I find your POV difficult to accept nor understand.
Re: Scott Kelby. I had a professional relationship with him for several years along with some of the so called Photoshop guys and NAPP as a paying member. I wrote that I had a great deal of respect for Scott based on what he's accomplished. I still have a great deal of respect for him but based on experience, it's greatly diminished. I compared him to PT barnum not Stalin or Pol Pot! My point was, over the years, the focus of NAPP, lead by Scott has been more about selling then educating his paid members. Case in point is his over sale of a product that supposedly provides "Layers in Lightroom". I'm not the only one that found his slant completely sales oriented, these blog posts are right on the money. PLEASE read them:http://regex.info/blog/2011-04-23/1753http://regex.info/blog/2011-05-04/1761
I'm not a fan of the "here's everything in 7 steps
" fast food approach which NAPP has focused on. I don't care for fast food education. As an example of a diametrically opposite approach, I'm more a fan of the lengthly and through tutorials of George Jardine.
Scott has on a number of occasions publicly dismissed soft proofing, something I feel I know something about. We strongly disagree. That the engineers at Adobe who are far smarter than either of us implemented this feature back in 1998, and that a large group of Photoshop and now Lightroom users find this necessary functionality, I find Scott's understanding to be wrong.I find his advise to be wrong! I have to wonder why he stated this on a number of occasions. He is supposed to be in the education business! I guess trying to distill color management into the fast food approach can't work but dismissing it is a deserve to his audience.
In that respect, this opinion I have of Scott isn't much different from that of Ken Rockwell also discussed on LuLa. I've only read two of his blog posts, both on color management and I find them glaringly incorrect. Other than my disapproval of Ken (and Scott's) understanding of color management, I have no beef with the qualities of their physical appearance! Any opinion I have of them as photographers is not science based so I'll not provide an opinion because it's not noteworthy.
You on the other hand have suggested that as an author, I'm out of line for stating my disagreement with another author (Scott). I told you I haven't been an author in many years and wondered when the statue of limitations runs out. You didn't reply which is telling!
On the other hand, you've said some pretty ugly things about Scott based on his physical appearance and wardrobe. You hide behind an alias. While complaining that my transparency as a forum poster is somehow out of line. Can you understand how some of us find that disingenuous? Distressful?