Memory has deeply rose-tinted glasses; Gene's Whole Light Catalog was full of misinformed pet theories and subjective opinions declared as facts.
There is a fairly major issue with Rigid's "SAE J583" fog lamps, right off the bat: J583 contains specs for two different fog beams. There's the old "F" spec, been around since the 1950s, which allows completely pathetic performance in terms of width (not enough), light below horizontal (not enough) and light above horizontal (too much). Then there's the much newer "F3" spec, which both requires and permits much better performance. The beam has to be wider, there has to be (and can be) more light below horizontal, and less light is allowed above horizontal. So Rigid shouting about this lamp being "compliant with SAE J583" sounds all nice and official, but leaves out important info. And if you look on their website, you'll find they've posted photos that make it very difficult to read the relevant part of the lens markings. Difficult, but not impossible; it reads "SAE F", not "SAE F3", so for some reason they designed and engineered this lamp to the prehistoric spec instead of the new one.
Then, elsewhere in their promotional verbiage for these lamps, they call them "long-range high-intensity lights", which is the opposite of an accurate description of a fog lamp. It's like saying a watermelon is a citrus fruit about 3 to 4 inches in diameter, orange in color.
Next: white LEDs with a yellow lens. OK, maybe the light color falls within the selective yellow boundary, but this is an inefficient way of getting there. Selective yellow LED emitters exist, so why not use them?
Then there are images like
this one. Give me a break...those aren't being used as fog lamps, they're up at headlamp height being used as "Me me me, look at me, my truck is big and expensive and I am too cool for school" lights. Which doesn't really say anything about the lights themselves, but is further evidence that Rigid will say/show anything, even if it's not really quite in line with the truth. Why fib around like this? Make a good product instead; it doesn't cost more, then the product stands and sells on its merits.
So after all that, are these any good? I don't have data, and given Rigid's BS-heavy approach, I don't think it's worth spending the money to obtain data. To answer your question, one gets an objective review by studying objective data. That's the kind obtained by putting the lamp on a photogoniometer and measuring exactly what it does. Photos won't cut it, and neither will any number of internet "reviews"...with or without rippin' guitar noise in the background.