[nldunne]

Since I did this idea, I searched some webslites - dealing with digial cams and the Grey Card. My thought is that - except for a bit of a color cast I have to deal with, the material in the articles shows this is a better way to go than what I did try at first.

I do confess that I am wrong in the fact digi's are based on the tone of white. I had heard that mentioned but it may be only for the WB - not meter calibration.

As for the program - I used an old version of PICTURE IT as I am so used to it. However, I also have GIMP to play with as well. Right now, I like some things in both - so I can go from one to the other when I need something from each.

As for the color cast you worked on - I have to say this - I did the original by house lights - and did not color correct it to keep the look of working under house lights. Either program would have given me the option to color correct the image.

Not selling work or worrying about everything being nth degree accurate in general, I stay as natural as possible for most all images. I realize many people like everything nth degree accurate - and I accept that - if that is their desire.

Also, I want to do my images in a way that I can sit/stand back from them and let them SPEAK TO ME - as if I was speaking to the artist. When I have visited art galleries overseas, I have learned many a strong lesson - not to stand close and count errors. Most images are the biggest collection of strokes and styles that make no sense. One loses the strong feel of the image doing that - and I will always stand/sit back from any image. Myself, I do not know why people sit close and count errors instead of sitting/standing back from the image and seeing what the author of the piece - right or wrong - is trying to say through the image.