U-Man

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 946 through 960 (of 1,602 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 12-09-09 – Low Key #25389
    U-Man
    Participant

    Maaaaan, enforcing the rules on this one might really suck. I don’t know what to say. Megain’s is low-key but has two points of illumination.

    My $0.02 is to let pics like his squeak through the rules. It may piss off some who followed the rules more closely – but I have a feeling there will be alot like megain’s.

    But, on the other hand, the description is right there to read….

    in reply to: 12-09-09 – Low Key #25387
    U-Man
    Participant

    Duh. I just went back and read orionid’s comment 0106 which said it’s fine.

    in reply to: 12-16-09 – White #25457
    U-Man
    Participant

    That’s waaaaaaaay better than “the cold weather caused a water main to break under my house.”

    /happened to me this summer.
    //would totally suck for all concerned at these temps

    in reply to: 12-16-09 – White #25455
    U-Man
    Participant

    God: “I like eight to ten inches better….”

    That’s what she said.

    /bu-dum tssshhhh. Tip your waitress.

    in reply to: 12-09-09 – Low Key #25382
    U-Man
    Participant

    On second thought, I might want to use the little cowgirl pic. Does it meet criteria for this theme?

    This one – http://www.ullepics.com/d/364-4/Ally_7415-bw-a.jpg

    in reply to: 12-09-09 – Low Key #25379
    U-Man
    Participant

    As I’ll sometimes do, I was trying to squeeze a pic into a theme. I took some last night and found a single light source pic in my files so I have 3 or 4 that meet criteria. Unless this discussion opens up the theme today, I probably won’t use either of those two. (maybe the first one…)

    But thanks for the input from y’all.

    Actually, I had an inspiration for a pic last night around 1 am but nobody to model for me. Maybe I can pull it off this evening.

    in reply to: 12-09-09 – Low Key #25367
    U-Man
    Participant

    I have a working definition of low key. For this theme, are we using super strict rules? I mean, If a shot embraces the concept of low key, but also has an element of the pic that is backlit – would that be allowed?

    Here is one that I’d love to use, but I don’t know if it meets the criteria. Maybe with the new description, it does. What do you think?

    http://www.ullepics.com/d/364-4/Ally_7415-bw-a.jpg

    Or how about this one? It has more obvious single-point lighting of the subject. But it also has the backlit element.

    http://www.ullepics.com/d/265-4/Lily_6988-bw.jpg

    If they don’t work, I have some I did with a single off-camera flash in a dark room with black background for that poke-you-in-the-eye garish low-key lighting. (does ‘garish’ work there?)

    in reply to: 12-16-09 – White #25453
    U-Man
    Participant

    My interpretation matches Elsinore’s. Photograph something that says ‘white’. That could be the primary color in the pic (snow) or just the subject (white shoes with dark dress pants 🙂 ).

    in reply to: 12-02-09 – Win, Fail, or #25341
    U-Man
    Participant

    Thanks. I give the falling-in-toilet fail pic credit to my wife. It was her idea. So was the make-up. The hamster was mine.

    See you all next week for low-key.

    in reply to: 12-02-09 – Win, Fail, or #25328
    U-Man
    Participant

    I feel bad for Mopsy now, having to read this thread… 😆

    I was going to start out with ‘I don’t want to speak for Mopsy”, but since I am about to I couldn’t.

    I think she’ll shake her head at us and then feel good to be included. I hope I can be as cool as she is when I’m blank-blank years old and have grand-kids. 🙂

    *Love you Mom.*

    /Although I kinda wanted to, I found that I just couldn’t curse in this message.
    //my subconscious tastes soap.

    in reply to: 12-02-09 – Win, Fail, or #25316
    U-Man
    Participant

    Naw, really, I liked seeing the set-up. I really enjoy it when you show us how you pulled off a wild or impossible looking shot. 😀

    You’re welcome and thank you at the same time.

    Elsinore, that totally bites. Although I admire your honesty as well as your profanity.

    in reply to: 12-02-09 – Win, Fail, or #25291
    U-Man
    Participant

    I’m getting the feeling that this contest could turn into a mess when it goes green and we get a lot of the people who aren’t regulars and don’t come here to read the forums.

    You are almost certainly correct.

    Maybe someone *ahem* Elsinore *ahem* should put an ALL CAPS BOLD statement at the beginning and at the end of the TFer posts about the rules.

    Oh, and I totally recognize that it was my bad. I mean the words were there the whole time. Just didn’t read them. 😳

    in reply to: 12-02-09 – Win, Fail, or #25267
    U-Man
    Participant

    Oh yeah. For the toilet one, I drained the bowl, put in some dry towels and then promised her candy.

    in reply to: 12-02-09 – Win, Fail, or #25266
    U-Man
    Participant

    For what it’s worth, here is how I got the hamster in her exercise ball rolling off the first step.

    This theme is already good. I think it just might be great. If so, I’m already looking forward to part II.

    Thanks for the comment linguine. 🙂

    in reply to: 12-02-09 – Win, Fail, or #25263
    U-Man
    Participant

    Okely Dokely. Re-posting.

    Thanks for calling, Mopsy.

Viewing 15 posts - 946 through 960 (of 1,602 total)