His puzzled look might imply that the guy had some indication in the VF that something was wrong, like exposure. It's obvious he couldn't work out why.

Copyright question.

As your were working for another professional, effectively employed by him/her. Who owns the copyright for the images that you took?

Did you sign any form granting rights to the pro?

You've resolved your financial situation then? I thought you were selling everything and getting something simpler, to raise money. Although, I did notice that the wind direction had changed again.

George,

Microsoft's Access is far from dreadful if one understands how to get the best from it. I do, and I can tell you that it has earned me quite a lot of money since I first started using the original version, and rapidly upgraded to version 2, in 1991.

My first application which I wrote for a department of the NHS, ran on a 386 PC. It replaced a Motorola based Unix system running an Informix database. On the Unix system, the weekly reporting application that produced the data required to be produced by this particular department was started on a Friday afternoon and didn't finish until around midday on Monday. If the system stopped for whatever reason, that weeks figures were lost because there was no time left during the weekdays to run the application.

My solution, written first in Access 1 and replaced using Access 2, did the same job in 3 hours.

How much that says about the capabilities of the Unix system v the PC, or Informix v Access, I'm not sure.

So, I'll not have any Access bashing around here. It's a superb system, but needs some understanding and more than a smattering of Visual Basic knowledge to get the best from it.

PS: Although the last upgrade I did to that application was from Access 2000 to XP (2003), it is still producing usable information almost 20 years from it's inception. Now that has to be some kind of record, doesn't it?

PPS: I don't use Access any more because I'm now retired . . . and it does my head in.

You are certainly not alone.

The reason for this restrictive practice seems to stem from members posting comments which in turn get replied to by others. Then, the post to which later posts refer, is removed, or substantially altered such that the following posts no longer bare much relation. Granted, this can make some topics confusing, but not many.

Personally, I think this restriction is unnecessary and actually prohibits many more posts that could justifiably be modified or removed, than it was conceived to combat.

I know of no other forum that imposes time limited restrictions on the editing or deletion of posts.

This is an excellent write up, thanks. Can we see the images somewhere?

One thing to remember is that for those who use manual focus most, or all, of the time, their lens/body calibration will 'appear' to be accurate.

The available adjustment is for auto focus inaccuracies and apparently doesn't affect manual focus.

Expodisk is good.

I can't answer the poll because the choice of answers is flawed. I have only a K20D (2x), and I've made small adjustments for most of my lenses.

To answer "Just on the K20D" would imply that I haven't had to adjust my K5, which I haven't got.

I'm no expert in studio work of this kind, but I do have some general observations.

I agree entirely with Tyr's comments about pose etc. but there are two other points that I find a bit distracting.

1: The backdrop is creased, and it shows. It's relatively easy to fix this in PP, but it might not be so pronounced if the model were positioned further from the backdrop causing it to be more out of focus.

2: There is a black line at right angles to the thumb of her right hand. This is probably the stitching of the hem of her skirt as I can see that it continues further to the left of her left hand. I think these lines should be cloned out.