Fame! Fortune! Glory!

..Or, you know, none of the above. See, now and then I go onto Flickr and check my stats, which shows photo views and whatnot. It also shows referring links: when people use my images on websites and do so properly (with a link back to the photo's Flickr page), someone clicks the link, I see the referral, then I can go see what my images are up to out there on the wild web. Usually it's dumb stuff, photo dumps and stock image sites, that sort of thing. But now and then it's a blog post or something more interesting. Yesterday I checked and was pleased to see that I made it onto a Slate travel blog, which I think is cool!

http://www.slate.com/blogs/atlas_obscura/2014/02/17/president_s_day_road_trips_see_taft_s_chair_the_lincoln_bullet_and_a_menagerie.html

Then today I see this one, which I dunno, it seems like a strange/random topic for a blog post, but whatever.

http://www.photographyblogger.net/15-great-pictures-of-little-red-wagons/

Sidenote: I know some photographers would see stuff like this and start sputtering about copyright infringement and lost revenue and that sort of thing. I respectfully disagree, and in fact I post most of my personal work to my Flickr stream under a Creative Commons license because I actually LIKE it when my images get picked up and used. I mean, it's my personal stuff--I upload it to my Flickr, maybe I make a print for archival purposes or to go on the wall, and then I forget about it unless it pops up on my PC as a wallpaper (there's a nifty program called John's Background Switcher that can pull photos from Flickr and other places to use as wallpaper, I highly recommend it!). So if someone does choose to use one of my images, I figure at least it's getting a little extra visibility, and I'm not losing anything since I wasn't trying to monetize it in the first place. Plus if not mine, the blogger (or whomever) would just go find a different image instead. Which is maybe the wrong attitude to have, but whatever. :) It's also why I don't watermark my personal stuff.

Speaking of photography, I think it's about time I invested in a new lens. I've had my trusty Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 since 2006, and for a consumer-grade lens it's been fantastic and served me very well. But it's not as sharp as I've become accustomed to from my better glass, and lately it's started acting up, throwing lens communications errors when I shoot with it. And it's a pretty crucial lens for weddings especially, so I feel like I need to replace it before I book another one (and even before my next portrait shoot, not that I have anything definite set up presently). Canon's 24-70mm f/2.8 is over $2k, but Tamron has their own prosumer-grade 24-70mm f/2.8 with image stabilization (which the Canon lacks) for $1300, and I think I'm going to ask the wife if I can spring for that with part of the annual bonus I'm getting this week. That lens will not be going on the kayak, though. :)

Short-Take Reviews.

Watched/read a few things lately that I wanted to note and review, but maybe not so in-depth. So:

Leon: The Professional
This has been on my to-watch list for ages--actually I'm sort of amazed I never watched it since it dates back to 1994! It's a Luc Besson film about Leon, a somewhat enigmatic and solitary hitman in New York City. He finds himself suddenly drawn together with Mathilda, Leon's precocious 12-year-old neighbor whose family is slaughtered as a result of a drug deal gone bad. In search of revenge for her family, Mathilda enlists Leon's help as they become fascinated by and attached to each other. It's a violent film for its day, but the violence is almost incidental to the story, which is by turns touching and disturbing--but mostly touching, as Mathilda and Leon alike struggle with their unfamiliar emotions. It's not a happy film, ultimately, but it's a darn good one. Jean Reno is very solid as Leon and Gary Oldman gives a stunning turn as the psychopathic DEA agent Stansfield, but there are almost no words to describe Natalie Portman's performance as Mathilda, especially considering her tender age of 12 at the time (part of her audition is here. Absolutely amazing.
Verdict: 58 on my 64-point scale.

MacGruber
I was actually turned on to this film by reading a Reddit AMA with its star, Will Forte, who seemed like a good guy. The film is a major spoof on the militarized one-man-army/unlikely-buddies types of action film, with a nod in substance and title to 80s tv show MacGyver. MacGruber is a highly-decorated, almost legandary special operative who has been in retirement and seclusion since the love of his life was brutally murdered at their wedding. He returns to action when his arch-nemesis, Dieter von Cunth (Val Kilmer in a fun role) pops back up bent on destroying DC with a nuke. There are laughs aplenty, but most of them rely on sheer ridiculousness and/or that old standby of toilet humor. Think Hot Shots!, but not as subtle. Ha! Go into this with an open mind and low expectations and you'll probably enjoy it if your tolerance for crudity is high. If not, give it a miss. :)
Verdict: 37 on my 64-point scale.

Horns by Joe Hill
I think I mentioned I was reading this one--Joe Hill is one of Stephen King's sons who is forging his own reputation as an author of horror, and I'd wanted to check him out, so when I saw this book on sale at the Dollar Tree I snapped up a copy. Horns is the story of Ig, a young man who wakes up one morning having sprouted a set of devil-like horns. He discovers as he interacts with people that the horns compel them to confess their deepest sins and darkest desires, and can even influence their behavior. With the help and curse of the horns, Ig finds himself unravelling the murder of his girlfriend Merrin, an unsolved crime for which Ig himself received the circumstantial blame. The story starts strong with Ig discovering the horns and their terrible power, and from there Hill does a fine job interweaving the story with flashbacks of Ig as he meets Merrin and befriends a boy named Lee. Twists and turns ensue, and even once the truth becomes known to Ig the resolution remains unclear until it arrives. Overall a good read, and I'm definitely interested in reading Hill's other novels. Sidenote: Horns is in production as a feature film starring Harry Potter himself, Daniel Radcliffe as Ig.
Verdict: 48 on my 64-point scale.

Ooh, forgot one!

The LEGO Movie
I took the older two girls to see this last Friday evening, since we're all big LEGO fans. It was even enough to interest Hermione, who generally says she would rather wait for a movie to be available to watch at home rather than go to the theater to see it. At least Hallie enjoys going to the theater! Anyway, I'd heard really good things about the movie, and I was not disappointed. I think the pacing was a little uneven in places, but the animation was generally excellent, the voice acting was solid, and the writing was very good. The plot is clever, revolving around President Business, who somehow rules all the various themed worlds of LEGO but is against change and non-conformity, hence his evil plan to use something called the KRAGL (which I don't think I'm spoiling too much to reveal it's KRAzy GLue) to freeze all the LEGO worlds into the configuration he deems perfect. Meanwhile, the Master Builders are after the Piece of Resistance, the only thing that can stop the KRAGL. Enter Emmet, a typical construction worker from LEGO City who finds the Piece of Resistance and finds himself labeled The Special, subject of prophecy and legend. Can he overcome the curse of empty-headed conformity to become a Master Builder and save the world? Lots of laughs, lots of action, a touch of pathos, plenty of jokes aimed at the adults in the audience, essentially everything I want in an animated flick--plus LEGO! Worth seeing again for sure, just to watch for more details and in-jokes!
Verdict: 55 on my 64-point scale.