I'm trying to learn how to measure here for close-ups and macro, so my comment here his is not academic. Just one example, this metric affects when I manually switch a macro lens on or off Full. I've been making it work, but really it has been hit or miss -- not my style, really.

So, you say as above but Nikon, without contradicting, I think, says AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED [CRC], July 2015, the minimum focus distance is 1.0' (0.314m).
I believe the Nikon value is wrt the sensor and is called Closest Focusing Distance, but you are citing wrt the front element, presumably not the outer glass or lens frame or sensor.
Maybe lens elements move in a CRC lens? Maybe some lens is or is not internal focus?

Seductive tutorial on fundamentals...

Super bright shots; I am pleased to learn that lantana grows in the UK! In your image, I can smell it -- the lantana, not the UK, LoL.

The most useful discussion ever on UHH, for me. Thanks much. Don't stop now!

I'm so pleased, Joe.
Keep in touch.
I'm reasonably far along in CC Lr but Ps, hardly at all. So, I'll be spinning up while you are doing the same.
Regards,
Tom

You have a point about Why the G. Esp. as I have just re-read the chat transcript I had with a photographer at Nikon this week and he said the D has better optical quality. I've spent enough lately and all I need right now is the 40mm D. Thanks, Steve.

Glad you mentioned the 50mm 1.8D. I have a non-ai Nikkor-S Auto 50mm 1.4 I should break out. Nikon considers this a significant lens -- see http://www.nikkor.com/story/0044/ -- apparently, this lens' innovations drove the emergence of 50mm 1.4 as today's normal lenses. I was interested to see Nikon's claim of consistent performance at all apertures while also saying the bokeh is questionable and flare is a problem until you stop down to f/4. Luckily, f/4 and smaller is my usual practice for close-up shots of small products.

The flare issue is somewhat addressed with a HS-9 or HN-7 hood. I have a HS-4 that snaps on nicely but I still need to check if the shape is similar to the HS-9 and HN-7.

A reason to listen to TAP? He is unlikely to be a sponsored - very unlikely! LOL.

In one of his videos he says he worked in a photography store and has been exposed to a huge number of lenses and cameras, seemingly in a troubleshooting role. That remark got my attention.

I'm getting a 60mm D this weekend for my new/first FF, based on his advice; I also plan to get a G, which he would not countenance, IMO. I'm hoping I'll prefer the results from the D. If so, then he will have added some value and I will owe him a modest $ contribution.

Exactly why I started studying this.

[quote=Algernon]I am a CC subscriber, using Lightroom. My question has to do with the feature set of Photoshop vs Elements. Is it worth my while to go ahead and enable PS on CC?

--
To your first question, is almost no trouble to "go ahead and enable PS on CC". However, on Mac, for best results be sure your OS X is up-to-date or no more than two .n revs back -- I'd expect CC/Ps will tell you while installing which OS X version is needed, even as, over time, Adobe requires still later versions.

Ps is aligned with Bridge, not Elements' Organizer. I learned the hard way to leave Bridge to one side, treat Lr and its catalog as home base, and visit Ps as needed, for example, for selections. Of course, this is just one of the ways to go.

Building on your second post in this topic, an advantage of Ps in CC over all earlier Ps versions is alignment with current on-line discussions, which may be more plentiful than for Elements 12.

Next project: Put the cork back.

Dick, Thank you for your interest. Here is the status:
The earliest respondent was at 6:47 PM PDT yesterday.
Regards,
Tom

Photoshop Elements 11 (2011) boxed software from Adobe plus a giant printed reference book. Both unopened. this is a legitimate copy bought in Apple store with my laptop in 2011. Includes a version of Premiere.

Free plus actual shipping cost to first interested hog. Send me a private email via UHH. I will correspond Thursday AM (PDT) with the first respondent who copies the above title into the subject line of an email.

This software version and book can be a reasonable way to spin up on PP and Adobe’s solution, until you need more in your software.

Adobe probably vacuums up what you have done between logins, but I doubt they want the photos. The amount of text data vacuumed is probably of no consequence to your billing for Internet services, but you could measure the impact after a month or two.

No worries.
Searcher's reply is correct and useful.
CC's photo offering still resides on and runs on your computer.
If CC did not do this, the responsiveness would be intolerable.

Some people on UHH have lately discussed which PP tools to use. The photography offering from CC is usually part of these conversations. The URL below is not proprietary and it gives us new info for our decisions about PP.

For example, the interviewees seem to be saying in the URL that the boxed Adobe PP software is now (or soon to be) history, which I did not know.

http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/Reborn_in_the_cloud?cid=other-eml-alt-mip-mck-oth-1507

I have pulled out a few quotes:


...we got serious pushback to our cloud plan from our photography customers, who felt the offering did not work for them. It was important for us to hear and address the community feedback. We found a way to stick with our strategy and satisfy our customers by releasing a bundle with Photoshop and Lightroom—separate from the full Creative Cloud suite—at an affordable subscription price. And the community responded favorably.
…
During the period that we were actively selling both perpetual and cloud versions, our finance team did an analysis and found it would cost us twice as much to offer perpetual and subscription products side by side. That was not sustainable. Development on the subscription-based product was generating new features and functionality about every month or every quarter. It no longer made sense to hold back all those innovations only to bundle them into the packaged product a year later.
…
we know who signed up for Creative Cloud, which apps they have downloaded, and which features they are using. We are using predictive analytics and our own marketing tools to listen to our customers and strengthen our relationships with them.
Dan Cohen: We are offering a broader and better value proposition to our customers. We’re adding new features and services on multiple devices and making frequent updates to our creative products, which help customers better address today’s content-creation challenges. We’re attracting new customers for our mobile products and building up our marketplace for content. Additionally, our entry-level price point is attracting customers we were not engaging with in the past. None of this would have been possible under the old model. Our brand value has gone up, and our ability to attract top talent has grown along with it.

You rang a bell here. Last night I ordered a new camera that is beyond my skill level. Why? My I need to do tethering and my D3100 cannot. I'd have preferred an on-demand, in-studio firmware upgrade to my D3100, to add tethering. The new camera will need a new workflow, so it will disrupt schedule.

There are two kinds of technology needed to do this:

1) For remote upgrades, this patent is one foundational mechanism for your vision: https://www.google.com/patents/US20030177480

2) For the cafeteria thing you mention, zany customer wishes would be costly and incompatible choices are likely. So, camera makers need to find usability innovation or else offer a very simple, unsatisfactory menu. Patent protection would allow one camera maker to add customers at the expense of another camera maker.