San Diego Temple – 1024 x 768 pixels

Here’s one of my photos of the San Diego Temple. Click to enlarge this to 1024 x 768 pixels. Feel free to use the photo as you wish as long as it’s for a wholesome purpose. If you publish it or post it elsewhere, please acknowledge the source.

Ouch! I’ve been rebuked sternly, but in love, as always, for putting my name on the temple photo. As I mention in the comments, this became a habit after I found people all over the Web stealing photos from my site without giving credit. Sorry about that. I actually do sell some of my photos and feel I need to identify the source. But, since the purpose of this post was to provide a public service rather than more self-promotion, I offer two compromises.

First, for those who are sorely offended by the subtle presence of my name on a photo of the temple – I suppose it may seem disrespectful, even blasphemous to plaster my name right on top of the temple – here is a link to a revised version in which the temple photo remains pure, undesecrated by direct contact with my name.

For those less offended souls who simply would simply prefer my name to be a lot less prominent, here is a revised, more humble version in which I bet you won’t even notice that the photo is marked.

Both new photos are 1024 x 768 and can be used as a background on your computer or for any other righteous purpose.


Author: Jeff Lindsay

22 thoughts on “San Diego Temple – 1024 x 768 pixels

  1. Yay! The best temple in the world! Okay, so I might be partial, since that’s where’s I’m originally from. I like your shot, with the blue/purple hues in the sky.

    Here’s one I snapped, it’s pretty much your standard SD temple shot.

  2. My daughter calls it her castle. She often tells me she is going to be the princess in that castle.

  3. Dear Jeff,

    I have long appreciated the hard work and tireless service you perform in defending our faith and bringing people to the gospel.

    But I must finally admit that there is one thing that drives me absolutely bonkers and that is your insatiable need to plaster your name over everything.

    Every picture you have offered us MUST include your name and website. You are adamant that everyone know where it comes from.

    I have taken many pictures of temples in the US and have offered them to the LDS Church Temples website as well as to many friends through e-mail distribution and yet I have never felt the need to have my name plastered on them. As I am not a professional photographer, I don’t make a living off the pictures so I see no need to seek praise or to control their distribution.

    I am sorry for being so personal but it is something that I feel distracts from the wonderful service that you provide out of the goodness of your heart.

    A picture of a temple is a picture of a temple. It does not need to have your name on it to mar its beauty.

    Spoken in love.

  4. Man,

    I had to strain my eyes to even find where Jeff’s name even was. I thought it was very tastefully done. Beautiful Photo by the way!

  5. I’m faithful LDS, I’m from Southern California, but I hate the San Diego temple with its Space Mountain design.

  6. Michael,

    I can see three reasons right off the bat for Jeff to copyright/brand his photos, especially the ones he puts on the web.

    Jeff may not be a professional photographer, but he takes professional quality photos. When he retires from his current day job, he may wish to make a living that way, and start selling or licensing his collection of photos that he’s taken over the years. And it may indeed become a source of income to him in the future.

    Putting his name/website helps prevent other people from currently making money off of his work, in addition to protecting a future income stream.

    Putting his name/website on them also prevents the detractors of the church (which Jeff’s apologetics work seems to attract) from using the photos in denigrating ways. That has already happened. So imprinting/branding the photos protects him and the church. It also gives him the right/ability to demand that web sites remove any of his pictures that they might use in unrighteous ways.

    There are some real sickos out there, and I don’t blame Jeff one bit for taking the minor precaution of branding his web photos.

  7. It’s a striking building. I also like the new Catholic cathedral in Los Angeles, which also happens to have been built next to a freeway; but some of my non-Mormon friends in L.A rate it unfavorably compared to the San Diego Temple, which seems to create good drive-by impressions.

  8. I liken the San Diego Temple Kolobian architecture, and its position on top of the freeway, to an insecure teenager who dresses in Goth: “look at me, look at me, look at me” while others just shake their heads…

  9. Yeah, I won’t lie–I love this temple.

    I served my mission in San Diego. Other than the Provo temple, I’ve been to the San Diego temple more than other. Beautiful inside as well as out. No head shaking going on here–except in utter awe.

  10. I don’t see the Disney-ish of the picture. I suppose the spires might be reminiscent of Cinderella’s castle. It’s a beautiful picture, Jeff. I have to say, I’m partial to the Washington D.C. temple (which has several castle-like spires), but, of course, I’m biased since it’s the closest one to me.

    Side note to Jeff: Thanks for all of your hard work here and at the Cracked Planet. I’ve been a long time reader.


  11. Thank you.

    I’ve been planning on finding a new wallpaper and this landed right in my lap. I now have a new background on my xp.

  12. Ouch! Yes, it has become a nasty habit, marking all my work. I didn’t at first, but then I found sites all over the Web that were stealing some of my favorite photos, and some were even hot linking to steal bandwidth as well. I grew tired of that, and now routinely mark my photos, sometimes in an obvious plus less obvious way.

    For the benefit of you who are offended by the subtle presence of my name on a photo of the temple, here is a link to a revised version in which no text is on the temple photo itself.

    For those who simply would simply prefer my name to be a lot less prominent, here is a revised version in which I bet you won’t even notice that it’s marked.

  13. I love the SD temple, I was married there!

    I admit, some of my non-mormon friends said it looked like cinderellas castle from Disney land, but so what. It is gorgeous. There was this cool picture of it I saw once where the clouds where all around it but the area directly above the Temple was clear. That was an AMAZING picture.

    I actually don’t mind the original image logo, it makes sense for a proffesional to copywrite his work. I acually find the “where’s waldo” logo a little tinybit more blasphemous, seeing as it is made to appear carved into the building, eventhough anybody with since knows it’s a logo.

    Nice photo!

  14. The Temple Picture is great with or without your name. I am thinking of posting a picture of me on the Web—–could I put your name on it?

    Thanks for all of your humor.

  15. Brother Lindsey, I deeply appreciate your talent in photography.

    If it doesn’t bother you, your temple image be used on the Edson Range [MCRD] Camp Pendleton Branch’s Sunday Program for the Marine Recruits- http://www.MCRDSD.ORG .

    Warm Regards
    President S. St.Laurent

  16. ###### Does anyone know where I can look at pics of inside the mormon s.d temple? Cant google them..? strange?whats to hide? ####

  17. Beautiful photo. In case you’re tallying whether or not you should keep your name on your photos. Leave it on!!! Sure, some could say it’s self-aggrandizing, but I’d rather know who took the photo I’m looking at. Accountability of internet information and all that.

    I’ll be using this photo, name and all, as a bulletin cover this week. Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.