More often than not (IME, AEBE), equipment reviews in Stereophile are, generally speaking, sparse in photographic content and/or in use of non-stock photos/images. Rarest are inside (under-the-cover) views of myriad indiv. products. [Note that I'm not referring to information graphics, such as graphs and charts; the exceptions here (unfortunately) may be certain schematics, (pseudo)code, block diagrams, etc.]
Because inside views really add substance to a review, as I see it anyway, I'm going to assume that the decision to capture and/or publish inside-view photos are ultimately the decision of the manuf. Is this (partially) correct?
I for one am a huge fan of inside-view images and feel every Stereophile-review product should include at least one such photo (top-down prepective), & preferrably several.
More often than not (IME, AEBE), equipment reviews in Stereophile are, generally speaking, sparse in photographic content and/or in use of non-stock photos/images. Rarest are inside (under-the-cover) views of myriad indiv. products. [Note that I'm not referring to information graphics, such as graphs and charts; the exceptions here (unfortunately) may be certain schematics, (pseudo)code, block diagrams, etc.]
Because inside views really add substance to a review, as I see it anyway, I'm going to assume that the decision to capture and/or publish inside-view photos are ultimately the decision of the manuf. Is this (partially) correct?
I for one am a huge fan of inside-view images and feel every Stereophile-review product should include at least one such photo (top-down prepective), & preferrably several.