Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Is this why Rockwell doesn't shoot weddings?

... or am I just a nutter and this is actually some really good tips.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/fill-flash.htm

Be sure to roll over the image of the lagoon and see which version is "better".

Update:

Don't get me wrong I'm a fan of most of his landscape work but flash has just always been something he's only slightly touched on. This I think is his down side.

There's some good info on his site, but then there's some stuff that's got to be sarcasm IMO, and some have a hard time deciding what's real and what's sarcasm.

5 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    You are right...they are dreadful!

    The lagoon is far better naturally lit. It would be improved by a little underexposure..which he has done accidently when he used the flash. The wedding guest looks over exposed (and the off-the-straight background is a beginner's mistake).

    I like his articles but these photos......

  • 1 decade ago

    Flash is most people's 'down side'. Flash photography is very hard to do well (I've tried, and after 15 years of shooting pictures of all sorts of subjects I try to avoid it, even at weddings). I don't shoot weddings professionally, just as a guest. But I try to do a good job.

    Yes, sometimes it is hard to tell when he's being sarcastic and when he's being serious. I'm the same way (which is why I find his site enjoyable to read).

    Looks like some haters responding to your question. I don't think Ken Rockwell actually claims to be a professional photographer (that may be a misconception by his critics). Maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't run across this sort of statement on his website yet.

    That's actually why I like to read his articles. He seems like regular guy who actually try things out for himself instead of relying on conventional wisdom and photo-gospel (like so many other self-proclaimed amateur photographers like to do when they answer questions on discussion boards such as this). I can't tell you how many people here and on other websites just parrot what they read on photo.net and think it's true. I'd rather read Ken Rockwell than listen to these self-important know-it-alls. SNAP.

    Source(s): annoying haters and know-it-alls on Y!A, Flickr, Photo.net, etc. . .
  • 1 decade ago

    Ken Rockwell's a bit of a joke tbh...the only people who think he's good are those relatively new to photography who swallow everything he says like its gospel. They don't know any better. Eventually they learn...

    He's blown the sky in one shot & tried (poorly) the technique of under-exposing the ambient & filling with flash but he's not balanced them well & it looks awful. As for general IQ - way too noisy.

    Fill flash has its place, but you need to balance it better with the ambient so it doesn't look so glaringly out of place. Putting a quarter or half cut CTO gel on it will help particularly in low light (like sunsets) so the flash looks warmer and not at daylight temperature.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Because Ken Rockwell is a better self promoter than he a photographer...and also a complete hack.

    He has a lot of really bad examples of photography in his gallery with a few decent ones and I wouldn't trust him to shoot my wedding even if his top package was $1.50.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    im not sure if your were being sarcastic, as im to hung over at the this time. ken rockwell is one of the best there is. and im the second best, remember the name adam dawson, as i will be the best all around photographer ever.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.