"Everything New Sucks"

[Roger Hicks]

No, no, not Lobb running shoes. 🙂 We are misconstrued and discombobulated, Roger. The running shoes I wear are Brooks, pretty much standard off-the-shelf stuff over here, but one particular model works for me. I can fly to London and stay a week at a decent hotel for less than any running shoe Lobb might make.

Dear Bill,

Ah, I thought I must have misunderstood you! Sorry!

A friend of mine has a pair of Lobb shoes he bought in a (rather upmarket) charity shop somewhere in the Home Counties. When he was looking at them, he said, "These don't appear to have a size marked in them."

The (rather upmarket) lady behind the counter said patiently, "No, they're Lobb." Even so, the previous proprietor must have had exactly the same size feet, as they fit my chum perfectly.

As an aside, why does everyone go to Ken Rockwell's site? I don't recall ever going there. Why would I?

Cheers,

R.

 

[wgerrard]

Dear Bill,

As an aside, why does everyone go to Ken Rockwell's site? I don't recall ever going there. Why would I?

Cheers,

R.

Well, I find Rockwell's site to be an entertaining and enjoyable light read every so often. He seems to have a few decades of experience as a pro, but his posts are almost entirely about his personal work. He lives near San Diego, I believe. The personal work he posts includes many landscapes from the desert southwest. Very colorful, very bright, well saturated. That's what he likes. He's unabashedly in love with Velvia 50.

The site includes many reviews of old and new cameras and lenses. There's a l-o-t of Nikon material. He's opinionated, often contradictory. He warns readers that he's often having a bit of fun.

He's been evangelizing about the complexity and the wrongheadedness, as he sees it, of many new digital cameras. A favorite theme: film is better than digital. (He gets that Velvia 50 processed and scanned at hi-res at a local pro shop.) He got an early M9 and ran a series about it, praising it to the hilt. Then, he started comparing M9 images unfavorably to film images from cheap cameras.

His site is several years old. The design is outdated. I'd guess it's straight out of Word. He doesn't accept comments. The technical level targets neophytes and near-neophytes. Because of the site's age and many posts, it ranks very high on Google. He also knows how to write headlines that grab attention, as in "Everything New Sucks".

He uses associate ads that provide a bit of revenue if someone clicks through and buys something. Some people think this means he biases his comments for those advertisers. I don't. The advertisers don't pay him to run ads, and he's quite happy to bash any camera brands. Many, many bloggers use associate ads and, having been one, I can tell you that very few make any more than pocket change.

 

[wgerrard]

The obvious reply is Ken Rockwell sucks, particularly as a photographer of oversaturated, cliche postcard images

Now, see, that's what I mean. I don't think matters of taste are fair game in judging photos. In fact, I think there are very few standards for assessing photos that aren't matters of personal taste. For every saturated "postcard" shot Rockwell posts, at least one wanna-be HCB posts sketchy b&w shots of random people engaged in routine boring activities. There's more to be photographed on this planet than big city types lurking on dark sidewalks.

 

[splitimageview]

Well-put. Your post definitely doesn't suck, Bill. 🙂

 

[Trius]

The iPod Touch doesn't suck.

 

[splitimageview]

"$225: World's Best Portable Computer

Apple's iPod Touch is the world's best portable computer. If you had one, you could be reading all this in the palm of your hand, for free, forever."

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm

 

[Meleica]

I like Ken's blog, but I too think this article was cleary written to provoke since so much of it, IMHO, is rubbish and I believe he knows it... it was still fun reading though..

Dan

 

[tedwhite]

The 1892 Winchester lever-action carbine. So good that the Rossi (Brazil) copy I recently bought is identical. Rossi couldn't improve on the original (probably they didn't want to, anyway).

Then there's the BMW R100RS, already discussed. I had one. Why I sold it is lost in the dark tunnel of the past.

1971 Pentax Spotmatic. I still have one. Amazingly ergonomic, everything right where it should be.

 

[bmattock]

The iPod Touch doesn't suck.

True, but RFF on Safari on iPod Touch does suck. Discussion forums need a theme that is mobile. m.rangefinderforum.com, sez I.

 

[photogdave]

Another entertaining read which has provoked much discussion. Thanks again Ken!
I agree with many of his points, especially TVs. I have one of the holy grail sets he mentions - A CRT HDTV. I love it because standard definition programming looks great, unlike many LCDs and plasmas, and the HD stuff shows plenty of fine detail without looking TOO sharp. My PS3 games look great too!
I strongly disagree with his take on BluRay and vinyl. Certain movies lens themselves to BluRay more than others as one would expect. The latest FX blockbusters and such look better than in the threatres, but surprisingly one of the top-rated BluRay releases is Casablanca!
I've been getting most of my music on vinyl lately and it's been very enjoyable. Music with a lot of bottom end sounds better to me than some CDs but they're really close now. A good master sounds good on any format. The cool thing about records is they are just plain more fun! Many of my LPs also include free MP3 downloads or even CD copies of the album.
Cars - I drive an '82 VW Westfalia. I think it's the best-designed vehicle of all time. Does your car allow you to sleep four adults and cook them breakfast in the morning? There are upgrade kits for better brakes and more powerful, more fuel efficient motors. I cycle to work and only drive once or twice a month so the annual maintenance is low and it's the perfect vehicle for running errands, camping and road trips. Nothing currently made comes close to the Vanagon Westy in terms of design!
So I think I'm pretty much 50-50 on the new/old technology thing. I'm typing this into my mac mini with a slide table and a loupe next to me. When the battery on my stupid cordless phone died earlier tonight I swapped over to my 1940s wall-mount rotary phone and it felt good!

 

[Lilserenity]

I've just realised what this post is referring to, dear old Kenny babes.

I read the first paragraph, on about his mother's 25" Futaba Fastext (ok maybe it's not that...) and I realised, I've got a 25" 4:3 telly too as my main one.

Not because I like it or don't like widescreens or flat screens.

It's the same reason I drive a 22 year old beat up (but reliable) Ford.

It was cheap (£20), it works, it's a Sony (ok the car ain't, and that was £150 5 years ago...) and it's all I can afford.

I'm not in the everything new sucks camp for sure.

Interesting how this debate between old and new has raged for so so long, as long as the hills have been 'round I'm sure.

I'm reading JB Priestley's English Journey at the moment and it is utterly fascinating. In it he describes a discussion with a friend who is very much self assured in the belief that its the new fangled machines that are driving people into poverty, robbing the people of their soul and livelihood, where as Priestley argues otherwise and not to get too hung up on the sentimentality, that peasantry isn't as romantic as the idea suggests sometimes and if anything new technology is liberating people from lives of hard toil.

Sound familiar?

That was written in 1933. And there are examples of this debate going way way way back.

Meanwhile when my 4:3 set packs in, I'll probably get another cheap telly out the Friday Ad when it comes out, not becaise I prefer it, but because it's cheap 🙂

 

[Acliff]

Quite entertaining, I do agree with some of what he says, but not as strongly as he appears to feel 😛

He does appear to swim against the current in all photo topics. Which is fine and all, but does give him a reputation of causing outrage and mixing things up for profit.

For example, when higher spec DSLRs were (and still are) all the rage, he would recommend (and still does) the D40.
Smaller unit referral profits, but much more volume.

Nice to know he still prefers film.

 

[Sparrow]

I've just realised what this post is referring to, dear old Kenny babes.

I read the first paragraph,.... EDIT

I'm reading JB Priestley's English Journey at the moment and it is utterly fascinating.

EDIT .... out, not becaise I prefer it, but because it's cheap 🙂

You’re reading Priestley for fun!!! I find that hard to believe 😀

 

[Paul T.]

Every generation has bemoaned the loss of new technology. And every generation has continued to buy the newer items - usually because they're cheaper. We want old-school quality, but we don't want to pay for it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

We want old-school quality, but we don't want to pay for it.

Dear Paul,

Nobody wants to pay for it, but some of us are prepared to do so, when we can afford it. I'd rather have a few good things, than lots of trash.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Lilserenity]

You’re reading Priestley for fun!!! I find that hard to believe 😀

Hehe, very much so. I haven't read any of his other work (yet) but this is a great piece of his work. The copy I have is also second hand (like my telly, like all my cameras, in fact like virtually all of my possessions!!) and laiden with pencil marks from someone who 120 pages to the end proudly wrote "120 pages to go!!" -- soundsl like they really enjoyed it.

The reason I am reading it is because I'm thinking of doing the journey myself and updating it, along with Beryl Bainbridge's stab of it which she did in the early 80s.

That said I shan't be doing it in a Daimler. I would have done it in my battered old Ford I mentioned, my delightful bucket of rust Escort. But I have got a new car.

By new I mean new to me. A Renault 5.

I'm definitely moving up in the world 😉

Anyway I digress!

Vicky

 

[nightfly]

But I'm not judging photos as a means of taste exclusively. I'm using them as a means to judge if I want to read the writing of the guy who took them.

My point is that if I'm going to read a website about photography, the person writing it either has to take good pictures to demonstrate his knowledge of the craft visually or failing that to take passably mediocre photos and be a good writer or incisive thinker.

Why would I value the opinion of a photographer whose own taste in photography leans in a direction that not only doesn't align with my own (which is fine) but also seems overly facile and cliche? I can't help but think all his reviews (which compromise the bulk of his site) are going to be predicated on how well the piece of equipment helps him achieve his ends. If these ends are questionable, why do I care what he thinks?

There are a lot of photography writers whose images I might not love, but at least they show an appreciation for the art and the mediocrity of their photos is superseded by their abilities as writers.

Ken's photos and writing don't achieve these ends. If I simply want humor or to read something provocative to get myself upset, there are lots of other places on the web I can go.

To provide a counter example, I recently read Roger and Francis Hicks' review of the M9. I know that I will never buy an M9 but I was interested in reading it. I had never read Roger and Francis before. One of the images (of Frances) was stunning and the others were useful in illustrating various points, even if they weren't all to my taste. They demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the equipment and of photography in general. Although the authorial point of view of the article (as a jointly written review) bothered me a little stylistically, it was insightful and left me with a definite sense of the authors' opinions and it reinforced their credentials as authorities whose opinions I might value.

Now, see, that's what I mean. I don't think matters of taste are fair game in judging photos. In fact, I think there are very few standards for assessing photos that aren't matters of personal taste. For every saturated "postcard" shot Rockwell posts, at least one wanna-be HCB posts sketchy b&w shots of random people engaged in routine boring activities. There's more to be photographed on this planet than big city types lurking on dark sidewalks.

 

[Strangeluv]

I have a theory that everything really important had been invented by 1972 and the advance of technology could have stopped then. Our lives would certainly be more relaxed now.

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree!

 

[Sparrow]

Hehe, very much so. I haven't read any of his other work (yet) but this is a great piece of his work. The copy I have is also second hand (like my telly, like all my cameras, in fact like virtually all of my possessions!!) and laiden with pencil marks from someone who 120 pages to the end proudly wrote "120 pages to go!!" -- soundsl like they really enjoyed it.

The reason I am reading it is because I'm thinking of doing the journey myself and updating it, along with Beryl Bainbridge's stab of it which she did in the early 80s.

That said I shan't be doing it in a Daimler. I would have done it in my battered old Ford I mentioned, my delightful bucket of rust Escort. But I have got a new car.

By new I mean new to me. A Renault 5.

I'm definitely moving up in the world 😉

Anyway I digress!

Vicky

I got Good Companions as a set book once, O level in 1968 maybe (Priestley was a local lad) it is one of the few books I’ve been unable to finish.

Down and Out in Paris and London is a better read 😀 the Renault would blend in nicely

 

[nonot]

Dear Paul,

Nobody wants to pay for it, but some of us are prepared to do so, when we can afford it. I'd rather have a few good things, than lots of trash.

Cheers,

R.

Be assured that someone is paying on your behalf when you by cheap, mass produced junk, you just don't see them on a day to day basis so why would it matter? The sole starts ungluing from your shoe and you curse kids in China like you had nothing to do with it. Quality isn't easy to attain, that's why few people bother to make or buy it.