Nothing is wrong with sharing an opinion. It doesn't make your assertion that Rockwell's blog is inflammatory a fact.
I never said it was a pure, cold hard fact. I said that many people agree with me, and feel "inflamed" by what he says.
2. If you think I am objecting to criticism of Rockwell, you are either deliberately distorting what i've said or can't understand it.
Really? Because I've outlined quite a few points from Rockwell that I, personally, take issue with. And yet you are unsatisfied with simply accepting my answer to your question "why all the ire?" Instead, you take up the subjects themselves and start arguing on Rockwell's behalf. (E.g., "but most people don't need to use AdobeRGB!")
Yet, I've seen no reasoned answers to my question All I've seen amounts to this: He irritates you.
So you are deliberately ignoring all the points I've made about Mac vs. Windows, AdobeRGB, etc. I could go on—film has a lot of positive qualities, and I could see someone calling it "the Original RAW." Rockwell calls it "RealRAW." He then over-simplifies how easy it is to get his film processed, while grossly exaggerating how long it takes to process digital RAW files. It's fine if he doesn't like digital RAW, and he may indeed have some good points about film, but he takes deliberately provocative positions about film, beyond just advocating for it.
I honestly don't know how much more explaining I need to do here. I've explained how Rockwell can be less than unbiased, and how his hyperbolic stances can confuse newbies. I think I've said plenty more than "he just irritates me."
3. I'm not interested in what Rockwell did nor did not say about AdobeRGB. I said people who don't want to mess around with the processing required by RAW files will shoot jpegs. So what if they might be missing something when they print, if they print at all. Most do not print. Most people with cameras post to the web and leave it at that.
Rockwell made grossly exaggerated statements about AdobeRGB. He didn't JUST say "it's irrelevant to amateur photography" nor "it's not important if you're just outputting to screen." He dismissed AdobeRGB out of hand, insisting that it's irrelevant to "real" photography. Rather than listen to my rather cogent discussion as to why I find his statements about AdobeRGB irritating, you instead decide to defend him telling people to not use AdobeRGB. Telling people they should or should not use AdobeRGB is not the issue; the WAY in which Rockwell expresses his opinion IS the issue precicely.
4. Why do you think picking quotes from Rockwell has any bearing on what I've said?
Fine, for the sake of argument, let's say it has no bearing.
Look, everything Rockwell has ever published could be entirely wrong. I don't care.
For not caring, you are sure quick to step in and support his point of view. Weren't you the one who said "Irrelevant to people who don't want to post-process and who are satisfied with jpegs"? Sounds like defending Rockwell's AdobeRGB position to me, considering that's exactly his argument once you strip away all his pretension and argumentativeness.
But, even if it is, what's it to you? Why are you and others prompted to go onto the web and proclaim to the world your feelings about his site?
Proclaim to the world?! That's RICH. I don't have a hate website setup to mock Rockwell; I don't take out advertisements in Google Adwords disparaging him. I come onto a forum and, when the topic of Rockwell comes up, I mention my reservations with him. What problem do YOU have that you can't accept that?
Do you do the same thing with every site you don't agree with?
Most of the sites I don't agree with aren't so inflammatory; most of them don't openly mock the people they disagree with. If you don't see the problem by now, you likely never will. I'm certainly done trying to argue my points with you. If, after my PAGES of reasoned, detailed responses, you still can't glean anything beyond "hurr hurr durr durr he irritates me waah waah" then I really have nothing left to say to you.
You are the one who gets emotional about mundane and largely irrelevant things like RAW files and AdobeRGB and managing color spaces and whatever.
These things are just as important to a digital photographer as darkroom methods, choice of enlarging paper, etc. are to a traditional analogue photographer. If you don't think color spaces are important, then you've obviously never had to produce quality, color-correct work for a client. And I don't give a damn if people shoot in RAW or not, but there are good, valid reasons to use RAW. If it's not your cup of tea, fine. But don't go to the expense and hassle of using film and then, in the next breath, decry how difficult and involved processing RAW is (as Rockwell does).
As far as being emotional, YOU seem awfully "emotional" about the fact that some people just really dislike Rockwell's antics.
These things are not important in real life. If you think trashing the need to manage color spaces is inflammatory, you need to get out more, honestly.
You need to have a better understanding of color spaces, and of the basic technical underpinnings of your craft. Oh what, did I just make gross assumptions about you and your life? Well, gee. You know what, I get out plenty, thank you very much.
You know, I usually shoot film, send my C41 out to be processed, scan the negatives, and do as little post-processing as possible in Photoshop, and post a few photos on the web. I've never printed, period. They'd just create clutter. Do I worry about color space? Not at all. When I do shoot digital, I put the camera on full automatic and turn out jpegs.
How special for you. There's nothing wrong with your workflow; it's entirely valid. A RAW workflow is ALSO valid, but Rockwell refuses to even accept it as a possibility.
It's still something of a mystery as to what you expect to gain from this conversation. If I truly had no life, if I truly needed to get out more, I could go back over the YEARS of posts Rockwell has made, and point out each inflammatory statement. Rather than just accept an exhaustive list, I'm sure you'd quickly defend each of Rockwell's contentious stances, all the while proclaiming you care nothing about Rockwell's opinions!
It goes further than RAW, AdobeRGB, Mac vs PC, etc. Those are just some obnoxious assertions he's made recently, or that have stuck out in my mind. There are dozens more. Not a month goes by, practically, without him taking an essentially valid and interesting fact or assertion, and then turning it into a flippant attack or mockery against whatever he's upset with du jour.
It's really damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't with you, isn't it? If I say I have a problem with Rockwell, you demand a reason as to why. If I explain my reasons with you, you begin arguing that my reasons are invalid. If I go into detail and explain why my reasons are, in fact, valid, then you switch to ad homenim and "argue" that I need to get out more often. You simply refuse to be satisfied, beyond anything except a total capitulation. That's it, isn't it?! You demand to be "right"—you want me to take back everything I've said about Rockwell, and to keep my trap shut. And if I try to logically, carefully justify my positions, you throw up obfuscations and logical fallacies.
No one is saying Rockwell doesn't have a right to express himself. I'm certainly not saying he's never right—I've pointed out times when I've *agreed* with him. Most people who have a problem with him are content to limit their reaction to a sentence or two. Then here you bluster into the forums, demanding people justify why they dislike Rockwell. You claim to be neutral, but then start defending Rockwell's positions as soon as we express our issues with them.
And really, let's look in the mirror for a second. You claim to be baffled as to why people have so much anger and general ENERGY behind their dislike of Rockwell. And yet here YOU are, doggedly trying to refute every fact and OPINION I have given you as to why I dislike Rockwell. Why do we loathe Rockwell so much? If you're not satisfied by now, you never will be. Fine. You win. Hundreds (and it seems like there are at least a dozen on every major blog) of competent, eloquent, skilled photographers find his antics annoying and unhelpful to the photographic community. We're all wrong. We're all a bunch of know-nothing weenies who spend all day discussing RAW conversions and color spaces and other "irrelevant" things. You're *so* much better than us.
A WINNAR IS YOU!
