NEVER listen to Ken Rockwell

Status
Not open for further replies.
Eddzz!!

Eddzz!!

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,120
Name
Eddy
Edit My Images
Yes
See this video (skip to 39:15) for why you should never listen to what Ken Rockwell has to say. Jared Polin AKA 'Fro Knows Photo' explains in perfectly. Rockwell spews lies and false information that no doubt limit beginner photographers when choosing the right equipment and using it in the field.

Always shoot RAW.
 
Last edited:
does he? Everything he has said about all the bits i own has been pretty much spot on, i can only accuse him of his rather over enthusiastic style at times.

But he does exist to generate click through income and he does that very well.
 
essexash said:
does he? Everything he has said about all the bits i own has been pretty much spot on, i can only accuse him of his rather over enthusiastic style at times.

But he does exist to generate click through income and he does that very well.
Click to expand...

The statistics that he copy and pastes from Canon/Nikon spec sheets? Yeah, he gets that right. His personal opinions, however, are just poison to new photographers.
 
There all the same theses new spin doctors of the internet,i take them all with a pitch of salt :rolleyes:
 
Eddzz!! said:
Always shoot RAW.
Click to expand...

I saw this on youtube Ken has removed statement that says you cant take a bad photo! Or I couldnt find that statement. Agree some of Ken advise is very bad I wouldnt recommend anyone use his macro advise.

But the statement I quoted is plain and simply wrong. Even Jared states it doesnt matter what you shoot and size.
 
I must admit, I wasn't fond of KR to begin with, but from what Jared read out......not impressed at all. Another thing that I despise is when people say that certain cameras won't take great images even when that particular camera is perfectly good. The great David Bailey took a whole set just using a camera phone and a cheap point and shoot.
 
Tintin124 said:
I saw this on youtube Ken has removed statement that says you cant take a bad photo! Or I couldnt find that statement. Agree some of Ken advise is very bad I wouldnt recommend anyone use his macro advise.

But the statement I quoted is plain and simply wrong. Even Jared states it doesnt matter what you shoot and size.
Click to expand...

The only time I wouldn't shoot RAW is if I wasn't concerned about post processing on an image. If I have an artistic vision for an image then I will always capture it in RAW.
 
I can see his point about JPEG, if that's what you are alluding to?

To a new photographer who just wants to shoot and have their photos printed off JPEG makes sense. As their experience and knowledge grows they can then start exploring raw.

Using raw without the means and knowledge to process them properly can lead to someone giving up on their raw capable DSLR, CSC or advanced compact and going back to a simple compact when the results from the DSLR raw aren't what the new photographer expected.
 
Ken Rockwell doesn't care if you actually take his advice. Good or bad publicity still gets him traffic through his site and that's what keeps his family supported...

Plus, once you know how to take him, he can be funny.
 
Eddzz!! said:
The only time I wouldn't shoot RAW is if I wasn't concerned about post processing on an image. If I have an artistic vision for an image then I will always capture it in RAW.
Click to expand...

Thats fine for you but dont advise everyone to shoot raw it may not meet their requirements, in that statement you are just as bad as KR. Just saying! :D

Btw I only shoot Raw. Lets have a :beer:
 
I'm not keen on Ken Rockwell but it seems to me like Jared's overly labouring the point for nothing more than effect and it doesn't reflect well on him.

A camera user guide from any of the available resources on the net is just that, a guide. It's not an order on how you must setup your camera. It's advice from one person on what they think's a good way to do it. I think it's dismissive of people's intelligence to assume that just because a beginner has seen Ken's site then they'll blindly follow what he says. I'd rather credit them with enough intelligence to be able to look at other sites for advice as well before making their decisions on the basis of everything they'd read as well as the experience they get from using the camera.
 
Linkbait, innit?

I stopped listening to an unrehearsed and barely coherent rant after a bit, but as much as I like to mock Kennie he actually says on this occasion to try stuff and see what you think. Which in general is pretty solid advice.

If that's the worst he can find on the site then it must have changed a lot since I last read it.

BTW I managed to accidentally change my D800 to basic jpegs the other day on a commercial shoot. The agency reckon they look great on the adverts they ran with them ;)
 
I'm sure he's rubbing his hands at that rant. I know I wouldn't of bothered reading his d3300 user guide prior to that. I'm sure I ain't the only one
 
Last edited:
He has certainly upset the Chinese but I doubt they are that bothered when people will buy any old crap these days. I rather like Ken Rockwell's reviews, much more coherent than some of the people that set themselves up as experts.
What he says about the PRC is true though.........I ain't going to tell you, you'll have to click through his website :-)
 
That Fro chap is a bigger tit than Ken Rockwell. Ken doesn't take himself too seriously and has some excellent advice on his site -

"It's not about your camera.

It's not about my camera.

It's all about you.

It's all about our ability to see.

It's all about our ability to new things, and to see old things in new ways.

It's all about our vision. It's never about your camera."

Sums it up for me. When someone normal (i.e. not a photogearfreak) looks at a photograph they don't give a toss what camera or lens was used, or if it was shot in raw, jpeg or on film, all they respond to is the picture. That's all that matters in photography. Pictures.

Ken Rockwell is God!

icon_stir.gif
 
The guy's almost as bad as the KenGod in his pompous, try-hard way.

To paraphrase him: "Ken Rockwell is an a$$hole and his photos are horrible."

I actually think some of Ken's pictures are nice as well.

EDIT: I also find that hairy guy rather aggressive and irritating while KenGod is... well... like a simple dolphin.
 
Last edited:
Rarely visit Rockwell's site but I am fan of The Fro. I know he can be annoying at times but I find him funny and I've learnt quite a bit from him.

For anyone who is interested here's his Youtube video. The rant starts around 37 minutes.

Cheers.
 
I don't mind him or his stuff and he has been pretty spot on with the gear i have

However the following is taken from his Donation page and he should probably have thought a little before typing this out !!!!!!!!!!!!

"I do this because I love to share. I dream about what I'm going to write all night, then get up at 6AM and hit the keyboard at 6:30AM and don't stop till my wife pulls me off"

Excellent stuff and lucky man haha

www.andrew-davies.com north east wedding photographer
 
Ed Sutton said:
That Fro chap is a bigger tit than Ken Rockwell. Ken doesn't take himself too seriously and has some excellent advice on his site -

"It's not about your camera.

It's not about my camera.

It's all about you.

It's all about our ability to see.

It's all about our ability to new things, and to see old things in new ways.

It's all about our vision. It's never about your camera."
Click to expand...

How he can say that ^ and then go on to say "you can't take a bad picture with a Nikon D3300" - I just don't get it. How can he be taken seriously?
 
Eddzz!! said:
How he can say that ^ and then go on to say "you can't take a bad picture with a Nikon D3300" - I just don't get it. How can he be taken seriously?
Click to expand...

Reading between the lines I see it as meaning there's no need to obsess about kit. It's the photographer that's more important. Maybe better phrased as the D3300 (or whatever camera you like) doesn't take a bad photo, the photographer does. Nobody's perfect and it seems a touch too much to pull someone up at length for one short statement.
 
Eddzz!! said:
The only time I wouldn't shoot RAW is if I wasn't concerned about post processing on an image. If I have an artistic vision for an image then I will always capture it in RAW.
Click to expand...

So you agree with ken then?
 
stu.artd said:
Reading between the lines I see it as meaning there's no need to obsess about kit. It's the photographer that's more important. Maybe better phrased as the D3300 (or whatever camera you like) doesn't take a bad photo, the photographer does. Nobody's perfect and it seems a touch too much to pull someone up at length for one short statement.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but that's just one example. Rockwell has made a multitude of similar statements (especially regarding the JPG Vs RAW debate) that are quite frankly absurd.
 
essexash said:
So you agree with ken then?
Click to expand...

The only time I would consider shooting anything other than RAW would be if I wasn't concerned about PP... JPGs out of the camera never look as good to me as an image that I am able to process.
 
Eddzz!! said:
Agreed, but that's just one example. Rockwell has made a multitude of similar statements (especially regarding the JPG Vs RAW debate) that are quite frankly absurd.
Click to expand...

I don't tend to read much of what he writes (or watch the afrodude) but one persons wrong is often anothers right, particularly where very subjective things like the JPG vs RAW big barrel o' worms are concerned.
 
OMG :eek: I came to the conclusion that KR was an a******e years ago when someone linked to a post on his site that you should only shoot in RAW for Landscapes. :eek:

Just looked at the FroKnows video, and I can understand why he is so irate.

KR apparently wrote that on the Nikon D3300 that the camera should be set to Basic Jpeg, because there is no difference between Jpeg Basic, Normal and Fine. And the camera can't take a bad image, whether in general or just as a Basic Jpeg I don't know. If the D3300 can't take a bad image I want one. ;)

You should always shoot in Auto ISO, not just on the D3300

KR shoots Landscapes at Large (24mp) or Medium, (12mp) and Family pics at Small. (6mp) Now you may think, what if he were to get a picture of his family that he wanted to print big? Don't worry, '6mp is more than enough to print out any size if your picture is in focus'! :eek: Why does he shoot in 12 or 24mp? :thinking:

I understand what KR does, he says c**p to generate traffic, and he seems to be very successful at it. And I'm aware that people are falling for it on forums all over the world, but for most beginners they don't know any good information he puts out from bad information, and unless they read the warning he used to have on the front page of his site that he sometimes writes less that fact/truth, they may have no idea that they are reading rubbish. Some of the stuff he says can mess photographers up, and possibly contribute to them not getting the results they expect, and/or being disappointed with their pictures.

I'm sure some of what he has written is useful and has helped people, but to write rubbish without seemingly any thought of how it could impact on peoples photography just to line your pockets leaves a bad taste. :(
 
The problem with Ken Rockwell is not that he is wrong. The problem is that he offered useful advice and information 90% of the time and misleading and harmful b*****ks the other 10% of the time. Unless you already know what you are doing it can be very hard to tell one from the other and that's dangerous.
 
It is not just about JPEG (BASIC) vs RAW.

Pretty much any of his suggestions is debatable and you can get wrong if you use exactly opposite camera settings than him. To mention a few. His downloadable settings bank (that even his 17 months old son can do perfect pictures with) contains things like: VIVID picture profile with sharpness/saturation +2, permanent -0.7EV exp. comp, auto ISO with 1/15 low threshold). I think sports photographers must be amused with his suggestions (AF-A it camera has it or AF-C with focus priority, 3D tracking mode telling the camera which player is yours, "big-rectangle" focus pattern for everything that's moving), etc.

Then his opinions like "D800, D600 and D4 are internally same cameras with same IQ and AF", "my $75 tripod is much more advanced than Gitzo", "70-300 VR is the best telephoto lens if you are serious about sports" (of course until he tried the 28-300), "18-55VR II is a great portrait lens if you can get close".

I think the primary reason for existence of these pages is to be controversial and increase traffic load and get money from referrals.
 
For me I'm happy to stick with jpegs, for the type of photography I do, aviation, Motorsport and the occasional wildlife shots, jpegs meet my requirements, I agree RAW images do standout compared to the compressed image of a jpeg, the RAW image is like a negative to adjust how you like, but you can still do a lot with a jpeg as well.

Jpeg or RAW, personal choice and whether you have the computer setup to manage the ever increase RAW images coming from the latest cameras, or more to the point, the storage of said images.

As for Ken Rockwell, he's just one voice in many to use when making your decisions. Eddzz would I believe everything you said, probably not, but I would consider it with other opinion to draw on my own decisions, probably yes. It's all about creating a balance in your photography that you are happy with.
 
:plusone:

If you know enough to sort KR's bullchod from the rest, you don't need his advice.
 
Eddzz!! said:
The only time I would consider shooting anything other than RAW would be if I wasn't concerned about PP... JPGs out of the camera never look as good to me as an image that I am able to process.
Click to expand...
What if you dont want to or dont have the time to process images, what if you cant shoot at continious speeds long enough because shooting RAW eats up the buffer, 99.9% of sports photographers and journo photographers fall into that category

Contrary to the elitists belief, RAW isn't everything.
 
Gary Coyle said:
What if you dont want to or dont have the time to process images, what if you cant shoot at continious speeds long enough because shooting RAW eats up the buffer, 99.9% of sports photographers and journo photographers fall into that category

Contrary to the elitists belief, RAW isn't everything.
Click to expand...

Gary Coyle said:
I was printing superb A3 images from my old 4mp ID years ago so.
Click to expand...

:agree: Or a A2 image from a 8mp jpeg.
 
redhed17 said:
OMG :eek: I came to the conclusion that KR was an a******e years ago when someone linked to a post on his site that you should only shoot in RAW for Landscapes. :eek:

Just looked at the FroKnows video, and I can understand why he is so irate.

KR apparently wrote that on the Nikon D3300 that the camera should be set to Basic Jpeg, because there is no difference between Jpeg Basic, Normal and Fine. And the camera can't take a bad image, whether in general or just as a Basic Jpeg I don't know. If the D3300 can't take a bad image I want one. ;)

You should always shoot in Auto ISO, not just on the D3300

KR shoots Landscapes at Large (24mp) or Medium, (12mp) and Family pics at Small. (6mp) Now you may think, what if he were to get a picture of his family that he wanted to print big? Don't worry, '6mp is more than enough to print out any size if your picture is in focus'! :eek: Why does he shoot in 12 or 24mp? :thinking:

I understand what KR does, he says c**p to generate traffic, and he seems to be very successful at it. And I'm aware that people are falling for it on forums all over the world, but for most beginners they don't know any good information he puts out from bad information, and unless they read the warning he used to have on the front page of his site that he sometimes writes less that fact/truth, they may have no idea that they are reading rubbish. Some of the stuff he says can mess photographers up, and possibly contribute to them not getting the results they expect, and/or being disappointed with their pictures.

I'm sure some of what he has written is useful and has helped people, but to write rubbish without seemingly any thought of how it could impact on peoples photography just to line your pockets leaves a bad taste. :(
Click to expand...

Exactly right. Bang on. :agree:
 
Gary Coyle said:
What if you dont want to or dont have the time to process images, what if you cant shoot at continious speeds long enough because shooting RAW eats up the buffer, 99.9% of sports photographers and journo photographers fall into that category

Contrary to the elitists belief, RAW isn't everything.
Click to expand...

I shot a football event two weeks ago with my 7D in RAW. 22 RAW image buffer at 8fps. Do you need more than 22 frames to capture the action in one shot? I certainly don't.

It isn't elitist, it is fact - shooting RAW is undoubtedly a superior format. Whether or not you care about post-processing you are disregarding valuable information from your files when you shoot in JPEG. You are losing a good chunk of dynamic range. RAW is invaluable to me in that sense.
 
boyfalldown said:
wow - someone who still thinks there are right and wrong answers in photography.
Click to expand...

Not at all, it's personal preference. If someone else wants to shoot in JPEG, I'm not going to call them out - everyone has their own style. For me, I see the obvious (and very real) advantages of shooting in RAW, so that's how I'll shoot.
 
Eddzz!! said:
Not at all, it's personal preference. If someone else wants to shoot in JPEG, I'm not going to call them out - everyone has their own style. For me, I see the obvious (and very real) advantages of shooting in RAW, so that's how I'll shoot.
Click to expand...


thats not what you said though is it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top