Adobe is apparently doing some market testing with the LR/PS subscription. I suspect that different prospects may see different offerings based on some demographics. The fact that I can see the 9.99/mo option (on view all plans) does not mean that everyone will see it. The fact that you cannot see the 9.99/mo option does not mean that no one will see it.

3. I am not sure what you mean by 16-bit. I presume that you want to process the image with a 16-bit depth for each pixel. The software runs as 64-bit but can process images with a variety of bit depths.

Processing at a 16-bit depth is far more important than being able to display the image with a 16-bit depth. You would need very long-trained eyes, very good equipment, and a well controlled environment to see much difference between the two bit depths on a display.

5. The X-Rite equipment is used to calibrate and profile the monitor. You are just talking about the calibration portion where you adjust the computer/monitor settings to get the display as close to your desired specs as you can. The closeness will vary with the specs you chose, the equipment capabilities, and the environment. You then profile the calibrated monitor to get the truest display that you can. If the graphics processor can handle LUTs then you can set a profile. You would then need to keep the laptop in the same lighting conditions to get consistent results.

Q1. I believe you are conflating "mode" and "color space". RGB is a mode. sRGB, aRGB, ProPhotoRGB, etc. are color spaces with the RGB mode. One way to see available spaces in PS is to go Edit -> Convert to Profile and then look at the drop-down list for the destination space.

If you are shooting critters in your house you need:

1) Something to contain them.
2) A tolerant wife (spouse?).
3) A budget for roses.

After that, it is want.

I don't know how you learn, but consider a book or some Internet searches on specific shots. You have enough equipment to get started. Dive in!

Try a few things. See what you can do with what you already have. Get feedback on your captures. Some questions to keep in mind:

How many macro/close-up pictures have you tried to take?
How many of those were difficult or impossible because of some equipment lack?
Why was each specific shot difficult or impossible?
What could you do, or did you do, to get around the equipment lack for each of those shots?
Was the process of rethinking those shot satisfying?
Do you notice a large proportion of shots that could be improved by the same piece (type?) of equipment?

Have fun!

I have used LibertyPuzzles.com a number of times with excellent results. They are not cheap, but I believe they are worth it. They have amazing quality for both their standard and custom puzzles. There is no slop between the pieces (laser cut). All puzzles are rectangular, but not all edge pieces have a straight edge. Some "whimsy" pieces are cut into recognizable shapes. They show the piece outlines in pictures of the puzzles. The actual piece outlines are often less noticeable in my opinion.

Custom puzzles have 225 or 500 pieces.

JW,

Quick look in PS. I would think it would be fairly dark in PA on 2/20 at 6:45PM (camera clock set?). Exif data shows a EF 50mm II lens and 1/40 second with ISO 200.

I don't have any experience with your rig. The EF 50mm II lens is not very expensive, but a quick scan of reviews shows people happy with it ("for the price"). I would think that the image would be sharper if that lens were clean front-and-back, un-filtered, and performing to spec (and everything else was done perfectly).

I see the image looking soft long before I start to see pixelation. I don't think the resolution is causing the problem.

Part of the problem could be camera movement. General rule-of-thumb is that the exposure speed should be greater than the lens length. 50mm would lead to 1/50 second or faster (image stabilization may help). If this happens on many of your shots, you might try the same shot at 1/40 and at 1/200 (there-abouts) to see if the faster shot looks sharper. You might also compare hand-held versus tripod mounted to see if camera movement may be contributing. I did not notice any elongation that would suggest movement in a particular direction.

I tried to check focus by looking at parts of the picture whose distances varied. I would expect to find something sharp if the focus was off. I really didn't find anything.

I can't provide and answer, just some probabilities. Hopefully something here gives you an idea to sparks someone else with more Canon knowledge to chime it.

Another thing to think about is visiting a local camera club. They are typically a bunch of people who love to talk about cameras and post processing - even paying money to do it.

Please do post an example image at full resolution. People here are just taking wild (well, maybe not so wild) stabs at diagnosing the unseen image.

When you enlarge the viewed image (zoom in) many technical faults become more apparent. The term "put under a microscope" comes to mind. For example, you might be seeing the focus problems you hypothesized. They are less visible when the image is smaller. Similar effect with motion blur and camera shake.

Thanks! I learned something.

If you don't find it in CS4, try a search on "EXIF reader" for stand-alone programs and browser add-ins. Some will find EXIF data in some formats (e.g., JPG) but not others (e.g., raw files like .NEF). Others might get some EXIF data, but not all EXIF entries. To see the variants in more detail that you might imagine, look at the description for the ExifTool by Phil Harvey.

Before you try something you might want to search on "nikon d7200 oil spots". You are not alone. I don't know if Nikon has taken any action. You should find out if there is some underlying problem you need to address in addition to cleaning the sensor.

I have a D600. Nikon did not replace it with a D610, but they cleaned it and replaced some of the mechanism for free. My interaction was a lot closer to the purchase date.

Prints being too dark is often the result of incorrect calibration/profiling on your post-processing computer. Generally the monitor is too bright.

Please forgive me if I am covering old ground for you.

The Costco in-store labs are also inexpensive and fast, but have very limited paper choices. They offer good quality within those parameters.

Costco has been closing photo centers at some warehouses. Look at https://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/Profiles/California_profiles.htm to get a sense of closed labs in California (and elsewhere). You will see "Note: Printer profiles are no longer available for this lab." in red for the stores without in-house printers.

They offer profiled printers that let you have more color control if you also do you post appropriately on a color-managed system. See https://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/CostcoPosterPrinters.html. You cannot get this if you use mail delivery.

Two shades of gray?

Echo that. If viewers have not done the download, they should. The change was dramatic on my screen.