Hey, that's good news. Congrats!

Glad you replied here, Kurt!
Just opened your gallery, and there's a lot to enjoy over there.!

With 28, to be multiplied by 1.6 (some 45) you don't have a wide-angle now. And for landscapes and interiors, that's a must.

The Canon 17-85 would overlap your Tamron for most part, but offers 17-28 extra. 17, or some 28 is already a decent wide-angle. And every one says it's a very good lens.

The 10-20 is very good also, but you'll have to get used to it.

At 10 it starts to deform if you tilt your camera, so pay attention to your composition.

Its main power lies in the enormous DOF, allowing you to get something very close and sharp, and have also a sharp background.

What I did notice though is that the 350D has problems autofocusing with it. No problem for me as I prefer focusing myself. Also, there's a huge risk of vignetting. Use the hood to avoid this as much as possible.
Finally, a pola filter for it (or any other one) has to be very thin. So thin that it becomes difficult to mount and remove it.

But it is a shockingly good lens indeed. Also for fun, like a portrait of your boss from very, very close...

Happy Birthday. Today? Tuesday? The day of the Total Lunar Eclipse? This should be something special, something to remember!
Have fun, and forget the rest!

I'll do my rain dance here, so you'll have no clouds if, and only if!!! you show us what it was like.

Take care of madmen and over-emotional reactions! This is a dangerous time to leave your pentagram.

eerie laugh (listening to Cradle of Filth)

May I ask what you mean by airbrushing? You mean creating a fake/adapted skin on another layer and then airbrushing the mask, or do you really mean airbrushing the skin itself?

The eclipse takes place between 7.53 and 13.21 (Universal Time) on TUESDAY 28.

It is not visible from anywhere in Europe or Africa.

The whole eclipse can be seen from Eastern Australia (Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane) New Zealand, Polynesia, and the West coast of USA and Canada).

For the rest of the USA, Canada and South America, it is visible at moonset.

For the rest of Australia, India, Japan, China and Eastern Asia, it is visible at moonrise.

http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/OH/image1/LE2007Aug28-Fig3.GIF

bummer. not for us.

thanks!

Yeah, but that would make us artists, and then we'd have to be serious  ;)

So do I now. Digital camera's include a mini computer with software. But this computer has a processor that is quite weak when compared to the one of a basic PC or mac. Which is why you don't have the same quality of algorithms of, say, Elements, PSP or PS in your camera. So black and white can indeed better be done afterwards on your puter /digital darkroom. And there is, my opinion of course, nothing wrong in using all available channels (rgc, cmyk, lab) and use all available tools to get your final result.  For example switching to a tri-tone. Yet, if you want to print, you'll need either a printer that you keep for it and in which you introduce four grey inks, or a ten or so colours machine that has additional greys. If not, get a very subtle, barely visible colour.

One big advantage of digital camera's though is that you can easiy extend the sensitivity range as compared to a traditional camera. I say "sensitivity range" because I don't know that exact English word or expression. I mean the range between the lightest and the darkest spot that your camera can capture without getting burned-out white or murky black. Call this the admired/feared zone-system.  I never used the real one, but I did use Ansel Adams findings, and still do.
Getting a good slide was sometimes quite difficult. No possibility afterwards to play, to combine...it had to be good from the first moment. Black and white film was more tolerant. I usually took a medium grey card with me to get a good central value. Or used my hand, which is the same. (skin is translucent greenish grey, and it's non-dead colour comes from blood on the deeper levels).

But the digital camera can outperfrom them all when using RAW. I haven't tried it out, but they claim that a 14-bit RAW can get you nearly 10 zones.
Up to now I used jpg best (which, indeed, uses the camera's processor) but I intend to switch in the near future.
This 10 zones (even 8 would be great) would give a superb base material that would need as good as no postwork.

Well, there are several things that you can do with a photo that cannot be done with a camera.

Like choosing the hardness/softness of your paper, like, after exposing for the highlights, developing for the shadows, like local enhancing, unsharp masking, solarisations (I admire Man Ray for these) . Etc etc.

I agree that knowing your camera is very important (and I admit that I don't yet know what my digital camera can do - I do miss the spot metering) but it's only part of the whole process.

My opinion of course.

Elgol  and the Cullin Hills lie on the Isle of Skye. Skye lies at the west side of Scotland, between the main land and the Outer Hebrides, rather to the North.

It was there that bonnie prince Charlie fled and was hidden after the massacre at Culloden, which makes many Scots still sing that "we can still rise up, and be the Nation again that stood against them, proud Edward (this was many centruries before Culloden, when the scots had won!) army, and sendthem homewards to think again.

Scotland is one of my dream destinations. You don't inhabit that land, you're tolerated by it. Pity the drive on the left. But ahhh... the Islay whiskies...

Back to this world...

I'm not referring to the wondeful shot by said photographer, but the image the threadstarter shows.

I known it's in German, butb this page by Sigma might be bhelpful:

http://www.sigma-foto.de/cms/bildwinkel/brennweitenvergleich.html

it shows you in Fleash a comparison between lenses from 10mm to 800mm, macro, converters etc.

You're shure it's a photograph, and not created with Vue, Bryce, WorlBuilder, Terragen or any other landscape soft? It looks rather unreal to me.

and exactly opposite of Jupiter (yesterday). Must say that there are so many rain clouds that you can see nothing.
BUT: the moon was quite big this year, and was higher in the sky. Which is good for people wanting to be followed by a moon shadow.

Thanks. You have formulated your experience very well. It's not urgent, so I can try out some options.