That's a great start then Stan, both the taking of the shot and processing It all looks very natural, good exposure (the brightest part of the water is the white-point), and you've kept detail on all the rocks apart from the darkest shadow areas which don't matter.

I'd probably crop a bit off the top and the RH side, just to tighten it up. Processing -wise, well I can't think of anything to say ... and I usually can!

I'm not saying that Facebook and other social media sites have nothing to offer photography, serious amateurs, professional and all. They are another promotional avenue, and as subsets of themselves (like the groups you mention) bring people and photographs together. But thats not the 'mainstream' (my 'massses'), the distiction that started this discussion.

My points above were not about the viewing and discussion possibilites for serious amateurs / semi pros on these sites - my points were about these sites fueling a new purpose and need for images, nothing to do with 'photography' but instead all to do with the masses online persona and 'status'. These photographic activities and opportunities you guys talk about will only be a niche aspect of these sites, dwarfed by the mass of images posted for entirely different purposes. That is the key distiction between the 'masses' (the new mainstream) and 'us'.

Equipment comes into it as well ... Smeggy, you've often talked about your high resolution mobile phone, and discussed its qualities in relation to our high end cameras. Well , thats another example of the difference between us & them. Very few mainstream phone photographers will be interested in or even aware of the matters you speak about here - pixel pitches, dynamic range, sensor densities, resolution, noise and all that, nor where their particular phone model might fit into all that. That sort of technical interest is part of the 'us', not of 'them'.

Most mainstream phone users have different priorities - its more about the ease and integration of feeding their status with up to the second supporting evidence. The phones are popular not because they might have 36 million pixels, but because they offer the chance to catch quick images, apply one-push effects and instantaneously send the images onto the social media sites. So you can be at a party, take the shots, send them online and sit and watch with friends while the images generate comments, likes and envy, and all while you're still at the same party! Thats the reason for the success of the phones and the sites. They have created a new need for images, a new purpose for the images that is very different from the purposes of traditional photographers like us.

Jim, its a varied set of images in a most atmospheric setting. In terms of PP, there's one aspect common to a few of them which I would look at, and that is the highlight areas. In a number of them the highlight tones are clipped, or nearly blown out - eg No5 the left most music stand / 6 outside the door / 8 the 2nd bassists left hand / 11 the stained glass .

Probably this is because the metering has 'seen' mostly darker zones in these shots (I'm guessing you used Matrix mode?) and has given you an exposure primarily for these darker parts of the frame. For me, these highlights can be distracting and pull the eye away from the main subjects, so I would select these brightest areas and try and reduce the brightness a bit. This will not be that easy now with these JPEGs, you'll be limited to a very small reduction, but it would probably help.

In hindsight in this sort of location it may be better to meter more for the brighter parts (eg by using spot mode , or just pointing the lens in the general direction and setting it manually or using the exposure lock before recomposing for the shot). This will give you darker images, but retain nice quality and detail in these clipped areas. You'll then have a much easier job to pull up the lower and mid tone brightness if needed on the computer a bit, and should give a very atmospheric and softer image.

With the Samyang 14mm the effects depend very much on subject. There are some shots that I don't need to correct anything at all as there's no obvious distortions at all - these tend to be landscapes with lots of complex foliages, gardens & flower beds, where there are no straight tree trunks near the edges.

Where there are trees near the edges then I usually need a few points of plus Vertical Perspective correction. I will usually activate 'edge extension' to keep the size and crop off where there's mirroring of objects. The lens has some barrel distortion, but its a very small correction, and again sometimes I don't need to bother. In general, architectural shots need more barrel an vertical perspective correcting than landscapes, and I do end up cropping a bit off the sides as a result. But hey, I'll get my super-wide angles withe the Samyang when we finally get FF!

There's plenty of examples with the lens in my PU gallery.

There is now very little connecting 'us' (serious amatuer / semipro photographers) with the 'mainstream' (I'd call it the masses image making and sharing activities). Our pursuit is the development and continuation of what it always has been - photography with the ideal tools of the day, learned about, practised and discussed ... pursuit of an ever increasing technique, skill and creativity combined.

Before I continue, let me be clear that I understand perfectly that any of 'us' can also be some of 'them', and thats perfectly OK.

What the masses do now is something entirely new, born of social media, something new in technique & equipment terms as well as intent. They are not driven by the same objectives as 'photographers' - they are driven by the need to fuel their online 'status' with supporting visual evidence, and a desire to ensure that evidence distorts their daily reality.

The many 'one-shot' effects services available now are needed to promote peoples images (their online 'persona') as more exciting, more popular, more fun, more involved than they actually are, to add some drama, style or other artificial element to their images in support of this aim.

Another fundamental change is the now lack of documentary, recording, or historic value to this new mass style of image making. By this I mean images are of very limited time value - they are of the moment, snapshots that vanish down a timeline, most never to resurface or regain their value.

Here's a personal example ... I take loads of shots of the family out & about, and many I treasure, not only because they are great images of my kids, but because they were technically proficient as well, they look 'professional' and polished. I don't have nearly enough time to edit and print out these better shots, so they stack up. Sometimes I'll finish working on one and show my wife ... 'hey, here's a great one of .... do you want to put it up on Facebook?' - she looks strangely at me ... ' no, thats from last year!' I'm thinking, so what? Its a beautiful photo, something that we'd love to have on the wall and everyone who visits would look at admiringly. She would love that too. But to her, it has no place on Facebook now ... its time has past there.

Congrats on the new lens Matty, there will be some fun to be had! I'm not keen on such distortions generally, accepting they can work with some subjects. I'd be curious, could you run these through some distortion correction process to see the results, and how easy / difficult it is to 'correct'?

Ralph, its going well, I think you've got plenty of interest in the 'poses' and expressions, the subjects are clearly engaged with it and thats the main thing.

I would take a closer look at the flash power or distribution of the light perhaps - in the group shots the light falls a bit unevenly, slightly underexposing those faces that are set back (eg the top girl in the first, the rear two in the second). On the shots with the black background the flash looks a little overpowered to me.

That 55-300 seems to have a great reputation on here Philip, and it has served you well also it seems! All nice sharp shots and good exposure control (eg the DR in No2). Those camera JPEGs look excellent also

Just need to hold on there for a FF iPad!

Have you changed systems to Apple now Gary?