Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Ken Rockwell (split from ImageIngester thread)
The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 30, 2020, 01:28:54 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28033 Posts in 5147 Topics by 2903 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  The DAM Forum
|-+  General
| |-+  Photo Blogs
| | |-+  Ken Rockwell (split from ImageIngester thread)
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Ken Rockwell (split from ImageIngester thread)  (Read 31344 times)
danaltick
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1616

evaa-xdtb@spamex.com danaltick
View Profile WWW Email
« on: January 08, 2007, 09:28:11 PM »

Marc,

Much appreciated.  Thanks for your continued support of Windows.

Dawnme,
 
Thanks to you too for testing the windows side.  You've saved me a lot of time.  I've been swamped lately getting ready for a six month commercial and stock photography class that starts this weekend.  I will be using this tool throughout the course.

On a side note - I've come to realize that there really just aren't too many Windows professional photographers, and after reading this article http://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/why-pros-use-mac.htm, I think I can understand why.  My history and experience happens to be with Windows, so I will stick with it, but I can certainly understand why most professionals photographers would opt for the Mac, and I probably would even recommend that; especially for photography, given Adobe's history on the Mac. (I can't believe I just said that ;-)).

Best Regards,
Dan
« Last Edit: January 10, 2007, 01:49:34 AM by johnbeardy » Logged

WindowsXP, ImageIngester Pro, RapidFixer, IVMP 3, ACR4, Photoshop CS4, Controlled Keyword Catalog, Canon EOS50D
David C. Buchan
Quantum Gardener
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 66



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #1 on: January 08, 2007, 11:08:23 PM »

Dan,

I'm a windows user, but not even a Mac would improve my photos enough to make me a professional photographer  Cheesy

Cheers,

David
Logged
Marc Rochkind
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1136


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: January 09, 2007, 12:33:40 AM »

Dan--

I don't know how many ImageIngester users are professional photographers, but I do know that I have more than twice as many Windows users as Mac users. This means a disproportionate share of Mac users, since the Mac overall share of the market is much less than 1/3, but it also means that there a lot of Windows users.

I can't draw any precise conclusions from this spotty data, but it has certainly reinforced my decision to support both platforms fully. There are probably very few areas where the Mac share is as high as it is in both photography and video. And, the Linux desktop percentage, which is very small but growing, is near zero in those two areas.

--Marc
Logged

danaltick
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1616

evaa-xdtb@spamex.com danaltick
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #3 on: January 09, 2007, 06:07:43 AM »

Marc,

If I had to guess, it wouldn't surprise me if a new wave of Windows yuppie/geek users are entering the DSLR market now that prices are becoming affordable.  Most of them probably have no intention of making a career out of it, but I imagine a number of them might be adopting something like II or IIP and learning DAM as well.

Dan
Logged

WindowsXP, ImageIngester Pro, RapidFixer, IVMP 3, ACR4, Photoshop CS4, Controlled Keyword Catalog, Canon EOS50D
johnbeardy
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1813


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2007, 06:32:10 AM »

OK, equating Photoshop users to professionals is not 100% accurate, but I used the number of posts to Adobe's Photoshop and Bridge forums to estimate a 60:40 split in the PC's favour. Since then I've seen this ratio confirmed by Jeff Schewe, with a heavy dose of insider info. I know q a number of PC using pros and I'm sure Ken's article will be a good laugh - didn't he publish his review of the D200 weeks before seeing it? I wonder if he still advocates jpeg?

Anyway, I'd shoot for a 60:40 split for "serious photographers", with the 60 rising with new DSLR users.

John
Logged
danaltick
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1616

evaa-xdtb@spamex.com danaltick
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #5 on: January 09, 2007, 07:09:38 AM »

Speaking of professional photographers, here's another interesting post by the same guy http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/pro-not.htm.

Dan
Logged

WindowsXP, ImageIngester Pro, RapidFixer, IVMP 3, ACR4, Photoshop CS4, Controlled Keyword Catalog, Canon EOS50D
johnbeardy
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1813


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 09, 2007, 07:12:47 AM »

Ha ha - I'm actually a CPA equivalent! Talk about a murky past.

John
Logged
Marc Rochkind
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1136


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2007, 08:54:43 AM »

That Rockwell "Why Pros Use Mac" article is, typically for him, very poorly researched. I'm a big Mac fan, but I find articles like Rockwell's irritating, and even embarrassing, to read. It reminds me of one of his columns a few weeks ago in which he said that an inexpensive point-and-shoot and an expensive SLR shot exactly the same pictures, illustrated by two examples that were clearly quite different. (If he really is using a laptop to evaluate images, as he says in his Mac column, this is perhaps why he sees no difference.)

The Mac article contains these amazing statements about Vista: "As of 2007 Microsoft is still working on it. It's just a buggy rip-off of Mac OSX." On this 9th day of 2007, I doubt that Rockwell has any evidence of bugs in Vista, due for release in a few weeks. He apparently thinks that Apple is not working on OS X, and that Leopard, due for release this year I hear, is both finished and bug-free. Rockwell seems not to know it, but Apple, like all software developers, has on occasion found that they need more time than they thought to complete a system.

His main thesis, that all pros use Macs, is based on unscientific evidence: The sample consists of every full-time photographer he has ever met. Really? He has never met a full-time photographer who uses Windows? My own experience with ImageIngester is different. (Pros write to me about the Windows version, and I can tell from their web sites that they are indeed full-time, career, pros.)

I have three Macs, including a laptop, and every one has had unexplained crashes, clocks that don't set themselves, numerous security patches from Apple, and many other things that Rockwell says never happen to him. I just don't believe him.

This is not to say that Mac OS X isn't better than Windows XP. It clearly is. Whether it's better than Vista I don't know yet, and I'm sure Rockwell doesn't either.

Given the clear superiority of OS X over Windows XP, it's amazing that Rockwell is unable to come up with a factually accurate argument as to why.

--Marc
Logged

Dawnne Gee
Full Member
***
Posts: 128

"Art is science made clear." ~ Jean Cocteau


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 09, 2007, 09:11:21 AM »

{my session ran out while i was typing this, so some of what i'm about to say repeats what Marc has said, but i didn't know that at the time, and i've got to get to a meeting....}

Thanks to you too for testing the windows side.  You've saved me a lot of time.  I've been swamped lately getting ready for a six month commercial and stock photography class that starts this weekend.  I will be using this tool throughout the course.

No worries. Testing software is something I've done for a long, long time, and I frankly don't get to do it enough. It's good food for the brain. My wife and I are both usability nuts -- she's actually the only certified usability analyst where she works.

On a side note - I've come to realize that there really just aren't too many Windows professional photographers, and after reading this article http://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/why-pros-use-mac.htm, I think I can understand why.  My history and experience happens to be with Windows, so I will stick with it, but I can certainly understand why most professionals photographers would opt for the Mac, and I probably would even recommend that; especially for photography, given Adobe's history on the Mac.

Re-read that. Some of Ken's arguments are valid, but the whole article is indisputably biased, anything but an objective comparison, lacks validity in the specific comparisons to Windows, and further lacks descriptive expression of the capabilities of most of the Mac software he cites. The equation of Wintel = aggravation is simply spurious. The article as a whole is also obviously written from the stance of an individual who, if he regularly uses Wintel PC's, has never bothered to investigate anything beyond double-clicking certain icons. That having been said, I've had his website bookmarked for a very long time, and I deeply respect virtually everything else he's written.

For those of us who come from a technological background, the eccentricities and anomalies of the Windows Operating System(s) are minor inconveniences. If one keeps up-to-date with some very simplistic and logical backup routines (in other word, professional due diligence), correcting errors can be as simple as on a Mac. There is far more Wintel software out there that does far more things than have ever been written for Mac. As one example, ProShow Producer runs circles around iMovie for still-shot interlacing, and the argument that since iMove comes with the Mac OS (thus making it more available and cheaper) holds no real merit in business accounting. As a result of the plethora of Wintel software, a Wintel machine can be used effectively for far more than a Mac as well.

Some of what he has written is an out-and-out lie as well. My windows clock, for example, has connected to the NIST time servers by default ever since I first turned the thing on. No Ph.D. required. As well, citing the virus issue is one of the biggest comparative fallacies in the Mac-Wintel argument. People haven't written (many) viruses for the Mac because of a) the lack of installed userbase in comparison to Wintel machines, and b) the lack of corporate ubiquity (corporations being where sensitive data exists to be compromised). Any responsible professional would connect any computer (Wintel, Mac, Sun/Sparc, Linux, whatever) to the Internet through a hardware router and/or firewall anyway. And I've had viruses attempted to be passed to me, forwarded through Macs, who think that just because they can't catch a Windows virus means they don't have to worry about passing one along to someone else. Not to mention that many PCs from as long ago as 2003 have FireWire ports. The fact that Apple invented FireWire really has no bearing on the discussion at all, and the inference that Wintel PCs don't have it is a matter of willful ignorance along the same lines as the inference of the article title that Wintel users aren't professionals.

Another thing he didn't seem to want to address is the cost of software migration and/or concurrent licenses if one decides to "go Mac".

A lot of what he says (towards the end of the article) ~ the cost comparisons, the issues with Redmond's dishonesty and questionable business practices ~ these are valid arguments. But then he launches into the fonts deal, as if the thousand+ that Adobe and Corel supply are worthless. Does it really matter if a font comes with the operating system or the software? And there are keyboard shortcuts in virtually every program (simpler than the [ALT]-combos he describes) for the special characters as well, which he conveniently ignores or is simply ignorant of. And the citation of a particular manufacturer's defect with "exploding" laptops is exactly the proselytization he declaims.

But that's okay, he's a Mac guy. Ironically, his complaints about Redmond's monopoly is fundamentally mirrored by the fact that no one but Apple builds OSes for Apple computers. Mac folks have conveniently ignored that fact for a long, long time.

I too, would ultimately recommend to a newcomer that a Mac might be the better way to go for high-end digital photography. But not just because Ken can make invalid comparisons and baseless rants. If you want a box that can do little more than run photos, movies, office software, play music, and browse the web, by all means, buy a Mac. Wintel machines are capable of, and do, run far more.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2007, 09:18:24 AM by Dawnne » Logged

~ Dawnne Gee
Dawnne Gee
Full Member
***
Posts: 128

"Art is science made clear." ~ Jean Cocteau


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 09, 2007, 10:07:24 AM »

i may have to change my assessment of "deeply respect[ing] virtually everything else [Ken Rockwell has] written". i was just in a meeting with a print master, and he just showed me how the sRGB vs. Adobe 1998 RGB comparison this article was either done on an uncalibrated monitor, or by simply converting the lower-gamut sRGB image to Adobe RGB and then reinterpreted to sRGB for the Internet (as Rockwell correctly states) instead of redoing the gradient directly in Adobe RGB (and further exacerbated by the difference in image sizes).

As well, if your entire workflow is Adobe RGB, this statement:

Quote
Worse, if you're the sort of vacuum-operating geek who wants to shoot Adobe RGB because you read about it in a magazine article, did you realize that because the colors are compressed into a smaller range that there is more chroma quantization noise when the file is opened again? Ha!

is patently false. Anyway, duly noted, and I'll probably have to think again before taking Rockwell's rants at face value.

hrm....i don't think i've ever had quite as entertaining of a thread-derailment in a while, LOL.....
Logged

~ Dawnne Gee
danaltick
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1616

evaa-xdtb@spamex.com danaltick
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #10 on: January 09, 2007, 10:42:44 AM »

Wow!  Didn't intend to create a derailment here.... sorry about that Marc.  Probably should have posted this in another thread.  I tend to read through Ken's work for informational purposes, trying to maintain a certain degree of objectivity in respecting other's opinions and their right to express them unbiased by sponsors and paid advertisements. There's no question, he's a knowledgeable guy and has a passion for what he does.  I've read his articles on color management and AdobeRGB vs sRGB.  For someone who is not knowledegable of color management, I too would recommend sRGB.  It is a universal colorspace that all digital labs support.  It's safe and it's cheap.  However I believe in time that universal space will grow as displays and printers gamuts continue to grow.  Epson and Canon fine art printers are already able to print the full Adobe1998 space.

Once again, it's hard to argue with his images.  His gallery is quite impressive.

As far as Windows goes, I'm not sure when he wrote that article, but times are changing, and I believe the two O/S's are beginning to converge more and more with their UI's; but there is no question, Windows has been down a rocky road.  I think allot of it can be attributed to sheer volume.  It's just the nature of the beast and there are advantages and disadvantages to small vs. large.  The same principal holds true with small business vs. large business.

Dan

Logged

WindowsXP, ImageIngester Pro, RapidFixer, IVMP 3, ACR4, Photoshop CS4, Controlled Keyword Catalog, Canon EOS50D
Marc Rochkind
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1136


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #11 on: January 09, 2007, 12:17:46 PM »

Dan, Dawnne, and everyone else--

I, too, enjoy Rockwell's blog, and I read him almost every day. I've sent him some money, too, because I want him to stay around.

I sometimes even agree with him. His new baby is indeed cute! (OK, I've found more than just that. He's clearly 100% correct about the D200, since I recently bought one for myself. ;-) )

The main problem is that, to him, light gray is white, and dark gray is black. To me, there's rarely white or black, and all shades of gray stay shades of gray. I would say something like "the difference between a point-and-shoot and an expensive SLR is less than you might think." He would (and did) say "they are the same."

To Rockwell, Mac OS X 10.4 is perfect. To me, it's pretty good, but I know that (as Dawnne says) it solves a much simpler problem than does Windows. 70% of Windows crashes are caused by 3rd-party drivers. (Source: Windows Internals, Russinovitch and Solomon, p. 846.) If Mac OS X ran on Sonys, Dells, HPs, Gateways, and 500 other brands and home-built machines, it would crash a lot more, too. (I have a Minolta scanner, and with the Minolta driver, it crashes my Mac. I've also read about lots of problems with Epson printer drivers misbehaving on Macs. Nobody blames Apple for these problems. Is that fair?)

--Marc
Logged

Dawnne Gee
Full Member
***
Posts: 128

"Art is science made clear." ~ Jean Cocteau


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 09, 2007, 03:06:14 PM »

Well said, both of you. And I will continue to read his works, and appreciate his photography. He's a great photographer. I haven't read everything he's written, but read a lot more of it today, via a coincidental conversation about one of his pieces with a friend. Indeed, my new-found complaints with his writings are largely semantical (outside his out-and-out lies which offend my own proselytizing). Not that big of a deal. I am probably the biggest offender of derailment here. For that, I apologize, all.
Logged

~ Dawnne Gee
johnbeardy
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1813


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 09, 2007, 03:08:23 PM »

I can always split this into its own thread....

John
Logged
danaltick
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1616

evaa-xdtb@spamex.com danaltick
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #14 on: January 09, 2007, 07:23:06 PM »

John,

Feel free to put this into the Photo Blog section of you like.  I think his site falls into the blog category; albiet it, a very extensive one ;-).

Dan
« Last Edit: January 10, 2007, 07:09:02 AM by danaltick » Logged

WindowsXP, ImageIngester Pro, RapidFixer, IVMP 3, ACR4, Photoshop CS4, Controlled Keyword Catalog, Canon EOS50D
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!