Impressive, as all your stacked shots are. I don't think I'd have the patience.

Lovely set, I especially like the tulip and swans.

The place to discuss anything related to this weeks topic.

Columbus visited Galway, and wrote a note about it (mentioning some very lost Eskimos) in the margin of his copy of the Imago Mundi, a 15th Century book the title of which means Image of the World. In Gaelic that would be Iomhá Domhan according to Google Translate...just an idea.

I agree....it often appears from your posts that the technical merits of your photography seems to take precedence over the artistic aspect. That's fair enough of course if that is what you want from photography. These shots all make good use of nice light, and are very well processed, but none of them, except perhaps #3, grab my attention. To me it looks like there is some great material available in this area, but, to quote a well-known saying, you're not seeing the woods for the trees. I apologise if my comments seem a bit harsh, but I'd love to see your undoubted technical ability put to more fruitful use.

Maybe not as cheesy as Eclectic Images....

It works with Lightroom, as long as you also install Fusion Express, which is a free download from Topaz. Then when you right-click the image in Lightroom and select Edit in Fusion Express, it comes up with a choice of all the Topaz plug-ins you have installed.

I've been using Detail for a while, and have got the latest version. It works very well, but it's quite difficult to get the hang of, but you'll soon get an ida of what the sliders all do. I don't like any of the presets, so use the sliders manuallly. It doesn't produce artifacts, so you can get pictures looking sharper than using unsharp mask if you want, and used properly it seems to give images a different, cleaner look than normal sharpening. The files have to be pretty clean noise-wise before you use it, though, as it can make noise look a bit odd. I use it quite a bit, and think it's well worth the reduced price.

Here's a couple of shots I've used it on, taken at ISO 400 and first processed in DXO Optics Pro.

Optics Pro works far better than DeNoise......I've used both extensively.

After having a K3 for a month or so, the main thing I'm noticing is that the RAW files (and more so the Jpegs, though I hardly ever use them) are very noticeably less tolerant of processing than those from the K5. For images requiring a lot of processing, noise becomes an issue far sooner than it does with the K5, to the point that images shot at ISO 100 exhibit quite significant noise when I have to expand the histogram, as I regularly do with aerial images. Now I have to use DXO Optics Pro on all K3 aerial images, when, with the K5, I didn't bother below ISO 400. The WB also tends to go a bit wonky during processing of aerial shots, to the point of being impossible to correct in extreme cases. I would expect these problems would also occur on landscape shots where haze and UV are significant factors, and am very interested in other opinions on this.

On the plus side, I can get far more detail from the K3 than the K5 in optimum conditions.

Some of these problems are no doubt going to improve as I get more used to the files, but at the moment it's giving me a lot of headaches. I'll try and post some comparisons to show what I mean when I've got time; work's a bit busy at the moment.