Exactly! And isn't that the best part... when you can go beyond the basic tools and create something new different?

I do not like the look, but it is fun to play with and is a great way to find something that does work.

How many people hate bleach bypass, or high contrast, HDR, or other effects?
How about grunge? Without that, most of the portrait industry would be dead (like it or not).
Who knows, the next photographic fad might be to plastic wrap the hottest models in Hollywood. OK, maybe not.

But potentially it could be used with some other effects to create something more pleasing and sellable.

I believe it was a Sony. Not sure which model.

I know someone who owns one of these and says they work great!

http://www.lightningtrigger.com/

They are a bit pricey, but apparently it is more than a light sensor. It is also supposed to work on the change in charge in the air before the strike happens as well as the light. Although I am finding it difficult to find that information on their website.

Pentax is listed with an "n/a" on their compatibility list. I'm not sure if that means it will not work, or simply that they have not tested. You may try to contact them and see what they think.

I believe they are also built to order, so I don't know what sort of distribution they handle. (US Only??)

Pentax Shake reduction is good, but not THAT good.
1/10th of a second can be OK if you have steady hands. It also depends a bit on the focal length.

You really do want to use a tripod (or place on a sturdy table that is not bumped by crowds), and probably longer shutter speeds for fireworks.

RC is really just a marketing term. Honestly, an actual release may be no better than an RC or a Beta. Its all just "words"!!

It really depends on how much care and feeding the product manager allows to be put into the product before marketing and finance requires that it be pushed out the door for reasons of revenue.

"Beta" used to be what companies or developers would put out just before release to allow a limited group of people help shake out remaining bugs or usage issues.
Currently, the term of the day for the same purpose is "Release Candidate" (RC).

Its all a load of horse-patuty to make everyone feel good and get some marketing hype for the next release.
It makes those who paid for the product feel that they are getting something extra.
It makes those who have not paid for the product feel that they will get some extra value by having a well tested product when they do.

I go somewhere in between, but I might selectively fill in the dark areas such as the dials and heavy shadows... if you feel the detail there is really necessary. But in general agree, the second one starts looking flat.

Adding fill in areas lit by high contrast lighting is normal. I add fill to many of my images... and 50-75% is not unusual unless I have enough flash power to do the fill light for me.
Of course, shadow is necessary to create a sense of depth and shape, so you don't want to go overboard and remove too much contrast.

Regardless, I think the KR raw files have a lot of depth in them. Don't worry about adding "too much" fill light unless you are also seeing noise and/or loosing important detail. There is no "too much" if the final image still looks good.


As far as viewing differences, lots of things. Just a start,
1. Are you exporting as sRGB? (I would assume you're using that as it is the default) If not, that might help.

2. Are you viewing with a viewer that properly handles color managed files? I would think most should now, but, for example, I'm still not sure MSIE dose so yet. I had a single image a few years back that displayed three different ways on three applications all running on the same machine (and same monitor). So getting consistent results is not as easy as it should be.

3. Any given display may show your image brighter or darker... even if it is calibrated and profiled.
Calibration is not perfect, and results may vary greatly on the type of display.
TVs are usually set to be much brighter and bluer than they really should be. It makes them more marketable. You often need to turn them down and adjust the color. See if there is a Movie mode or something similar. That might make things a little less bright and also a little more in line with your computer display.

You may find that the 105W lamps are rather dim without upping the ISO a bit.
For people who can sit still and don't mind having continuous lights right on top of them, they would be OK.
For babies, and other "fast moving" subjects, they probably will not do very well.
I'd have to say 500w lights are barely getting into useable territory if you want to keep the ISO low.

I didn't see a price, so I can't say they are a waste of money.
They may very well be a good starting point.
Probably a better choice than spending $1000 for a good set of strobes, then finding out you're not into them.

Still, I'd look for higher wattage lamps if you don't quite want to go to strobes.
You may be able to re-use the modifiers (umbrellas), but be careful about how much heat they can handle!!!!
You can almost certainly re-use the stands later as you expand your setup.

Using the set and replacing the lights with your Metz flash might be a better idea for the set.

#1 rule of photography... there are no rules of photography.

Define "worthwhile". Plus, how are your planning to make money?

Are you just posting photos hoping someone will notice and want to pay you?
Flickr might do that for you if you're a very socially connected type of person and like to join groups and so on...

SmugMug is good. For the money it offers a lot.

Many of the photos I post there are for customers that have actively sought out my photography work (portraits, events, etc...). So when I put up a photo it is with the expectation that some of them will bring in money.

Some are just artistic or for fun, but many are for customers to review and request prints.
I only do this part time, so it mainly helps pay for the Pro-level of Smug Mug and some equipment.

I do not know what SmugMug has to offer with regards to photos being randomly "noticed" and purchased.
Thy do offer the option to have your work searchable, and to allow ranking and comments, so I know there must be some aspect in that regard.

Naturally, my business cards and event posters/handouts direct people to that site so I do get 'random' traffic... but I have never had anyone 'notice' my work out of the blue on SmugMug if they were not somehow guided my direction.

One might also argue that the default settings are configured that way for a reason.
The defaults are not be a bad place to start.

Once you get a feel for how things work you may have a better understanding what effect your changes may have. Otherwise, as stated, who says the "recommendations" are right for you?