Hay, a little decency here if you don't mind. Let's not go around exposing ourselves here.

Sorry about that for my part. Elitist just burn me and I want to chew:-)

That is like say that a man that uses an electric tool such as an electric planner as opposed to a hand plane is not a true cabinet maker. It just doesn't fly these days, 100 years ago yes, now no. You don't calibrate the camera you simply lock in the settings that other wise you would adjust in post processing. In short you deliberately choose to lessen you flexibility. While that may imply a higher level of skill with the camera it does not imply a better photographer, just a less versatile one.

I do understand were you are coming from and to some extend I tend to agree with you, not just in the matter of photography but many other fields as well. It is as if to be a carpenter I simply need a hammer and saw. There are a couple of issues though. One, we live in a society that practices free enterprise and that complicates the issue greatly there. Two, once you start either a licensing or standards process you begin down a slippery slope that leads to someone, other that the producer (photographer in this case) and/or costumer determining the standards and in the case of fields like photography and art, I and many other have a real big problem with that. No body will tell me what is to be excepted as good or bad in matters of art among other things. I'm a bit of a libertarian in matters like that. I simply is no ones else business. I believe that if a person produces something that to everyone but he and one customer and the customer believe the item to be of value, then the producer has the right to sell his product unimpeded and it is the business of no one else. In short each of us has our on standard and has no right to impose those standards on anyone else. It is a double edge sword.

Question: Who determines what is good and what is bad? I bet you can not come up with an answer to satisfy all. While there may be SOME general agreement among a group there is never a definitive answer suitable to everyone. Quality is a very subjective matter and different individuals will have different sets of values.

So...If I understand you then, we are more or less in agreement. As are most of the people that have posted on this thread. And most will say that the idea of licensing photographers is about as absurd as you can get. Am I correct?

Man... there are a couple of dynamite camera clubs in Asheville. Try contacting someone in ether the Carolina Nature Photographers or the F32 clubs. I live an hour and half away and wish that I could to the drive to Asheville to get to the meetings. They have some knock your socks off photographers. You should check them out.

http://www.cnpa-asheville.org/
http://www.f32nc.com/

The D5100 is good to start, but if you are not looking for more than a step or two about a point and shot look at the Nikon D3100. It is light and very easy to use. The D90, though still in production, is supper-ceded by the D7000. According to some the D7000 is the best DX- DSLR camera available (and could be more camera than you need). I tend to think the matter has more to do with personal fit. FYI, I am a Nikon user and have shot with the D7000. It is excellent but so are a number of Canons, Sonys, and Pentaxs, among others.

Please do. I believe that what everyone one is think is that with a little help and effort, you may find yourself enjoying the camera. It take time but it is so worth the effort :-).

To though a fly in your ointment, many people will tell you that some of the worse photographers are Pros with all kinds of credentials academic and otherwise and some of the best are simply very passionate self-taught amateurs. Note the use of the qualifier "some". Are you going to License ditch diggers? Just because you can hold a shovel does not mean that you know how to dig a ditch... but to license every job type would bring the economy to a dead stop. Think people! Maybe we should require a license to allow breathing.

Yes, Lightroom is an excellent program for those who's needs, budgets, and work flows it fits, for others there may be better choices. I don't see how that you can say that it is intimidating though. It is very good that you have found a product that meets YOUR needs. My experiences Lightroom with left me with the feeling of nice but not what I and some others need. It is geared toward a particular market and for others it is like buying a multi-ton earth mover when what you need is an SUV. One should always match resources (equipment and software) to work requirements not market hype. This is a simple business fact not opinion. Many of the people on this site are other than mass production type professional photographers (wedding, events, portrait, etc). For many of them Lightroom is an expensive overkill that may be more of a problem that a help.

NOTE GIMP will not handle raw unless you have the Ufraw plug-in.

Interesting... But it fails to address the major advantage of shooting raw, the ability of edit an image without out the information loss involved in the jpg 8 bit color depth among other things. If you are looking for a viewer for raw and you are using MS Windows XP or greater then Microsoft had a download that does, that in Windows Explorer, for many raw formats. An many editors that work in raw will allow you to view the raw. Link to MS Window XP version is http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?displaylang=en&id=8802

Carbonterry, looking at your web site, with the high level of skill shown, I find it hard to believe that you would not be aware of other available programs for handling raw images and image management. I would also hope that your would be aware that a proper answer would depend on the users operation system and maybe other tools used in photo editing.

Other that to say that in the case of raw processing for the orig poster, a Nikon user, if not comfortable with more complex raw editor/converters I would recommend the Nikon product that comes free with the Camera "View NX2". Else this gets into a messy debate involving issues that are not relevant to most users and really beside the point. My only advice for most users is to take into account their skill level, the level to which their wish to obtain, their finical resource, computer and operating system, and most important look for a program that suits the way that they think and work (which will differ with each of us).

Please do not take offense but, that is your opinion and your statement is more than a little misleading. While I appreciate the fact that you may have found the tool to be of great value, you are leading others toward a tool which may or may not be worth their spending time and money. While Lightroom is an excellent program, it is no where near necessary for raw image processing or image management and there are a number of programs as good or better, depending on your work flow or other tools at your disposal. While many will find Lightroom to be a useful tool there are other that will find it to be a waste of money.