Well, here's the thing. The healthcare mandate is there to protect other people also. You see, right now when someone goes into an Emergency Department and is in need of care, they get it. They also get medication, surgery or any other medical treatment that is necessary.
If they can't pay, then that cost is absorbed by the Hospital and made up by charging other patients who do pay, whether through Insurance or out of pocket more.
So there is a victim here and the bad news is, that it's you.
The mandate is there to protect you from paying for my treatment.
It's that simple.

The mandate seems to be the sticking point on this issue. I'll give you my opinion of the mandate.
1. I think it's needed for the law to work as having only sick people get insured makes it impossible for the Insurance Companies to make a profit.
2. If you look at Healthcare and accept that every human being will at some point in their life get sick or injured you can then say that everyone is part of the "Healthcare Marketplace". Thus just as saying if you own a car you need insurance, I think the government can say, if you are a human, you are in the market place and insurance is required. (Of course the Supreme Court may not agree with me).
3. If the mandate is removed, then the Affordable Healthcare Act will probably fall apart and we'll have no plan at all.
4. So much good has already been done and is planned to be done that we really need to save this plan. Not just insuring your adult children but no charge for preventive medicine such as flu shots, vaccines, colon, prostrate and breast cancer screening etc. And last but not least charging women, the same price as men for health insurance.
Whatever the outcome of the courts decision, I hope someone comes up with a plan to save our healthcare system because right now our hospitals are all in crisis.

Well, opinions are cheap and many on this site, but you asked so here's mine. If you're shooting landscapes, I'd go with a wide prime lens. Even wider than the 35mm. Like 24 or 18. As to which one should you go with Sigma makes great lenses at a reasonable price and Nikon makes really great lenses at a higher price. If money isn't an object go with Nikon. If it is the Sigma will perform well and you won't see any difference in most enlargements.

If it's sharp through the viewfinder but not the image, the cause is most likely the sensor. Whether it was moved, dislodged or smeared with something is anyone's guess but you need to see a qualified repair person.
You also need to revisit the person who did it as I've never heard of a sensor moving itself.

Seems counter productive to close the chit chat area by chit chatting about it.

I'll give you the advice that I got. If your friends have Nikons buy a nikon, if they have canons, buy a canon. This way you have someone to talk to when you come up with a problem and can even lend each other lenses and equipment to try out.

follow Knightmarion's link and set up an account. They accept zipped files so you can literally register hundreds of photos for one small fee.
It's worth it.

I'm with Judy. I keep most of them. On more than one occasion those mediocre shots were saved when Adobe upgraded their software.

.

As long as he's got these images copyrighted this lawsuit is a slam dunk. I understand his being upset over their use especially in venues being used for banners but I'm sure the court can arrive at a figure that will make him feel better. If however, they aren't copyrighted then it's a more complicated issue and added to that will be that the monetary award will be much lower.
A lesson for us all.

Yeah, pretty much. If you don't believe me try Portrait Professional. It definitely requires very little skill beyond moving a mouse and retouches portraits amazingly well, including darkening lips, retouching eyes and softening skin while removing blemishes and leaving texture.
It's unfortunate for the pros but the general public is going to get astounding photos in the future with very little talent. Our job, is to be better than that.

Anyone got a good recipe for goose?

First, congratulations on being selected. The pricing issue is always tricky. Let's face it there are photographers who can get thousands of dollars for a print but that's the exception. I revert back to my retail days (not photography) where everything was 3x the price that we paid for it. So if a framed print cost you $50.00, I'd start the pricing at $150.00 and go from there. You can still bring it down to $100 if you'd like but make sure they don't cost you more than you get.

Guess it depends with me. I really like the wrap around look i get from a softbox when shooting portraits. However, if I need to light the whole body, I like an umbrella because of the spread. I find you can illuminate the background and the subject with one umbrella but if you use a softbox, you need to light the background separately.

I personally like the first one but I have to admit the third one is unique.