I had a canon pro 1.

there are times when it was the right camera.

one place is where you want video and stills, and neither needs to be "Pro" like family events or travel.
another is when shooting long... cameras like the canon is10 or the new pentax cost way less than even a mediocre 400mm tele for the slrs.
on a tripod, in good light, these cameras can match the quality of my old sigma 400 fairly easily.

so for nature shots, or travel...

another area is in dark areas when using flash (here the new pentax disapoints) the canons I had (g5 and pro1) both had advanced wireless capabilities same as the dslrs, but unlike the dslrs, they also had bright evf/live view lcds and passive and active af that worked perfectly even in pitch black conditions. They were also nearly silent shutters. So speedlights and bridge cameras made more than a few dark venus look good...

what if that really long flat prism is made that way because the af uses a hybrid of safox and moving the sensor forward and backward...which would make all mf lenses af, make all older af lenses focus faster, AND allow af in video mode? of course the video would need distance info from the lens itself, but pentax did file a patent for that and they did revamp new lenses before they even released them...hmmmn..sounds plausible to me...

there was a patent posted here recently that covered that very topic...

It is a lovely shot.
I don't think you did anything wrong.
But there was this one mother, a professional photographer that got arrested because a customs agent saw photos in her bag...it was her own child, and they were not much different than yours. popular photography posted the story in june or july of 2007 or was it 2008.
I hope I didn't embarrass you, I sure did not mean to.
Just felt it was worth mentioning, for education purposes.

Sounds good to me too...

bill a set rate for event coverage, licence out the usage, and retain your copyrights.

I usually ask $400.00 per 1/2 day and more for commercial usage rights.

I'm glad you get where i'm coming from.
and yes, they are fine photos for any family album.

many people find find my honesty and directness, a little disconcerting, but I can't help but be me.

and often my sense of humor gets me in trouble, but again I must be me.

so I'm glad the pictures bring you satisfaction and pride. you are good.
those photos are good.
be happy!

I have no doubts that Judith-ann shot these with artistic intent. and they're good. But yes we do have to fear. Some people, that need to be locked up.. as well as those that want to lock them up.... both of them can and sometimes do take photos like these the wrong way...

I have to walk a careful line here. I generally don't shoot nudes. People need to know there is a risk. Parents have been arrested for having photo's of thier kids....even pro photographers.... art and politics...Dangerous waters. swim in shark territory, and you might get bit. that is all I'm saying.

Sometimes being right isn't enough.
the problem lies in how far somebody who disagrees is willing to go....
link