Instead of ordering a 2000 calorie mega-meal the next time you're out with friends, why not keep things simple? Check out the "Sides" section of the menu. Often times, sides are priced in relation to adding it onto a full entrée, and when done so, comes in a smaller portion size. But in many restaurants, the kitchen/serving staff will actually "super-size" your portions when ordering a side by itself, without increasing the price in the least bit. The french fries photographed above cost a grand total of $1.99. And that was before I ate most of them, when the basket was still full. Sure, I could have ordered the $6.95 Gyros meal like I usually do, but it's often too much food for me. That extra $5 can go a long way, and when combined with a glass or two of water, a large serving of fries fills me up pretty fast.

The downside to this is, of course, the fact that most sides do not offer a complete nutritional range. But as long as one adjusts their other meals of the day at home sufficiently, this should not be a big issue for most individuals with standard diets. And it sure beats indulging on insane quantities of food, only to feel sick afterwards.

Spear fishermen in La Jolla, California

My to-do list of "adventure" seems to be never-ending. I'd love to learn how to surf and snowboard. Rock climbing has always peaked my interest. And scuba diving seems like something I'd get a big kick out of. But even though I have an initiative for self improvement, I have a strange lack of motivation when it comes to tackling these goals. In some ways, I don't even know where to start. And this is further complicated by the fact that I have my whole life ahead of me to spend doing these things. But as someone who wants to go into the field of travel and adventure photography, I'm going to have to rack up many of these skill sets eventually. Or at the very least, I should try to gain back the wonderful sense of challenge that has all but faded.

Climber at the Garden of the Gods, Colorado

I told myself that I would travel this summer, and if the stars align properly, I'll at least get a chance to get out of here for a short bit. Still, that hasn't stopped me from dreaming. In-between spurts of cleaning and organizing today, I randomly planned bits and pieces of a theoretical Jack-Kerouac-style road trip. And it sounds like UCSD, my new school as of this fall, has plenty of opportunities for recreation and adventure. Who knows? Maybe I'll be able to redeem myself and reach that target of an adventurous spirit after all.

What you see above was taken with such a lens. Though it is a pretty poor sample shot, it shows you that a decently artistic photo can be crafted on the cheap. And what glass was responsible for this picture? Photographed below, this lens is a prime (ha!) example of a dirt cheap lens. My second thrift store lens (in recent years) for $7, this baby isn't without its flaws. Unlike my first $7 lens, a 50mm Pentax-M f2 that was covered in grime but cleaned up nicely, this latest find isn't in full operational condition. Though physically clean with clear glass, this Sears 28mm f2.8 lens seems to have aperture blades stuck wide open at f2.8. For casual shooting, this isn't much of an issue, as I usually keep my glass open in most situations. And for $7, I'm not complaining in the least bit.

At this point, I fully intend on purchasing a Sony NEX-5 camera as soon as it is widely released. And assuming that a Pentax-K to E-Mount adapter will be available from third party vendors in short time, it would be nice to have a collection of cheap prime lenses to use on such a tiny body for casual and street shooting. Though I wont go out of my way to purchases lenses for such a use, there's no harm in having "extras" lying around. And often times, working within the constraints of manual focus and exposure forces you to critically examine potential shots in new ways.

Image via dpreview.com

What you see here is the new Sony NEX-5 camera, coming out this July. It features a full APS-C sensor in the smallest mirror-less interchangeable lens system to date. Retailing at $650 with a 16mm f2.8 pancake and $700 with an 18-55mm zoom lens, both crafted out of metal and not plastic like most modern lenses, the cost is a steal for the phenomenal image quality that samples have produced thus far. In many ways, it even surpasses my current Pentax body. For those looking for a cheaper option, Sony is also releasing the NEX-3 with plastic housing (as opposed to the metal casing of the NEX-5) and reduced video options, but with a $100 savings.

While nothing is set in stone, there's a very good chance that the NEX-5 (with the 18-55mm lens) will become my new secondary body. As of late, I've been taking my primary camera everywhere I go, which gets rather cumbersome and challenging depending on the circumstance. If I had a camera with identical image quality, better video capabilities and more casual features in an incredibly small form factor, I would definitely feel safer bringing that instead. Though it could never replace the pure power that having an optical viewfinder provides, mirror-less interchangeable lens cameras fill an interesting niche in the increasingly diverse camera market. And there's a very real chance I'll own a piece of this revolution come later this summer.

Yes, it's still grainy. With my current cropped-sensor camera, it's literally the best that I can do. But this hasn't stopped me from calling this photograph a success. And for ISO 6400, you have to admit that it's not too terribly bad either. Unless a stranger randomly donates a Canon 5D Mark II to my cause, I'll just have to be content with what I've got. It's not the best Milky Way photograph I've taken, but it's the one I've most anticipated. And I'm glad it could finally happen.

Photographic paper, the stuff that black and white photographers use in the dark room, is usually extremely sensitive to light, as it is developed and fixed in chemicals that bring out an image captured in a matter of seconds on the paper. But because it is so light sensitive, photographic paper also darkens when exposed to sunlight, which (in a sense) overexposes it to the point of visibility. Solargraphy utilizes this same quirk of the paper to let it act as a negative, capturing an image over the span of a matter of months. But Solargraphy uses a tiny pinhole, which lets in a minuscule amount of light. What if you used an actual camera, with a wide-aperture lens?

This is the result. Each one of these images takes anywhere from 15 minutes to 2 hours to capture, depending on how bright the sun is. The "negative" that is created on the photographic paper is extremely impermanent, due to the fact that it cannot be fixed to halt any reactions that might occur. You basically get one chance to scan in the negative, after which the negative becomes even more faded from the light in the scanner. The images created with these methods are ethereal and oddly timeless, using unorthodox techniques to call back to a time when photography was much more inconvenient and difficult to master. It's a far cry from the digital cameras that we're so used to now, and it really makes you appreciate just how special the art of photography is.

I'm not sure I'd say that I invented a new technique. In all honesty, I'm not that clever. Someone must have done this before me, I simply can't find any record of it. Still, on a personal level, I came up with the idea on my own. And sometimes, experimentation of this sort is worthwhile to achieve results such as these. There's nothing fancy about this. No film is used, no developing is needed. Chemicals are unnecessary, and you only get one shot to get things right.

This photograph, though taken in August 2008, reminds me of this time of the year. It's a great example of using bokeh to enhance an image, and is one of my favorite stylistic tools for general use in photography. It was captured in Julian, California behind the Julian Pie Company restaurant on Main Street.

While fake-Polaroid (fauxlaroid) programs usually bug me, this one's slightly different. Instead of plugging in an already captured image and spitting out a retro-ized copy, ShakeItPhoto captures a fauxlaroid directly. Sure, it's still a fake post-process that gives it its vintage look, but at least the photograph you take is destined immediately for such a process. It's ever-so-slightly more legitimate, and ultimately more fun!