flying when the self righteous celebrity zealots like Leonardo DiCaprio fly commercial or take Amtrak.  (I'm sure he would just love to travel like the rest of us but his work is just soooo important....) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ew101]

Yes booking future cruises would be a lot more fun if the Earth had infinite resources and could not be harmed by human activity.  

However the mass of our planet can be precisely calculated as can the human impact on the atmosphere and oceans.  

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_mass

 

 

[exlondoner]

8 hours ago, BlueRiband said:

 We don't have the power to destroy this planet even if we set out to try to do just that.  Nature is far too vast and powerful

 

 

 

Let us hope so. That is probably what the original inhabitants of Easter Island thought. What we do undoubtedly have is the power to destroy ourselves, as they did.

[roscoe39]

10 hours ago, exlondoner said:

 

Let us hope so. That is probably what the original inhabitants of Easter Island thought. What we do undoubtedly have is the power to destroy ourselves, as they did.

HEAR HEAR!!!!!!!!

[Germancruiser]

Of course they photoshop- I suppose we all learned early on- very early one- in school- or maybe even in kindergarden- that we should not trust commericals. Host Hattie- I loved your comment about the models posing for Cunards brochure and how hard one will be pressed to find some such on board a Cunarder - or any ship for that matter!

I am on the bright side of fifty- and take cruises since about 25 years. From a youngster on board any cruise ship I went to the " average- ager"- LOL!

One guy - my age- i met on board the Mary2- we had nice conversations- what he said was so funny i never forogt:

" We all know we are on board gods anteroom- and we love it here" ! I agree - i very much agree!

 

Edited November 15, 2019 by Germancruiser

[BlueRiband]

On 11/13/2019 at 9:21 PM, ew101 said:

Yes booking future cruises would be a lot more fun if the Earth had infinite resources and could not be harmed by human activity...

 

 

I did some searching and found that Bahamas Paradise line does indeed have an LNG ship.  But Pullmantur does not.  More LNG ships are under construction but bunkering infrastructure is still in its infancy.  So at the moment their itineries are limited.  If you're going to limit yourself to only sailing on LNG ships then you won't be sailing on Cunard for many years to come.  The fourth Cunarder is coming out of Fincantineri and that yard has yet to build an LNG ship. 

 

Yet diesel-fueled ships have not stopped you from cruising.  If I thought that a business was acting irresponsibly I just would boycott them rather than say that patronizing them would be more fun if they did otherwise. But that's just me.

[LittleFish1976]

LNG is still an environmental problem. Hurtigruten has its first partially electric powered ship sailing in the Antarctic - MS Roald Amundsen and sister ship MS Fridtjof Nansen.

 

Yes, I know they're not 'cruise ships' in the way Cunard and others are but still offer a cruising/sailing experience.

 

https://www.hurtigruten.com.au/ships/ms-roald-amundsen/

[Topper123]

While on a TA on QM2 a year ago last July, I noticed a large smear of brownish colored smoke, miles behind us. If I hadn’t known that we were in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, I would have thought that I was looking at a forest fire. There was a ship’s officer handy, giving directions to the early morning deck crew, whom I queried about the phenomenon. He said “That’s us!” Apparently the ship’s exhaust, which is practically invisible as it exits the stack, and which is directed straight up by the stack geometry, settles to the surface of the sea several miles behind her. The phenomenon I had observed evidently only occurs on clear, calm days and is most readily observed in the early morning. It may not be apparent by looking at the stack, but that boat is generating a LOT of smoke!

That being said, my main squeeze and I will be celebrating Christmas on QM2 in the Caribbean this year. This will be only our second cruise and I intend to put on my blinders with my tux and enjoy myself without fretting about climate change. There will be plenty of opportunity to fret about that ( and much else!) when we return home.

[BlueRiband]

There is a very clean and reliable source of marine power with a 65-year safety record: nuclear.  The entire active US Navy aircraft carrier and submarine fleet is so powered.  Nuclear isn't without its problems as the engineering crew requires training and licensing far in excess of what needed for conventional maritime licensing.  The economics only make sense when fuel oil prices exceed these operating costs.  However the Fukashima disaster is still fresh in everyone's mind and it will take decades before public acceptance can be restored - if ever. 

[Bigmike911]

1 hour ago, BlueRiband said:

There is a very clean and reliable source of marine power with a 65-year safety record: nuclear.  The entire active US Navy aircraft carrier and submarine fleet is so powered.  Nuclear isn't without its problems as the engineering crew requires training and licensing far in excess of what needed for conventional maritime licensing.  The economics only make sense when fuel oil prices exceed these operating costs.  However the Fukashima disaster is still fresh in everyone's mind and it will take decades before public acceptance can be restored - if ever. 

Hear, Hear. Nuclear ships and submarines in the US Navy have safely crossed the high seas for decades. Unfortunately there are still folk who have an irrational fear of nuclear and that has prevents the evolution of safer nuclear power. If we had approached nuclear, like we approached air pollution we would be miles ahead both on land and sea. Nuclear can power more electric cars with no pollution that wind and solar ever will be able to. At present we are simply exchanging the pollution from vehicles to the power stations that generate power for their batteries.