Welcome to UHH! That's my old home territory -- born there and lived in various places in Humboldt County as a child. Beautiful country!

If you enjoy getting out and exploring the area, you can probably identify where these photos were taken one rainy day a few miles north of Eureka:

(Download)


(Download)

In the legs, it looks like he's built a bit like Alley Oop!

Wow -- my drive-by's of Shasta have never turned out like that! Beautiful shot!

Good point, thanks, Sue! Unfortunately, no -- I didn't get them in the original photo, was focusing on the mountain and the arch. I'll keep that in mind for future shots.

This technically meets the criteria, but the frame is more attention-getting than the thing framed (Mount Edith Cavell in Jasper National Park.)
Any suggestions from Hoggers on how this could be improved are welcome. I've already done whatever post-processing looks to me to be an improvement, but am a beginner.

(Download)

Reminds me of Aunt Nettie...

Thanks, another nice shot! I hope to go there in December.

Nice shot! Where is it, which desert?

Beautiful! I should check my rear view mirror more often...

Beautiful! They are very "graceful" flowers.

A couple of places I've been and can highly recommend:
Big Basin National Park in Texas.
Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in southern Arizona: this is one of our favorites. A very nice big campground (half-price if you have an interagency senior pass) in beautiful desert scenery -- lots of vegetation, unlike most deserts.

It looks darker than most -- is it a Florida panther?

Sorry for taking up everyone's time for something that was just an oversight on my part!

Question answered! Thank you, Bret Perry, for asking how I was determining the size -- I was using the dimensions given by my viewer (GwenView on a Linux system). It evidently reduces the size of RW2 files in order to display them. When I open the RW2's in a program made for processing Raw files, the dimensions are actually slightly larger than the dimensions of the biggest JPEG.

Oddly enough, two different Raw-processing programs show different sizes for the same RW2 image, although both are larger than the JPEG.

Thanks again to all who responded.

Thanks to those who have responded so far.

hassighedgehog, in my other cameras, the raw image is the same or larger pixel dimensions as any of the JPEGs, which makes sense. My understanding is that the raw image should be 1-pixel-per-photoreceptor data, whereas the JPEGs are processed, and could include data from more than 1 photoreceptor in a given pixel.

Bill_de, I tried various drive modes, including Off, no change.

Gene51, yes, I've verified the settings you mentioned, all were set as you suggested. Tried 3 different Burst Rate settings plus single (no burst), no change in Raw picture size. Have tried Quality setting of RAW as well as RAW+JPEG FINE, no change. Aspect ratio 4:3. I tried a very fast memory card (SanDisk Ultra, 80 MB/s) and an EXTREMELY fast card (SanDisk Extreme Pro, 300 MB/s), just in case write speed might be a limiting factor, no change. Like you say, weird!