Jump to content

michael gordon httpwww

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    182

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by michael gordon httpwww

    Bad Experience with Focus Magazine

    in Business of Photography

    Posted

    <i>My question is why didn't you ever try the first e-mail address listed on the contact us list? david@focusmag.info?</i>

    <p>

    We've already gone over this. I emailed every address. And you conveniently neglected to get my emails *until* I emailed the URL of the LF Forum thread. You don't have the time or interest to respond to photographer/customers, but you made time to try and defend yourself in public.

    <p>

    <i>The only working one is submissions@focusmag.info which I already explained that I missed your first e-mail.</i>

    <p>

    Then get your website updated. I also sent to sales@..... Are you suggesting that you provide potential advertisers with an incorrect email address? I do not believe you for a second.

    <p>

    <i>I did not leave a message as I figured I would try you back later in the day.</i>

    <p>

    More unprofessional conduct. My voice mail to you asked you to call me immediately. Most people leave messages when they return calls. Nice try.

    <p>

    <i>Michael, I have presented to you facts. NO portfolios are returned before 12 weeks.</i>

    <p>

    Then ONCE AGAIN, this should have been made absolutely clear in your April call for submissions. That is what I responded to, and it says nothing of the sort. Why is it that you ignore the reponses for which you have no good answer? Once again, "<i>along with shipping materials for us to promptly return your prints after we've reviewed them".</i> Now quit evading the question; How is nine weeks a "prompt" return?

    <p>

    <i>Let me ask you something. You probably submitted your photography to me from the March/April issue, with Arnold Newman's Picasso on the cover. What did you think of the issue?</I>

    <p>

    Irrelevant, and nice try on trying to sidetrack people who are following this thread

    <p>

    <i>If I had some extra room in this September issue (144 pages, biggest issue yet) and I wanted to publish your photography at no cost to you (no advertising follow-up though as the other photographers get) would you tell me you didn't want me to publish your photography because of this stupid mis-understanding we've had?</i>

    <p>

    Yes, you are not permitted to publish my work. You are not worthy, and this thread and the LF thread have shown that.

    <p>

    <i>We're a new magazine,</I>

    <p>

    That is no excuse for your conduct.

    <p>

    <i>Okay, I admit it, it would be great if I could return your photography tomorrow, but I can't...much too much to do </I>

    <p>

    You know, you just have to win here, don't you? Others have made suggestions about how you can rectify this, and you just cannot do it. You've wasted who knows how long trying to defend yourself from facts, but you can't drive up to a USPS drop box and drop my Priority mailer?

    <p>

    <i>I can't help it if you didn't read the website, and I can't help it if I didn't receive your e-mails...</i>

    <p>

    Why would I read your website? My point of contact was your April issue. The call for submissions did not refer me to your website. As stated in the LF forum, I followed your submission instructions to the T, and you have not honored your written and published word regarding a "prompt" return of my work. And the delay is not what started this: it's your lack of integrity, ethics, and unwillingness to accept responsibility for this mess you created.

    <p>

    <i>we both should have done better. You should have read the website for information on the Photographer Marketing Package and how soon your prints would be returned</i>

    <p>

    No, YOU should have done better. Please read the above. Your April call for submissions was all-inclusive. Why would I have needed to visit your website?

    <p>

    <i>and I should have seen your e-mails two months ago...we both screwed up. </I>.

    <p>

    You did see my emails, it was just easier to blow me off (like you'd done to others before me). YOU screwed up, and you still are. You really should have quit long ago while you were minimally behind.

    <p>

    <i>So what are we going to do, just sit here like cavemen and keep bashing each other over the head until someone blinks or resolve this situation like adults?</i>

    <p>

    You had the opportunity to fix this early on. I told you how, and others made suggestions as well, and you just won't do it. I accept no excuses.

    <p>

    <i>Please be careful with words, Michael. There is no scam here. Photographers have an opportunity to advertise their product inside of my magazine. There is no scam. People do not pay me money and then receive nothing in the magazine.</I>

    <p>

    Sorry, you're right, David. It's not a scam. Photographers do get what they pay for (as far as I know). Let me rephrase it: it's sleazy. I've never been called by any other magazine or gallery, and then had a sales pitch thrown at me followed by an early disconnect when I showed no interest. Scam, no. Sleazy, oh yeah.

    <p>

    <i>Michael, this is my last post to you. Your portfolio will be returned between 12 and 16 weeks.</i>

    <p>

    You're a real man, Spivak. I can assure you that I am not the one who has been harmed by this experience. And I'm disapppointed to see that this is how you intend to resolve the situation.

    <p>

    <i>Most of them are pent up APUG'ers with nothing better to do than put down my magazine because it accepts digital.</i>

    <p>

    I suppose that you know they are APUG'ers because you were banned from that forum for your conduct?

    <p>

    <i>Apologize? Okay, Michael. I apologize for not communicating in my March/April issue the rules. I apologize to you and any other photographer who might be experiencing this problem right now. I apologize for missing your e-mails.</I>

    <p>

    Too late for the apology now, David. You should have done this on the 13th when I brought this to the public. You chose a more shameful direction to take it.

    <p>

    Better luck with your next venture.

    Bad Experience with Focus Magazine

    in Business of Photography

    Posted

    Nice try, David, but you've already dug a deep hole for yourself in the LF Forum thread. Since you insist on repeatedly lying, I will dissect your statements:

    <p>

    <i>Michael first of all sent e-mails to the wrong e-mail address (non-working ones),</i>

    <p>

    If they are wrong, then why do you publish them on your website? And if they are wrong, how is it that you receive ANY email? I sent to EVERY email address listed on your website. You didnt get the first four emails over a span of 8+ weeks, but you somehow immediately received my email pointing you to the LF forum?

    <p>

    <i> and then left me a voice-mail in which I returned one day later.</i>

    <p>

    No, you did not. *I* called again and got you on the phone, with my fiance as my witness. Let's keep the facts straight.

    <p>

    <i>The guy and his cohorts are on another board insulting me and acting like 6 year olds...it's truly annoying. </i>

    <p>

    Quote one incident of "insult" in that thread. They are merely facts which you are not able to handle. Those that have spoken out are NOT my cohorts - I know none of them. They are photographers who deserve to know about your ethics and magazine. I only needed to tell the truth. They've figured out your scam on their own.

    <p>

    <i>Michael also is leaving out the part where I told him that I would keep his portfolio in case I had some extra space in one of my next couple of issues.</i>

    <p>

    NO, you did not. You have a clever way of distorting facts when your cave is crumbling around you.

    <p>

    <i>Anyway, Michael was treated rudely after he yelled and cursed at me.</i>

    <p>

    So, you admit to treating me rudely? I am indeed very angry (who wouldnt be after eight weeks, four emails, and two telephone calls ), but unlike yourself, I have not behaved unprofessionally. I did not yell, and I did not curse. My fiance was at my side through the whole conversation. Do you have someone to corroborate your lies?

    <p>

    <i>He wants to sit and cry and complain that he can't get his portfolio back, when my rules specifically state how long it takes. (and for those thinking why I'm sitting here posting about it instead of returning his portfolio, all submissions are stored in a different office which is about an hour travel time from here)</i>

    <p>

    Excuses, excuses. ONCE AGAIN, I responded to your April issue's call for submissions which stated NOTHING about delays of this extent. And I quote: photographers should include "shipping materials for us to promptly return your prints after we've reviewed them". Is nine weeks of waiting considered by Focus to be a prompt return? The facts exist in your April issue. For you to state anything contrary is blatant lying.

    <p>

    <i>Anyway, this isn't any kind of sleezy marketing gimmick or anything like that.</i>

    <p>

    So you say! Many photographers seem to disagree:

    http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=18633

    <p>

    Grow up, David. You still have not apologized, nor have you addressed my reply as to how to rectify the situation. You can try your best to save face, but your schtick is as transparent as it gets.

    Bad Experience with Focus Magazine

    in Business of Photography

    Posted

    In the April issue of Focus, the call for submissions (which is the one I saw and responded to) stated that photographers should include "shipping materials for us to promptly return your prints after we've reviewed them". That was the extent of it. Nine or twelve weeks does not constitute "promptly" in my dictionary. And I'm okay with the delay. What I am not okay with is his absolute lack of courtesy and respect. Four emails and a voice mail went unanswered - there is excuse for that kind of "service".

     

    Please read this thread http://tinyurl.com/z5py8 for more insight.

    Bad Experience with Focus Magazine

    in Business of Photography

    Posted

    I'm making this post to hopefully prevent other unsuspecting

    photographers from enduring the same trouble. You'll find a concurrent

    thread here http://tinyurl.com/z5py8. Please forgive the inclusion of

    trivial facts. I have included them because I expect David Spivak to

    refute my statements.

     

    Shortly after making a submission to Focus in late April 2006, David

    Spivak left me an urgent voice mail asking me to call. We spoke on May

    1, 2006, and he not only praised my work but stated how well I would

    fit into the next (at that time) issue, deadline soon approaching. He

    then proceeded to pitch his $1500 marketing package to me, and when I

    didn't bite on that, he tried to sell me on his online Focus Gallery.

    I didn't bite on that either, and suddenly Mr. Spivak no longer seemed

    interested in my photography or publishing it in his magazine. This

    concluded my call. He made no comment as to when my portfolio would be

    returned (for which I included $4.20 in Priority Mail postage).

     

    I sent follow-up emails on May 9, May 26, June 7, and July 11 asking

    when he would return my portfolio. None of these emails bounced, and

    in fact, the June 7 and June 11 email recipients included EVERY email

    address listed on the Focus magazine website (info@, sales@,

    submissions@, feedback@, as well as dspivak@). Mr. Spivak nor ANY

    Focus agent has ever contacted me regarding these emails. On July 12,

    2006 in the p.m. (PST), I left Mr. Spivak a voice mail on his personal

    cell phone (clearly indicated by his own voice and message). My call

    went unreturned, so I called again today, July 13, and got him on the

    phone at 1030am PST. He claims to have never received any of my

    emails, nor did he comment on my voice mail. He appeared cleverly

    ignorant to who I even was. I requested that my portfolio be sent back

    immediately, to which he said he would only happen at Focus Magazine's

    convenience (I guess there's never been a convenient time to return my

    work over the last eight+ weeks). Like others who have had similar

    dealings with him, I was treated rudely, disrespectfully, and hung up on.

     

    I have given Mr. Spivak more than ample opportunity and patience to

    deal properly, responsibly, and respectfully with this matter. He

    neglected to do so, and that's why I am making this story public. My

    time has been disrespectfully wasted in attempting to communicate with

    Mr. Spivak and retrieve my portfolio. I fully expect that it and my

    $4.20 in return postage is a loss.

     

    Unfortunately very similar stories are held by David Aschkenas

    http://tinyurl.com/gyhda and Arlene Love http://tinyurl.com/gg3rr, and

    who knows how many others that have not made this public. I urge

    fellow photographers to NOT SEND any prints or money to Focus Magazine.

     

    Michael Gordon

    www.mgordonphotography.com

    Just what is Alpenglow?

    in Nature

    Posted

    The definition of aplenglow is being over-scientificated (new word) here. Although alpenglow may be strictly defined by science, most of the posts I'm reading here are killing the magic of the moment. Does the minutiae really matter? Alpenglow is a beautiful thing that stirs my soul, and when I witness it, the very last thing I'm scrambling for is the technical definition for its occurence.

    One sunset, many photographers

    in Nature

    Posted

    Here's my version. Although I rarely expose more than one sheet of film per composition, this evening was magic, so I ended up exposing 6-7 sheets of film on this event of atmosphere and light. I prefer the 'quieter' mood of color and contrast that occured before the intense orange seen in the other images.

    http://www.mgordonphotography.com/NPN/wave_sm.jpg

     

    Even if no one got this on film, it was amazing just being there and seeing it. That's what it's all about!

    Online B&W Inkjet Printing

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    I cannot second the recommendation for mpix b/w. The sample prints I received looked horrible, and you'll find similar comments in the photo.net archives. Moreover, there is no comparison between Mpix's 'true b/w' paper (Kodak Endura, IIRC) and a velvet matte paper.

     

    You don't define how many "a bunch" is, but I offer reasonably priced printing (although I do not meet your criteria as an online lab). See my website for details: http://www.mgordonphotography.com/services.htm

    Why Ebony

    in Large Format

    Posted

    Here's another satisfied Ebony owner. It should be noted that Ebony cameras are available in mahogany as well, which will save approx. one pound of carry weight. Mahogany is not as durable as ebony, but one should generally take care with a camera of this expense.

     

    I think that (metal) cameras such as the Linhof or Toyo AII are finer and more precise cameras (almost specifically through rigidity and geared movements), but are hindered by minimal movements and short bellows draw. I have the SV45Ti, and I have only once come up against the limits of my camera's movements or bellows. It's worth paying for a camera that will always deliver the goods, no matter the situation.

    Fall colors in eastern Sierra (Bishop)

    in Nature

    Posted

    What Mark said about the aspens! And even more, it's not temperature related but related to the length of the day. After the equinox - when the days begin shortening - the trees suspend their production of chlorophyll.

     

    Yep, indeed there were lots of photographers about. DSLRS? Guy Tal and I conducted our workshop this weekend on Bishop Creek with seven large format photographers. Long live film and big negatives!

     

    www.gtworkshops.com

×
×
  • Create New...