Comments on: Lies, Damn Lies, and Bias http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml You tell that other boy, not to touch the woodwork... Sat, 06 Sep 2008 07:38:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-hemorrhage hourly 1 By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Running with cameras http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-382243 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Running with cameras Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:54:51 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-382243 [...] But I thought I’d try to get my point across without the numbers or andwithout the vitriol. [...] [...] But I thought I’d try to get my point across without the numbers or andwithout the vitriol. [...]

]]> By: don Ferguson http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-198290 don Ferguson Tue, 16 Oct 2007 06:35:27 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-198290 Hello I agree with you assesment of Riechman! I have noticed his opinion change dramatically on even Canon cameras as they progressed. In one article on the d30 [which in my opinion is the best canon ever produced} it was the film beating time in digital imaging and six months later it was a piece of crap. I myself have purchased three models from that camera only to go back to it for it's amazingly clean images. I wrote Micheal on this issue and told him what i thought of him and his reviews but never recieved a reply. Phil Askey of dpreview is guilty of the same crap! The bottom line in all of this is that we are all guilty to some extent of buying into the hype! I shoot now exclusively with the d30 using only Leica primes and am very happy with this combination but my raw files are obsolete and I am being forced from this by canon and this really pisses me off! Reichman would never mention this on his site because canon would be pissed with him and his whole world would shatter, if you can call that a world! Bottom line is that we are all victims whether it be Canon or Nikon or whatever, as photographers we don't matter in the big picture, what matters to these corporations is the bottom line and if a few thousand photogrophers are pissed so what! I am glad you slammed this guy for he deseves it, I know when I was starting out in digital I would always refer to his website until I started to see the cracks! Don Hello
I agree with you assesment of Riechman! I have noticed his opinion change dramatically on even Canon cameras as they progressed. In one article on the d30 [which in my opinion is the best canon ever produced} it was the film beating time in digital imaging and six months later it was a piece of crap. I myself have purchased three models from that camera only to go back to it for it’s amazingly clean images. I wrote Micheal on this issue and told him what i thought of him and his reviews but never recieved a reply.
Phil Askey of dpreview is guilty of the same crap!
The bottom line in all of this is that we are all guilty to some extent of buying into the hype!
I shoot now exclusively with the d30 using only Leica primes and am very happy with this combination but my raw files are obsolete and I am being forced from this by canon and this really pisses me off! Reichman would never mention this on his site because canon would be pissed with him and his whole world would shatter, if you can call that a world!
Bottom line is that we are all victims whether it be Canon or Nikon or whatever, as photographers we don’t matter in the big picture, what matters to these corporations is the bottom line and if a few thousand photogrophers are pissed so what!
I am glad you slammed this guy for he deseves it, I know when I was starting out in digital I would always refer to his website until I started to see the cracks!
Don

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Live preview http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-78877 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Live preview Mon, 14 May 2007 07:50:25 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-78877 [...] transmittance so half the image goes to the viewfinder and half goes to the LCD. An example is the Panasonic DMC-L1 or most of the Olympus Four-Thirds line, most notably (and I’ll get to later) the the E-510 and [...] [...] transmittance so half the image goes to the viewfinder and half goes to the LCD. An example is the Panasonic DMC-L1 or most of the Olympus Four-Thirds line, most notably (and I’ll get to later) the the E-510 and [...]

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Leica and Aperture. Don’t you think it’s about time? http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-17510 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Leica and Aperture. Don’t you think it’s about time? Sun, 31 Dec 2006 01:02:58 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-17510 [...] Second, Panasonic introduced the L1, this is a serious camera whose RAW files Apple don’t support. Leica has introduced a truly revolutionary (in a Leica retro way) M8 digital camera. I can imagine professional street photographers using this camera and Apple doesn’t support it. [...] [...] Second, Panasonic introduced the L1, this is a serious camera whose RAW files Apple don’t support. Leica has introduced a truly revolutionary (in a Leica retro way) M8 digital camera. I can imagine professional street photographers using this camera and Apple doesn’t support it. [...]

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Nikon going full frame http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-15114 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Nikon going full frame Sun, 24 Dec 2006 20:23:13 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-15114 [...] I bagged on this earlier so I’ll reiterate. [...] [...] I bagged on this earlier so I’ll reiterate. [...]

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » The next Rebel http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-5728 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » The next Rebel Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:06:03 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-5728 [...] The Woodwork You tell that other boy, not to touch the woodwork… « Lies, Damn Lies, and Bias [...] [...] The Woodwork You tell that other boy, not to touch the woodwork… « Lies, Damn Lies, and Bias [...]

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-5549 tychay Mon, 21 Aug 2006 03:12:52 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-5549 @NealStephensonFanatic: Because he is <a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fucktard" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">one</a>. What sort of person says how much they have a big Panasonic/Leica hard-on as a launching pad to attack it? What sort of person compares a single 35mm film lens to a single 4/3 lens and then makes a generalization about the entire platform? What sort of person mentions two data points and then extrapolates the death of 4/3 and (by extension, APS-C) from it? Basically, what sort of person engages in clearly fallacious arguments when they know they are clearly fallacious? Answer: Someone with an agenda. Michael Reichmann’s agenda comes from his background: 35mm nature photographer who had to live under an inferiority complex with respect to view camera people and now is rich enough to engage in the same abuse he received. Where he has a bias and then claims he’s unbiased; when he claims he is biased for something, it is obvious he is biased against it. Would it have made you happy if I said that I had a hard-on for Reichmann and a big Reichmann bias before I pissed all over him and systematically destroyed the arguments in the first half of his “review” of the Panasonic L1? Because that is the exact strategy Reichmann used in his “review” and he knows it! I’m not going to let someone like that treat me like a moron and prostrate myself to him on this blog. I mean the guy first compares the 14-50mm Leica + Panasonic L1 combination to the 24-105mm + Canon 5D in one sentence and then in the next switches it deftly to a 24-105mm + Canon Rebel XT in another—a completely different camera where the focal length and picture shot will look completely different! Notice when he did which comparison? You expect me to believe that the switch was accidental given what I know about Michael Reichmann from his writings? And you expect me to let him get away with this? Just because I can respect someone for the knowledge he has and some interesting points he brought up doesn’t mean I’m not going to call him out when he passes off opinions as fact and bases his conclusions on data clearly designed to misread the reader. In fact, his expert knowledge just closes off the defense that his deception was accidental. To me, that’s the essence of what a “fucktard” is. If I thought he was speaking from ignorance, I’d have just said he was a “moron” or a “retard.” I’m sorry if you are offended—you can read another blog because I’m not going to clean my potty mouth anytime soon. Otherwise, if you think I was a bit harsh in my pronouncement, tell me <strong>why</strong> I am. Don’t purport to have your set of values change mine. If you think I made an error, <strong>correct</strong> them! Don’t talk about my opinions here unless you are prepared to debate the facts also. (You can always post your response on why I’m a fucktard on your blog—heck, I might even agree with you!) When I’m being disingenuous, I expect someone to call me out on it. I’ve been corrected and humiliated more than a few times on this blog (I hope I have been quick to correct myself when I have been wrong). I don’t tolerate this sort of bullshit coming out of respected authorities, and I don’t think anyone else should either. They say, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” Michael Reichmann is certainly brilliant about digital photography, but that brilliance couldn’t dazzle his obvious, unstated bias from me. I wasn’t baffled either. I hope, after reading this blog entry and perhaps ignoring the scatology, you won’t be either. @NealStephensonFanatic:

Because he is one.

What sort of person says how much they have a big Panasonic/Leica hard-on as a launching pad to attack it? What sort of person compares a single 35mm film lens to a single 4/3 lens and then makes a generalization about the entire platform? What sort of person mentions two data points and then extrapolates the death of 4/3 and (by extension, APS-C) from it? Basically, what sort of person engages in clearly fallacious arguments when they know they are clearly fallacious?

Answer: Someone with an agenda.

Michael Reichmann’s agenda comes from his background: 35mm nature photographer who had to live under an inferiority complex with respect to view camera people and now is rich enough to engage in the same abuse he received. Where he has a bias and then claims he’s unbiased; when he claims he is biased for something, it is obvious he is biased against it.

Would it have made you happy if I said that I had a hard-on for Reichmann and a big Reichmann bias before I pissed all over him and systematically destroyed the arguments in the first half of his “review” of the Panasonic L1? Because that is the exact strategy Reichmann used in his “review” and he knows it! I’m not going to let someone like that treat me like a moron and prostrate myself to him on this blog. I mean the guy first compares the 14-50mm Leica + Panasonic L1 combination to the 24-105mm + Canon 5D in one sentence and then in the next switches it deftly to a 24-105mm + Canon Rebel XT in another—a completely different camera where the focal length and picture shot will look completely different! Notice when he did which comparison? You expect me to believe that the switch was accidental given what I know about Michael Reichmann from his writings? And you expect me to let him get away with this?

Just because I can respect someone for the knowledge he has and some interesting points he brought up doesn’t mean I’m not going to call him out when he passes off opinions as fact and bases his conclusions on data clearly designed to misread the reader. In fact, his expert knowledge just closes off the defense that his deception was accidental. To me, that’s the essence of what a “fucktard” is. If I thought he was speaking from ignorance, I’d have just said he was a “moron” or a “retard.”

I’m sorry if you are offended—you can read another blog because I’m not going to clean my potty mouth anytime soon. Otherwise, if you think I was a bit harsh in my pronouncement, tell me why I am. Don’t purport to have your set of values change mine. If you think I made an error, correct them! Don’t talk about my opinions here unless you are prepared to debate the facts also.

(You can always post your response on why I’m a fucktard on your blog—heck, I might even agree with you!)

When I’m being disingenuous, I expect someone to call me out on it. I’ve been corrected and humiliated more than a few times on this blog (I hope I have been quick to correct myself when I have been wrong). I don’t tolerate this sort of bullshit coming out of respected authorities, and I don’t think anyone else should either.

They say, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” Michael Reichmann is certainly brilliant about digital photography, but that brilliance couldn’t dazzle his obvious, unstated bias from me. I wasn’t baffled either.

I hope, after reading this blog entry and perhaps ignoring the scatology, you won’t be either.

]]> By: Enoch Root http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-5537 Enoch Root Sat, 19 Aug 2006 20:08:58 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/lies-damn-lies-and-bias.shtml#comment-5537 If you respect Reichmann, why do you call him a 'fucktard?' 'Fucktard' is pretty much the most offensive thing you can call anyone. If you respect Reichmann, why do you call him a ‘fucktard?’

‘Fucktard’ is pretty much the most offensive thing you can call anyone.

]]>