course I didn't burn up to 500 pictures in a single day either like my wife and I have. Technology. It CAN be cool (when it works).

Did you also do your own prints, at the paper?

Yeah we did. Also was fortunate enough to make our own halftones as well. FUN TIMES. I also did offset and typeset type printing. I was younger then and a lot of times ran 120 copies a minute on the manual old type printer, where there was a bic flywheel on one side and the two pieces slammed together to make the impression.

I tend to be very slow and deliberate – more of a "sniper" than a "machine gunner". However, there are some occasions where the ability to shoot several hundred shots in a day, at an affordable cost, is a fantastic technological breakthrough.

Just remember, if you place value on your labor spent dealing with the pictures, vastly overshooting can still be expensive.

Yeah, she usually takes so many because the only go on the card and then the computer. She is selective about what she keeps in storate/on a cd and even more selective about what she actually gets printed.

Oh about my above post, I guess the manual was an offset printer and the other was done on an automatic feed multilith.

Sounds like a blast. Many of the masters of photography and printing got their starts learning by printing their own stuff at a paper, in such an environment.

Man, trying to remember all this stuff back from 38 years ago is tough!

I have been trying to explain F stops and shutter speeds and Iso speeds to her, but ususlly wind up just confusing her. Right now she is trying to figure out how looking at a histogram of a picture can help her understand what she needs to do to improve.

I would put up a couple pics for you but I am afraid of Photpbucket. Couple weeks ago I got a NASTY virus on our office computer just by trying to post a pic from my account there to the forum here.

It doesn't need to be confusing. I tried to do a 5 minute course on manual exposure. It was successful. It's easier to give that 5 minute course in person, though.

Histograms are a great tool for reading exposures, though – unfortunately – most cameras base the histogram on the embedded JPEG, not the RAW file. That makes it less precise. It helps if you set your camera's JPEG mode to as low of contrast as possible.

Ok, I'll try and remember to pass that along. I know that the camera My stepson and I bought her (canon EOS XS) isn't the best camera in the world, and so does she but we like it and it does work well for us. BUT it's not a bad one, expecially for our type of picture taking. Now you, on the other hand, is a different story.

I just wish that we had the money for a (or a couple) of GOOD lenses for it. THAT would make a world of difference.