[urq] NAC: Spy photographers : myth or reality ?

[Louis_Alain_Richard at computerhorizons.com]

Precision about my initial post:

I know that manufacturers DO test their cars on public roads. I don't
question what many of you have seen. Even my own Honey swear she saw a Q7
this spring in Montreal.
What I DON'T believe, is the existence of "professionnal spy
photographers". It's just unbelievable that a guy can shoot 10, 20, 50
unseen new cars a year without being caught.
That's why I said that these fictious persons hide a PR agency doing
(carefully timed) release of the pictures of the next vehicles. It's part
of the "hype" preceding the launch of any new face in automobile-dom.

Now, look at this month Car and Driver "Future cars" feature, and tell me
that the pictures of the cars at the Nurburgring are spy shots. No kidding,
the camera must have been in that same corner for years...

Louis-Alain,
trying to start a (friendly) flame war out of damp wood...


Ed Kellock wrote:

I believe they exist, though I don't have any proof.  I've never met
one, but in 30 years of reading car magazines, seeing them, and
reading stories talking about the profession or specific individuals
emplyed as such, I belive they exist.

When I was in college in Long Beach, CA, I worked in a Fotomat booth
and on a regular basis, I saw a group of late-model Mercedes pull into
the shopping center parking lot and the drivers would go into a store
or fast-food restaurant there.  They all had extensive gear in/on
them... antennas and other stuff.  They weren't disguised, but they
were obviously a test group of some sort.  I finally asked one what
was going on and they were just putting miles on them in real-world
conditions.

At the time I was salivating to get a job like that, but it never came
to be.  These weren't the fodder for spy photogs, but it was the same
sort of testing program, just without any body work they were worried
about being seen.  It's easy to do it with just engines/drivetrains,
but with a totally new model, it's not quite so, hence the need for
disguising them.

I would venture to say that some car companies might put disuised cars
on public roads to throw some teasers out via the spy photogs, but I
doubt they're employed by the car companies.

Ed


> On 7/18/05, Louis_Alain_Richard at computerhorizons.com
> <Louis_Alain_Richard at computerhorizons.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I was having a discussion with a friend, and we had a gentle argument
about
> > the so called "spy" photographers.
> >
> > I ,for one, don't believe these guys really exists. Or, if they really
do,
> > they just put their name on a shot that some manufacturer sent them.
They
> > are in fact a PR agency for the manufacturers.
> >
> > My arguments are:
> >
> > 1- If they wanted, it would be real easy for a car manufacturer to
"test"
> > their mule in a remote location where no Hans Lehmann, Brenda Priddy or
Jim
> > Dunne are waiting, hidden in a cache with a 3 ft long zoom.
> >
> > 2- Anybody had actually talked, seen or can confirm their existence ?
> >
> > 3- Strangely, we never see shots of the "test mules" broken, in fire,
in a
> > ditch or in any unfavourable position. The cars are always
"...cornering
> > agressively at the Nurburgring", "...enduring successfuly hot weather
> > testing", "...experiencing the most extreme cold of the year", etc.
These
> > cars are amazingly reliable, for test mules, no ?
> >
> > 4- After all these years, even my mother would know that a car with
tape
> > over the rear lens is a "disguised test mule". Then, if I was a car
> > manufacturer, I would have found a way to disguise my cars in less
evident
> > way !
> >
> > 5- And the massive argument : To whom this "spy" shot is profitable ?
Who
> > is gaining media interest for "free" ? Answer this question and you
have
> > the proof that they are bogus.
> >
> > So, any takers to defend the reality of the spy shots ?
> >
> > Louis-Alain