Just did something similar. I also had a UV filter on the lens. The filter cracked but the ring didn't seem warped. However, I could not get the filter unscrewed. Filters are held in place by a screw-in ring. I removed that, and then carefully used wire cutters to snip the edge of the filter ring. This was the recommendation from the camera shop. Be careful not to cut too deep or you cut into the threads of the lens. Once the filter was off, and new filter screwed in smoothly. I guess I got lucky because the filter absorbed the damage.
Since most lens caps are plastic, I assume they can also be carefully cut off. Just go slowly.

No matter how classy a car Hyundai makes, Mercedes will still sell to a certain clientele.

several shop bots are showing $350 at best

Each has it's place. The cell phone camera function will complete with $100 P&S cameras. They will compete in the market with people who don't want to spend more than $200 for a camera. With current technology, they will not have the range & flexibility of the DSLR. Those who disagree will probably not learn to use the features of the mid to top of line DSLRs anyway. I think the only debate is in how an individual sees photography. There have always been snapshot photographer. They are only part of the DSLR market to look cool, because they won't ever use the full capability of the camera. They will still spend money for the best in order to show off. I don't think Nikon/Canon have much to fear from the cell phone.

When I did weddings, I would take 200-300. Many were near duplicates. I promised 100. If there were 6 of nearly the same pose, I picked the best 2. I always did 2-3 for each formal shot because somebody would blink. They usually only saw my best shot. I found that if I provided 100-150, the final order came back faster than If I provided 200-300. They had trouble picking from similar pictures. Besides, I only wanted my best on public display.
On the other hand, I did gratis shots at a family wedding (My rule was never to contract family- screw it up and they are still family. You won't ever hear the end) The pro was shooting very few. In the church balcony, he told me that he was the photographer and I should go away. I told him that I was family and would be there long after he was gone. He then told me that he shot only 100 pictures, and made every one count. He showed ceremony slides at the reception. They were all washed out. He then got drunk during the reception. The B&G use my pictures.
Now, with digital, I do 400-500. The B&G get to see about 200 of them. Again, only my best. I don't understand why anyone would would want questionable work out there if you get jobs by word of mouth. Doesn't seem to be a good business choice.

At the risk of disagreeing with many others, I offer my 2 cents. It is intended to be constructive, so please don't take offense.

The tones of the face are somewhat gray. The exposure is not as good as the neck & chest. The cleavage seems to be a bit over-processed. It appears she has freckles, which may be the case, but usually not seen on blondes. It may be a result of over saturating orange tones. There are highlights on the teeth and upper lip that seem distracting.
I think the composition is good if you were after a casual, not formal pose. I find it very appealing. I would not have included torn or damaged leaves in front of the subject. You would have been better off removing them if they are damaged.
All in all, a good picture, but leaves room for growth. I do agree that a soft box for the light source might help. Hope to see more of your work as you incorporate new ideas into your photos.

I have a Canon 8800 and have no problems. The software is easy to use and the instructions were not a problem either. It does about 1 slide per minute @ 9600 dpi.

You forgot that Freedom of Speech didn't apply 60 days before an e******n. And what law provided the government with the right to collect phone information? That's right: The Patriot Act.

Somebody is getting their information from Faux News

[quote=Searcher]Thank goodness for that. So there is no need for importing.

FOUND THEM!
They were in a collection without keywords. I had them in a collection set. By deleting the set and creating a smart collection with keywords, then adding those keywords to the other set (without) they showed up in the new collection. No clue what happened, but I found them and can work with them again.
Changed settings to back up every time LR exits, but don't know if that will help with a freeze.
Thanks for the effort. It gave me places to look and I just tried a few changes. Only one worked but that is all I needed.

Very little is actually known about most v***l diseases. However, the evidence is suggestive, and lacking evidence to point in another direction, there is little point in entertaining uncomfortable alternatives. If there is evidence suggesting something new, it will be investigated. Ideas without evidence or testing are not theories, but hypotheses. Some are practical and some are not, but without evidence, they can actually be harmful by diverting attention from likely solutions. A church opposed to v******tions on the unfounded idea that they may cause other problems is the source of a new measles outbreak. Children will suffer because adults don't understand the nature of science.

No, no changes.

I am patient. Appreciate any and all help.

No, but I don't see any on the collections that work either. I only show indications of cropping or adjustments. Am I looking in the right place?

The photos are there. The folders are all C:/ or E:/ drive (external), and they are intact. The photos will show if opened individually in develop mode, but do not show in the collection into which they had been previously imported. However, it says they are duplicates if I try to import again.