Thank you BullMouse, but my problem is that "big one" is not like any other image.

I need to somehow fit a 3:1 aspect ratio into a 2.68:1 aspect ratio as I am just not willing to lose that much of the photo capture. Completely ruins the pan effect.

For information purposes, my pan is the result of stitching four landscape photos, if that makes any difference.

Still need to hear from that UHH printing guru. Thx!

When using the adjustment brush on my MAC and activating the Option "O" function to check the areas I have affected (i.e., colored shading), I have been experiencing inconsistency with it showing the shading one time and then not the next, even after toggling on/off several times.

Is there something I am not understanding about this tool? In other words, is the shading affected by one of the sliders (i.e., opacity, density, etc.) that would cause this? I have played with them a bit but have found no consistent results.

Thanks for your thoughts/time!

First time attempting to print a canvas pano and cannot seem to get my aspect ratio straight out of Lightroom CC (i.e., Merge > Panoramic) to match the aspect ratio of the canvas I am attempting to print (16" by 48" or 3:1) without cutting off about one-third of the photo. Can someone offer some assistance?

I have attempted exporting (RAW to JPEG) by photo dimensions (i.e., 16 X 48), pixel size (i.e., 2850 X 7650), etc. Cannot seem to get a handle on it?

So, how do I get my pano shot to match the 3:1 aspect ratio without lopping off the photo loosing the composition effect of a pano? Is this a crop or a zoom issue?

Probably a simple fix (I hope) but one I have never encountered before so need an assist.

Thanks in advance for your feedback!

Just so you have all info before you to consider, Induro also makes their version on the Sidekick that sells for $175. Very similar. I use mine with a Canon EF 400 f5.6 with 2x teleconverter with no problems. Works great for my part time hobbyist purposes.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/655338-REG/Induro_485_000_GHBA_Gimbal_Head.html

Also check Craig's List in your area. Got mine for $75.

Is there somewhere to document post processing steps when you have used several plugins and might want to duplicate those steps in the future?

I noted there is a Comments section at the bottom of the Metadata section on the right in Library mode, but it states "Comments not supported here."

Guidance/suggestions? Thanks!

Yeah, that's the ticket! "Move photos first, then remove subfolder." So simple, yet so elusive. Thanks!

Unless I am mistaken, when you import into a subfolder, the photo count of the subfolder increases by that number, as does the parent folder. So lets say for example I imported 5 photos into a subfolder called "Lions." This is the only subfolder so the parent folder called "Wildlife" also indicates a photo count of 5.

And this is where my confusion starts. If I attempt to delete/remove the subfolder (I want the parent folder to remain with the photos), I get a message that the photos will be deleted from the catalog but will remain on disk.

So, is there no way to remove the "Lions" subfolder without removing the photos from the catalog? Do I need to remove them and then re-import them into the parent folder?

I hope I have made myself clear. Thanks!

Thanks, but when I tried this it gives me a message that the photos will be deleted, that unless I am mistaken will also delete them from the parent folder.

So, I ask again, how do I delete the subfolder WITHOUT deleting the photos?

Pardon me if doing what you instruct accomplishes this, but I did not want to proceed without knowing for sure. Thanks!

How do you delete a sub folder without deleting the photos from the parent folder?

In other words, I have a few folders where I created a sub folder during import anticipating other sub folders that never came to fruition. I now want to remove the needless sub folder without deleting the photos from the parent folder.

Appreciate the assist! Thank you!

My experience with phone/internet providers, like most other companies for that matter, is it all depends on who you talk to. One person will not offer the "special deals" while another will.

So my point? If at first you do not succeed, try, try again! Or, if you have been a customer for a long period of time, ask to speak to their "Loyalty Department."

Good luck, and may the dice roll in your favor!

I second this recommendation. There are many options out there, but for much more $$$$. For $36.19 right now at B&H, this is a steal.

I may have to buy another at that price! Has served me well.

Moose,

You may be able to extract some applicable/useful information from an earlier post of mine. Hope this helps.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-350676-1.html

I also learned watching Anthony Morganti's LR videos. Free, informative, and easy to follow.

Would also supplement with the following site:

http://www.jkost.com/lightroom.html

I recently purchased my first refurbished camera directly from Canon (7D Mark II). As far as physical appearance you would not know it was not brand new. Not a scratch or ding on it. It had 3,450 shutters actuations. Since this camera is rated at 200,000 actuations that is less than 2%, so I can live with that. Were it 34,500 actuations I would probably have sent it back.

I will say, however, I am having initial focusing issues as well as many pics seeming darker than my former Canon 60D at the same settings. With that said, at this point in time since I have not put in sufficient time to learn the ins and outs of this camera, it is likely user error.

This camera has great potential. I simply have not lived up to that potential to current date. I am sure I will have future things to say once I have gotten over the learning curve hump.

Opinions-a-plenty, so I will give mine.

The primary issue/cause based on the provided photo is that you have side lighting casting undesirable shadows on the subjects faces, supplemented by the woman's face angled down with her hair possible blocking the side lighting source, as well as some likely facial complexion differences. Fill flash would have eliminated the shadows and likely helped with exposure. Any slight facial exposure differences remaining could easily be tweaked post processing.

My two cents worth, keep the change!