Do you prefer raw photos or "improved" versions ?

[Ecstatic]

PSP is a fine program, Tadmirer, though Photoshop is the gold standard. I've been using Photoshop since v. 3.0, so I've constantly upgraded and gotten the upgrade price. If you have to buy the program outright, it's damned expensive; best to buy it as part of the CS suite and even better if you can swing an educational purchase.

As for enlarging photos, unfortunately that never works well because the program has to interpolate, adding non-existent data based on the data of surrounding areas. It's much better to reduce filesize than to enlarge a rastered (bit-mapped) digital image.

Any 5 megapixel camera is a good start. I waited for years to invest in digital because of the quality/cost factor; until just a few years ago, digital simply was far inferior to film. Then professional cameras (like the Nikon D) came out, which were arguably equal to film but cost $4000 and up. I could get a digital back for my large format (4x5) camera...for a mere $16,000. Last year Nikon introduced the D70, and I finally went for it: under a thou, full SLR with interchangable lenses, the kind of system I need. A little compromised compared to the D2, but at a fraction of the cost. (Of course, there are other fine prosumer cameras, but I'm already invested in Nikon so I wanted to leverage that investment.)

Glamour photography is "a whole nother" field, where photo retouching is expected and necessary, but it is easily overdone. The best photographers make you forget the artifice and just see the beauty, but it's not an area that I've much experience in. Nature and event photography is my mainstay.

[chefmike]

thanks!

[Tadmirer]

Well chefmike, I saw some bold there, but no color .

Just kidding !

[chefmike]

Well chefmike, I saw some bold there, but no color .

Just kidding !

How's this-Thanks!

[Tadmirer]

Jolly good.........I believe you've got it, sir.