Ken Rockwell- So Uncool

I was reading some photography-related articles and I came across this guy, Ken Rockwell. I know hat he is a well known guy in terms of photography but I fond some of his articles really offensive like: 
www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-spot-an-amateur.htm
I understand if he is knowledgeable in this field but an attack to people, amateur in this case (like me), is so uncool. He could have written some suggestions how to improve from being an amateur not ridicule them.
Maybe I am just too sensitive. Maybe I am wrong.
How do you know this guy?

If you don't like the article, don't read it. I take what ANY reviewer says with a grain of salt. I have learned my lessons the hard way over the last 45+ years.

Ken puts stuff out for click bait. Plain and simple. 

Shadowfixer's right.......Ken's running a website for profit. You have helped him make money by going there then telling others to go there and read this article. Not that that's a bad thing. And I did read the article you linked to......kind of humorous.......and kind of true. I know many people that have wheeled carts literally overflowing with hardware, and they can't shoot their way out of a wet paper bag. We all know many that absolutely have to own the latest bodies and lenses the day they are released, and their pictures are just mediocre. How many times have you heard someone say....'I want to take my photography to the next level, so I'm buying X lens or X body'? That's the one that always makes me chuckle. This article is clearly written for entertainment value. And what he is saying is stuff probably many of us has said at one time or another.

Ken's just like all of the others, which is why I read very little of any their crap, because that's pretty much all it is. It shouldn't be upsetting to you. There is certainly no shame in being an amateur. Jay Maisel, Dorothea Lange, Vivian Maier, James Baes, Andreas Feininger........were all amateurs at one point. I don't think anyone has ever popped out of the womb holding an SLR in one hand and a Pulitzer in the other.

I will say that Ken has a few decent basic suggestions for those that are just getting into photography. Otherwise, it's just entertainment.

Yeah, click bait pro.  As stated above, you helped him out with this thread.  

I don't think he gets money directly by people going to his site, except it does probably bring in more viewers for the ads. His site shows options to give him a 'gift' or to make a 'donation'  if someone is so inclined. Why, I don't know.

I ran across his site years ago, and he has a certain amount of knowledge, and writes what often seem to be rather humorous or tongue in cheek articles or stories. I think this is more about amateurs with cameras acting as if they're pros. There seem to be more people in recent years listing themselves as photographers on craigslist, facebook etc. without the necessary pro skills, so that's probably what the article is about. I don't think it refers to someone who is doing photography as a hobby or for their own enjoyment.

He pulls in $$ from all his ads and affiliates on there.  Rather annoying chap if you ask me. 

Another KR sucks thread.....Its a monthly event, why not make it a sticky!!!

I just came to read the comments.  

A Ken Rockwell thread isn't a Ken Rockwell thread with out some humor.  

For those who like or dislike Ken, this is funny.

• Ken Rockwell's camera has similar settings to ours, except his are: P[erfect] Av[Awesome Priority Tv[Totally Awesome Priority] M[ajestic]
• Ken Rockwell doesn't color correct. He adjusts your world to match his.
• Sure, Ken Rockwell deletes a bad photo or two. Other people call these Pulitzers.
• Ken Rockwell doesn't adjust his DOF, he changes space-time.
• Circle of confusion? You might be confused. Ken Rockwell never is.
• Ken Rockwell doesn't wait for the light when he shoots a landscape - the light waits for him.
• Ken Rockwell never flips his camera in portrait position, he flips the earth
• Ken Rockwell ordered an L-lens from Nikon, and got one.
• Ken Rockwell is the only person to have photographed Jesus; unfortunately he ran out of film and had to use a piece of cloth instead.
• When Ken Rockwell brackets a shot, the three versions of the photo win first place in three different categories
• Before Nikon or Canon releases a camera they go to Ken and they ask him to test them, the best cameras get a Canon sticker and the less good get a Nikon sticker
• Once Ken tested a camera, he said I can’t even put Nikon on this one, that’s how Sony was born
• Rockwellian policy isn't doublethink - Ken doesn't even need to think once
• Ken Rockwell doesn't use flash ever since the Nagasaki incident.
• Only Ken Rockwell can take pictures of Ken Rockwell; everyone else would just get their film overexposed by the light of his genius
• Ken Rockwell wanted something to distract the lesser photographers, and lo, there were ducks.
• Ken Rockwell is the only one who can take self-portraits of you
• Ken Rockwell's nudes were fully clothed at the time of exposure
• Ken Rockwell once designed a zoom lens. You know it as the Hubble Space Telescope.
• When Ken unpacks his CF card, it already has masterpieces on it.
• Rockwell portraits are so lifelike, they have to pay taxes
• On Ken Rockwell's desktop, the Trash Icon is really a link to National Geographic Magazine
• Ken Rockwell spells point-and-shoot "h-a-s-s-e-l-b-l-a-d"
• When Ken Rockwell went digital, National Geographic nearly went out of business because he was no longer physically discarding photos
• For every 10 shots that Ken Rockwell takes, 11 are keepers.
• Ken Rockwell's digital files consist of 0's, 1's AND 2's.
• Ken Rockwell never focus, everything moves into his DoF
• Ken Rockwell's shots are so perfect, Adobe redesigned photoshop for him: all it consists of is a close button.
• The term tripod was coined after his silhouette
• Ken Rockwell never produces awful work, only work too advanced for the viewer
• A certain brand of high-end cameras was named after people noticed the quality was a lot "like a" Rockwell
• Ken Rockwell isn't the Chuck Norris of photography; Chuck Norris is the Ken Rockwell of martial arts.
• Ken Rockwell never starts, he continues

Screamin Scott wrote: If you don't like the article, don't read it. I take what ANY reviewer says with a grain of salt. I have learned my lessons the hard way over the last 45+ years.

I so happen to read it while looking for some good reads. Unfortunately, I found it. 

Shadowfixer1 wrote: Ken puts stuff out for click bait. Plain and simple. 

Yeah! Thiis would be the last time. 

Bryston3bsst wrote: Shadowfixer's right.......Ken's running a website for profit. You have helped him make money by going there then telling others to go there and read this article. Not that that's a bad thing. And I did read the article you linked to......kind of humorous.......and kind of true. I know many people that have wheeled carts literally overflowing with hardware, and they can't shoot their way out of a wet paper bag. We all know many that absolutely have to own the latest bodies and lenses the day they are released, and their pictures are just mediocre. How many times have you heard someone say....'I want to take my photography to the next level, so I'm buying X lens or X body'? That's the one that always makes me chuckle. This article is clearly written for entertainment value. And what he is saying is stuff probably many of us has said at one time or another.

Ken's just like all of the others, which is why I read very little of any their crap, because that's pretty much all it is. It shouldn't be upsetting to you. There is certainly no shame in being an amateur. Jay Maisel, Dorothea Lange, Vivian Maier, James Baes, Andreas Feininger........were all amateurs at one point. I don't think anyone has ever popped out of the womb holding an SLR in one hand and a Pulitzer in the other.

I will say that Ken has a few decent basic suggestions for those that are just getting into photography. Otherwise, it's just entertainment.

It's an entertainment without class. You could be entertaining while not offending some groups of people. Anyhow, thanks for this insight. 

Uplander wrote: Yeah, click bait pro.  As stated above, you helped him out with this thread.  

A mistake that I don't plan in making again. 

icepics wrote: I don't think he gets money directly by people going to his site, except it does probably bring in more viewers for the ads. His site shows options to give him a 'gift' or to make a 'donation'  if someone is so inclined. Why, I don't know.

I ran across his site years ago, and he has a certain amount of knowledge, and writes what often seem to be rather humorous or tongue in cheek articles or stories. I think this is more about amateurs with cameras acting as if they're pros. There seem to be more people in recent years listing themselves as photographers on craigslist, facebook etc. without the necessary pro skills, so that's probably what the article is about. I don't think it refers to someone who is doing photography as a hobby or for their own enjoyment.

It could be. Thanks for this,,,