stp

<p>I do what Lorne suggests.</p>

<p>I don't use a polarizer on a wide angle, let alone a panorama. It's against the laws of physics. ;>) If you want to do something to the sky, process the raw image twice, once with the sky (and everything else darkened to the point that you like the blue of the sky at the top. Then with the two versions as layers in a single photo, merge them with the gradient tool such that the top portion of the sky remains dark but then soon lightens along with the rest of the image. Experiment with the degree of darkening and especially the placement of the gradient tool. I believe that will yield a much better sky than a polarizer. You can also selected the sky and apply additional contrast and/or structure to mimic the effect of a polarizer, but the effect will be uniform from one side to the other.</p>

<p>If Nik (Google) is offering the entire collection for $149, that's a great bargain.</p>

<p>If video, which you currently lack, is an important function, then it seems that upgrading the body first should be given priority.</p>

<p>I think this is more about the very, very wide range of human personalities, including mental outlook, mental resiliency, responses to life experiences, strengths of social networks, family support, and similar attributes of an individual's life. Whatever experiences I might be able to cite are likely to be totally irrelevant to Leanne Bearden's situation.</p>

<p>So many wonderful photographs!</p>

<p>Some years ago I used American Frame (<a href="http://www.americanframe.com">www.americanframe.com</a>) frequently and was very pleased with their products, prices, and service.</p>

<p>O.k., I'll do one: It only produces crappy pictures.</p>

<p>The first two lenses I'd take are the 24-70mm and 70-200mm (several to choose from; I like the f/4 IS). For wider shots on a T2i (I don't know the camera, but I assume it's not full-frame), the 17-40mm might be a good choice. For Yellowstone, I'd strongly suggest video as well as stills, with a good external microphone that's protected from the wind.</p>

<p>IMO, the Nik/Google HDR program does an excellent job. It's relatively easy to control the "strength" of the HDR effect.</p>

<p>Generally solo, but even when I go out with another, we each shoot on our own, only occasionally sharing something special one of us has found. Nice to share gas costs, too.</p>

<p>Agree with Phil. This seems pretty straightforward. Experiment with those layers, and don't push too hard on the sliders. Don't overexpose (levels will take care of that).</p>

<p>There are three people in the group.</p>

<p>I'd sit back and enjoy my problem. After that, the 5DIII starts looking pretty good.</p>

<p>I sometimes let my Epson 3880 sit idle for 6-9 months, and it always prints nicely when I fire it up again.</p>

<p>Yeah, there are a lot. This is the one I use: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/file-synchronization/id414421761?mt=12</p>

<p>Not proud, but happy taking a backroads trip from Washington State to Arizona/Utah and back over a period of four months. Favorite camera is an H4D-40 with 150mm lens.</p>

<p>I have a program called File Synchronization that does this beautifully. I've customized it to synchronize only in one direction. I have a "master" disk that I use for primary storage and then periodically synchronize to two "spare" disks (one kept in a safe deposit box). The program will transfer any changes made on the "master" disk to the "spare" disks, including (if I choose this option) any deleted files. Files that haven't been changed in any way are left untouched. I think I got this program in the Apple Store.</p>

<p>I don't own it, but the reviews I've read from users provide a lot of support for the 24-105L. The 24-70L may produce higher quality images, but the reduction of available focal lengths may make it less useful for the variety one typically finds at weddings.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Speed and the amount of thinking one does before a shot does not need to differ between film and digital. It's all under the photographer's control.<br>

...........................................<br>

Film slows me down and allows me to think about what I could be doing. Like shooting that fast changing scene while changing rolls or using a more suitable ISO after, say, 5 shots. <br /><br />Its not in my control.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is a good example (for me) why it's dangerous to make universal statements. ;>)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>film slows me down and allows me to think about what I'm doing</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Speed and the amount of thinking one does before a shot does not need to differ between film and digital. It's all under the photographer's control. I really haven't changed my shooting attributes over the years whether using film or digital. I do, however, try more compositions with digital, giving each the amount of time to think through as I do/did with film.</p>

<p>I just take three bus-driven external hard drives, all exact copies of each other. I like redundancy. At home I have three 3-TB external drives for permanent storage, one of which is kept in a bank safe deposit box.</p>

<p>Upgrade to Spyder 4 Pro, with a discount. New monitor bought several weeks ago.</p>

<p>I never found scanning to be difficult. Tedious perhaps, but not difficult. </p>

<p>You tell him the name of your paypal account. That way he knows where to send the money. My paypal account is simply my email address, just as Lex stated above.</p>