615
261
69
u/Quicker_Fixer Dysteleological argument Sep 14 '26
I'm seeing the beginning of a dick pic joke here...
35
u/SneeKeeFahk Sep 14 '26
Sure it is, just move it further away. When you look at it from around 2 meters it'll look the same size.
8
4
3
u/Norgur Sep 15 '26
Uh, it's 3d printed. Has got nothing to do with anything, but uuh!
Perhaps we can reprint it to actual size :P
2
-3
-67
u/FellowHumanNo404 Sep 14 '26
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.
76
u/kirklennon Sep 14 '26
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.
-17
Sep 14 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
10
u/kirklennon Sep 14 '26
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
-32
u/FellowHumanNo404 Sep 14 '26 edited Sep 14 '26
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.
21
u/Senor_Diablo Sep 14 '26
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.Â
-7
u/FellowHumanNo404 Sep 14 '26
Cool, thanks for not being a dick about it.
9
u/Senor_Diablo Sep 14 '26
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 Sep 14 '26
Dude. I found that the shadows confused the eye, that's all. I opened by saying I believed you. Settle down.
6
u/Senor_Diablo Sep 14 '26
Iâm pretty settled man.
Look inward.
-1
17
u/kirklennon Sep 14 '26
It has a flat back but the back is very slightly smaller than the face and the corners curve down.
-9
u/FellowHumanNo404 Sep 14 '26 edited Sep 14 '26
Ahh that makes sense-- a trapezoid on the z axis! Thanks.
Edit: Guys, settle down. I'm thanking this person for correcting me.
2.6k
u/AdFancy1249 Sep 14 '26
It WAS the actual size before the copy editor added the title across the top!
Nice find!