Lives in United States Carlsbad, CA, United States
Works as a Photo Editor
Has a website at http://www.jphotog.com
Joined on Apr 6, 2003
About me:

Photo Editor for the Gemological Institute of America. If you shoot gems - why haven't
you called me? (Or mines and factories, and other stuff related to gem/jewelry industry.)
I use a 1Ds Mark II at work, but thinking about getting a D200 or D2X for myself.


Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Papi61: Why would GoPro be afraid of a cheap knockoff? Call me when Xiaomi releases something capable of taking 4K video and/or 240 fps @ FHD.

Oh, and BTW, stop with the thinly-veiled anti-Chinese racism: every tech company steals ideas from others. You don't think Apple invented the phablet, now did they?

Thinly-veiled anti-Chinese racism? Sorry, the truth is they are very well practiced copycats. Has nothing to do with racism to point out the truth.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 00:41 UTC

"...perhaps best known for copying Apple obsequiously, right down to presentation slides with "One More Thing" on them...

There. Fixed that for ya.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 00:39 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Couscousdelight: usb2 in 2015 ?
Seriously Nikon ?

As he should be. Or how about WIFI that's quite the sick joke. It only works with mobile devices to upload to social networks? Good thing that has a 100 image buffer. Facebook needs to see everything I see!

I'm done with Nikon. They are clueless. I should turn my NPS card in at renewal time.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2015 at 21:22 UTC
In reply to:

Leo "Zoom": If they seek for truth - then it is impossible. Even straight from the camera picture can lie - it can be staged, can be framed to hide unwanted things, etc. IMO contests should seek evaluate the photos, not the event behind them. That's why manipulation shouldn't be disqualified.

The camera never lies. But photographers do.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 17:49 UTC
In reply to:

papa natas: One should NEVER take part or send images to contests.
One will only gather sour grapes, since ONE has no idea of the state of mind of the so called judge panel. That jury is generally composed by very instable geeks, fragile of mind people. Must of them are veggies, believe in reincarnation, were exposed to abuse during childhood, harbor social grudges, hurry home before dark, use their lunch hour to go home and use THEIR bathroom, have erratic social skills, hold the highest score of Face book friends, live at mom's or she comes to do the weekly cooking and cleaning, are unequivocally convinced that sex is a human aberration (not a celebration, like yours truly)..Get the picture? So...Don't send them your pictures!!!
What was LAB WORK when we used film to record images, is now called EDITING. What was ART WORK back then, is now called IMAGE MANIPULATION.
Go figure where the fine line is, and PLEASE...DEFINE IT, Geeks!!

And people shouldn't comment when under the influence of hallucinogenic drugs, either.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 17:48 UTC
In reply to:

Mr Birk: Sounds like the world of the press is somewhat lacking behind the rest of the world.

Photos should underline the point of the written story, preferably in an artistic and gripping fashion.

Who cares if its has been altered with, so long as the key parts of the picture is relatively unaltered.

Actually, stories ought to fill in the holes that the photos don't cover.

How about them Apples, word herder? :)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 17:47 UTC
In reply to:

Thomas Traub: it is very easy to solve this problem: the NPPA should discuss what is allowed an what not an how long a photo is a photo made by a photographer or a picture is a picture that is based on a photo and changed on a computer.

My personal view is, that everything you could have done in a darkroom to develop a photo should be allowed. Real Photoshop-Work to change the content should not be allowed.

Changing the content of a photo is bad in the sense of a photography or documentation (not as "art" - then it should be allowed).

Maybe the can determin, if they want an photo-contest or an art-contest.....

I myself have been an NPPA official. I was a member for over 15 years. I used to help with the Pictures of the Year contest when they held it in conjunction with the University of Missouri-Colombia J-School (which created the contest in the first place).

And they have been saying that for as long as the contest existed.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 17:45 UTC
In reply to:

Deardorff: Have those at NPPA ever criticized Eugene Smith for his manipulations presented as reality?


Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 17:43 UTC
In reply to:

arrr: These dinosaurs need to evolve, many digital effects can be applied in camera at the time of exposure. It's no different than smacking a filter in front of your lens. Cloning out a distracting element shouldn't be an issue either. This is something any talented printer could have done for you in their darkroom. Photoshop aint cheating baby... it's part of the camera.

Photography Purists need to go back to shooting film and processing it a Walmart.

Oh please, that argument has been around for more than 50 years. Talk about dinosaurs. The point is that journalism can never be allowed to change the facts of a photo. It's not about an adjustment to tone or color, white balance or those kinds of things. Dodging and burning and color correction has been acceptable for decades in photojournalism. What is not allowed is changing the content of the photo. Because once you start down that path, then everything is suspect.

As the wise man once said, photos never lie, but photographers do. If you can't comprehend that principle, it's okay. If you don't want to follow such principles, that's cool too. Just call yourself an artist, or a surrealist. But don't label yourself a photojournalist, because you obviously don't grok the principles on which that profession relies. Once your credibility is shot (Ask Brian Willians.) it's not recoverable.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 17:40 UTC

No. 8 is just bad. Horrid composition. Crop it!

There are a few that are just killer. The winner's photo reminds me of the work of Canadian photographer Freeman Patterson.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 21, 2015 at 16:26 UTC as 31st comment | 4 replies
On Adobe celebrates 25 years of Photoshop article (356 comments in total)

They forgot the icon where the knife is in the customer's back due to the mismanagement of the CEO from marketing taking over from the engineer CEOs when Photoshop was loved and respected.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 19, 2015 at 19:23 UTC as 46th comment
On Astropad turns iPad into drawing tablet for Mac post (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

EssexAsh: "Astropad turns THE iPad into A drawing tablet for THE Mac"

The continued mangling of the language carries unabated. You would think people who claim to be journalists would have the basic understanding of grammar.

Apparently some grammar Nazis don't know about implied words?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 18, 2015 at 20:49 UTC
On Pro DSLRs, Pro Photographers article (126 comments in total)
In reply to:

Manic Tuesday: .
with all due respect anyone standing there with a dslr camera at his face for the duration of the game would have taken identical shots. pro means merely that they make living with it, not that its actually good. taxi drivers are also pros, arent they? yet i dont think anyone would claim that they drive better than a person who does not make a living driving a car. same thing with photography. so pls get over the defiled 'pro' abreviation.

That's absolute nonsense. I've been on the sidelines of many sporting events alongside many pros, including the wire services and Sports Illustrated. And nobody gets identical results. Every photographer has their own take on things.

It's not being a pro that makes you stand out. It's the vision you have for what the photo can be. The word amateur comes from the word armor. It's a love for doing it, not for the money. Many amateurs are as good or better than many pros. I've know a lot of pros who are not very good. How do they make a living? Because there's a lot of bosses and clients who are not good judges of photography.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 10, 2013 at 03:04 UTC
On Pro DSLRs, Pro Photographers article (126 comments in total)
In reply to:

Yiotis: I can take those photos anytime with an Iphone...

Who needs those bulky cameras and lenses.

Right, and give me a knife and a fork and I can do brain surgery.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 10, 2013 at 02:58 UTC
On Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction article (1852 comments in total)

Absolute bunk. Photoshop is a modular piece of software, they do not have to keep two code bases. They could simply add a subscription-checking plug-in to the subscription version.

There's no reason they can't give perpetual license owners the same updates. They simply choose not to because they are trying to make Wall Street happy with a more consistent revenue stream. They don't care about users any more. They only care about the bottom line.

As for Lightroom, they talk about how those who get it via subscription will get more features. That's exactly what they said about Photoshop last year. Sad to know I was such a supporter of Adobe for years. Now I'm rewarded with paying more for Photoshop.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2013 at 04:12 UTC as 66th comment

I dumped Instagram when Facebook bought it.

Like people thought AOL was the Internet, so now people who will like this phone THINK Facebook is the Internet.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2013 at 01:07 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

BruceBorowski: Than the article is an outright blatant lie for you just informed us ( jcmarfilph) .......it was a mass shot of 50 couples all at once............... This is just the kind of info-mercial we can come to expect of a company who uses slave labor and false advertising to push their over-rated cheap chinese products on us. So apple will NOT shoot 50 weddings in one day then...... they will shoot 50 couples all at once in a mass wedding group photo session which will last aprox. 30 seconds to one minute. Thanks for clearing that up. Funny how plain , mundane and trivial it is now eh. So this was all spin doctored as I expected. That's more what we expected from apple a $20,000,00 spin on the title of an article to drum up interest on a $5 chinese produced piece of .C**P

Okay, so tell me one phone that is morally or ethically, or economically superior to the iPhone.

You can't because of all the tech companies out there, only Apple is doing something about worker conditions. All the rest of the manufacturers are cowering in the dark, hoping people don't notice they aren't doing what Apple is doing to stop worker abuse in their supply chains. Apple even recently fired one of their major manufacturers for not following their guidelines.

Alas, some people's lack of regard for the truth is seriously crippled by blind hatred. Not to mention an astoundingly poor discernment of quality manufacturing.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 18, 2013 at 15:50 UTC
In reply to:

Mike Walters: Don't know what all the fuss is about. Mobile photography has been around for years. My DSLR is mobile, compact cameras are mobile, phones with cameras are mobile.

It would take courage if the photographer was not a big name photographer, was not published and was trying to make a business out of wedding photography.

Its all about using the right tools for the job. Nothing wrong with using a phone if thats what you decide is the right tool for the job. I am pretty sure that 99.9% of wedding photographers wouldnt take the chance of using a mobile phone as their only tool to photograph a wedding, which just about says it all I think.

One of the all-time greats of photography, Andre Kertesz, used to have to lie to editors about his camera. If he told them he used a Leica, they would not give him work. So he would print at home and then bring the prints in. They couldn't tell the difference. Cartier-Bresson even remarked "Kertesz taught us how to see." Just goes to show what great work must have been lost over the years because of prejudice, ignorance and convention.

As a D800 user professionally, I do love boat loads of data. But I also love my point & shoot and my iPhone when the Nikon is just too big and bulky to pull out and get a quick shot of the 13 week old grand baby.

As for ignorance and prejudice, I see the anti-Apple contingent just can't seem to pass on an opportunity to vent their spleens.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 18, 2013 at 15:36 UTC

Of course subscriptions are growing with the draconian rules. No more skipping upgrades or you're paying full price. For all those with 5.0 or earlier when subscriptions started.

The hostility towards Adobe's customer-unfriendly policies seems to be increasing even more. I dropped owning the Creative Suite. Now it's Lightroom and Photoshop CS6. As a pro I have to have the latter. So I paid for the upgrade for the boxed version which is way cheaper. I'd like to have Acrobat Pro, but it would be cheaper to pay $50 a month for everything. And Acrobat Pro X is such a mess of a program in terms of usability that I just can't justify paying for it.

Ily I do have the creative Suite at work, so I have access to the programs. But no longer at home.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2012 at 13:58 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

tinpusher: Quite useless really.

Only the smallest of the bags is suitable for low cost operators in Europe and I need provision for cables , chargers , sat navs plus at least one change of clothes and a wash kit.
Since 2008 I've used an Antler Back Pack with wheels and that's got me around the Globe a couple of times and through the States 3 times a year.
My cameras are packed inside it in a Domke bag.

Ipads are always removed for checking.

IPads do not need to be removed for checking in the US. I have never needed to. I used to love Domke bags. But they don't last like they used to. Abd they get misshapen too quickly. The bottom bends too easily. I used them for 20 years. Now I only use them to carry extra gear downstairs to the studio.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2012 at 10:52 UTC
Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »