OK.

I assumed that the procedure was to start with an actual photo and then instruct the AI what you wanted done to it. If, as Terry says, the Adobe Generative Fill was never meant to generate images from scratch then it's not a fair comparison. My question was based on the observation that Adobe editing in general seems to be biased towards keeping a natural look.

Damn, I wish I'd thought of getting the grass cutter in.
.

(Download)

Would I be right in thinking that in the Adobe image the bird is closer to the original, as in using your bird image instead of generating one from scratch using AI?

Good variety of perspective, and both well chosen.

If you want something that works for very long exposures, my Nikon cable shutter release has a feature where you can depress the button and push it forward, which holds the button down until it's pushed back. Your camera's cable release may have a similar feature.

I think you'll find that all cameras work like that.

Everybody has memories that they can recall. A photograph is a memory on steroids.

Ultrasonics can damage delicate things - like mechanical shutters. And the liquid that the objects are immersed in is usually some kind of solvent. The wrong kind of solvent could damage any non-metal parts of the shutter mechanism, plus it would totally remove any lubrication. You would then be left with the problem of finding appropriate lubrication. Apparently you can't use just any lubricant. Too thick and it impedes the shutter, too thin and it can migrate onto other parts like the optics. The fact that you have to ask about it suggests that you don't know enough to experiment with that technique. if you want to use ultrasonics, do so only with professional guidance, or pay a professional to do it.

That's the sort of thing I'd expect to see on a reeeeealy nice Christmas card.

Good summary of the possible pitfalls - frustration, impatience, complacency, plus a reminder to have clear objectives based on our own idea of what's desirable and what works well.

Doing something that you've learned to do well can be its own reward. When you know that it's a job well done, you'll feel a sense of achievement. Plus the end product will be a reward itself.

The ultimate is to keep on developing until you've achieved mastery of your chosen style. Ideally your chosen style will be based on your preferences and your aptitudes because then you'll be playing to your strengths. But aptitudes can always be developed as we progress so our starting point doesn't define our eventual limits or the limits of our achievements. And it's possible to achieve mastery of more than one style.

Do telephoto zoom lenses tend to be soft at or near their maximum focal length? Yes.

Does cropping increase softness (and noise)? Yes.

Does distance (i.e. lots of atmosphere) make for soft images? Yes.

Does increasing the focal length increase the need for fast shutter speeds, and does using shutter speeds that are insufficiently fast at long focal lengths make for soft images? Yes.

Does using very high ISOs cause softness? Yes

You yourself will have to decide which of the above are relevant to you. If you never get sharp images, the lens may be at fault.

Beautiful sunset.
.

(Download)

Sometimes I get the impression that those early photographers with their relatively primitive equipment must have known a thing or two.