The reality is that anything you post, anywhere you post it, could become public whether it's private or not.
And that is the point I believe Stuart is making.
Indeed. However at this point I think pretty much ever comment is just arguing for the sake of arguing, and this thread has run it's course. Done.
As anyone the right to free speech ? You all give the man this much free advertising for a statement he made = you are not confident
Not confident in what? In my business? Hardly.
It is pretty clear that Mr. Jay was trashing Smugmug to bolster his own business venture. I was under the impression that Mr. Jay was a paid endorser of Smugmug, so that was highly questionable behavior for him.
I have no clue what you are getting at with the right to free speech. If you have confidence in constitutional law, you shouldn't. No one is saying Mr. Jay doesn't have the right to say whatever he wants. Furthermore, the first amendment applies to the government restricting speech, not other people questioning the wisdom in speaking it.
Just because it's the internet, doesn't mean it's public. You enter your credit card information on the internet from time to time, I'd wager; can I have that info? My point being, there is at least a slight hint of "behind closed doors" when you have that many barriers for entry. It may not be as "in private" as a bedroom closet, but it's still a private community by a few standards...
=Matt=
When you say something in a group of hundreds? thousands? tens of thousands? of photographers, it is not a private statement.
I think I can understand some of why the comments he made irritated you. It kind of comes off as a finger pointed at anyone who uses smugmug as being an amateur. I know, as do you that this is absolutely untrue.
I don't think that is it as much as it came across as backstabbing some really great people (SM staff) that treated him well and probably paid him well. If someone wants to disparage a group of photographers as diverse in talent and skill sets as Smugmug users, they are only making themself look like they are either ignorant or a liar. You simply cannot group the talent and skill level all SM users with a statement like that.
I assume you are as loyal to SM as I am and have recieved the sAme type of service. Another reason to be angry about the bashing.
Absolutely. I have found the SM staff to be fantastic when I have a question and in person at WPPI.
I was moderator here in "weddings" for a stint a couple years ago and so I knew many of the forum members who frequented "weddings" when DJ became AIR. I was hesitant to drink the koolaide and always thought that something didnt seem right. I felt like he was only here to increase his fold and sell his wares rather than truely elevating the photogs that frequent dgrin. But it didnt last long. And. He never truely made any REAL contributions here.
When I posted here the other day, I went back and looked at his individual posts. He disparaged a member or two and spent the rest of his time pimping ShowIt and trying to get SM users to integrate ShowIt into the SM website.
The simple truth is that DJ hasnt been an active member in this community for quite awhile. He has moved on.
So has Dgrin.
All for the better. I had been somewhat active years ago, but forgot my username/password, so just created this. I am more active elsewhere, but still come to DGrin to search for SM answers fairly frequently. This is a very good resource.
I think what shocked Thomas so much was the fact that DJ was not just another forum member, but an official artist-in-residence, who appeared to still be one even now / recently, when he made that comment about SmugMug.
As I am not, have never been, and will never be a part of that community, I don't really care. I can't violate the TOS as I never agreed to it. Posting this falls under fair use.
But good job of distracting from the real issue with something inconsequential. Screencapping just the pertinent part and posting it saves all the "He didn't really say that" nonsense that would have occurred had I just said "DJ said Smugmug is for amateurs!" and his loyal followers respond with "LIAR!"
It seems that the veil has been pulled away from the cult of personality that is David Jay and we are starting to see some of what is really behind that fantastic branding.
Hello everyone,
this is my first post here.
It will probably look like I am here for the benefit of my pubic dispute with David jay - that's not the case. It's already public enough. I stumbled across this site quite by accident as I was looking at SmugMug - and I was absolutely astonished to see the content of the screen grab posted earlier.
I'm going to say a few things though, and I really hope it doesn't offend anyone. This is not the "first post" I would have liked. but I suppose things can only get better. I do want to say that my involvement in any photography forum is twofold - to learn from people who are better than me - and to help anyone who is trying to improve at a lower level.
David jay posted some nonsense on his Facebook page the other day, stating that I had became the "go to guy" at OSP. That part was about the only grain of truth in the entire posting - so my point is, I like to be in a forum, both to give and to receive.
Thomas, you posted a link earlier that now doesn't work. It was my wedding images, and a complaint by David Jay, or a follower, resulted in Facebook removing the images, It's supposed to be that after 10 days they can be active again unless he has taken legal action - but still they are down. Strange huh, the man promoting the phrase "Shoot & Share" had my wedding images removed! Why? All the images are now online somewhere else, I won't post the link unless requested to do so.
Matthew - sorry, but I would bet my life that a "well crafted, private message" would make absolutely no difference. As his client, I sent him an email which he dismissed immediately. Unless you message makes him money ...
I don't like conflict - but I am deeply involved in a lot of it with David Jay. My wedding image issue could have been resolved with a simple, polite reply by him. It wasn't. Once my images were online he chose to go onto Facebook and tell his 11,000 plus followers that I had processed my images to make him look bad. Really? There is a definite "poor me, I need some sympathy" to his postings.
I read something the other day that he posted about Pictage banning him, on his birthday of all days, A 27 year old man (at the time) talking about is being "a bummer" that they would do such a thing on his birthday - wow. It seemed so "needy" to me, like the writing of a 14 year old. Just my opinion though.
A few days ago he made another Facebook post - told his 11,000 followers he "thought they should know the truth" Then he completely distorted everything, again stating that the images were either manipulated, or not his. On the suggestion of someone who posted, I offered him the opportunity to show the RAW images, and prove that his claims were true - silence.
Here is the thing - if I post the RAW images to prove my innocence, I open myself up to copyright infringement. So, all I can do is sit here and allow scurrilous remarks to remain on his FB page. You can guess what his followers are saying - I am being portrayed as the devil, and all because I told a man who took $6,5000 from me that I wasn't happy with my wedding photographs.
I am absolutely disgusted by the whole affair, and his handling of the truth. David jay went on to blame both his assistant and his brother for the poor images. What a guy, huh? He stated that his brother had "NEVER picked up a camera" before my wedding day - then why the hell was he shooting me and my bride???
As I look at what he has written I read so much contradiction. Posts stating that he shoots almost 100% on Manual - then The Photo System claiming that people shooting on manual are "clueless". Stuff like that, lots of it. Even a post that suggests using alcohol to smooth out things with a bride if need be.
I'm sorry - starting to rant now. I just wanted to post my agreement to what Thomas said, then it all started to flow. Maybe this will be deleted - that's cool if it comes to that.
I emailed SmugMug yesterday with a question - and I had a reply in something a very short period of time - can't check right now but it may have been around 15 minutes. Very impressive. Then three emails each passed between myself and someone called Doc. These emails were coming out from SmugMug at a little after 7am! On Easter Sunday! It didn't seem amateur to me. But then since David Jay has a product to sell, sowing a seed of doubt about SmugMug seems no to be typical of his methods.
I can't change what happened to me - I can't replace my wedding images. But I will pursue David jay for a complete removal of the untrue comments he has made about me, and I will make it my mission to educate anyone new photographer who will listen, the folly of following The Photo System. If I have to create a hundred website with better advice, I will. And let's be honest, the advice won't have to be that great to be better.
From here on in I hope that I can be a part of this community. Thanks for reading.
Dgrin is a place to discuss photography. This is not the place to air personal feuds, vendettas, etc. I have no idea what the dispute is about and I really don't give a damn. Dgrin doesn't have many rules but one is "Personal attacks will not be tolerated".
This is not the place for this personal dispute.
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Dgrin is a place to discuss photography. This is not the place to air personal feuds, vendettas, etc. I have no idea what the dispute is about and I really don't give a damn. Dgrin doesn't have many rules but one is "Personal attacks will not be tolerated".
This is not the place for this personal dispute.
Harry,
This whole thread has been a discussion about "David Jay" and the comments I have read don't seem all that positive. One could even say they were "personal attacks"
Based on my reading of this thread Hugh's comments don't seem out of line with the general comments. On that basis I might be inclined to give the new guy a break, and try a kinder more gentle approach by simply saying we really don't want this degenerate any further.
Wait and see what his future posts are like, then if necessary go with the stronger language.
This whole thread has been a discussion about "David Jay" and the comments I have read don't seem all that positive. One could even say they were "personal attacks"
Based on my reading of this thread Hugh's comments don't seem out of line with the general comments. On that basis I might be inclined to give the new guy a break, and try a kinder more gentle approach by simply saying we really don't want this degenerate any further.
Wait and see what his future posts are like, then if necessary go with the stronger language.
Sam
Sorry Sam but this thread was resurrected to attack Mr. Jay. I see nothing here about photography. All I see is a personal dispute. It ends now.
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Comments
Indeed. However at this point I think pretty much ever comment is just arguing for the sake of arguing, and this thread has run it's course. Done.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Not confident in what? In my business? Hardly.
It is pretty clear that Mr. Jay was trashing Smugmug to bolster his own business venture. I was under the impression that Mr. Jay was a paid endorser of Smugmug, so that was highly questionable behavior for him.
I have no clue what you are getting at with the right to free speech. If you have confidence in constitutional law, you shouldn't. No one is saying Mr. Jay doesn't have the right to say whatever he wants. Furthermore, the first amendment applies to the government restricting speech, not other people questioning the wisdom in speaking it.
When you say something in a group of hundreds? thousands? tens of thousands? of photographers, it is not a private statement.
I don't think that is it as much as it came across as backstabbing some really great people (SM staff) that treated him well and probably paid him well. If someone wants to disparage a group of photographers as diverse in talent and skill sets as Smugmug users, they are only making themself look like they are either ignorant or a liar. You simply cannot group the talent and skill level all SM users with a statement like that.
Absolutely. I have found the SM staff to be fantastic when I have a question and in person at WPPI.
When I posted here the other day, I went back and looked at his individual posts. He disparaged a member or two and spent the rest of his time pimping ShowIt and trying to get SM users to integrate ShowIt into the SM website.
All for the better. I had been somewhat active years ago, but forgot my username/password, so just created this. I am more active elsewhere, but still come to DGrin to search for SM answers fairly frequently. This is a very good resource.
Very well said.
Hello everyone,
this is my first post here.
It will probably look like I am here for the benefit of my pubic dispute with David jay - that's not the case. It's already public enough. I stumbled across this site quite by accident as I was looking at SmugMug - and I was absolutely astonished to see the content of the screen grab posted earlier.
I'm going to say a few things though, and I really hope it doesn't offend anyone. This is not the "first post" I would have liked. but I suppose things can only get better. I do want to say that my involvement in any photography forum is twofold - to learn from people who are better than me - and to help anyone who is trying to improve at a lower level.
David jay posted some nonsense on his Facebook page the other day, stating that I had became the "go to guy" at OSP. That part was about the only grain of truth in the entire posting - so my point is, I like to be in a forum, both to give and to receive.
Thomas, you posted a link earlier that now doesn't work. It was my wedding images, and a complaint by David Jay, or a follower, resulted in Facebook removing the images, It's supposed to be that after 10 days they can be active again unless he has taken legal action - but still they are down. Strange huh, the man promoting the phrase "Shoot & Share" had my wedding images removed! Why? All the images are now online somewhere else, I won't post the link unless requested to do so.
Matthew - sorry, but I would bet my life that a "well crafted, private message" would make absolutely no difference. As his client, I sent him an email which he dismissed immediately. Unless you message makes him money ...
I don't like conflict - but I am deeply involved in a lot of it with David Jay. My wedding image issue could have been resolved with a simple, polite reply by him. It wasn't. Once my images were online he chose to go onto Facebook and tell his 11,000 plus followers that I had processed my images to make him look bad. Really? There is a definite "poor me, I need some sympathy" to his postings.
I read something the other day that he posted about Pictage banning him, on his birthday of all days, A 27 year old man (at the time) talking about is being "a bummer" that they would do such a thing on his birthday - wow. It seemed so "needy" to me, like the writing of a 14 year old. Just my opinion though.
A few days ago he made another Facebook post - told his 11,000 followers he "thought they should know the truth" Then he completely distorted everything, again stating that the images were either manipulated, or not his. On the suggestion of someone who posted, I offered him the opportunity to show the RAW images, and prove that his claims were true - silence.
Here is the thing - if I post the RAW images to prove my innocence, I open myself up to copyright infringement. So, all I can do is sit here and allow scurrilous remarks to remain on his FB page. You can guess what his followers are saying - I am being portrayed as the devil, and all because I told a man who took $6,5000 from me that I wasn't happy with my wedding photographs.
I am absolutely disgusted by the whole affair, and his handling of the truth. David jay went on to blame both his assistant and his brother for the poor images. What a guy, huh? He stated that his brother had "NEVER picked up a camera" before my wedding day - then why the hell was he shooting me and my bride???
As I look at what he has written I read so much contradiction. Posts stating that he shoots almost 100% on Manual - then The Photo System claiming that people shooting on manual are "clueless". Stuff like that, lots of it. Even a post that suggests using alcohol to smooth out things with a bride if need be.
I'm sorry - starting to rant now. I just wanted to post my agreement to what Thomas said, then it all started to flow. Maybe this will be deleted - that's cool if it comes to that.
I emailed SmugMug yesterday with a question - and I had a reply in something a very short period of time - can't check right now but it may have been around 15 minutes. Very impressive. Then three emails each passed between myself and someone called Doc. These emails were coming out from SmugMug at a little after 7am! On Easter Sunday! It didn't seem amateur to me. But then since David Jay has a product to sell, sowing a seed of doubt about SmugMug seems no to be typical of his methods.
I can't change what happened to me - I can't replace my wedding images. But I will pursue David jay for a complete removal of the untrue comments he has made about me, and I will make it my mission to educate anyone new photographer who will listen, the folly of following The Photo System. If I have to create a hundred website with better advice, I will. And let's be honest, the advice won't have to be that great to be better.
From here on in I hope that I can be a part of this community. Thanks for reading.
Hugh Anderson.
This is not the place for this personal dispute.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Harry,
This whole thread has been a discussion about "David Jay" and the comments I have read don't seem all that positive. One could even say they were "personal attacks"
Based on my reading of this thread Hugh's comments don't seem out of line with the general comments. On that basis I might be inclined to give the new guy a break, and try a kinder more gentle approach by simply saying we really don't want this degenerate any further.
Wait and see what his future posts are like, then if necessary go with the stronger language.
Sam
Sorry Sam but this thread was resurrected to attack Mr. Jay. I see nothing here about photography. All I see is a personal dispute. It ends now.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"