In Praise of Biased Reviewers

In a previous post on how I became interested in photography I mentioned that I already had a camera before I met Lene. A crappy little point and shoot. The pictures were a bit soft and the autofocus wasn’t the greatest - but it worked. This was before phones had decent cameras and before I even thought about spending a lot of money on a camera like a DSLR. I needed a digital camera so I bought one.

Before I bought it I tried to do my research. I’m one of those people who overthink some of my purchases. I’ll check reviews, look at alternatives, read up on the subject, and do as much research as I can. This can help me decide exactly which thing I want to buy. This can also push me into completely different products or thingies that I didn’t originally know about or intend to buy. This can also, thankfully, lead me to the point where I don’t decide to buy anything at all. For the moment.

Doing my research on point and shoot cameras was… problematic.

The “serious” photography sites did not want to cover and review point and shoot cameras. They weren’t real cameras after all. They wanted to review expensive cameras with swappable lenses. Tiny little pipsqueaks didn’t warrant much attention.

To be honest they did put out short items based on the press releases from Canon or Sony or whoever. If a camera company announced a couple of new point and shoots - they would write up a post. Parroting the press material. After all you want to look like a good representative of Canon’s or Sony’s cameras. That way you might get review units of the more expensive and impressive models.

The only other time these sites seemed to take these little cameras seriously was once or twice a year when they would do a comparison review of all the water proof models. Why? Because it’s fun to take photos during your scuba or snorkeling vacation.

Now I didn’t want a camera that I could take into the ocean. I wanted a simple point and shoot.

Then I stumbled across Ken Rockwell’s site. He reviewed several makes and models of point and shoots. Serious reviews. That talked about image quality. That compared one model to another. That took the that category of cameras seriously. I found his review on the Canon SD880 and it helped make up my mind. He pointed out that one of the reasons he liked this model, even when compared to its more expensive brethren, was that you got more for the money and better ergonomics.

A few days later I went down to my local camera store. Asked to see a couple models of point and shoots. Found that I agreed with Ken’s ergonomic assessment, and bought myself a camera.

After I met Lene, and started to become more interested in photography, I spent more time online looking at camera and lens reviews. The “serious” camera sites were now more useful as I was in the market for a camera expensive enough for them to take seriously. I read review sites, photography blogs, and forums full of people writing about their experiences with these cameras.

Which is when I found out that many people in that world look down on Ken Rockwell and his site. They poke fun at him. They look down their noses at what he does. He is a running gag on some forums.

I didn’t understand this. Why? He does his thing and he seems to do it quite well. Though I have to admit he does have his quirks. The biggest one is in how he likes his pictures to look.

Yes - he likes well composed pictures that are sharp and well photographed. But he also likes his colours saturated. Oh does he like saturated colours. In most digital cameras there are settings to modify the quality of the picture taken by the camera. Want to take a black and white photo - set the camera to automatically turn pictures into black and white. Want to have colours saturated? There’s a setting for that. One that Ken uses in most of his reviews. If the camera has a vivid setting that can be adjusted - he sets it to the highest level. The result is, to most of us, over saturated pictures with garish colours. It isn’t a look most of us are trying to get. So when Ken then complains about how the vivid mode isn’t vivid enough… it can be easy to be a bit snarky about his pictures.

Here’s the thing. When I was reading reviews on his site I quickly found that he loves saturated colours. I don’t. That doesn’t make his reviews irrelevant. When he talks about sharpness, autofocus, the ergonomics of the camera, and almost everything else - his views are informative and valuable. When he talks about the colours… well I tune out or skip over that part.

Later I found out that there is a reason for his love of saturated colours. He loves the look of photos taken using Fuji Velvia 50 slide film. He’s trying to capture that look and feel in his digital photography.

He’s biased. He has a personal point of view - and one most of us don’t agree with. That doesn’t make what he writes wrong. It just means that when he gets talking about colour science in cameras you can ignore what he says if you don’t want to get the same results.

I like biased reviewers. More so when they are the first to admit their biases.

Take the world of fountain pens. Yes. Fountain pens. I’ve been using them since 2013 or so. There is a small, but passionate, portion of the internet that discusses, reviews, argues, and writes about fountain pens. And ink. Let’s not forget ink. One of the best part of using a fountain pen is that you can use whatever fountain pen ink you want. It’s a subculture that may have passed you by.

One reviewer, Stephen Brown, online as sbrebrown, has reviewed hundreds of fountain pens on his youtube channel. He has his own bias and admits it freely. He likes pens with a broad nib and the wetter the resulting line of ink the better.

I prefer an extra-fine nib which puts out a very thin line. I prefer a nib that is not overly dry - but I don’t need lakes of ink to pour out of my pen as I write. As a left handed person too much wet ink can be a problem.

Stephen and I disagree on this point (no pun intended). Our disagreement doesn’t make his reviews less useful. When he talks about how comfortable a pen is to hold - that’s useful. Is the pen well made or does it feel cheap - that’s useful. Even the portion of his reviews where he writes with the pens is useful.

If he reviews a pen with a broad nib and complains about how the nib is dry and inconsistent and doesn’t work well - that’s good to know. If he reviews a pen with a fine or extra-fine nib and proclaims it a better than expected writing experience - that’s good to know. There is nothing wrong with biased reviewers.

Another pen reviewer has never seen an expensive, vintage, or limited edition fountain pen he doesn’t like. If you and I are unlikely to own it - he loves it. Most of the time. There are times he pans expensive pens or praises inexpensive ones.

Think about it this way. Does your local film critic love art house cinema and has a disdain for action shlock? If they like the latest action movie - that tells you something. If they say no one should see the latest three hour pretentious masterpiece by their favourite auteur - that tells you something.

Take the world of audio and recording gear. I’ve been digging into reviews and websites for a while now. More on which later.

I’ve found that what is useful is a combination of objective reviews full of measurements and numbers, subjective reviews by people with particular points of view, and comparative reviews where the reviewer lets me decide.

Objective reviews - such as those by Julian Krause. If you want to have audio interfaces compared by the numbers - watch his reviews. He doesn’t just parrot the technical specs, he measures the actual performance of the equipment. Using repeatable tests so that he can then compare equipment objectively against other equipment. Even so his reviews discuss build quality, the measured results versus the cost of the equipment, and are not completely objective from beginning to end.

Subjective reviews - such as those by Bandrew Scott on his Podcastage youtube channel. Whether he’s reviewing a microphone or an audio interface - he’ll give you his impressions after he puts it through its paces. Did he think it captured his electric guitar well? Does he like how it makes his voice sound? He’ll let you know.

Reviews that let you decide - like the many microphone comparison reviews out there. Microphones each have their own sound. Having someone speak into different microphones allows me to listen and decide on which ones I think sound better than others. Some of these reviewers don’t even pick a winner or a personal favourite - they leave it up to you. They know that in this case what I prefer is more important than what they prefer. I’ve talked my way out of several expensive options with these types of reviews.

I’m a fan of reviewers who bring their own opinions and biases to their reviews. Just because they have strong opinions doesn’t make their work useless. Quite the opposite. It also makes their reviews more fun to read and watch. Unless the reviewer is performing measurements to compare things - I tend to be wary of people who say that are unbiased and objective.

Do you agree? Do you like your reviewers to be biased? Who’s your favourite biased reviewer?