I am 2 weeks into a trip to Italy. I have been to Europe many times before Covid but I noticed the accelerated change in photo taking, as we know. I have seen relatively few cameras especially DSLRS, more Canon than Nikon, and even a lonely Pentax which I also carry. My wife has an Olympus OM 10 and on a winery tour the guide said to her "you have a real camera and I have not seen one for a while ". Of the 9 in our group doing a tour only one other used a camera-a Canon rebel I think.

Most people use mobile phones (me too on occasion) and they can deliver good images but they are slow to use and I find them hard to use in strong light.

FYI

First my apologies as I’m guessing this subject may have been done to death but I cannot really find clear answers to my specific questions.

Nearly all of my post processing (PP) so far has been done directly in a copy of the original, image raw file. I make extensive use of masking and other tools such as dodge and burn, graduated filters, levels, brightness and contrast, sharpening and so on. The attached image (screen dump) was processed without layers. Would it/could it have been better if I had used a layer based approach to processing it?

I use ACR and Adobe Elements 21 with several plug in programs. I believe the plug-ins work on a layer basis. I also understand the underlying concept of layers and have used a layer, for chromatic aberration correction but that is about it. However, I have insufficient understanding to make fully informed use of layers.

What I would like to know is:
• The reason for using layers in PP and the advantage over direct image manipulation/when to use and when not to use layers?
• How to decide which of various types of layer to use and the optimal tool/process to use?
• How to determine the individual layers transparency?
• How to arrange the order of the layer stack for optimal results?

Aside from moving my overall PP to a better level, I want to be able to cut out and insert objects in an image for creative purposes.

Any assistance gratefully appreciated.


John

I suspect he is referring to the fact that the super rich pay a much smaller percentage of their income in taxes than the average person.

This is due to the fact that the super rich have the resources to affect the tax code and put things into it for their benefit. It also results from the fact that their income is structured in such a way as not to be called 'income'.

For example, someone who is paid in stock, has no income, just stock. The stock is not taxable until it is sold. But it's an asset. Now if that person needs money for some purpose, he borrows money against an asset (e.g. the stock). Now he has money, but no income. And the interest is tax deductible. To pay off the loan he can borrow more money, same result.

Last time I looked at a tax return, there was a section that referred to 'alternative minimum tax'. I wonder where that comes into this equation? (I am not an accountant and the tax code is meaningless gibberish to me).

This is a hypothetical challenge for all the financial wizards on UHH. It has to do with the financial situation of a young man having just graduated from college and started his first job.

His current annual financial posture is below. Note that parentheses indicate negative numbers.

$ 26,000 Income
($ 58,000) Expenses - including apt. rent, car payments, utilities like gas, water, electricity, cell phone, internet, Netflix, cable TV, food, entertainment, insurance, medical, etc.
($310,000) College Loan Debt. - yes it was an expensive college
($342,000) TOTAL SHORTFALL from above numbers

If you were his financial advisor, how would you have this young man fix his financial house? Note that filing for bankruptcy is not an option, as College Loan Debt cannot be wiped by bankruptcy. Note that there is an underlying theme or a trick to this financial challenge that will be revealed when enough UHHers have had a chance to respond.

Curmudgeon, Thanks for reading and for adding content. I added this post to voice that there are many things connected to inflation and the state of the economy other than the price of fuel. We are all like spiders living on a web where each thread affects us for they are all connected.

Water is a finite resource that constantly gets recycled. There will never be more and there will never be any less water on the planet. It just is somewhere else, including the water that makes up our bodies. When we die, even that water gets recycled.

As areas of the earth warm, the surface water evaporates into the atmosphere. Unfortunately, water vapor is one of the largest sources of "greenhouse gases" making the heat content of the air rise even higher, which drives more evaporation, which raises the temperature, and on and on.

The uneven heating and cooling of the earth along with its rotation and moisture content create pressure differences that drive the winds and carry away the moisture in the air. As it travels it condenses and rains down in areas most often not accustomed to such heavy downflows. This is a cycle that is presently impossible to control due to scientific and economic limitations.

The rivers are the backbone of life including commerce. Low rivers are a serious problem...including the higher density of pollution that becomes more and more concentrated.