"Everything New Sucks"

[Roger Hicks]

Well, I find Rockwell's site to be an entertaining and enjoyable light read every so often.

Dear Bill,

On the strength your admittedly qualified recommendation above, I visited his site for the first time. His photographic style is certainly distinctive, albeit not very varied, and I don't find the reviews particularly revealing: a mad churn of technical details, but very little about what the camera is really like to use, and few or no pictures taken with the equipment under 'review'.

Sure, you can't judge qality from web pics, but they can inspire you (or not) to take pictures, and they can give you ideas about the sort of pictures the equipment is best suited to taking. I was not inspired, nor did I think, "Ah, yes, this camera (or lens, or whatever) would be good for that sort of picture.

I doubt I'll be going back to it.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Sparrow]

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.

I think you are misjudging people there, I’m sure many people buy stuff based on “best value” or “most suitable” rarther than simply cost, I know I do

 

[Roger Hicks]

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.

The highlighted portion is a very fair argument, and indeed, one reason why I avoid the majority of Chinese-made goods, especially those sold in cheapo shops who sell on price alone. I'm not sure about the difficulty of achieving quality, though. Usually, it takes a complex cocktail of things: choosing the right materials/ingredients (not the cheapest), designing the product right, paying the workforce properly (and treating them right); and taking a bit more time to make sure the job is actually done, rather than just looking as if it's been done.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Paul T.]

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.

There is a kind of decadence about our consumption of junk; but a compulsion too, it's like a game of prisoners' dilemma. Buy cheap junk and you will put your peers, who make decent equipment, out of work, or even yourself - and you are supporting a corrupt regime. But we, as a society, keep doing it.

One problem is that, as many industries have fled to China, the costs to those remaining have shot up. So decent well-made products are more and more expensive.

 

[wgerrard]

Dear Bill,

On the strength your admittedly qualified recommendation above, I visited his site for the first time. His photographic style is certainly distinctive, albeit not very varied, and I don't find the reviews particularly revealing: a mad churn of technical details, but very little about what the camera is really like to use, and few or no pictures taken with the equipment under 'review'.

Sure, you can't judge qality from web pics, but they can inspire you (or not) to take pictures, and they can give you ideas about the sort of pictures the equipment is best suited to taking. I was not inspired, nor did I think, "Ah, yes, this camera (or lens, or whatever) would be good for that sort of picture.

I doubt I'll be going back to it.

Cheers,

R.

Well, I don't really go to it for inspiration or advice, either. I see it as a blog that reflects the writer's personality, not primarily as a reliable source of photographic expertise and advice.

But, it's out there and it's been there for a long time. If someone Google's for, say, "Nikon FM3a", Rockwell's site is gonna be right up there at the top, for better or worse. I do think it's the kind of site that appeals to newbies looking to buy that first DSLR. In that context, Rockwell's frequent harping about the virtues of film and old cameras is in synch with sensibilities popular around here.

 

[Lilserenity]

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

Sounds an interesting read. I must admit Priestley is a deviation for me, my usual repetoire is the likes of Burroughs, Ginsberg, Huncke, Kerouac, Hubert Selby Jr, JG Ballard, Will Self ...

As for the Renault, yeah, well good point as I'm off to France this summer. 🙂

Vicky

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sounds an interesting read. I must admit Priestley is a deviation for me, my usual repetoire is the likes of Burroughs, Ginsberg, Huncke, Kerouac, Hubert Selby Jr, JG Ballard, Will Self ...

As for the Renault, yeah, well good point as I'm off to France this summer. 🙂

Vicky

Dear Vicky,

If you happen to be in the Loire valley...

Or are you going to Arles?

Cheers,

R.

 

[nonot]

I think you are misjudging people there, I’m sure many people buy stuff based on “best value” or “most suitable” rarther than simply cost, I know I do

Sure, and "value" or "suitable" are subjective and entirely personal. My problem with that ideology though is in it's attempt to exonerate the consumer from responsibility of what they believe the cost is "Yeah I know this shirt is sewn by children for a penny in Sri Lanka, but it's the best value for me". You can wear blinders until this stuff takes it's effect on you personally, and then you can discuss what's truly valuable or suitable for your lifestyle.

I don't buy things because of their cost, but I realize that the quality and ethics that I value do have an inherent expense that I have to bare by working harder and spending more of my money on less, not by others breaking their backs so I can have something for cheap.

 

[nonot]

...I'm not sure about the difficulty of achieving quality, though. Usually, it takes a complex cocktail of things: choosing the right materials/ingredients (not the cheapest), designing the product right, paying the workforce properly (and treating them right); and taking a bit more time to make sure the job is actually done, rather than just looking as if it's been done.

Cheers,

R.

Well we're on the same page, so I guess it's easy for us. 🙂

 

[Sparrow]

Sure, and "value" or "suitable" are subjective and entirely personal. My problem with that ideology though is in it's attempt to exonerate the consumer from responsibility of what they believe the cost is "Yeah I know this shirt is sewn by children for a penny in Sri Lanka, but it's the best value for me". You can wear blinders until this stuff takes it's effect on you personally, and then you can discuss what's truly valuable or suitable for your lifestyle.

I don't buy things because of their cost, but I realize that the quality and ethics that I value do have an inherent expense that I have to bare by working harder and spending more of my money on less, not by others breaking their backs so I can have something for cheap.

Charles Trewhitt made the shirt, I think they are in Jermyn Street, the shoes are Grenson. If I were to wear blinkers, which I don’t, I’d try Grieves and Hawks first so some of us don’t fit your simplistic stereotypes.

 

[Jason808]

Phphffftt!:angel:

Rockwell doesn't seem to link to someone else very often, though.

Only if the link helps support his growing family

 

[wgerrard]

Only if the link helps support his growing family

The same kind of associate ads and the same kind of pitch are on thousands and thousands of sites. If we thought that the presence of ads always influenced editorial content, we wouldn't read much of anything, including this site.

I don't want to come off as the RFF Defender of Rockwell. I'm not. He's a guy spinning stories on a blog, which, by nature, is pretty analogous to the guy spinning stories down at the bar.

But, I also don't see the point of so many seeming to enjoy poking a stick in him. He's got his take and we've all got ours. It's not like someone is keeping score.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sure, and "value" or "suitable" are subjective and entirely personal. My problem with that ideology though is in it's attempt to exonerate the consumer from responsibility of what they believe the cost is "Yeah I know this shirt is sewn by children for a penny in Sri Lanka, but it's the best value for me".

Even though we are singing from the same hymn-sheet, I do not think this is entirely fair. "Value" and "fitness for purpose" have, I suspect, an ethical/moral dimension for quite a few people.

On the other hand, I am completely in favour of trying to raise the awareness of those who do, indeed, buy only on price with no moral, ethical or 'fair trade' dimension, so I'd rather see your arguments, even if on occasion I believe them to be overstated, rather than the morally repugnant raw-capitalist argument. I always liked the 19th century slogan which ran something like, "Good works, and five per cent [profit]."

Cheers,

R.

 

[splitimageview]

I prefer "whatever profit the market will bear." If the product doesn't sell, the price gets lowered. High profit margin attracts competition, which drives innovation, which gives consumers all the choices we have today. A very good thing. 🙂

 

[nonot]

Even though we are singing from the same hymn-sheet, I do not think this is entirely fair. "Value" and "fitness for purpose" have, I suspect, an ethical/moral dimension for quite a few people.

On the other hand, I am completely in favour of trying to raise the awareness of those who do, indeed, buy only on price with no moral, ethical or 'fair trade' dimension, so I'd rather see your arguments, even if on occasion I believe them to be overstated, rather than the morally repugnant raw-capitalist argument. I always liked the 19th century slogan which ran something like, "Good works, and five per cent [profit]."

Cheers,

R.

Yeah of course I'm using a little bit of hyperbole here, it's to illustrate a point that it seems a lot of people are ignorant of. There's no way to be entirely ethical all the time, saints are few and far between, I suspect. But it is at least worth putting it out there that IF you are aware of the "true cost" of cheap items (labor, environment, etc) you need to ask yourself the questions that might lead to some uncomfortable self-evaluation. It's really easy to blame companies for producing the stuff, but without the demand you can be sure there wouldn't be someone there to fill it.

Sparrow, I'm unsure what simplistic stereotypes you're accusing me of lumping people into here, I suspect it was my use of the word "you" rather than "one", sorry for that. I'm sure your shoes and shirt are very nice indeed.

 

[Jason808]

But, I also don't see the point of so many seeming to enjoy poking a stick in him. He's got his take and we've all got ours. It's not like someone is keeping score.

Let me say first that I've been enjoying your posts in this thread.

I realize many sites are affiliate driven. It's just the recurring plea that I find mildly amusing. It's almost a catch phrase. We get it, help me out by visiting sponsors. Many other forums (fora?) do it without being so...cheesy. But like I said, it's only mild amusement and I was just trying to crack a joke.

I think people like having as much fun at his expense as he does with others. He doesn't have any problem being pointed, smarmy and brusque in his discussions. He'd be a fool not to expect similar reactions.

As my momma said, if you stir up sh*t, expect a few flies....

If there's anything I regret, it's spending more time on this subject than I ever planned.

 

[Sparrow]

Yeah of course I'm using a little bit of hyperbole here, it's to illustrate a point that it seems a lot of people are ignorant of. There's no way to be entirely ethical all the time, saints are few and far between, I suspect. But it is at least worth putting it out there that IF you are aware of the "true cost" of cheap items (labor, environment, etc) you need to ask yourself the questions that might lead to some uncomfortable self-evaluation. It's really easy to blame companies for producing the stuff, but without the demand you can be sure there wouldn't be someone there to fill it.

Sparrow, I'm unsure what simplistic stereotypes you're accusing me of lumping people into here, I suspect it was my use of the word "you" rather than "one", sorry for that. I'm sure your shoes and shirt are very nice indeed.

In this and previous posts you profess to have a superior grasp of ethics and economics and I don't believe that to be the case, in any event it has an evangelistic whiff about it I didn't like.

Many here have bought high quality cameras and continue to use them for many decades; I contend that is a mindset which is diametrically opposed to your assertions.

With respect I therefore do not believe any pronoun is appropriate in this context, weather "one" or "you" is irrelevant.

 

[nonot]

Sparrow, I didn't claim a thing about my knowledge of economics, just that I think the way things are done en-masse is a little deplorable. My ethics are sitting there within that, if you think it's evangelical and if I offended you I am truly sorry. I don't tend to paint people with the same brush, though I could see that that you'd feel that way after the "leica and cheap shoes" comment. It was meant more as an example of what extremes people will involve in their lives as far as purchasing goes, it wasn't seriously directed at you or anyone else on the message board, though it surely applies to someone, somewhere.

Take care.

 

[-doomed-]

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

Eh its not bad, its not terribly fun , but manageable.

 

[Trius]

Eh its not bad, its not terribly fun , but manageable.

The first thing is to change the colour scheme/skin to something other than black.

When reading a thread from a "new posts" search, open the threads in another window. Helps a lot.