I think just about everything you need to know was answered in the posts above. If you have a specific question not answered, start a new post so it is not buried in the OP's post. BTW, Laser printer are not for printing photographs. Great for text or business graphics, but not quality photographs.

Comparing cameras based on megapixels would be like comparing vehicles based only on horsepower.

Strobe, speedlight, a candle, flashlight, sun, LED panels, car headlights...all are light, and light is light. If you can fit a studio strobe into the orb, go for it.

This is pretty nice. It might be a bit hot on camera left, but nothing a bit of highlight recovery cannot handle. It looks like you have a good loop lighting pattern with the nose shadow going down and toward the corner of his mouth. By not closing off the shadow by having it NOT merge with the shadow on the cheek, it is a loop pattern, Had the two shadows connected, it would have been a Rembrandt pattern, Nice job. The term "loop" comes from the shadow under the nose which looks like a little loop. His mustache hides the detail a bit, but it is there.

As to the image a a whole, I would have liked to have seen his shoulders turn a bit away—his right shoulder moved away from us to put him on a bit of an angle. Then, have him turn his head back to the camera and maybe a slight tilt to the head. To add a bit of "movement" to images, it is good to consider having two of anything on slightly different levels. So a bit of a tilt puts the eyes on a slant. This is by no means a hard and fast rule - just something to consider. Keeps things from being too static.

I also think it is cropped a bit tight, but that is a personal thing. OH yeah, back to the lighting...good job! No glasses reflection!

I am not going to repeat advice already given. Some is pretty good - some is so-so.

I will advise you some other areas: Be sure you have any business/sales tax licenses required in your area. Register your business with the Secretary of State. Use a program to keep track of every penny you spend and earn—come tax time it will save your sanity. Remember that about 30% of what you take in goes to the IRS.

Join a professional organization. Those can help with training, marketing advice, and support. The PPA membership will get you $15000 of equipment insurance. If you are going to photograph people or pets, you REALLY need liability insurance.

If you think you can make a living selling landscapes...well...keep that day job. I have several professional landscape photographer friends and the work is spectacular. Getting clients, however, is really tough.

If by "Lifestyle" sessions you mean photographing people in supposed natural settings, forget it. That is what EVERY wannabe professional does. YOU ARE NOT DIFFERENTIATING YOURSELF one bit. Learn how to pose and light people outside so your work looks different from the other 10,000 photographers in your area. That is what I did and people tell me they hire me because my work, "...does not look like everyone else's."

Good luck! Figure 3+ years before you are profitable. Might be less, but the odds are not in your favor. To succeed today, you have to be REALLY good as a photographer and SUPERB as a businessperson. Especially the business part.

I would prefer to critique just one image, but let's take a look.

The fuzzy blur vignette is applied right over the faces of the ladies and that is because the composition of those ladies has their heads forced up agains the top edge of the photo. Were this to be framed, the frame would come down into their foreheads. The faces are also the darkest parts of the image and the is no life in the eyes (catchlights) whatsoever.

That big brown/tan section of the dress on the left is strange. I am not suggesting is was not there, but it is a distraction on what a viewer would think is a white dress. One advantage of the subdued color image is that the brown stuff is not as prominent.

I can understand your desire to include all of that dress on the left, but it really compromises your composition by forcing the ladies to the upper right. If the intent is a portrait of the two ladies, then ignore all that dress and make sure the subjects are well-composed and properly lit. Everything else is secondary/supportive.

The cracked overlay is a bit heavy-handed iMO. Textures can be used to enhance the look and feel of an image, but they need to be there without being noticed as a part of the image—if that makes any sense. In this case, the first thing I noticed was the texture and then the blurring of the ladies heads.

One minor thing is the yellow pillow on that white chair. In the color version, it is brighter than the faces and draws one's eye to it for no reward. Were the faces lit properly, then I think that might not have been an issue.

Interesting you would say that. I cropped a bit off the top, made it 1:2 ratio and printed it as a 9x18 on metallic paper and it is gorgeous. I may now go to a real metal print even larger. That bit of a crop was a small amount but made a big improvement in the overall look.

Metal print is what I was thinking as well.

Thanks. I judge some art and photo shows myself, but I have found evaluating my own work is useless. I am often ambivalent some images that I find judges love and, of course, the opposite.

I thought I would make more of an art image than plain old airplane shot. Not really sure it is art, but it is a bit different. Extracted the subject, placed some textures behind it, one layer was a photo of clouds. Added some grain and a copper tint.

The Story Telling is just ONE of the 12 elements. Some images have a very definite story. The image of the little girl crying at the border is a great example. That fireman carrying the body of a child at the site of the Kansas City bombing is one. On the other hand, I think most landscape images do not tell a story—although some do. A well-done portrait will tell a story about that subject.

Now that is just silly. If you ever look through a PPA Loan Collection Book, you would see hundreds of images that are all different and show the enormous variety that exists in great photography. Are there some similarities? Sure. But to suggest that those 12 elements make images look alike is a very uninformed position—to which, of course, you are welcome.

Areas differ, but I can tell you my pricing in the suburban Denver area.

Session is $300. some sample print prices: 8x10 - $85, 5x7-$75, 11x14- $135, A album 8x11 is $700 for 20 sides.
Average sale is $1500-$1800 range. I do discount prices based on order size. 80% of by business is from referrals.

The size of their house, the brand of car they drive, has zero to do with what they will spend. It depends on the experience you provide, the quality of your work, and most of all how much they value photography.

IMO, it is fine to shoot for free. HOWEVER, consider it practice/training, not something that will generate referrals. It MIGHT, but don't count on it and do not do it for that reason.

When you say it does not "show up," how are you expecting to see it? What menu item have you selected?

HSS reduces the flash output a LOT. Try upping the ISO. That would be my first adjustment. Oh, and do not use an aperture any smaller than absolutely necessary to get good focus as f16 will require twice as much flash output a f11.

Nicely done.