variation on a theme:
I made another.
used one styrofoam plate, and one tinfoil pie plate (same diameter).
cut a hole in the centerof each half before assembly, and hot glued a lenshood into the center, creating a ringflash. have mounted my 360 fgz to it to create a p-ttl ringflash accessory.

easy mini softbox....
glue two styrofam plates together, (to make a flying saucer like object) cut out a notch for your flash.
Here's the rig:


Here's a close up of a cup:


and a mini studio type shot:


Note no real clean up on these, don't mind the dust and stuff.

quantim has a wireless ttl flash unit (with pentax dedicated modual I believe), compatible with thier radio slaves. be prepared to sell your car.
;0)
http://www.adorama.com/QTQFT5D.html

All bets and options considered, the cost of a hotshoe adaptor, for the body, and an adaptor for the flash, and a set of long and short cables, is going to add up. There are no ttl radio triggers for generic flashes that I'm aware of.
you may find thst a pc cord and shoe along with an inexpensive flashmeter (polaris- if they still make them) will be your most veritile option.

leave the iso alone and set your EV compansation to +1 or +2 for a single shot.
or set your iso to auto and let it override your setting.

habit is where one creates or solves most minor problems.
When my spouse and I met, photography was a common interest, but learning to work together was a challenge.
My habit is to lock all tripod/lightstands legs and bolts when taking down equipment, hers was not.
My habit is to reset all camera controls to a "default position" before putting it away, hers is not.
my suggestion is to find a system that works for you and make it a habit and then you'll never forget.

Thanks guys.
I appreciate the kindness, and honesty.
(I have another shot of the dress).
We also intend to do a redo of that shot.
The reason I asked was simply this: Gerri and I were having a disagreement on that one. Gerri is learning some photoshop stuff and as we worked through it (it's hard to help somebody get thier Ideas to finished product), we nearing completion on the image, and she was quite proud.
While I feel the image had shown a great improvement over the original...I did not want to show it to a client. I also didn't want to discourage her.
I knew we wouldn't get bashed here, and I'll post the reworked image with the dresser removed, (I don't like the frame...it seems to me that fancy frames and borders and edges are sometimes a diversion on an image that was weak to begin with).

A little feedback please.
maybe I'm just too tired...but I can't decide whether or not to show this one to the customer...it was just a blah snapshot of the wedding dress...thought I'd experiment a little.

national gegraphic used to send a photographer out to a locale with a crew and several hundred rolls of film.
200-300 rolls times 36 shots per roll to get 8-14 images ofr a feature story.
One outa forty doesn't sound so bad for a tough shot if you ask me.

ps keep an eye out for more hardware and software with expanded dynamic range....(just like colorspaces from srgb to adobe for example)...I expect to see a revised zone system in the future sort've a zone ten to zone 100 for example....where one meters with points on a curve in photoshop in mind at the shooting stage.

Given the fact the film NEVER looked true to life...(limitied contrast range, color repruductions ETC) I'd have to say digital gives the end user more controls in an easy to control environment...that this results in unreal images more oft than not is an end user issue. I saw an image that had used dynamic contrast from several images to reproduce all the detial in the actual scene that would've been visible to the naked eye, and to be honest I didn't really care for it. It was a little flat looking to me and didn't resemble any REAL PHOTOGRAPH I'd ever seen.....but proves it is easier to achieve truer to life effects digitally...end user, not medium that really matters...