U-Man

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 781 through 795 (of 1,602 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 06-02-10 – Macro Bugs #27694
    U-Man
    Participant

    I’m going to be sleeping with a can of Raid for weeks now.

    Oh is that what that was?

    No I think he was just happy to see you.

    People confuse those two all the time. Or similar-sized cans like pringles or krylon.

    There is a gold paint huffer joke in there somewhere.

    in reply to: 06-02-10 – Macro Bugs #27657
    U-Man
    Participant

    we’re at 5 now. i forget most weeks, too. hangs head in shame…

    in reply to: 06-02-10 – Macro Bugs #27655
    U-Man
    Participant

    Justkat, thanks. 🙂 I think you were referring to photography and not photography equipment. I like having good stuff but I would still have fun shooting off-brand ebay finds.

    Some of my better farktography shots were taken with a point and shoot –

    http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Neon_1942.jpg
    http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Cold-Trees_1787.jpg
    http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Lift-2_1719.jpg
    http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Iron-Mt.-Sunrise.jpg
    http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Tree-Slope_1672.jpg

    fwiw – I have the Canon 100 mm macro and am happy with it. I’ve used it for some portrait stuff and like it for that, too.

    in reply to: 06-02-10 – Macro Bugs #27643
    U-Man
    Participant

    Hey. I have DVR. Duh.

    The two I posted I shot this week. I’m still debating with myself on #3.

    in reply to: 06-02-10 – Macro Bugs #27642
    U-Man
    Participant

    Aaaaaaaack. The Blackhawks are coming back on and I can’t decide on #3!

    in reply to: 05-26-10 – Kid at Heart #27580
    U-Man
    Participant

    If I may say, I like this one a lot better than the candy one. It also looks like you’re having a little too much fun with off-camera flash. Someday I’m going to drop a wad on an SB-900 or two and play around with complex lighting. Someday. It’s on the list.

    I know. I think I agree. It’s just that the candy one was a pain in the butt to get. I tried 4 different times. 1st the candy was on the ground and way out of focus due to DoF. 2nd and 3rd tries involved putting a bunch of encyclopedias on the floor with a place for my head (in order to raise up the candy). My 12 year old did the candy placement and effed it up both times with obvious holes. It was frustrating because I couldn’t preview the images. Mrs U-Man did set up for the 4th try. The DoF is still too shallow.

    It was one of those times where my choice was based on what went into the photo rather than what came out of it. Y’know?

    I am fascinated by off-camera flash. It is a pretty big topic. The http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/ site is pretty cool.

    in reply to: 05-26-10 – Kid at Heart #27559
    U-Man
    Participant

    I haven’t clicked on orionid’s yet. Just ate. Don’t want to risk it.

    This is one I did at the park at night. Chose the other three.

    http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Swing_8187.jpg

    in reply to: 05-26-10 – Kid at Heart #27544
    U-Man
    Participant

    Elsinore, congrats on topping 10K total votes last week. 🙂

    in reply to: 05-26-10 – Kid at Heart #27540
    U-Man
    Participant

    Thanks for that ‘mofo. Big smiles. 🙂

    in reply to: 05-26-10 – Kid at Heart #27536
    U-Man
    Participant

    I got kicked out of a local park tonight at 12:20. I was actually finished, putting on my camera backpack, when a cop came up and shined a light on me. Scared a really loud “Whoa!” right out of me. Seemed somebody called about a suspicious flashlight in the park.

    He was cool. I was cool. I left.

    I think that will be #3. But I have another idea….

    in reply to: 05-26-10 – Kid at Heart #27533
    U-Man
    Participant

    I’m just an educated 42 year old kid. This should be easy. But it’s not. I am finding that combining the kid thing and photographically-pleasing to be a challenge.

    /got one in the hopper, need to re-do the second one for the 4th time (it’s just not there yet), only got faint ideas for #3.

    in reply to: 05-12-10 – Happy Farktography Anniversary 5 #27401
    U-Man
    Participant

    I printed my Guitar Triptych at 20×30 and hung it up in my living room, and I love it. Now if only I had the money for decent 20×30 frames with museum anti-glare glass…
    http://hphotos-snc3.fbcdn.net/hs388.snc3/23706_386198719381_692289381_3671437_7712360_n.jpg

    I agree, that really works. Good stuff.

    in reply to: 04-28-10 – Plants #27323
    U-Man
    Participant

    Wow. You guys make me smile. Thank you very much.

    I assure you, I’m an amateur. Three kids, a wife and 60 hour work weeks sort of get in the way of my photography hobby. 🙂 Then again, the girls are beautiful (and available) subjects. And the radiologist gig keeps me in good glass.

    My Fark-fu has been strong the past few weeks. But I didn’t recognize that stat Elsinore posted. Pretty cool.

    in reply to: 04-28-10 – Plants #27303
    U-Man
    Participant

    As for another post of yours, I’m sure someone related to you (*cough–U-Man–cough*) can tell you how to do the pops-to-larger thing…

    What? Huh? Who?

    After slapping my posts up, I took the girls out on the Illinois River this evening. The jumping Asian carp are pretty amusing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jb8OmEr7VqI At one point tonight, we had as many jumping as the 30 sec mark in the video.

    I’ll look at the fark thread.

    I don’t know though. I think Mopsy might be getting a bit too good. I might not want her to learn about the pops-to-larger…. 🙂

    in reply to: 04-28-10 – Plants #27293
    U-Man
    Participant

    I’ve been glancing at this thread while working. I’m busy but want to throw in my 2 cents.

    First, I decided to not use the pic I was considering. It was waaay closer to the line than Olavf’s. However, I disagree that O’s pic is beyond the line. Part of being a plant is having bugs and whatnot around. Consider these pics as plant portraits. Would you disqualify a human portrait if it had plants (or a car or camera or a pet) in it? No, other element can have meaning to the subject.

    I hope I didn’t offend. I don’t really have time to do this buit I wanted to chime in.

    See y’all tonight.

Viewing 15 posts - 781 through 795 (of 1,602 total)