Thanks wayne_MO for the info. Yes, it is very tiny. I went yesterday to PETCO and another Pets store in my area, and I showed them that snake, in one store the guy was really knowledgable and in the other store they were just saying, "just set it free". The guy in PETCO told me that I can feed it eggs. So, I went home and cracked an egg, put some yolk in the container the snake was in, and I watched. The snake thought it was water or something, so it just swam through it. It didn't drink it. Anyway, I thought I'm keeping it from its mother. So, I let it free. In the picture, you can see a dried mango pit that I used provided for the snake to maybe shed it skin. Well, it got used to the pit after a while. But when I let it free, I introduced it to an avocado dead leaf. It crawled right into it, without hesitation. So, I said to myself, the guys from the other pets store were right, "just set it free", and let the nature take its cycle. FDRamsiss

Andrea, I shoot RAW exclusively now for the reasons you stated except occasionally flip it over to sports because it goes auto to burst (I think), and does only .jpg. I love Photoshop, has a very steep learning curve, waited years until I got a $299 upgrade with Elements to CS2. I don't just use it for my photographs, and I agree with you about some of the software that comes with cameras, read about Nikon's, refused to get in the camera wars, was really torn between Canon and Nikon, at the time I thought Canons had better noise reduction at the expense of IQ, understood that going in. I started just doing graphics learning all I could with PSP (quit upgrading at 5 because I didn't like some things), then bought Photo Impact (fun for awhile but a waste of money), but when I saw the power of PS, I was sold. I don't use all the features, no, don't jump on the upgrade bandwagon (lightbox is really cool, can't afford it), but I love their USM and ACR white balance corrections and several others such as highlight/shadows tool (because of the limited dynamic range with all digital cameras, may be better with the more expensive, super-high resolution ones), when I want to make them pop more. And a lot of it is strictly a matter of taste. There are some incredibly talented with PS; I'm not one of them. The actual conversion process doesn't take more than 30 seconds, and when I can, I batch convert using scripts. I know everything you said is true, especially you can use Nikon pics right out of the cam, sharp as a tack, same with some good P&S cameras. Have to watch oversharpening, too. For web viewing, people probably can't tell the difference about sharpening. I can see it, very occasionally I don't bother with it, depending, but do like to do my own cropping and straightening, can't stand really crooked photos unless for creative effect. Other software does that just as well. I highly respect your opinion, and it sounds like you are some kind of pro. I don't presume to know everything. Blowing blows more dust in than I get out sometimes, always do that first regardless, a couple tries, then test, but I have used the wet method only once, got it better, but just let the dustbunnies I missed be for now and try to be careful changing my lenses. The only people I'd really trust to clean my sensor filter, not the sensor on Canon, but extremely delicate, is Canon. Nobody on the Canon dslr forum I've read yet on dpreview for almost 5 years now sends theirs anywhere for sensor filter cleaning; they all clean them themselves, most very confidently (not me!) many, many use a wet method usually Copperhill or a pen. I used extra pure alcohol and qtips I got at the medical supply center, just a drop w/eyedropper. I first try the dry method with Walgreen's brand q-tips very gently. The camera store person told me some use plastic knives from McDonald's! Not for me! I don't really trust my local camera store or Best Buy technicians. With the camera store, last time I was in was tempted to butt in and tell the customer something I happened to know, while the salesman didn't seem to, held my peace. Had some photos and a painting scanned I wanted to retouch, state-of-the art, awful, ended up using my camera and tripod. The camera store wasn't set up to cater to dslr users, maybe they're more with it now. I hate cloning out dustbunnies once a bad one gets in there, most don't show at the sizes and resolution I use, but do clone quite a bit for other reasons and like the healing tool. Once a piece of fiber got in there, it drove me nuts, that I got out by blowing, need a better blower, the Hurricane one. Sorry for taking up so much "airtime". Sooner or later most dslr owners are going to have to choose how to deal with it. Then if I screw up, I screw up, and will pay the consequences. You HAVE to clean your lenses, even on P&S cameras, which I do as little as possible. I know Nikon has fine cameras and lenses; that is why the choice was so hard, and sometimes I still look back, but now I'm invested heavily in a few lenses not as many as some have, don't need them, but very expensive and wouldn't get near what I paid for them if I sold them, even though they are all in mint condition.

I'm here and I know how to do this :) Results will be approximate of course, but close enough for our needs as plant growers. You need a piece of white paper or card. You need to set your camera to point-metering mode so that it is only measuring the light at the centre of the view. You also need to use a shooting mode that shows you the ISO speed, F-stop and exposure, or allows you to fix some settings and shows you the rest. So, put the paper/card at the spot to be measured and point your camera at it with the metering spot on the card. You will probably need to press the button down halfway to get the camera to measure. Read off the ISO speed (I), the F-stop (F), and the exposure in seconds (E). Focus doesn't matter. Telephoto, zoom, or macro modes don't make any difference, but may reduce the availabe settings the camera can pick. Just make sure the metering spot is completely filled with the white card. The light intensity in foot-candles is given by: 6*F^2/(I*E) As an example, if the speed is ISO 50, the F-stop F/2.8, and the exposure 1/500 sec, then the intensity in foot-candles is: 6 * 2.8 * 2.8 / (50 * 1/500) = 470 foot-candles Try it and feel free to come back with any questions or comments.

Yes its a Robin