What do we make of Ken Rockwell?

[Rhossydd]

It's perplexing..

or simply bad taste.

[Steve Weldon]

You are assuming that the purpose of photography is to capture the world as it is perceived by most people. I think his "over the top" color is his choice. A "Fine Art " choice. Some would say that accurate color is boring color. Unless of course, it is necessary for a client and their needs. That is a very different ball of wax.
Peter

I considered this.  But when he extended it from his landscapes to his family members and they all started having bright red faces I discounted the thought.   You may still be right.. but I think it's something else.

[Steve Weldon]

or simply bad taste.

Or a different taste for sure.  But I'm saving that one for last.

[petermfiore]

   You may still be right.. but I think it's something else.

You may be right as well. That's the point.

Peter

[Steve Weldon]

You may be right as well. That's the point.

Peter

Well sure, an obvious one.  It's why we use terms like "in my opinion" or "I'd guess" etc..  it's implied and unspoken.  Or in my case when I use question marks after an opinion and say " I dunno" it's being implied I don't know, could be anything. 

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

or simply bad taste.

+10.

[Codger]

Ken's blog is one of many options for us all to sample and consider.  If he's not serving someone's needs with his content, they can (as "they" say) change the channel.  All the good blogs are reflections of the writers' biases and experience.  We like them because they bring their personality to the commentary that goes beyond what the manufacturers put in their press releases and ad copy.  Ken certainly has his own perspective and shares it.  We all know it's best to get our news from multiple outlets unless we've found the TRUE source that we're comfortable relying on.  There are a handful of excellent resources for serious photographers: when you find one, share it with more people and enlighten even more of us.  As for Ken, it seems the remarks here have been "piling on" for a few days.  So, apparently, he's probably better suited for beginners and hobbyists, in most cases.  I've gotten some useful info from his blog and have enjoyed some of his side remarks.  Since, for a lot of readers, none of of his stuff is going to be a "life or death" issue, I'll leave it to them to determine its value.  Meanwhile, tell someone about LuLa in the next 24 hours.  They'll thank you.

[orchidblooms]

my .02...

i had been shooting olympus digital since the d-500l 

had been using the e-1 for many many years...

into to my local pro shop last winter ( feb 2012 )...  to finally get the e-5...

my ooh so pro salesman advised me, of the upcoming d800's.... 

i ordered the d800e on the spot....

the salesman knew me, and some of my long term photo goals....

decision was simple simon
.....

got to doing some 'googling' for the first time in my life for camera related items some time later, after ordering d800e... (i made it years with no photo forums - thought never came to me to look...)

i landed on the aforementioned... persons site...  and thought to myself after a very short while...  who in the world is this bafflegab belching blatherskite....  and moved on in rapid fashion

[LesPalenik]

You are assuming that the purpose of photography is to capture the world as it is perceived by most people. I think his "over the top" color is his choice. A "Fine Art " choice. Some would say that accurate color is boring color. Unless of course, it is necessary for a client and their needs. That is a very different ball of wax.
Peter

I would agree that it is purely his choice and style. I have a friend who is a very experienced and capable photographer and he routinely oversharpens and oversaturates photos for his clients. Drastically so, more than Ken! He knows his processing is way over the top, but he keeps telling me that the clients like the bombastic looks. He may be wrong but he may be right, it's a very different population segment, unlike the Lula readers.

[EduPerez]

When someone repeatedly declares that his main source of income (90%, if I recall correctly) comes from the links to camera shops in his website, I think we must no longer consider that person a photographer, but a professional blogger; and I think that is a very important point to realize that KR is quite successful in his business, and to understand the reasons behind his articles and photographs.

[digitaldog]

When someone repeatedly declares that his main source of income (90%, if I recall correctly) comes from the links to camera shops in his website, I think we must no longer consider that person a photographer, but a professional blogger; and I think that is a very important point to realize that KR is quite successful in his business, and to understand the reasons behind his articles and photographs.

Good point!

In terms of his over saturation, as I said in the other post on Ken, he hasn't a clue about color management! So I suspect that's part of the issue. I've only read two pieces Ken wrote, both on color management and both were filled with nonsense (we've gone there in the other post about him). Easy to tear him a new one just on the ideas he has about color: this isn't an opinion of his, it's misinformation and that's why I think he's a kook. I'm fine if he has an opinion about aesthetics, that can be up to debate. I'm not fine when he posts what is technically nonsense as he's done with this two 'articles' on color. Hence the flat earth label which is accurate in terms of describing him, at least in terms of two articles he's written.

[Hmm1000]

People seem to like to knock KR, but, in terms of complex technical knowledge, I've been impressed. I take it his two USA patents -- one for a 'Wide dynamic range vector data raster display' H2,184 March 6, 2007 and another for 'Alternate triggering in digital oscilloscopes' 6,473,701 Oct 29, 2002 -- aren't a joke?

The question is whether technical knowledge on its own makes much difference. KR thinks its doesn't (he calls people who do think it does 'measurebators'). I quite like people who have a _lot_ of technical knowledge, and don't suggest that (alone) is why you should listen to them.

[digitaldog]

People seem to like to knock KR, but, in terms of complex technical knowledge, I've been impressed. I take it his two USA patents -- one for a 'Wide dynamic range vector data raster display' H2,184 March 6, 2007 and another for 'Alternate triggering in digital oscilloscopes' 6,473,701 Oct 29, 2002 -- aren't a joke?

That's indeed a fact based on his blog, or there's some other verifiable way to know that's a fact?

[Hmm1000]

You can check it here:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/index.html

[digitaldog]

You can check it here:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/index.html

So specifically, you found Ken's patients and it's the same guy?

[Hmm1000]

I'm not certain (as I said in my first post above) -- but it fits in with his bio (working in broadcasting), and sits well with his some of his comments on types of measurement (optical and audio). He might have selected 2 patents from the 57 or so that exist from a Rockwell in CA. Would be happy to have it confirmed or disproved.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

So specifically, you found Ken's patients and it's the same guy?

Andrew, are you trying to suggest that Ken's followers are... ahmm... loonies?

[digitaldog]

Andrew, are you trying to suggest that Ken's followers are... ahmm... loonies?

Never! However, trust but verify.

[Steve Weldon]

Good point!

In terms of his over saturation, as I said in the other post on Ken, he hasn't a clue about color management! So I suspect that's part of the issue. I've only read two pieces Ken wrote, both on color management and both were filled with nonsense (we've gone there in the other post about him). Easy to tear him a new one just on the ideas he has about color: this isn't an opinion of his, it's misinformation and that's why I think he's a kook. I'm fine if he has an opinion about aesthetics, that can be up to debate. I'm not fine when he posts what is technically nonsense as he's done with this two 'articles' on color. Hence the flat earth label which is accurate in terms of describing him, at least in terms of two articles he's written.

I remember scratching my head over several comments he's made about color management.  I suspect, as with several areas I've noticed with him, he just hasn't got into that area yet.  He didn't think them important enough until he was shown they were.  RAW processing vs. Jpegs being one such area. 

[Steve Weldon]

People seem to like to knock KR, but, in terms of complex technical knowledge, I've been impressed. I take it his two USA patents -- one for a 'Wide dynamic range vector data raster display' H2,184 March 6, 2007 and another for 'Alternate triggering in digital oscilloscopes' 6,473,701 Oct 29, 2002 -- aren't a joke?

The question is whether technical knowledge on its own makes much difference. KR thinks its doesn't (he calls people who do think it does 'measurebators'). I quite like people who have a _lot_ of technical knowledge, and don't suggest that (alone) is why you should listen to them.

Well.. he could very well have such technical experience and my vote (from what I've read and seen) is he does.  But it doesn't necessarily translate to photography.  My own background is very heavy into electronics, cryptology, and radio wave propagation.. enough in each one to earn an EE.. but precious little of it translates to photography.  So his background certainly shows he has the capacity, but perhaps not the knowledge.