[U-Man]

I completely agree. That’s why I wanted to change the description. I only changed it slightly due to being somewhat late in the game.

How about a simple, “Show us bokeh”?

[U-Man]

I may be late, but I’d like to quibble a bit about the description. Way back when, I authored the title and description – ‘Mmmm Bokeh’ Show us shallow DoF. (or something like that). But I was young and (more) ignorant. The two are not really synonymous. Are they? I mean you can get narrow DoF with a macro on a solid background without showing ‘bokeh’ per se. I envision bokeh as using the out-of-focus blobs as part of the composition. Granted, that is best done with a wide aperture and it does involve relatively shallow Dof, but bokeh is more than just shallow Dof. Right?

Anyway, I suggest that the description gets tweaked a tiny bit this week to read something like, “Show us bokeh using shallow depth of field.”

Also, if you’re having trouble narrowing down your choices this week, I bet that a good portion of the voters have the narrower definition of blobs-of-light-in-the-background in their heads.

[U-Man]

Thanks. I liked the shot but wasn’t sure voters would consider it “in-theme”.

See y’all in a few.

[U-Man]

orionid says he’ll allow it “mostly cause I want to see it”

I tried some tonight. Not great, but sort of cool. I’ll probably use one.

[U-Man]

I am considering doing a long exposure shot of something that is supposed to represent a worm-hole is space. Since I’m not actually out there, it will be a fake. Is that OK?

[U-Man]

I was bopping through some Flickr last 7 days and came across QueenBee as a child 🙂 – http://www.flickr.com/photos/emiv/5962881211/lightbox/

[U-Man]

Re: U-Man’s entry from 2011-07-27 08:13:19 PM, I had no idea the Flock of Seagulls hairstyle was making a comeback.

I haven’t seen this young man for a few days – but I guess it’s blue and purple now. I need to find some time to shoot some more of him.

[U-Man]

Clouddancer, I had a conversation with Mopsy a few years back about focusing her 18-55 kit lens. It was over the phone so neither of us could actually see what the other was talking about. I kept referring to the focus numbers on the lens 9 including infinity – and she kept saying she couldn’t find them. We got frustrated with each other until I looked like CISS and discovered that the lens has no such numbers. 🙁

I use cheapo shutter release cables too. They don’t click in as well and sometimes fall out, but they’re waaaaay less $.

When shooting star trails, I have never had any trouble just pointing my camera at a distant light source (star, planet, streetlight) and using auto-focus. I have is limited to the center sensor. If I’m shooting something on the ground at night, I use a flashlight for auto-focus. But I really like the laser pointer idea.

[U-Man]

Huh. I didn’t notice that wasn’t a rule anymore. I think the essence of the rule is in keeping with the spirit of farktography. The 3 or 4 px limit was a bit restrictive, but the faux wood frame used by MMM is too much. I agree with olavf that we shouldn’t nix the post. But I think we should discuss this a bit.

[U-Man]

CISS –

What does “NVC” mean?
The Bibliostats vote totals are slightly different than the FSM totals.
Are you looking at having the photos clicky-pop to larger size in the future?

This is really, really nice work. You should set up a PayPal thing so we can send you a few bucks – then you can take your wife out for dinner! I, for one, would not interpret a PayPal donation request in any negative sort of way.

[U-Man]

Well, well, well, look at the new bibliostats. So far, I am only completely impressed. I’m sure that will progress to blown away after I look at it more. 🙂

[U-Man]

Yeah. I was thinking ‘itchy’ (pruritis).

[U-Man]

Elsinore, I totally forgot about my metal silos stairs pic and just entered it. Then I couldn’t decide which of the other three to pull. I decided that the skateboard pic is the least stairs-y. Would you please just delete it? In the Fark thread I asked to have it de-envotinated — but please just pull it. I think it would be somewhat confusing if we left it in.

[U-Man]

Thanks y’all. And special thanks again for BiblioStats.

[U-Man]

Thanks for the portrait compliments guys. 🙂

I stopped looking at my files. Perhaps there’s something better in there but I was messing with the county fair pics last night. And, well, I’m happy with my entries. I really considered a fireworks pic but figured they would be pretty popular tonight. Here are some B’s –

http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/fw_3087c.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Osprey_8395.jpg – this guy will show up again.
Here’s a compressed 2000 x 1000 px version – http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Osprey_8395b.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/moon_7830.jpg – Sanibel Is, 30 sec exposure, I like the moonlight ‘scribbles’.
Tall crop – http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/moon_7830c.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/tidal-pool_8629.jpg – tidal pool
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/reed_6564.jpg – shoreline reeds
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Feather_0966.jpg –
I really like this one too…maybe I should replace one of my three…

http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Goslings_1200.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Peeps_7705s.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Water-Strider_8170.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Peoria_0414.jpg

[Author]

Posts