I'm thinking that last picture should be XXX rated. Where's the moderators???? You'll have to excuse me now, I need to take a cold shower.

I subscribe to the theory "if it works, it's right" and speak only from experience (vs knowledge and wisdom). In researching what lights to buy, I found many pros advocating both methods so that was little help. As I am mostly a studio shooter... still life and "artistic" (how presumptuous does that sound?) model shoots. I like shadow and lightplay, to "study" and play with the lighting for a shot, so for me continuous (hot) lights work best. I rarely use flash. My first light was a quartz light but I quickly changed to lights that had standard incandescent bulb sockets for the flexibility they provide. With these I can use temperature controlled photo bulbs (expensive and short life span) for portrait style shooting, or everyday soft/natural light bulbs offering a range of wattage and effect on the image for "artistic" and still life shooting. Depending on need, I have available 2 8" reflectors, with barndoors (which I can cover with translucent material to make a pseudo soft box), and umbrellas. Also one deep 6" light for hair and focused lighting. I use a boom arm for overhead lighting, which can be great. I also break with traditional wisdom and occasionally use dimmer switches to modulate the light's intensity... yes I know it changes the light temperature, but you can set WB to offset that and it gets me the light/shadow I want. This is all cheap stuff from Ebay, the total coming in at a couple hundred dollars. The only negatives are glare for the model (though none have complained and umbrellas can help mitigate that) and sometimes heat... but that's why God created air conditioning. :) Hope this helps.

Now there's a pair... would have loved to be a mouse following them around listening to their secret "girl" talk.

Great buy. I have an Epson 2200, the 2400's precedessor, and love it... especially 13x19 prints (actually 12x16) B&W prints on watercolor paper. Must caution you I went through 3 2200's (over a one year period) before I got one that worked reliably and predictably, however must say it was worth the work... also I wasn't alone in that many swap-outs. Of course now I'm drooling for a 4800... 16x22 prints. I saw a company (on the net) that uses one for commerical printing for photogs... food for thought. Good luck.

Hmmmmm, I would guess that might be more likely a browser function than a Windows function, hence why it would work on some not on others. Doesn't work on mine (Netscape 7x).

Yeah, thanks from me too, was curious about that myself.

I fail to understand the preoccupation with what people post and how they rank/comment. This is not a professional organization, but an open community, without credential requirement. Home to novices such as myself, some with great talent and a few who over esteem their talent. Certainly it contains social subgroups, contains members who are humble and a few who are pretentious... those who are generous with their comments (for whatever reason), those who offer serious comments, and those that just can't be bothered. Maybe a less talented photog actually thinks a mediocre shot is great. Maybe some are just being kind to encourage those who are learning. So what? Where's the crime or sin? We're all free to view or not, comment/rank or not, accept comments/rankings or not. I fear the only thing this does is detract from a great place for a bunch of photographers to share their work and "hang out", regardless of their talent, ability or motives. I suggest it might help to re-read the definition of a communty.

Tibet... I don't think so. I believe "center-weighted" is more of an onboard camera's method of how to interpret light for the shot, focusing on the center of the image. If one were to look for analogous terms, I think (remebering I don't know for certain) "incident" would be more closely related to the camera's matrix metering, where the light is considered from a variety of sources

Thanks Misha883, my camera does allow for manual settings (Sony f828), which I usually employ. The light meter I am considering handles spot and incident lighting as well as handles flash, though I rarely use the flash.

Thanks TV, good to know I'm not the only one with this shortcoming. However, since I wrote this, I figured out a way to use the camera as a light meter... which has always been available (DUH!!!). I take a pic in the auto setting, review it and check the settings the camera chose for the pic... which is usually a bit brighter than I prefer. Then I can use those as a base point to begin tweaking shutter speed, aperture and iso settings to suit what I'm going for. Maybe someday we rookies will become proficient enough to do this on the fly... but until then, any crutch will do.

Generally, and briefly, it's a hand held sensor that you place near the target of your shot and it will give you suggested shutter speed and f stop settings. I have difficulty getting it consistently right (or even near right) the first time.

I bought mine at best buy as well. But I've also bought a bunch of stuff on Ebay and do so with confidence. Prices there can be soooo much better.

Oh my... getting paid to take pictures... aren't we the lucky one? Congrats for well deserved recognition.

For what it's worth (keeping in mind I'm a rookie, or maybe that should be Doufous Jr.) the bottom line is the end result. I've read about it, tried it and concluded: 1. I don't do sophiscated enough postwork to require the extra info. 2. My basic impatient nature is riled while waiting for the longer processing of the image in the camera and uploads to the computer plus filling up cards so quickly. 3. I do backup frequently and don't want to be using a truck load of DVD's to hold my photos. 4. I have taken identical shots in all modes and saw no perceptible difference on the screen or when printed on my Epson 2200, 2880dpi at 13"x19". But then, I do wear glasses. So I guess it's good to be a rookie, content with my 8mp jpg's, and not worry about such things. I especially like the link DBGRAFIX provided... made sense to me.

Re: DBgrafix You know what they say, the mind is the first thing to go... or at least I think that's it... I can't remember.