Kacey, sounds like someone never got a Hot One Award and is upset! I'm guessing this anti Buff thing has been brewing a while inside in you? Just took something personal to pull it out...
You're making a fool of yourself in a public forum. I don't own any product from you, and only own a handful of cybersyncs' from Buff so I'm not on either side. In fact I'm not a fan at all of Buff, but your obsessive compulsive posting on this is embarrassing for you....very unprofessional.
It's certainly changed my viewpoint of you as a business man. It's not like you or anything you manufacture has changed the photography game, especially since your claim to fame is copying a beauty dish that Mola designed first....except yours is plastic. Great idea and nice product but remember....the original design isn't yours. It's a copy of someone else's efforts.
After the last few posts by Jerry, I can honestly say that I would choose not to buy a product from him had I not already made the purchase. It is perfectly acceptable to stand by your product and I would expect a business owner to do so. One can even have a distaste for other manufacturers, which Jerry obviously has towards PCB. The last few posts by Jerry were just downright ridiculous. I keep waiting for some sort of demonstration of dignity and professionalism but it isn't coming.
Correct me if I'm wrong Jerry but you are slamming the magazine for giving PCB an award for a product you claim they never used. On the other hand, you slam the same product without having ever used the product yourself. How is this different? One group loves something they didn't use and you hate something you didn't use. Sounds to me like neither of you is a reliable source of feedback on that product.
The Einstein has problems; we get it. You have done a great job of listing them. You've also done a great job of attacking Ellis, who has personal experience with the product (sense a theme yet?). At this point, what do you, your company, or the forum members have to gain by continuing on? No doubt, there are potential customers reading what you're writing and, conceivably, some will not find your methods respectable. Why not stick to the products you make, and focus on bringing new products to the market? Let PCB and any other company you don't care for do their thing and you do yours.
Yes, since they publish that the products are to be reviewed in hand by 18 photographer like Ellis or other pro's to issue it. Not sure if you read the link I provided. Paul is actually the one that says the magazine issues his awards based on his press releases of products that are not even completed to point of having the 18 photographers test them. Not me.
I will just point you again to the start of this where Paul said to everyone my adapter has a 40 percent light loss. This was from a web pic with no testing at all. ...Show more →
Send the Wambulance for Kacey. Stop crying, dude. You're running a business. If you feel the publication in question has behaved in an unethical way, contact them, on a professional level. Complaining about it on FM with assertions that certain members are co-conspirators is only hurting your reputation.
The operative word there is 'assertion'. Unless you have conclusive evidence to substantiate your claims, you're just defaming people with silly allegations.
Yes, since they publish that the products are to be reviewed in hand by 18 photographer like Ellis or other pro's to issue it. Not sure if you read the link I provided. Paul is actually the one that says the magazine issues his awards based on his press releases of products that are not even completed to point of having the 18 photographers test them. Not me.
I have participated in a past "Hot One's" survey in Professional Photographer myself (I've also written a couple of software reviews for them). The magazine staff compiles information from a large number of brand new products in a number of different categories -- "hot" products -- and provides the information to a selected focus group of professional photographers for opinions on how interesting they appear to be.
If you take a look at the survey, they're all products that have just been announced or just barely reached the shelves. I do think the magazine could explain a bit more clearly how they're chosen and that these are not actually product reviews, but it should be pretty clear that no working professional could have actually used all those products or even all the products in a given category. Nor is it said anywhere that anyone did.
They're just new products that look pretty hot to working professionals from companies that have reliable track records. Magazines run such articles all the time, with the difference in Professional Photographer being that the choices are made by professional photographers instead of professional magazine editors.
I've never read the magazine in question; however, are any reviews in any photography magazine all that useful? In any of the popular magazines, every product reviewed is fantastic. If you read enough of those "reviews," you'd be convinced that every lens available is equal to every other lens. This wouldn't be the first time a "review" holds little merit.
Lousy magazine practices or not, it isn't an excuse for every professional in the photography business to act unprofessional. With regards to Paul's original comment...Jerry could have said, "I respectfully disagree..." or, "our tests show something different..." and moved on.
I've never read the magazine in question; however, are any reviews in any photography magazine all that useful? In any of the popular magazines, every product reviewed is fantastic. If you read enough of those "reviews," you'd be convinced that every lens available is equal to every other lens. This wouldn't be the first time a "review" holds little merit.
A number of years ago, Herbert Keppler stated in his column in Popular Photography (or it might have been much earlier in his Modern Photography column) that magazines occasionally held back a bad review to give a company an opportunity to fix a particular problem. The rationale is that the end goal of service to their audience is often better met by getting a problem fixed in an otherwise good product rather than condemning it forever.
" In any of the popular magazines, every product reviewed is fantastic."
Speaking solely for myself, since I'm a working photographer (http://www.ellisvener.com ) and a working writer writing for an audience of working photographers, I hear what you are saying, and all I can say to defend myself is that I do an honest job of reporting my findings. By that I mean, if I uncover a problem I'll report on it. If a piece of equipment isnt up to snuff I will either not review it or point out the faults I find. But its always possible I as an individual will miss some problem that you or another person uncovers. This follows from the software coding truism that "all bugs are shallow to 10,000 eyes".
To follow up on what RD Kirk wrote above, there are a fair number of high level photographers (some are PPA members but not all are) who are NDA ( non disclosure agreement) covered alpha and beta field testers for different pieces of photo gear. Is it not reasonable to expect that some in that group are also asked to participate in nominating and voting on the Hot One Awards? I don't know who is asked to participate in the HOA voting process and even if I did, how would I or other HOA participants know which if any products another HOA voter might have been testing for awhile before it is publicly launched?
rrweather wrote:
Lousy magazine practices or not, it isn't an excuse for every professional in the photography business to act unprofessional. With regards to Paul's original comment...Jerry could have said, "I respectfully disagree..." or, "our tests show something different..." and moved on.
Not to be Jerry's defender here, I know it's starting to look like I am, but Paul reacts the same way when his products are shot down by others. In fact, he reacts that way claiming "I'm only human" when the person speaking against his product is only complaining of his very real personal experience. So if I may ask, why is Jerry being chastised by a mob of FM members? Did his product not get shot down by Paul at the very start of all this?
You guys say Jerry has been unprofessional in many more ways I thought possible, but I didn't hear once about Paul's "professionalism" around here or on his boards. Aren't we being the pot calling the kettle black here?
Let's be fair guys. Paul vs. Jerry is enough. Paul and Ellis vs. Jerry is a little much. But not 4, 5, 6 people against Jerry? Like I said, I'm not defending Jerry here but before his hard work and good track record goes down the drain, I'll have to step in. That's not right. You (those who don't manufacture anything and have no business at risk here) are messing with someone's livelihood. Yes, Jerry's comments did some damage to Paul, but it's nothing that Paul didn't do to Jerry's products first.
And guys, if someone jumped on Paul's throat and Paul got his undeservingly, I would step in, too. But what started as a discussion on flaws of each others' design or products has now become a bash-fest.
Many are saying they will never buy Jerry's products because of Jerry's "unprofessionalism". Other people might read this and agree with you just because Jerry isn't defending himself. Meanwhile, Jerry's products are that good and widely used. Just like how some would say, Paul the man is different from Paul the guys who makes strobes, I hope both their sales don't get affected.
And another thing about Jerry's "plastic beauty dish that Mola designed first". That was uncalled for. Yes, it's true the design isn't his. Then again, nor is it Speedotron's. Right? In fact, Speedotron's is metal just like the Mola. At least Jerry's "plastic BD" offers a lightweight alternative for those who don't use the modeling light to shoot anyway (i.e, Quadra, speedlights).
I don't expect Jerry to apologize for restating the flaws of an Einstein or other widely-known issues that everyone already knows about. As for Paul retracting the statement about Jerry's product eating up light or at least do a test to prove it, that would be up to him.
Seanzky wrote:
You guys say Jerry has been unprofessional in many more ways I thought possible, but I didn't hear once about Paul's "professionalism" around here or on his boards. Aren't we being the pot calling the kettle black here?
There are probably 50 threads that deal with Buff's "professionalism."
Seanzky wrote:
Let's be fair guys. Paul vs. Jerry is enough. Paul and Ellis vs. Jerry is a little much.
I think you are wrong about this. Jerry is the one who dragged Ellis into the fray with very personal attacks. I have always enjoyed reading Ellis' posts for the helpful and unbiased information I get from them. Most of the people are defending Ellis and not Paul. From reading previous posts from Paul everyone gets a feel for how he is on the forum and from this thread Jerry seems to be cut from the same mold. In less than a 100 posts he is getting the same reputation in my mind as Paul, useful technical information but you have to wade through a lot of crap.
Even though he wrote above that "he doesn't know me from Adam" Mr. Kacey has felt free to mount multiple ad hominem attacks on me. I'm not "on Paul's side". I'm not "on Paul's team." I am standing up for myself.
az-dave wrote:
I think you are wrong about this. Jerry is the one who dragged Ellis into the fray with very personal attacks. I have always enjoyed reading Ellis' posts for the helpful and unbiased information I get from them. Most of the people are defending Ellis and not Paul. From reading previous posts from Paul everyone gets a feel for how he is on the forum and from this thread Jerry seems to be cut from the same mold. In less than a 100 posts he is getting the same reputation in my mind as Paul, useful technical information but you have to wade through a lot of crap. ...Show more →
No, I'm pretty sure that's not how it went. Jerry and Paul was having a 1 on 1 and what I called a good discussion. It wasn't as heated as it became later on, of course. The sarcasm from Jerry did provoke Paul for some personal attacks. So I can't say Paul is at fault. But to say (as someone above said) that Jerry should have taken the high ground and say, "let's just agree to disagree", couldn't that apply to Paul too then? Or is Jerry the only one subject to that?
But anyway this is where Ellis came in...
E-Vener wrote:
Kacey, you make a fine after market problem solving adapter, but as an Einstein owner, and as someone who has independently and pretty rigorously tested Einstein and Elinchrom gear for published reviews, and not being someone trying to hawk product or is connected with either Paul C. Buff, inc or Elinchrom, you are spouting gibberish: Very, very little light is being "sucked" through the vents on the front of the Einstein.
If you feel a compelling need to create fake drama, Hollywood is always looking for talented writers for their so-called "Reality" shows.
That's why Jerry got defensive and brought out all the quotes to show that he's not the one spouting gibberish.
So, it was Ellis who chimed in after Paul and Jerry's 1on 1, slighting Jerry along the way. Then Ellis went on saying he isn't affiliated with Paul in anyway, but it didn't look like that the way he came to Paul's rescue. This was why Jerry felt he was ganged up on.
Now, to say Ellis' posts are informative and enlightening to read is an understatement. Like many here, I never thought Ellis or Jerry would go into it like this. I take Ellis as a great source of information and an asset around here.
I'm not trying to be the arbitrator. I just want to point out to you guys to be fair to Jerry, too. Your reactions are really overboard and can affect his business, which isn't cool. In this economy we're in right now, how would you feel if you lost your job and had no way of putting food on the table for your family. Please don't put others in that situation. Just think about that before you say something.
And by the way, like I said, if someone came and unfairly bashed Paul for no good reason, I would say something in Paul's defense, too. No matter how much money Paul is making, his hard work in everything he does shouldn't go down the drain just because someone wills it to.
I really thought the discussion at first was interesting because I've been in the same one before with Jerry on the other side, though the result of that one never went astray like this one did. I was hoping I could learn something from the whole Elinchrom to AB/WL adapter just out of curiosity. I believe it was also because Jerry has a mount for dual Alienbees, which I find ingenious and a very interesting product.
After some back and forth Jerry admitted that he has neither seen or handled the Einstein. Since I have, and to a greater degree than Paul Buff is likely comfortable with or knows about, i think it is fair to point out that Mr. Kacey's characterizing those vents as "light sucking" and "huge" was not only off base but incredibly misleading. Is that "riding to Paul's rescue" or pointing out that Mr. Kacey was spreading disinformation, and yeah "creating fake drama"?
he has since then gone to mischaracterize and distort what I've written and impugn my integrity and that of a magazine I write for.
If he's doing any damage to his business here --and I do do like the ideas behind his various products -- it's most a series of self-inflicted wounds. I know he's lost me as a potential customer.
Yes, that was speculation on Jerry's part much like Paul's "40% light loss" due to the tunneling. After all, neither has used each others' product in question (Einstein and Elinchrom to AB/WL adapters). But Dave (Tetrode) has done tests that proved Paul's theory wrong about Jerry's products. I've seen those and I trust Dave did it unbiasedly.
You stepped in, as an Einstein user, to point out that Jerry was wrong after they had already gone 1 on 1 about "design flaws". I'm not saying you intentionally came to Paul's rescue, but you have to admit, you're timing made it appear that way. I believe Jerry asked you how you've tested, what procedures you took to prove that light doesn't leak through the vents which he said you avoided or never answered clearly. Logic tells me that some light would get through along with the heat from the modeling lamp and the fact that so many have complained about the overheating (when tilted down, as heat rises) and because Paul is recalling and redesigning the back plate, I believed that Jerry had a good point.
Jerry, to some effect, merely said the "vents" did the opposite of "venting" and instead allowed light and heat to leak through causing overheating and perhaps the missing 40ws? At least that's how I understood it underneath the back and forth sarcasm and ridiculing. So to me it wasn't creating fake drama on his part.
After some back and forth Jerry admitted that he has neither seen or handled the Einstein. Since I have, and to a greater degree than Paul Buff is likely comfortable with or knows about, i think it is fair to point out that Mr. Kacey's characterizing those vents as "light sucking" and "huge" was not only off base but incredibly misleading. Is that "riding to Paul's rescue" or pointing out that Mr. Kacey was spreading disinformation, and yeah "creating fake drama"?
he has since then gone to mischaracterize and distort what I've written and impugn my integrity and that of a magazine I write for.
If he's doing any damage to his business here --and I do do like the ideas behind his various products -- it's most a series of self-inflicted wounds. I know he's lost me as a potential customer. ...Show more →
Well, that's the thing Ellis. Others who look up to you, as I do, might follow your lead. I hope they don't. You're free, of course, to boycott as you wish. Just the same, I hope no one stops reading your reviews just because of the exchange you've engaged in in this thread. Though I have a bad memory, I've read your review on the Einstein and I remember it being very thorough or at least as thorough as a reputable magazine's review should be.
