Barkley said: They compensated a little too much this time to avoid any further errors. Going by my calculations of volume using pixels cubed as the unit the difference the image shows is as follows. New Image: 35.2% smaller than the box that is surrounding it. Old Image: 74.17% smaller than the box that is surrounding it. The old image was absolutely MILES off. |
I think that whoever the PR guy that came up with the first image was, they were thinking of 40% of the original size, not 40% less. But, either way someone clearly didn't proof the image with real math...
It's more likely(from my experience dealing with advertising people), that the image was ordered by one person and the text was created by another.