I must admit the K-x shots look clear enough at the high ISO, but is it the camera or photographer that has the severe lean?

I confess to being hopeless in the dark room, maybe why that's why I take my time(with film) to get the shot right.

I didn't shoot slides, but didn't dodge and burn etc.

Maybe I should try and get my head around Photoshop.

Until then I'll just have to get it right in camera.

Stunning Amin, well captured.

It reminds me of some wierd mushroom!

Take it personally, not me mikew

You grew up on film and moved to digital and took the time to use the technology. In doing so you've learnt new ways to improve/manipulate/alter images impressively so with what I've seen of your work.

Myself, again grown up with film, moved to digital and to damn lazy to learn the thousands of possibilities available in Photoshop. I prefer to try and get the shot right in camera.

My early remark about everybody having to use film certainly sparked a fire here!

I was merely trying to state that a lot of what we learnt the hard way can now be done in 'idiot' mode by the camera, taking the skill out of our art.

After all anybody can shoot on full auto,but it takes time learning to do it well using Av, Tv or manual.

I'm also very impressed with the quality of posted images by 'newbies' who ask for, get and use advice.

What a name for a printer, it sounds down right dangerous!

I confess to owning a Canon LIDE 20 scanner, it was cheap and does what it says on the box!

welcome and enjoy your stay.

Sorry to rattle you Mike, but I feel that there are two camps regarding digital photos.

The first is minimal cleaning and cropping, leaving the shot mostly untouched.

The second camp seems to manipulate a shot endlessly until they get something they like, which could be nothing like the original subject.

I fall in the first camp, but have no argument with those in the second.

The OP was asking do we rely too much on Technology?

I feel yes and often go back to a film body to keep my 'eye' fresh.

Point taken Martin.

I still think that a lot of potential owners would start with 'old' glass to see how things go and, as we do with DSLRs move on to a digital lens when the time is right.

Aminstar, your smoke, bubble and water shots are superb. You obviously have the patience, skill and time to set them up, experiment and edit them.

Something the older ones of us on here can't/won't do. Computer manipulation and editing is an art in itself!

The point 'spider is getting at is how often people rattle of hundreds of shots and actually have no input into the image apart from pointing the camera!

I shoot on Av, film and shutter speed are not my concern. Depth of field is. Something I learnt about in my film days. I know that f2 gives a shallower depth than f22.

How many modern users have figured that out?

I won't start about film speed but...

I second polchraine's view about Firefox.

I use it and find the spell check very uesefull, though not perfect.

My own spilling has improved a lot since using it.

EDIT: that should read spelling, FF does that though, if a word is spelt correctly it doesn't highlight it. A grammar check would be nice as well!