Art Director Wants Me to Email Her

Discussion in 'Business of Photography' started by george_jonathan, Jul 24, 2013.

  1. Hi PN memebers!I need some serious help. So long story short, I met the art director from the Bergamot Station in Santa Monica California and she wants me email her a quick five images to get critiqued and perhaps get considered for a gallery. What I need help in, is wording this email. Any help is good help and thank you guys!
     
  2. George, you can find sample replies online, just Google it.
    More to the point, you appear to be posting images that don't belong to you. Just make sure you don't send the art director and take credit for pictures you didn't take.
    For example you claim these to be yours in your portfolio here and on Flickr:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/annabelrae/5371687922/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrefolkedal/4787264762/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/niko_villegas/3310850425/
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=1047728
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/george_briseno/
     
  3. "I met the art director from the Bergamot Station in Santa Monica California and she wants me email her a quick five images to get critiqued and perhaps get considered for a gallery."
    Really? This is their official policy:
    http://www.bergamotstation.com/learn.php
    "Can I send you my portfolio, exhibit my art, or get represented?
    Submissions must be made directly to an individual gallery. Bergamot Station is not a gallery and does not represent any artists. DO NOT EMAIL asking about having a show or with an attachment of your work. ALL MATERIAL sent regarding these issues is DELETED and will not be responded to."​
     
  4. Posting images that don't belong to you is a violation of Photo.net's Terms of Use and grounds for closing your account.
    Care to tell us what's going on before that happens?
     
  5. George, you have bigger problems than crafting a letter right now.

    Your website: http://www.georgejphoto.com seems to be full of photos that you didn't shoot. This is definitely copyright
    infringement and probably fraud as well.

    I would stop whatever you are doing—right NOW—and remove images that are not yours from your website, your Flickr
    account, and anywhere else you've been promoting yourself with other people's work.

    You should also make sure you're honest on the about page ( http://www.georgejphoto.com/?page_id=95 ). Are you really
    asking us how to write to a simple letter to an art director when this line is in your bio:

    "Coming from a background of producing high quality work for Nike, Billboard, and many other editorial magazines."

    Especially considering a couple months ago you were searching for a good lighting kit for a beginner:
    http://www.photo.net/photography-lighting-equipment-techniques-forum/00bax9

    It stretches credulity. You can't get away with this today with google and especially google images. You've just about ruined
    your online reputation with this thread.
     
  6. Do you not understand that there are people in this field who actually work towards their success and make a name for themselves without STEALING from other photographers and LYING about their experience to their clients? Being a THIEF does not make you a photographer. You should be ASHAMED of yourself.
     
  7. Well, I know several owners and directors at Bergamont Station. Perhaps it would save you the trouble of drafting a cover letter if I wrote them a note introducing them to "your" work.
     
  8. George,
    Please listen to all of the above. You don't want to end up featured here
    http://stopstealingphotos.tumblr.com/

    And have your name, when searched, land people on a copyright infringer outing blog.

    Be honest from here on out. Change those bios and abouts to reflect you and your photography in an more honest light. Success means
    nothing if your integrity is not kept intact.
     
  9. Good advice, Melinda, and it appears George is heeding to lessons learned. He has removed his portfolio on PN and cleaned up his Flickr site. His homepage still needs some work, though:
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/?udt_portfolio=180
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/?udt_portfolio=tunn-composition
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/?udt_portfolio=jackobs-identity
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/?udt_portfolio=photoshoot-milan
    Let's also hope he conducts himself accordingly on Model Mayhem:
    http://www.modelmayhem.com/2207853
    We should also be more collectively vigilant so we're not made fools of, and our helpful nature isn't abused:
    http://www.photo.net/business-photography-forum/00beIO
     
  10. Don't forget your Facebook George.
    Be sure to remove ALL the stolen works, even the ones you think we and others didn't see or notice. Go ahead and read through that blog I linked above. Most times the offenders only remove the work of others, that were linked and proven to be stolen, or only from the online marketing that has been mentioned, hoping that it will go unnoticed, but when you have already been found out, you can be pretty darn sure nothing with in your online presence will be left unnoticed. Be sure to go through ALL your albums and profiles. I know it may seem a daunting task when there are so many stolen works, and so many sites that you have used for marketing your business, and Ive heard (from reading some replies on the Photostealers blog) that sometimes it's hard to remember where and which ones are stolen from someone else and not taken by you. So try to think hard... "do I have a linkden account, google plus, twitter, etc? Did I advertise on Craig's list, or any other online service? when you go through your albums just ask yourself "Do I know this Subject/person. Was I there? Am I the one that clicked that shutter?". If the answer is "no" then more than likely it doesn't belong to you and should be removed. Just adding more images you actually made yourself to any online port, won't hide the stolen work, or make it any less difficult for others to find.


    https://www.facebook.com/GeorgeJonathanPhotography/photos_stream

    Just for an example. This one. There are others, but I just thought Id give you a head start.
    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...179765.-2207520000.1374762660.&type=3&theater



    Just to let you know,
    Photo.net is read by many many people. Lots of people that don't regularly post. I only subscribe to this very business forum because I'm interested in the business side of things right now and like to learn from people's questions on the subject. I also search questions I have, that have been asked by others, and learn that way as well. I guess you could say Im a lurker. I'm one in hundreds at least. Your behavior is simply not tolerated. Taking other people's work, is pretty much the lowest thing a photographer/artist could ever do.
    Checking this thread, and seeing if you cleaned up was one of the first things on my mind today. I guess by telling you this, I'm hoping to try to get you to understand how your actions deeply affect others, even if they aren't the ones who's work was stolen by you. Again,
    Please clean things up properly, and never ever do this again.
     
  11. No, not my blog but I follow it, and use it when necessary (can't get over how very often I run into thievery just by talking on online forums and looking for wonderful photography and researching what interests me. It's crazy!) . A few years ago I ran into a thief in business that would not comply after I contacted them, even after I explained the law to her she found nothing at all wrong with it. "There has to be more that I can do. What can I do to make them stop?" I didn't know how to source, or find original owners, or what to do legally to get them to stop and take the stolen work down. So I googled and found out there was a group called PACT (photographers against copyright infringement). They were a huge help! I learned what to do, to better help the owners of the stolen content, learned how to source, screen shot affectively, and I keep an eye out for new blogs and groups that handle this sort of thing as they pop up.
    https://www.facebook.com/supportpact
    There was also a blog called Little photography sleuth that helped find and contact original owners and publicly out stubborn theives.
    Unfortunately, both the blogs above have been successfully taken down by thieves claiming that by publicly sourcing and proving their work is stolen from others the blogs/pages are "Internet bullies" and that they should have been contacted privately about the matter and not blogged and publicly disscussed. I never heard of any public business out there where people were not allowed to discuss their business publicly. Somehow photography businesses are exempt from criticism or anyone complaining of shoddy products or business practices, in some people's minds. Or the blog admins and facebook admins just get tired of all the complaining, and figure it's easier to just shut them down instead of doing the right thing. Most, if not all cases start out with private contact or within a forum such as this with the offender. When it doesn't prove to be productive, and they still don't comply, what do you do? So far photostealers has had more success. They screen shot and save all conversations and contact with the thieves I believe, and this helps when the whole "bully" ("I'm the victim! This is slander! I'm contacting the FBI! I'm getting your blog taken down!") card gets played. Hopefully they remain dilligent with whatever it is they do to protect themselves from being taken down. We need people like this willing to stand up for what's right and do what needs to be done legally to put a stop to it.
     
  12. why hasn't Mr. Jonathan's photo.net account been closed?
     
  13. It really is sad how many people think they can get away with this sort of thing.. most of them never apologize to any of the photographers they stole from, and it's even sadder that most of them can't ever admit that they did anything wrong.. and continue to lie, steal, erase watermarks from images that aren't their own, etc. What's even worse is that once they're outed, most of them don't stop.. they just change their name, get a new website to fill with stolen work, etc. I've been following the PhotoStealers Tumblr account for awhile now, and the excuses some of these people come up with are unbelievable.
    • "They're stock images that represent what my work will look like."
    • "My website came with those pictures on it already."
    • "My graphic designer did it."
    • "All 50 of those photographers must have stolen from me!"
    • "I never said those photographs all over my website, Facebook page, etc. were my actual pictures.. my potential clients should know what my photographs will look like."
    What's your excuse, George?
     
  14. Rob, I'm not detecting any signs of plagiarism between the two pages. The similarities are in concepts which is generic in the process of wedding photography.
    If it matters, the two links are dated approximately 4 years apart with your link being the newer, June 2012 when the first blog was posted.
     
  15. [[Rob, I'm not detecting any signs of plagiarism between the two pages]]
    If you put them up side-by-side, there is more than "similarities" there.
    One example, the last line:

    " At the end of the night, we will always check in with you to say our goodbyes and congratulate you on the awesomeness of your wedding!"
    vs
    "We also want to say our goodbyes and congratulate you on a wedding well done!"
    Either both photographers pulled from the same basic template and changed a few words slightly, or one took the text from another and re-wrote some parts.
    [[If it matters, the two links are dated approximately 4 years apart with your link being the newer, June 2012 when the first blog was posted.]]
    I don't see how the dates matter.
     
  16. Thank you so much George for attempting to clean up. There are a few more sites that may need your attention
    http://georgejphoto.tumblr.com/
    http://flickeflu.com/photos/26548281@N08
    http://gbphila11.wix.com/gjphoto#!
    You also have a stolen image in your slide show on your main web page
    http://www.georgejphoto.com
    Here's the original
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/francescasemenza/6539436391/in/photostream/
    Here's another few that also need to be taken down from your sites
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/#/?udt_portfolio=tunn-composition
    http://www.up-her.com/photo-5241/seyrantepe-istanbul-2008-by-yagmur-kizilok/
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/#/?udt_portfolio=photoshoot-milan
    http://www.dripbook.com/Igortermenon/photography-portfolio/unpublished-work/
     
  17. I think you can get into a little bit of trouble with this series of shots as well. Not to mention making such a false claim "Coming from a background of producing high quality work for Nike, Billboard, and many other editorial magazines." looks a little ridiculous, and is very misleading and fraudulant
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/#/?udt_portfolio=jackobs-identity
    http://help-en-us.nike.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/16379/p/4099
    I went ahead and highlighted the parts that pertain to your situation
    Intellectual Property
    All intellectual property on the Platform (except for User Generated Content) is owned by NIKE or its licensors, which includes materials protected by copyright, trademark, or patent laws. All trademarks, service marks and trade names (e.g., the NIKE name and the Swoosh design) are owned, registered and/or licensed by NIKE. All content on the Platform (except for User Generated Content), including but not limited to text, software, scripts, code, designs, graphics, photos, sounds, music, videos, applications, interactive features and all other content ("Content") is a collective work under the United States and other copyright laws and is the proprietary property of NIKE; All rights reserved.
    Platform Use Restrictions
    You may use the Content only for your own non-commercial use to participate in the Platform or to place an order or purchase NIKE products. You agree not to change or delete any ownership notices from materials downloaded or printed from the Platform. You agree not to modify, copy, translate, broadcast, perform, display, distribute, frame, reproduce, republish, download, display, post, transmit or sell any Intellectual Property or Content appearing on the Platform, including User Generated Content (defined below), without NIKE's prior written consent, unless it is your own User Generated Content that you legally post on the Platform. You agree not to use any data mining, robots, scraping or similar data gathering methods. Nothing in these Terms of Use shall be interpreted as granting any license of intellectual property rights to you.
     
  18. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    "why hasn't Mr. Jonathan's photo.net account been closed?"​
    I believe it has been.
     
  19. Too bad, in a way. He is apparently attempting to rehabilitate himself.
     
  20. "why hasn't Mr. Jonathan's photo.net account been closed?"
    "I believe it has been."
    good-thanks William. cb
     
  21. Rob (and others), the "Your Wedding Day" jargon was stolen from me. Another photographer directed me to this forum. I wrote it myself for my site and it sucks to know that someone else copied it word for word. The "About" section is also paraphrased, nearly identically to mine: http://lovemedophotography.com/about.html
    Overall it feels very defeating finding things of yours copied or claimed as someone else's.
     
  22. Welcome, Carina. It does suck to have your writing plagiarized and certainly constitutes unwelcome flattery.
    Hope you'll stick around photo.net; we're mostly a friendly bunch. :)
     
  23. Carina,
    Thanks for commenting. Welcome to Photo.net, though I wish it were under better circumstances.
     
  24. This raises a somewhat peripheral issue t that I don't know if we have addressed and probably should be a separate query. From time to time my son and I will collaborate on a shot -- recently a couple of thousand of them. He is in the military and we recently were together on his ship and shot about 3000 images together and he gave me another 20 thousand images from his recent deployment to process, since he does not have access to PS or LR on his ship, though has much more Nikon equipment than I do. We do share common bodies and have some lenses in common. When shooting together we are collaborating on composition, passing cameras back and forth, acting behind and as assistants for each other etc. How would Photo.net have those shots credited?
     
  25. Question:
    If his PN account has been removed, does this mean he can no longer see the replies in this thread?
    I'm wondering if I should give him the benefit of the doubt as far as why he hasn't removed ALL stolen content from ALL his ports and pages. I'm growing impatient. I realize it should have been done regardless, and without us walking him through it, but... He's just a kid (I don't mean that in a derogatory way), and time is on his side. If he wants to learn how to photograph and someday be a very good and respected photographer, he could possibly achieve it, but... Only if he learns from this, and completely cleans up the mess he created. He still has a site out there with several stolen images that he has already taken down elsewhere.
    http://gbphila11.wix.com/gjphoto#!
    And 3 stolen images remain on this site
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/
    Depending on the answer you all give me, I may just give the go ahead for Photostealers to post about him. I just don't want to jump the gun, because he seems to want to clean up and do the right thing.
     
  26. If his PN account has been removed, does this mean he can no longer see the replies in this thread?
    No, it does not mean he can no longer see the replies--anyone can read all of the thread without logging in--although if he had set the thread to send him replies automatically, presumably that ceased.
    [H]e seems to want to clean up and do the right thing.
    Please pardon my cynicism, but it seems more likely that he has removed many stolen images because the perceived likely negative consequences to himself personally and/or his business outweigh the perceived likely benefits of keeping them there. Offering to return the bank's money after the dye bomb explodes and the cop grabs your arm isn't likely to be motivated by a desire to do the right thing. I hope I'm wrong--but I bet I'm right.
     
  27. Dave, I believe you are right. After re sourcing all the stolen images that are still up, I found out he actually favorited many (if not all) of the artists on flickr before stealing from them. I also took the time to re read his abouts and bios, look at his "work" again, and just reevaluate altogether, and...George lacks character (to put it as nicely as possible). He is not a photographer, and I don't believe he has what it takes to ever become one. Photostealers has been contacted and given what they need. The ball is in their court now, unless George makes some changes in the mean time. At the very least he will be put on the "watch list" as a repeat offender risk. If he does it again, or keeps things as they are he will get blasted for sure. He may even be facing some fines, and legal problems at this point. I just don't get it. I don't get it at all.
     
  28. George is not a photographer. He is a fraud who deserves any fines and legal problems that come his way. He asked for this the second he started posting photographs that he did not take on his websites and claiming them as his own. He's still asking for it by leaving these stolen photographs up. You can't lie and steal your way to the top. The truth will eventually come out.. if it's not someone catching him in his lies, it's going to be by someone who hired this photographer with "a background for producing high quality work" to capture an important moment in their life and got terrible photographs in return.
    The only way to gain experience as a photographer is to BE a photographer.
     
  29. Your right about the one in the slide show, and these two as well
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/#/?udt_portfolio=photoshoot-milan
    One of his "High school seniors" can be found here
    http://www.dripbook.com/Igortermenon/photography-portfolio/unpublished-work/ (he stole a few from this photographer)
    Used to be in an album called "Fine art" but, he changed the label to "High School Seniors"
    http://www.georgejphoto.com/#/?udt_portfolio=tunn-composition
    original here
    http://www.up-her.com/photo-5241/seyrantepe-istanbul-2008-by-yagmur-kizilok/
    and then there is his other site with numerous stolen works. I think this site was left completely untouched
    http://gbphila11.wix.com/gjphoto#!
    Some of the Originals (mostly found through his favorites on flickr)
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/58668227@N02/6539436391
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/30616213@N04/6144096007/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/karrah_kobus/6884291369/in/photostream/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/salutemyshorts/3425734877/in/faves-george_briseno/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/salutemyshorts/3594092338/in/faves-george_briseno/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/salutemyshorts/3593654460/in/faves-george_briseno/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/marisachafetzphoto/7897441070/in/faves-george_briseno/
    It also looks as though his "business" used to be called "George Briseno Photography" at one point. He most likely got caught stealing and had to change his name. He's probably in the process of doing it again. Who knows?
     
  30. I took what I thought would be a quick look at this thread, and then could not stop reading due to the investigative work of Melinda. Wow, what a skill you have for finding and matching images from web sites around the world. I am impressed. If you're not already, you ought to be earning money from your web sleuthing skills.
     
  31. John,
    Hard to tell if you are being sarcastic or not, but...
    No, its not hard or time consuming at all. Especially when others who posted before me were already on the ball sourcing
    and linking. It takes longer to write a post and submit it here at photo.net, then it does to find where photographs are on
    the net. Using google image search is really easy, just drag and drop, and a lot were found just by having a quick scroll
    through George's Flickr favorites. I'd gladly get paid to do it, but I don't think anyone would pay me to do something they
    could easily do themselves if they needed/wanted to stop an infringer. Besides I wouldn't want to run into George's
    everyday multiple times a day, I think it would get to me too much. I'd become jaded, and disgruntled for sure. I'd much
    rather spend my free time shooting, learning, reading, and looking at wonderful photography made by legitimate, talented,
    honest photographers. I'm still kind of shocked that this even happened here at photo.net within this forum. It's the last
    place I would ever think of running into this sort of thing.
     
  32. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    "I'm still kind of shocked that this even happened here at photo.net within this forum. It's the last place I would ever think of running into this sort of thing."​
    It should not be a shock to you.
    Firstly, anyone can become a member at Photo.net, it is a public forum - there is not a background search to ensure members are suitable.
    Secondly, it occurs to me that Photo.net managed this situation with due diligence and also promptly, once the facts were apparent and clear cut.
    Rather, it is the commentaries, not from the OP: but by other Photo.net members which is keeping this thread active and uncovering more sample images.

    So it appears obvious that it is members, other than the OP, who see value in continuing this particular conversation.
    WW
     
  33. "So it appears obvious that it is members, other than the OP, who see value in continuing this particular conversation."
    Yes, and I think the value is in keeping with site rules and maintaining an honest and mutually helpful community.

    George's Flickr images have been deleted. He has been banned from p.net and ModelMayhem. His Facebook account has been removed all likely as a direct consequence of his foolish self-serving post here.

    He was also given the benefit of a doubt by way of a few days of grace period to explain himself, and things might have turned out differently had he come clean immediately and did what was necessary to redeem himself. He chose not to.

    No one likes to be the site policeman unless tasked to do so, but it's in our collective interest to expose those who abuse the community for purposes of self-interest. It would be a good outcome if this thread served to prompt another would-be-George to reconsider their conduct.
     
  34. What concerns me the most is the tone of the conversation and the almost apologetic fashion in which some photo.net
    members have gone out of their way to forgive this person. Some of you have offered advice on how to circumvent the
    law and punishment. I'm all for repent but seriously folks! Let the guy realize what he's done and pay for it. It almost
    seems as if some members feel sorry for this guy and want to help him overcome his attempt to cheat and lie to make
    money. He is either a repeat offender or a young novice and neither should be allowed here I think.

    I await the bashing of the masses with a clear mind.
     
  35. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    "He is either a repeat offender or a young novice and neither should be allowed here I think."​
    I don't feel sorry for the OP - BUT:
    There is not ANY reason why a person simple because they are a 'young novice' should not join and be welcomed to and assisted by the Photonet Community.
    WW
     

Share This Page