I use a Canon IX6550 A3 printer and epsom sx425w a4 printer. had a problem with PSE 8 printing odd colours and often quite dark. also difficult to size to paper using pse. Borrowed a Spyder monitor calibrater and it made no difference.(that could have been me) Used the cannon/epsom software to print and most problems dissapeared. I find that using srgb (not adobe) looks better for my needs. I also have a batch of cheap glossy paper to run "trials" of post processed pictures before printing on decent paper.(on A3 it saves finding out half way that a nozzle is blocked or ink low notifications.) that way spots,errors and extra processing can be adjusted when looking at the prints in daylight!!!. I use cartridge world inks (non generic) and keep promising myself that the cost savings will go towards fancy paper, but it usually goes to the wife instead. Had a few winning prints at competition and less " adverse print comments" so its not BAD advice to try....and costs little time and effort as a beginning.

Coo.."Art" "Photography" and "Judges" in one question. Wow 400 years of discussion couldn't quantify Art, so I guess if your picture is enjoyed by more than one person its a great "something". Art usually costs more than 'a picture', but a picture is apparently worth a thousand words. Judges interpretation is often split between "artistic" and "practical" and in any room full of people it will be "wrong" to the majority or at best only partly right. The most knowledgeable judge is probably the one who marks you highest. But, as has been said many times, a photograph should at least originate in a camera. In the UK we use "Enprint" to describe a non manipulated photo. (but that is only on trust...!" everything else stands or falls on its own merit with the public...If we didn't believe in fairies there would be no pictures or photographs of them.

Oh forgot. the sigma 70 - 300 dg macro originaly with the kit lost auto focus because the gearing was not up to the strength of the Sony motor. Sigma have upgraded newer lenses so whatch what you buy...

I have had a Sony Alpha 230 for three years. First time user and it is a great camera. At the time there were not many 2nd hand lenses about so later bought a 2nd hand EOS 450D so that i could buy cheap lenses to practice with (didn't) and live view (slow). I keep on going back to the Sony cause the images are so much sharper. As for professional use....most mags have a list of cameras that they accept pictures from...usually last two new versions made by canon and nikon, occaisionally last version Sony. it is not camera fault ...simply snobbery.

Hi Mike,
My local club had a spyder monitor calibration tool, tried it and couldn't see the difference. When I moaned about Elements printing darker than screen, told this is just the way it is, and best to use the printer software. Now I trial print and adjust so that the final is how I want it to be. I'm not printing hundreds so cost is minimal. Looked at using "proper Print Paper" as this also affects looks...not THAT good a photographer yet. Think the answere I'm giving is that calibration is a tool that depends on how many other options you have and your spending priorities.

Welcome PIP, The learning curve for photoshop and gimp is pretty steep. Having said that, elements and a good book will teach you 'what you want to do - when you want to do it'. Photoshop tutorials abound on the net and can be printed off. If you're new to using a camera you will want to do quite a bit of editing till you get the hang of things cause ther's lots of buttons and things to try and even more things that go 'wrong' between lense and printer..

The guide number is the reach of the flash in metres. The problem then comes with the flash with a zoom head which means it can have a narrower flash spread over that distance/or a weaker light. no idea which is better. I use manual flash as i'm a skinflint and won't pay for Canon till I master it.
Also remember that the flash lights for a millisecond and your apperture / speed /ISO affects the background exposure unless the background is where your focal point is... Play with a 'cheap manual one and and have fun...see yongnu on utube

Hi, I've been reading your posts for a couple of weeks and think that the coverage of the questions asked are really helpful. It also appears that not many bored kids get on here. I have been taking pics for about 3 years. Got a couple of high marks in the local clubs. Use a Canon EOS 450D and a Sony Alpha 230. Tried the recent thread on shooting the moon, got an egg shaped one with the sigma 70 - 300 f4 5.6 (?) is it always that shape when not truly full - My eyes are over half a century old.....what post processing do you recommend in PSE 8 to make it 'a keeper'? should it be BW from RAW?
Cheers
George