Gerry Winterbourne

You're welcome. I've thought of a few more things. You haven't said how you are going to present the recipes once you've recorded them. A photobook seems a good idea - there are plenty of companies ...

Let's start with a "perfect" set up. You need a tripod - it doesn't need to be expensive, but make sure it is sturdy enough for your camera. I don't really think you can do anywhere near a decent ...

This is sensible advice but I'll add a caveat - there may be circumstances that are unusual and not, therefore, easily testable. My brother and his friend (sand their wives) go on wildlife tours ...

Fair enough, but that's about whether you like the Lightroom model whether it's bought outright or via subscription. Interesting in its own right but not the topic of this thread.

Yes, 0.3 is a rounding of 1/3 so it's 3 clicks for 1 stop, 6 for 2 stops. Many cameras allow you to choose 1/2 (0.5) stop increments instead. A stop is a stop: it's nothing to do with the clicks on ...

Most cameras have DOF preview button/switch. It shows the DOF you'll get in the shot but does so by stopping the lens down to your chosen aperture (that's how it shows the DOF, of course). With ...

Quibble over semantics if you like, but there's no logic in Adobe meaning anything other than that it has no intention of ever pulling LR as a standalone option. Consider the income stream Adobe ...

Which is, of course, why they won't.

I don't see what cloud storage has to do with it. Adobe is in competition with lots of other software providers. It won't raise prices just for the sake of it because that will deter new customers ...

I'm happy with my memory of what I read many months ago; I don't feel any need to refresh it.

But that's still not this sub-thread. The post I was replying to was about the potential for Adobe to increase the $10/month for CC, not the relative price of standalone v CC. Adobe has said that ...

Adobe has undertaken that it will. Some people pretended Adobe had broken its promise to maintain LR as a standalone product when it introduced LR CC alongside LR6.

The post you are replying to was about the potential for Adobe to increase the price of the CC package. That has nothing to do with comparing the prices of two different offers, so you have ...

My view isn't philanthropic - it's straightforward business logic. Well, of course, phone cameras never will rule the day so to that extent it's an idle speculation. However, if Adobe does go ...

If the photos on Flickr are representative you'll get better value by buying better lenses than by buying a FF camera. Yes, FF offers advantages but compared to the best APS-C cameras they are ...

That's silly. Adobe is in competition with lots of other software providers. It won't raise prices just for the sake of it because that will deter new customers and lose old ones. A relatively low ...

No it doesn't. You can buy LR as a standalone - there's no push. It offers a bigger package, which isn't pushing. You'll be able to update to LR7 in due course if you want the updates . Whether or ...

This leaves me puzzled as to the problem you are trying to solve. Most of the cat is blurred; I find the blurred nose spoils the picture, so I'd have used a smaller aperture rather than seeking a ...

This is true of Adobe, certainly, and possibly also true of others. With the Adobe CC suite one can buy a version of PS that satisfies many people (CS6) and it will remain functional (effectively) ...

Of course they couldn't. Raising prices earns more profit on the items sold but also reduces the numbers; the net result is just as likely to create a reduction in profits. Adobe used the "raise ...