JPG Article

_mpd_ [deleted] 10:38pm, 7 May 2007
"JPG expects $2.5 million in revenue by the end of the year."

The 2.5 million number is a bit interesting. This seems to imply at first glance paying the submissions is about 1/5 of that revenue target, which makes it seems like it could easily be increased in the future for the amount of profit they are getting.
_mpd_ [deleted] Posted 8 years ago. Edited by _mpd_ (member) 8 years ago
In other news, Derek (fraying) has apparently left the group and isn't listed on the "About" page of JPG anymore.

I have no idea what's up with that though hopefully he'll weigh in. I'm sure we all wish him the best. Pretty much all help/suggestion email I sent to JPG was responded to by Derek.

Not entirely sure what that means for this group, per se, but if you all find the pool and discussions interesting, keep contributing to it. I doubt it will be an official JPG forum for Q&A though. (Could be wrong?)

I still like the pool and it's guidelines. With the other admins ok we might take a few of the logos off and make it sound more unofficial ... maybe it even needs a new name. I don't know. I'm not much up for running a fan-of-magazine pool with no affiliation when we ought to rename/repurpose the pool.

Anyone else have any thoughts?
antijenx PRO 8 years ago
are you thinking just a general photog group? seems like it might get a little discombobulated without a "theme" or focus. needs specificity. ok, i'm done with the big words.
purplezebra 8 years ago
Yeah, that's totally bizarre. I hope all is well, too. Before the group becomes less official, or even more unofficial, I'd like to know what happened with Derek. I liked that he answered questions in this group.
_mpd_ [deleted] Posted 8 years ago. Edited by _mpd_ (member) 8 years ago
@antijenx -- Yeah, I don't know. Huge general purpose groups are a pain to admin. I really don't want the work. If someone else does and has a vision for it, great. I think some of the alternatives are a bit cliquey (Central, Utata) --- either too happy or too sarcastic -- maybe I don't know what some of the other good ones are. I kind of like the Canon DSLR user group, but it's a bit gear focused most of the time (that's ok, that's what it's for).

Just talking about JPG submissions is waring a bit thin IMHO ... there are a lot of great photographers here though so I don't want to just let it go to waste.

@purplezebra -- totally agreed.
antijenx PRO Posted 8 years ago. Edited by antijenx (member) 8 years ago
well i'm all for keeping something afloat. i like it here :) and yeah, jpg talk 24/7 is a bit old. although, that is what this group is for so ...... anyway, we should be able to come up with something. and i'll admin with ya.

i would like more info on what's happening with derek and jpg though. maybe someone else from jpg will "step in" around here for him.

and we can just start a whole new totally separate group.
_mpd_ [deleted] 8 years ago
I've given you the moderator bit...
Brenda Anderson PRO 8 years ago
You could always look at Derek's profile page on jpgmag website. :)
On his profile page it says:

"I founded JPG Magazine with my lovely wife, Heather Champ, in 2004. In 2006, we sold JPG to 8020 Publishing, which I also founded. I am no longer working for JPG/8020, but am still incredibly proud of the work we've done."
antijenx PRO 8 years ago
well i hope someone from jpg pokes their head in here on occassion.
theorem PRO 8 years ago
Hey guys, I'm JPG Magazine's publisher. Derek has indeed left the company to pursue other projects. He was a big part of getting us to where we are and we are all really proud of the work we did together.

We're all still hard at work at making JPG great and will continue to be a part of this community and forum to answer questions and let everyone know what is up.
devinpoolman 8 years ago
Hey all - I also work with JPG Magazine (at 8020 Publishing), and I want to add that the Folio magazine quote about us making $2.5M this year is not accurate. We're not even sure where that number came from, but our revenue goals for this year are more modest than that.
_mpd_ [deleted] 8 years ago
Guys, if you want admin bits, you can have them.

Just Flickr mail me.
Laura Brunow Miner 8 years ago
Hi there! Another JPG staffer chiming in to say hello!
antijenx PRO 8 years ago
well it's good to know you guys are around :)
Laura Brunow Miner 8 years ago
Yup. And the much anticipated emails should have all gone out tonight, in answer to that question...
_mpd_ [deleted] 8 years ago
This is strange.
deyes 8 years ago
This is strange.
afaik, a request was made. no word on the status though..
antijenx PRO 8 years ago
wait, what was the question?

tbit 8 years ago
i understand the removing of Derek and Heather from the "People" page of JPG if they are no longer with it but things definately seem fishy when they are removed from the historical nature of starting the bloody thing.
admin Posted 8 years ago. Edited by (admin) 8 years ago
I wish them well in there new endeavors. Peace.
rvacapinta 8 years ago
Derek has published his side of it here:
FlyButtafly PRO 8 years ago
I think it's totally rotten.
Steve Rhodes PRO 8 years ago
The letter from the editors is gone.

Though I'll paste it below from google's cache (it doesn't seem to exist at so a copy of it should be preserved somewhere).

I don't understand why it and the links to the earlier issues were removed.

The issues page only has issues 7 and later

Though the pages on the earlier issues are still currently on the site (or issue 2 just put 2 instead of 1, etc).

and they are at lulu (without links to the photographers in the descriptions)

Letter from the Editors

There are photographers, and then there are photographers, and then there's us.

There are photographers who know their shutter speeds from their f-stops, and which combinations of the two will result in a shallow depth of field. And, of course, they know why that's a good idea, and even what all those words mean. These are photographers who use the word "glass" when they mean "lens" and spend thousands of dollars on equipment to prove it. And why not? These are the photographers who make a living capturing moments with cameras.

Then there are photographers who point and shoot on the default setting. They take snapshots on vacation and at family reunions. They develop their photos at the supermarket. These photographers might not even call themselves photographers. They're everyday folks, shooting the things they want to remember.

Then there's us. People who, for one reason or another, have a camera on us most of the time. We learn what we can about technique when it suits us, and skip the rest. We put up websites to share our photos with the world.

We're the great in between: not quite amateur, not quite professional. Some do it for art, some as a kind of visual journal, some because they want to become a professional one day, and some just because we have to. It's just what we do.

There have always been magazines for the amateurs and the pros. They'll compare every last new camera, give you handy top-ten lists for better snapshots, and tempt you with half-naked models on the cover. ("Really, honey, just look at the lighting on her! Wonder what glass he used.") But they almost never take the time to get at that rare thing that makes us want to capture these moments in the first place. And there's never really been a magazine for us – the in-between folks who shoot for love, not money.

And that's why we're here.

JPG Magazine is a new quarterly publication built by and for the great in-between photographers who, like us, photograph our lives for no good reason except that it brings us joy.

And who are we? Derek Powazek and Heather Powazek Champ, husband and wife, partners in crime. Heather is the founder of the photo community called The Mirror Project, where there lives an ever-growing collection of submitted mirror self-portraits. And Derek is the founder of the personal storytelling magazine/performance series called Fray, which features true stories told online and onstage. Heather was an art major and Derek was a photojournalism major, but we both work as designers today. We're life-long camera junkies with a passion for unique, spontaneous, and original photography.

We've taken the magazine's name from the JPG file format that most digital cameras use to save images, but we're putting out a tangible paper magazine. Yes, the irony is intentional. But we're not just about the digital – we're lovers of all kinds of photography, from the fastest CCDs to the tiniest pinholes, and we plan on featuring it all.

We see JPG Magazine as a way to take the best online photography and honor it in print. If you love photography as much as we do, we hope you'll love JPG Magazine. Thanks for reading.

– Heather & Derek
FlyButtafly PRO 8 years ago
It's like the previous issues (one of which I got published in!) never even existed! So much for JPG.
catscape 8 years ago
"We're all still hard at work at making JPG great and will continue to be a part of this community and forum to answer questions and let everyone know what is up."

Here's one for you. What's up with the revisionist history?
_mpd_ [deleted] Posted 8 years ago. Edited by _mpd_ (member) 8 years ago
I hate to see good ideas go South.

I worked for a great startup in the past that bit the bullet after similar VC/execs turned the tables on the founders. It was very ugly. The company is now dying and/or going slowly Enron. Given my past circumstances, and how much Derek and Heather have done for the online photosharing community (Heather pretty much holds Flickr's community together just by herself), I really can't continue to support that.

(JPG account deleted, bye...)
Groups Beta