Maybelline Subway Ad Wasn't Real, So Why Did Everyone Believe It?
Maybelline Subway Ad Wasn't Real, So Why Did Everyone Believe It?
A short video circulating on social media in the summer of 2023 changed the advertising world's perception of reality for a few seconds. There were giant eyelashes in front of a train entering the London Underground. As the train progressed, a giant Maybelline Sky High mascara brush placed in the station came into contact with the eyelashes, and the eyelashes curled upward as if mascara had actually been applied. A similar image was then shown for one of London's iconic red buses. At first glance, this seemed like an extraordinarily expensive and bold outdoor application by the brand to the city centre. The problem was: such an application never physically existed. There were no giant eyelashes on the trains, no giant mascara brushes set up in the subway station, and the bus didn't really travel like that either. The image was digitally created for Maybelline by CGI artist Ian Padgham and Origiful. Despite this, not only users but even some publications reported on the campaign on social media, thinking it was real.
Today we hear the name of this type of work more often: FOOH, that is, Faux Out-of-Home. In Turkish, we can think of this as fake, fictional or virtual outdoor advertising. The basic idea is pretty simple; A real city image is taken, and an advertising idea that is extremely difficult, expensive or completely impossible to implement in the physical world is placed into this image using CGI, 3D and compositing techniques. The resulting content is designed to be viewed mostly on Instagram, TikTok and similar social platforms, rather than as a billboard. Maybelline's giant mascara brush became one of the most well-known examples of this, and played a major role in transforming the FOOH approach into one of the mainstream debates in advertising in 2023.
The ad looked like it was on the subway, but the ad space was actually on a phone screen
Here's the first thing that makes the Maybelline campaign interesting. The image looks like an outdoor advertisement, but the real advertising medium is not the London Underground. Phone screen. In traditional OOH advertising, the brand buys a spot where people will physically pass by. No matter how successful the campaign is, its visibility is limited to a certain geography. Maybelline, on the other hand, used London's recognizable physical environment as a setting and left distribution to social media. Thus, “advertising in London” turned into content that could be seen by millions of people who do not live in London.
This real-world connection is what differentiates FOOH from the classic CGI commercial. If the giant mascara brush were shown in a completely imaginary 3D city, the image would still be beautiful, but it would leave the viewer wondering, “Did they really do that?” It wouldn't raise the question. We know the London Underground. We know the red bus. We know the behavior of the station. Therefore, the element of the extraordinary becomes much stronger when placed within the reality we know.
The ad doesn't actually tell a complicated story to deceive us. It adds just one impossible detail to the world as we know it.
And our brain accepts this for a few seconds.
Why Did It Look So Convincing?
Good CGI is not just about producing a high-quality 3D model. The main thing is to convince the viewer that the digital object belongs to the same laws of physics as the environment. In the Maybelline video, the position of the mascara brush, the movement of the train, the physical response of the eyelashes, camera movements, light and perspective work in the same system. The video doesn't particularly try to look "too cinematic". A person actually acts like he took out his phone and took a photo.
This small decision is very important.
If precise crane movements, high-production lenses, or dramatic lighting were used, like in a commercial, the user could read the image as fictional from the start. Instead, the video moves closer to the aesthetic of a casual city recording we might see on social media. This is exactly why the contrast between the real image and the extraordinary object works.
Describing such works, Ian Padgham explains that for him they are a kind of surrealism, imagining events in daily life that would "look very cool in an alternative universe." The same approach is seen in other examples of viral FOOH, such as Jacquemus' buses that turn into giant bags on the streets of Paris.
Maybelline's success was in creating believable surrealism rather than hyperrealism.
He Described the Product Features Not with a Sentence, but with a Giant Visual Metaphor
Just because the campaign went viral wouldn't make it good advertising. The real difference between viral content and a strong advertising idea emerges in the connection established with the product.
Sky High is a mascara.
The task of mascara is related to the eyelashes.
In the video, a train turns into a giant eyelash and passes through a giant mascara brush.
The function of the product can be understood with a single movement of a few seconds.
This is a pretty neat example of visual metaphor in advertising. Instead of explaining in a long text that the mascara "impressively lifts and defines your eyelashes", she enlarges the product itself hundreds of times and has it applied to public transportation.
Absurd.
But it is directly related to the product.
This is where most FOOH efforts can fail. The brand's product is made gigantic, hung on a building or moved in the middle of the city, but the question "why?" There is no answer to the question. The image may go viral, but the product idea remains weak.
In the Maybelline example, the effect and product benefit are the same idea.
Therefore, the image is remembered not only as "I saw a giant mascara" but also for what the mascara does.
Does Advertising Lose Its Value When You Find Out It's Not Real?
This is partly why the Maybelline case was so controversial in the advertising world.
While some people said, "I was disappointed when I found out it wasn't real," another group viewed it as a creative digital advertisement. Discussions on The Drum also questioned whether, although the display was impressive, it could truly be considered OOH and whether virtual work would overshadow the value of actual physical outdoor advertising.
Terminology is important here.
This was not an out-of-home campaign in the classic sense.
A more accurate definition is social media content that uses an out-of-home aesthetic.
The discussion becomes much more interesting when we make this distinction. Because Maybelline didn't actually invent a new billboard format. Billboard translated its idea into a content format.
The physical realization of an advertisement was no longer essential for the impact of the image.
Moreover, social media users asked "Is this real?" asking each other turned into the second layer of communication of the campaign. It didn't end after watching the ad; Its reality continued to be debated.
It is not easy for an advertiser to find a more powerful earned media mechanism than this.
“Is This Real?” Question May Be the New Clickbait
The main appeal of FOOH content is partly based on our brain's desire for validation.
When we see an image, we try to categorize it within the first few seconds.
Real.
Advertisement.
Movie.
CGI.
AI.
The category is not immediately clear in the Maybelline video.
That few seconds of uncertainty stops the scroll.
The user watches again.
It goes into the comments.
He sends it to his friend.
“Is this real?” he asks.
In today's social media algorithms, almost all of the behaviors requested by a content occur automatically.
In Creative Review's evaluation of FOOH, it is emphasized that curiosity between what is real and what is not plays an important role behind the rise of these works. Padgham also points out that this field of curiosity may grow even further, saying that it will become increasingly difficult to separate the real from the synthetic image in the age of AI.
So the viral mechanism of FOOH is not just “good looks”.
Doubt.
Maybelline Actually Removed the Laws of Physics for Advertising
In traditional outdoor campaigns, the creative team has very clear boundaries. The weight of the structure, safety permits, traffic management, municipal procedures, production cost, assembly, weather conditions and spatial restrictions determine the feasibility of the idea.
FOOH eliminates most of these boundaries.
You can make Big Ben into lipstick.
You can unzip a skyscraper.
You can turn a bag into a bus.
A giant product could fall from the sky.
A building can become product packaging.
An idea that might require millions of dollars and dozens of permissions in the physical world can be turned into a single social media video with a strong 3D/VFX team.
This opens up an incredible amount of freedom for creative teams.
But it also creates a new problem.
If we can do anything, what should we do?
When the technical limit is removed, the intellectual test becomes more difficult.
The Rise of FOOH is a Story of Social Media, Not CGI
CGI is not new. For decades, commercials have been showing things that don't actually exist.
What's new is that CGI acts like documentary footage.
Once upon a time, advertising using visual effects would say, “look what an impressive movie we made.” FOOH, on the other hand, uses the aesthetic of “someone saw something very strange in the city and filmed it with their phone”.
This change is a direct result of social media culture.
Because the way users consume content has changed.
We don't watch 30-second commercials on television.
In the feed, we make decisions in three seconds.
FOOH is also designed accordingly.
It should be understood quickly.
The first frame should be strong.
It should be able to work without sound.
It should be read on the mobile screen.
It should be worth watching again.
It should be weird enough to share.
And most of the time the narration should be completed in a few seconds.
Therefore, it would be incomplete to see FOOH only as a VFX trend.
In fact, it is a product of social-first advertising design.
Jacquemus, Maybelline and “Unreal” Cities
Maybelline wasn't the only example. Especially since 2023, many campaigns have emerged in which fashion and beauty brands transform physical cities into digital playgrounds. The images of Jacquemus' giant bags driving like vehicles through the streets of Paris became one of the most recognizable examples of the FOOH language. Creative Review points out that especially fashion and luxury brands quickly adopted this approach in the early stages of the trend.
It's understandable why this has a rapid response in the luxury and fashion industry.
These brands don't just sell products.
Fantasy sells.
A Jacquemus bag doesn't really have to be the size of a bus. It is enough for the image to belong to the dream world of the brand.
Maybelline has brought a similar logic to the mass beauty category.
The city is no longer the backdrop against which the product is placed.
The scene where the product plays.
A New Production Model for Advertising Agencies
The rise of FOOH campaigns is also changing the nature of advertising production.
While media planning, permissions, physical production and assembly play a big part in a traditional outdoor project, the team in FOOH is different.
Art direction.
3D modeling.
Motion design.
VFX.
Tracking.
Compositing.
Color grading.
Sound design.
Social media strategy.
These disciplines are becoming much more centralized.
The real world image taken by the photographer or director comes together with the impossible product created by the 3D artist. The result is neither entirely real footage nor entirely animation.
A hybrid advertising language.
For us, this transformation is particularly important. Because the duty of the advertising agency is no longer just "finding a campaign idea and sending it to production". Being able to manage design, motion, video and technology around the same creative idea is becoming increasingly valuable.
Will FOOH Get Even Easier When AI Comes?
Largely yes.
The development of generative video tools, object replacement, video inpainting, camera tracking and image production is rapidly lowering the production barrier for FOOH-like jobs. Some scenes that required a dedicated VFX studio a few years ago can now be prototyped with much smaller teams.
However, a strange result may arise here.
As it gets easier to do technically, it can get harder to do good FOOH.
Because there are hundreds of them on the internet at once:
giant perfume bottle,
giant shoes,
giant bag,
product coming out of the building,
packaging rolling on the street
If we start to see, the scale loses its surprise.
The first giant bag is surprising.
The fiftieth giant bag is the content pattern.
So the future of FOOH will require better ideas, not more CGI.
The Line Between FOOH and Fake News
The ethical side of this aesthetics should not be ignored.
When the Maybelline video was released, it was not immediately obvious to everyone that the content was CGI. Some users and media outlets believed that the practice was actually carried out. This has created controversy about how clearly brands should state when producing synthetic ingredients.
The result of this in a mascara ad can be a lot of entertainment.
But the issue is much more serious when the same technology is used in other contexts.
A view of a city.
A politician.
A disaster.
A protest.
A product malfunction.
As realistic CGI and generative AI become more common, it becomes increasingly difficult for users to tell whether the image they see is real or not.
Therefore, transparency will become as important as creative freedom.
The ad may not have to be real.
But the brand should not consciously mislead the consumer.
Will FOOH Replace Real Outdoor Advertising?
I think no.
Because the two media do different things.
Real OOH has physical presence.
It really takes over a square.
Seeing people together in the same place creates a common experience.
It can be touched.
It can be photographed.
Part of the real world.
FOOH, on the other hand, eliminates the limits of scale and can tell more fantastic stories for social media.
One is not an advanced version of the other.
Two different vehicles.
Even the most interesting campaigns may use both together in the future. A physical activation can be set up in the real world and an impossible version can be produced on the digital side.
The relationship between the real and the virtual can turn into advertising itself.
What Does It Take for a FOOH Campaign to Be Successful?
One of the most important lessons from the Maybelline example is that expensive CGI is not an idea alone.
Good FOOH should have a connection that is simple and can be explained in a few seconds.
Maybelline → mascara → lash → giant lash → train → mascara brush.
The chain is very clear.
The viewer can understand the ad without reading the caption explaining it.
Therefore, the first question creative teams should ask is “How can we make it look giant?” not.
“What feature of the product can we describe on a scale that is impossible in the physical world?”
Although these two questions seem similar, they produce completely different advertisements.
The first produces effects.
The second generates ideas.
What do we, as Voldi Creative, take away from the Maybelline Campaign?
What makes Maybelline's subway video valuable to us is not the fact that "we could do this with CGI". 3D and VFX have already been able to do this for years.
The really interesting part is the redefinition of the medium.
The London Underground looks like an advertising space.
But not.
It looks like there is a billboard.
But no.
We are watching a physical activation.
But it's actually a social media video.
Maybelline is not buying a billboard here, but the idea of a billboard.
This change says a lot about the direction the advertising industry will take in the coming years. It is no longer necessary for a creative idea to be physically feasible in the real world in order to be experienced by the user. When 3D, CGI, generative AI and real footage combine, cities themselves can become a creative canvas.
But no matter how much technology develops, there is only one thing that does not change.
The rendering engine wasn't the reason people shared the video.
It wasn't the polygon count.
It wasn't compositing software.
It was such a simple and such a good idea to see a train brushing her eyelashes on a mascara brush.
Perhaps this is the most valuable advertising lesson Maybelline has left us:
Technology can remove the boundaries of reality.
But we still need ideas to attract attention.
Nur Oğuz