print_r($recent);

Array
(
 [168]=>Tigers of Banner...
 [167]=>:)
 [166]=>Home Sweet Home
 [165]=>Last Summer (3)
 [164]=>Last Summer (2)
)

 

Boycott SONY

PicsCal(date('my'));

March 2005
sun mon tue wed thu fri sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
             
archives(JPics);


print_r($newStuff);

Array
(
 [RAndoMness]=> 28Sep09
 [JPsDocs] => 22Feb09
 [JPics] => 10Dec11
 [frontpage]
 [FeedBack]
)

good 1 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 9:47 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 2 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 9:48 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 3 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 9:49 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 4 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 9:51 PM
1 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 5 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 9:52 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 6 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 9:59 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 7 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 10:04 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 8 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 10:04 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 9 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 10:05 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 10 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 10:06 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 11 of 12- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 10:06 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 12 of 14- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 10:07 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 13 of 14- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 10:07 PM
2 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry
good 14 of 14- : When I sorted out the 636 pictures I took last weekend, I split them into "Good," "Bad," and "Ugly." These are not references to the quality of the subject, rather the quality of the photographer (and/or photograph). Please don't be offended if you see your picture in the "bad" section, it just means that I didn't like how it turned out. You won't see your picture in the "Ugly" section, because I already deleted them, they weren't worth looking at. Aren't you glad that for once, I pre-sorted them, so you don't have to sort through 400 junky pictures to get the 200 good ones.

bad: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12;

good: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail thumbnailthumbnailthumbnailthumbnail
Please see the full-sized pictures.


Sun March 06 2005 at 10:08 PM
0 comments
this entry has not been rated yet.
please rate this entry