Rudy Umans

You can probably thank the cellphone camera technology for that I suspect. (not sure) I think it is a useful camera feature for handhold shot. On the other hand it seems we have to use our brains less and less and, although it has some pros, is a little bit of a shame, but that is for another day. Fortunately Charles seems to be happy with his new stacking software and that's what counts.

Whiteaster is right! Great job Steve. Especially the mushrooms, the turtle and Wally. The insects look great too, but those 6 or more legged creatures not really my thing

a 100% crop of the original would be better than viewing a compressed version at 100%. Any issues that appear in there could have been caused by different things and mean very little

https://shuttermuse.com/glossary/focus-breathing/#:~:text=Focus breathing is term that is used to,appears to zoom in or out very slightly. If you focus manually in a number of steps from front to back and you would simply manually try to blend these images, you will encounter a small difference in magnification. Even with prime lenses. The combined image will be blurry obviously. Focus stacking software takes care of this so you don't have to worry about it If you move the camera/lens combo without touching the lens, you don't have that magnification problem and with extreme macro t

Look up "Focus breathing"

I agree (the M50 has a larger sensor too)

You do change the focal length that way. It's the other way around

I have been using Affinity from day one a number of years ago (4?) until about a year ago. As said, the only reason I use PS is because of some 3rd party software that doesn't work with Affinity because they are extensions and not normal plug-ins. My PS UI doesn't look like the regular user interface most of the time One is Canon's print module and some 3rd party luminosity mask and B/W conversion software. If it wasn't for this software, I would still be using Affinity Photo. (I still use Affinity Publisher though)

both ways have problems If you change the focus on a lens, you effectively change the focal length (Focal length to subject) of the lens each time. With that, you also change the magnification. If you move the camera/lens combo, you change the focal plane to subject distance, but not the magnification. Although professional Focus Stacking apps are perfectly capable to handle and correct both situations, moving the camera seems to be less problematic

Looks good Charles

Focus stacking is not part of the solution, it is the solution. Besides a sturdy tripod and a remote release or 2 sec. delay obviously I strongly recommend to look into Affinity photo. It is great software and much much better than Elements. In some aspects even better than Photoshop and Focus stacking is one of those aspects. Few clicks and it is all done for you. (the other thing is Fast Fourier Transform - FFT to get rid of patterns in scans) I use Affinity and Photoshop and although most plug-ins work with Affinity, I use a couple of extensions (panels, not plug ins) that only

I had to look that up

Not exactly! Not in the US. Conspiracy theories can be very dangerous What happened in the US on January 6th and for a great deal what led up to it, was caused by conspiracy theories (look up QAnon)

Ever since the invention of removable type, you never could trust the newspapers. Not by a long shot The medieval troubadours were probably not all that reliable either

You mean after it was discovered by William Janszoon? ("Bill-Son of Jan) and James took credit for it? (Well the indigenous people at the time told him, didn't they? The Spanish called the island later " "Austrialia del Espiritu Santo" - "Southern land of the Holy Spirit" Maybe some on that Island need to be reminded? I have a number of Friends and relatives there and it has been on my bucket list for some time now but it will probably stay there for a little while longer. (If my dogs can't go, I don't go)

That's true! It can only go up. Might take a while though since I have different photographic priorities nowadays.

Dropped 4 stories here too. One sale this morning for 0.10. I will try not to spend it at once.

Reading too fast or too slow again? It is not the price for the customer, it is her cost for a shoot. “The thing that people don’t seem to get is that it takes about $250,000 to $350,000 to produce the kinds of shoots that I do,” she says.

Ask the people who were exclusive with IS or DT Of course, you could just (non-exclusive) upload to the one site of your choice

I seriously doubt that even Annie Leibovitz 's elaborate shoots cost that much The price of babies must have gone up tremendously ................

and you know that how? Either way. I think that net worth is in Australian dollars and even if only half or even only 25% is true, she will be fine methinks

one of FAA's best sellers Anne Geddes - Shop (fineartamerica.com) With a net worth of 85 million dollars, I have a feeling she will be Okay. Anne Geddes Net Worth (idolnetworth.com)

Sounds like a soap opera Sheila! "All my Children have One Life to Live"

it turned out that I have 3 drops of blue blood (could be 2, but I stick with 3) I am a Descendent of the Count Dirk van Brederode. This line started in the 12th century, but stops for me with my great grandmother on my father's side The maiden name of my great grandmother was still Van Brederode, but she married a Smit. They had a daughter, my father's mother, who married a shoemaker named Umans. Dirk's place (of what is left of it) built in the 13th century

That's interesting. Let me know the outcome. If you happen to have Belgium/Dutch (Flanders/Vlaanderen) blood, I can teach you some dirty words ...