Because of you I purchased a laptop as well as Elements (in different stores) taxes and shipping where just extravagant at costco.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20304829

Basically, regardless of what you voted you are an ass for the other side.

This bodes well for the future.

In short we have 314,744,607* asses in the US, all braying at the same time.

* http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

This link is a bit long do TinyURL.com is used

http://tinyurl.com/english-wolf-DP-Compare

This is the DPReview page.

This is getting.. well: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-41940-1.html

It does not get any better than that here.

Please do some reading:
http://planetphotoshop.com/camera-raw-color-spaces.html
http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/in-camera-color-space-for-raw-shooters.html
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/RAW-file-format.htm

What the RAW file does not take into consideration is the white balance.

One article is a bit misleading as if you can step down to sRB stepping up is not possible as you end up using a sRGB as a RGB. Your post processing start using RGB when you make modification.

What I love here is:
RAW 12-14 bits JPG 8 bits
Translates to:
Billions of colors vs. 24 millions
Now:
RAW 6 stops in range JPG 2 stops

Also:
RAW: accepted as forensic picture
JPG: Nope.

Finally, there is one more thing:
RAW is much larger, flexible and cannot be modfied (but deleted)

For the use of it:
RAW is not for common folks but only those who know what they are doing in post processing. Just look at the exposure range and the color depth. Note that the color space is set by the camera not the format so if you want the best you might want to select RGB vs sRGB but this another can of worm.

RAW vs JPG? Apple vs Orange, select your poison or better yet, mix it. There is no right answer.

Personally I shoot 100% RAW and JPG fine, that way if want instant result I have it and if I want the full flexibility needed for post editing, I have it too.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=42606320

Only one thing: Profile need to be opened in front of the face.
First image straight up
Second image open toward the ground where the girl is looking.

Exposure is ok but the focusing on the second is off (would be visible if you had uploaded the original).

Beside not being unable to find a point of focus in this picture I find definite color artifacts all over the place which indicates underexposure.

In a case like this one you need to use a fill flash to equilibration the light ratio.

In addition, you may want to raise the ISO to 200 (400 best) w/o loss due to noise. This will push the depth of field to 4, still a bit narrow but the fill flash can push it to 8.

Use spot metering/focusing.

First pictures: rainy/misty, dusty day, not dirt n lens.
Flash is weak, colors are modified by wetness

(first observations)

Same sensor do not mean same result for different models. Reason? The software used by the manufacturer is different. If you want to by-pass this, shoot RAW (NEF in your case)

Lighting need to be flat and cover forensic information.

Always use a ruler to indicate the dimensions.
Shoot from above, below and each side (if hexagonal eight shots.

This shows the condition of the object, branding if any as well as potential flaws.

If you have a certificate of origin (or value), keep a photocopy @ home and the original in a safe deposit. Note that the certificate must be from a recognized expert, not necessarily from the insurance. Update the value certificate over time.

The light box suggestion is really good, if the objects are small. Sharpness is important and shoot RAW, not jpg as RAW is more easily accepted than any other format.

One more thing, do not use a wide angle as it distort the image. Use a 'normal' focus lens (35mm for DX camera 55mm for FX cameras) F11 is your best bet for Dof,

How I see this debate:

Just as insane as the folks in the video...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/17/balloon-fetishist-elle_n_1793818.html?ref=topbar

You are of bad faith as anyone else here, ngc1514.

You know perfectly well that faith cannot be proven until a final action is taken.

I have faith in you (and loan you $50k)
This faith will proven the moment I have my 50k back.

Faith in god is akin to this, there will never be any proof until the fat lady sings.

All along you have been needling fools, trying to get them to trip over themselves yet have never offered PROOF that god under any name dos not exist.

Please prove that God does exist then a discussion will be valid. In the mean time, you have proven nothing other than small mindedness and very little originality as you always quote someone else. I have yet to see a 'reasoning' that is yours.

You do not want any answer to your own 'What is faith'. You just want to make folks look like uneducated fools as, in your opinion, this is what folks who believe in a god, any god, are, according to your point of view.