Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Ken Rockwell  (Read 16488 times)

jalcocer

  • Guest
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2012, 08:51:49 PM »

I just love how sometimes he contradicts him self. I've read him from now and then and every time there is something he says that opposes to past comments he made. You forgot the comment where he always shoots jpg's and needs no raw because he always get it right from the camera.
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4738
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2012, 09:09:13 PM »

And don’t get me started with Ken’s take on color management and sRGB. As silly as the stuff you posted about photography.
It's hard to find anything that isn't silly on that site.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10608
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2012, 11:53:13 PM »

When I hear mention of KR, I think of that classic New Yorker cartoon caption: "On the Web nobody knows you're a dog!"   ;)
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

Bryan Conner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 526
    • My Flickr page
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2012, 12:44:40 AM »

I never take anything that Ken Rockwell says as being serious.  On his "About" page, he even states "I occasionally weave fiction and satire into my stories to keep them interesting. I love a good hoax. Read The Museum of Hoaxes, or see their site. A hoax, like some of the things I do on this website, is done as a goof simply for the heck of it by overactive minds as a practical joke. Even Ansel Adams kidded around when he was just a pup in the 1920s by selling his photos as "Parmelian Prints." I have the energy and sense of humor of a three-year old, so remember, this is a personal website, and never presented as fact. I enjoy making things up for fun, as does The Onion, and I publish them here — even on this page.".


I think that he enjoys getting all of us "techies" fired up.  Don't believe everything you read!
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2191
    • Website
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2012, 03:15:21 AM »

I think that he enjoys getting all of us "techies" fired up.

Doesn't everyone?
Logged

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #25 on: February 17, 2012, 03:56:55 AM »

When I hear mention of KR, I think of that classic New Yorker cartoon caption: "On the Web nobody knows you're a dog!"   ;)

We all know you're a dog Eric.
Probably Michael is a dog too - he disallowed cat photographs on LuLa.
I myself am proud to be a dog. I don't care who knows it.

Woof, woof, wag, wag ....

 :P

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #26 on: February 17, 2012, 04:38:43 AM »

Doesn't everyone?



I shall break my own rule to write: +1

Techies - aka the death of creative photography.

Rob C

Bryan Conner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 526
    • My Flickr page
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #27 on: February 17, 2012, 06:21:16 AM »



I shall break my own rule to write: +1

Techies - aka the death of creative photography.

Rob C



Anti-Techies: the death to the future of photography.  Now, my intention of that statement is to point out that the future of photography is dependent on both creativity and technology.  Without either, it will die.  Both are needed.  In fact, it is possible to be both a techie and be creative at the same time.  Some of us are technically creative.
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2349
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #28 on: February 17, 2012, 07:16:43 AM »

Anti-Techies: the death to the future of photography.  Now, my intention of that statement is to point out that the future of photography is dependent on both creativity and technology.  Without either, it will die.  Both are needed.  In fact, it is possible to be both a techie and be creative at the same time.  Some of us are technically creative.
Absolutely. I don't remember reading much criticism of Ansel Adams' creativity and he was a serious analogue techie.
Logged

michswiss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 270
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2012, 07:55:29 AM »

Ansel Adams creative?  Where'd that come from...

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #30 on: February 17, 2012, 10:19:58 AM »

Ansel Adams creative?  Where'd that come from...




It came with the sainthood, Jennifer. You know, 20-20 hindsight. ARAT is the definition of creativity in some quarters; it also involves a ritual with old tripod holes, but I never quite grasped the significance of the latter. I believe that using a little artificial heating is frowned upon, too. Rules, rules; thirds, triplets and octaves even! Makes me think of Fats Domino.

Regading the death of techies or photography or whatever: reading the techie posts here, I seldom appear to see them linked with any great photography.

Now, perhaps for the record, some personal definitions might come in useful and avoid another zillion indignant posts.

With techie, I refer to pixel-wankers; you know, fairies on the head of a pin, etc. at 100% (of something or another). I do not mean active, professional people in the job who know how to use complicated equipment in their daily work. There has never been a problem with understanding one's gear; there has always been a problem with thinking that said gear has to be very complicated, be the very latest flavour of the month, be exchanged as rapidly as it's bought (just like yachts) and bear a famous name. Never realised it before: many yachties suffer the same angst as 'photographers': they can't enjoy what they are fortunate enough to have for wishing they had something bigger, newer and more expensive. Just the way I feel about cars, come to think about it... fortunately, I'm poor enough to have avoided making a fool of myself over them. Cars, I mean; the rest is not up for discussion.

Rob C



Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10608
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #31 on: February 17, 2012, 10:48:19 AM »

Woof!
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8815
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #32 on: February 17, 2012, 12:00:23 PM »

Woof!

Now we are talking (or is it barking?)!

The thread has finally reached the level of seriousness worthy of Ken Rockwell ;)

jalcocer

  • Guest
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #33 on: February 17, 2012, 12:06:04 PM »

The thread has finally reached the level of seriousness worthy of Ken Rockwell ;)

+1
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10608
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2012, 12:41:00 PM »

Now we are talking (or is it barking?)!

The thread has finally reached the level of seriousness worthy of Ken Rockwell ;)
+1!   Meow!
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2012, 12:47:30 PM »

You know what ?
You're awesome ... gave me a good laugh ...
(walks away wagging his tail)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #36 on: February 17, 2012, 01:55:18 PM »

You know what ?
You're awesome ... gave me a good laugh ...
(walks away wagging his tail)





Speaking of tails, it reminds me of the parable of the little fox who got his tail chopped off: he wanted all the other little foxes to get theirs chopped off too.

Rob C


P.S. Also reminds that all this publicity would probably have cost Ken more than he'd want to afford!
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 02:06:56 PM by Rob C »
Logged

siba

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
    • http://www.stefansiba.com
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #38 on: February 24, 2012, 11:19:32 AM »

I can assure you that he is in no way the kind of photographer I would look up to.  I think KW could have easily come up with a better example.
Ken Wockwell?

Stefan
Logged

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: Ken Rockwell
« Reply #39 on: February 24, 2012, 03:58:24 PM »

Ken Wockwell?

Stefan

What Wock ?


Jabberwocky
by Lewis Carroll

Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!
He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.
And as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.
And hast thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!
He chortled in his joy.
Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.


 :P
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up