Who / what is Fro?

Im contrarian here. His stuff is entertaining, and decent for someone new to the hobby/craft/profession​. But they are also very amateurish and juvenile at best. Ok, the smell test is worth it, but the rest....? He occasionally does real photographic discussions, which can be helpful. But honestly, his genre of reviews is about as useful as Tony and Chelsea's stuff. Take from them what you want, but their whole gig is to get you to buy something new.

For example, I think it was just a few weeks ago that chelsea said she was going back to Canon. This after going from Canon to Nikon, then to Sony, and now back to Canon. Now I have no idea what your all disposable income is, but she shoots big glass, and having to put out in the mid-teens thousands for a single lenses each time you switch brands just isn't worth it or practical to many of us. Not going to fork out 20 or 30 grand on gear each year to buy the latest from whom ever is peddling what ever.

I subscribe to his YouTube channel as well as his podcast. I don't watch/listen to everything he post. But for those I do I find them informative, entertaining and at times interesting. I admit though that he is an acquired taste. Not for the profanity, lord knows I have a potty mouth myself, but he can come off as pompous and obnoxious at times.

Croasdail wrote in post #19154941
Im contrarian here. His stuff is entertaining, and decent for someone new to the hobby/craft/profession​. But they are also very amateurish and juvenile at best. Ok, the smell test is worth it, but the rest....? He occasionally does real photographic discussions, which can be helpful. But honestly, his genre of reviews is about as useful as Tony and Chelsea's stuff. Take from them what you want, but their whole gig is to get you to buy something new.

For example, I think it was just a few weeks ago that chelsea said she was going back to Canon. This after going from Canon to Nikon, then to Sony, and now back to Canon. Now I have no idea what your all disposable income is, but she shoots big glass, and having to put out in the mid-teens thousands for a single lenses each time you switch brands just isn't worth it or practical to many of us. Not going to fork out 20 or 30 grand on gear each year to buy the latest from whom ever is peddling what ever.

What I found useful, was rather than just sit and talk about a piece of equipment or feature, he shows the equipment working in use. Again, for me, this played a part in why I ended up with a 1DXIII. His video showing the face detect. It was almost as goods as shooting with it. I find his videos too long and too full of his shtick, yes. But those long videos do contain useful content. Just be prepared to fast forward a lot!

I guess what irritates me most is his purist philosophy he learned from his high school photo teacher that "cropping" isn't right, it has to be displayed as caught in camera. And yet has no issues with lightroom/photoshoppin​g images. Makes no sense to me... I feel a proper crop, even sometimes in untraditional shapes and ratios can enhance the viewers experience, but that just my philosophy, and to each their own.

Maybe I am just unaware of his body of work. The images he has shown, most are fine, and above amateur for sure. But for me right now... and I may be horribly wrong.... its his shtick that entertains, not his photo prowess. I do like he sometimes will say something isn't the "best" but good enough for most... which I whole heartedly agree with.

If some new gear comes out that hasn't gotten into our hands yet, his videos are usually some of the better ones to see what we have in store for us when we get the gear. Entertaining and informative in that regard....

I felt like I knew the R6 very well after watching his videos, and I wasn't wrong when I finally acquired one.

I don't get the no cropping thing either.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #19155516
I don't get the no cropping thing either.

I wish I had the skill to nail composition on moving subjects well enough never need to crop.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #19155516
I don't get the no cropping thing either.

Enjoyed your portfolio.... clean.

With 35mm film you are mostly going to be making prints that are not in a 3:2 ratio. How the hell do you do that without cropping the image? Isn't cropping an integral part of the darkroom process when working with film?

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #19157783
With 35mm film you are mostly going to be making prints that are not in a 3:2 ratio. How the hell do you do that without cropping the image? Isn't cropping an integral part of the darkroom process when working with film?

Alan

When Ken Rockwell makes an 8x10" print from a 35mm negative, it fills the paper with no cropping or borders. It also prints onto the easel.

Fro must know what he is talking about. Because if he didn't Canon wouldn't be flying him all over the country with the latest camera to test and review. Not every photographer is allowed to follow Bernie Sanders around for a day.

and Sony... but, it's called a marketing budget. He has a big following and the companies know that he will sell cameras. Smart.

filmuser wrote in post #19158356
Fro must know what he is talking about. Because if he didn't Canon wouldn't be flying him all over the country with the latest camera to test and review. Not every photographer is allowed to follow Bernie Sanders around for a day.

Only 1% of the 1% get to follow Bernie.

filmuser wrote in post #19158356
Fro must know what he is talking about. Because if he didn't Canon wouldn't be flying him all over the country with the latest camera to test and review. Not every photographer is allowed to follow Bernie Sanders around for a day.

Wouldn't good photographers get the chance to follow a winning candidate?

:P

Sorry.

filmuser wrote in post #19158356
Fro must know what he is talking about. Because if he didn't Canon wouldn't be flying him all over the country with the latest camera to test and review. Not every photographer is allowed to follow Bernie Sanders around for a day.

Assuming "youtube influencers" equates to someone who knows a lot about a subject, or is a leader in the field would be a very precarious reasoning to base anything off of. Nothing against "fro" aka Jared Palin... but his body of work doesn't elevate him to a leader in the field. Not many of the Youtube "reviewers" have portfolios that are better than some of the better photographers here.

There are some on Youtube that are very good.... but Jared is a reviewer.... he is competent... but not inspiring