Do you or your buddies dive with a Camera?

[paradicio]

I take my camera on 98% of my dives. My wife usually has her P&S or video camera (but never both!) with her as well.

 

[Doc]

Into the mid 80's I had the standard 37 pounds of Nikonos cameras. Got tired of it all, plus... one day I flooded my camera, then~ all of a sudden, I began to see things.

Cameras are the worlds most perfect blinders. I always comment to students, "Don't let the camera block your view". This could mean two different things...

1) Imagine the photo you want to take before trying to compose it through the viewfinder.

2) Don't let the photography get in the way of your dive and the enjoyment.

We, as a current generation of divers, are very much so "task oriented". We like the mastery of BSO's (bright shiny objects) and we like to recall and share our memories after the dive.

It is more common than not that a divers first few open water dives are spent clutching everything from a disposable single use 35mm camera to u/w housed advanced pount and shoots. Either class of shooter is likely to get the same results: A bunch of bluish pictures of Angelfish Butts and Squirrel Fish. That, and absolutely no increase in diving related skills.

Unfortunately, there is another more insidious effect: the post dive de-brief has gone the way of all quaint practices. Gone are the moments when divers share a drink around the bar and discuss how the dive went and what could be better tomorrow. What has replaced it? The chatty post-dive crowd crowding around the laptop to see the startling images brought back from the deep.

I really take a lot of pride in not touching or finning the reef. When I have a camera, I am told that I become quite a bit less of a Boy Scout in that regard. Hmmm- I just thought it was other photographers who manhandled the reef.

I have been with name brand celebrity u/w shooters, people whose work you have seen and oohed and aahhed over. Nine out of ten of them grab "the dead spot" or use "muck sticks". A lot of them wear at least one glove, "to hold the down line". I was once with a real high profile shooter in Africa. After day two, I asked the group leader, "Am I really seeing him dredging that reef?" Yes, apparently that's what I was seeing. Hand over hand, flipping and moving stuff for pictures. We engaged in a baited discussion later where he honestly stated that as a Photographer, he was keenly aware that he was expected to not molest anything. He honestly believed he didn't grab, etc.

Divers make purchasing decisions for camera gear based on a lot of misconceptions. Unless you are going to drag around serious gear, you may well be advised to stick with micro/macro and advanced point and shoot. After you got your Shark shot and Flipper, most of the other stuff is quite small. Wrecks? best shots by us amateurs are wide angles into the overhead sun. If you think you're going to use a flash on anything bigger than the coffee table, you're going to have some serious overweight baggage.

Subjects larger than 12" and more than 2 feet away are going to likely need large external strobe heads. If you want to reduce shutter lag, you're going big money for camera and housing. Add on a bigger strobe.

This is where we get lost in the BSO trap. I see that cool Camera, or BC, or Fin, or Computer and inherently understand that:

a) I will be a better diver if I have that
b) I will have validation as a better diver if I have that
c) Chicks will dig me (see a & b above)

Up until the 1980's, gallery qaulity u/w photography took a whole lot of skill, great equipment and any number of expensive frames of Ektachrome mounted into slides. Lest anyone doesn't know, we had 36 chances per dive to make that picture. On the low end, that came out to $.58 each time you pushed the shutter on that Nikonos. The strobe flashes were huge, because most folks don't remember that even the biggest strobe is a pipsqueek compared to the original source of illumination: m5 flashbulbs that were the rough equivelent to the Nagasaki bomb.

So with all that stuff, you got gallery quality. Maybe once a roll of 36 if you were really lucky. (It was better to be lucky than lucky to be better)

These days, even with 12 meg resolution, the imagery is so "flat" in comparison, that it is simply a technical exercise. 5 meg is more than adequate, even for super close-ups. Absolute beginners today are getting fine images, stuff that only the advanced shooters used to get.

But look at the stuff that they're pushing as the holy grail. 10 meg SLR counterweighted housings, twin boomed strobes, plus the Pelican case to show it all off in as you try to board the plane with it as carry on.

I got my Olympus 5050 in a housing and I feel over burdened with that.

I would decide why you want one before you decide on whether or not, much less "which".

 

[Jim Ernst]

The only time I ever dive without my camera is when I am teaching ...

My camera is my dive buddy and a lot of people that I dive with are just as bad as I am.

 

[sunnyboy]

A super-excellent post!

-S

Into the mid 80's I had the standard 37 pounds of Nikonos cameras. Got tired of it all, plus... one day I flooded my camera, then~ all of a sudden, I began to see things.

Cameras are the worlds most perfect blinders. I always comment to students, "Don't let the camera block your view". This could mean two different things...

1) Imagine the photo you want to take before trying to compose it through the viewfinder.

2) Don't let the photography get in the way of your dive and the enjoyment.

We, as a current generation of divers, are very much so "task oriented". We like the mastery of BSO's (bright shiny objects) and we like to recall and share our memories after the dive.

It is more common than not that a divers first few open water dives are spent clutching everything from a disposable single use 35mm camera to u/w housed advanced pount and shoots. Either class of shooter is likely to get the same results: A bunch of bluish pictures of Angelfish Butts and Squirrel Fish. That, and absolutely no increase in diving related skills.

Unfortunately, there is another more insidious effect: the post dive de-brief has gone the way of all quaint practices. Gone are the moments when divers share a drink around the bar and discuss how the dive went and what could be better tomorrow. What has replaced it? The chatty post-dive crowd crowding around the laptop to see the startling images brought back from the deep.

I really take a lot of pride in not touching or finning the reef. When I have a camera, I am told that I become quite a bit less of a Boy Scout in that regard. Hmmm- I just thought it was other photographers who manhandled the reef.

I have been with name brand celebrity u/w shooters, people whose work you have seen and oohed and aahhed over. Nine out of ten of them grab "the dead spot" or use "muck sticks". A lot of them wear at least one glove, "to hold the down line". I was once with a real high profile shooter in Africa. After day two, I asked the group leader, "Am I really seeing him dredging that reef?" Yes, apparently that's what I was seeing. Hand over hand, flipping and moving stuff for pictures. We engaged in a baited discussion later where he honestly stated that as a Photographer, he was keenly aware that he was expected to not molest anything. He honestly believed he didn't grab, etc.

Divers make purchasing decisions for camera gear based on a lot of misconceptions. Unless you are going to drag around serious gear, you may well be advised to stick with micro/macro and advanced point and shoot. After you got your Shark shot and Flipper, most of the other stuff is quite small. Wrecks? best shots by us amateurs are wide angles into the overhead sun. If you think you're going to use a flash on anything bigger than the coffee table, you're going to have some serious overweight baggage.

Subjects larger than 12" and more than 2 feet away are going to likely need large external strobe heads. If you want to reduce shutter lag, you're going big money for camera and housing. Add on a bigger strobe.

This is where we get lost in the BSO trap. I see that cool Camera, or BC, or Fin, or Computer and inherently understand that:

a) I will be a better diver if I have that
b) I will have validation as a better diver if I have that
c) Chicks will dig me (see a & b above)

Up until the 1980's, gallery qaulity u/w photography took a whole lot of skill, great equipment and any number of expensive frames of Ektachrome mounted into slides. Lest anyone doesn't know, we had 36 chances per dive to make that picture. On the low end, that came out to $.58 each time you pushed the shutter on that Nikonos. The strobe flashes were huge, because most folks don't remember that even the biggest strobe is a pipsqueek compared to the original source of illumination: m5 flashbulbs that were the rough equivelent to the Nagasaki bomb.

So with all that stuff, you got gallery quality. Maybe once a roll of 36 if you were really lucky. (It was better to be lucky than lucky to be better)

These days, even with 12 meg resolution, the imagery is so "flat" in comparison, that it is simply a technical exercise. 5 meg is more than adequate, even for super close-ups. Absolute beginners today are getting fine images, stuff that only the advanced shooters used to get.

But look at the stuff that they're pushing as the holy grail. 10 meg SLR counterweighted housings, twin boomed strobes, plus the Pelican case to show it all off in as you try to board the plane with it as carry on.

I got my Olympus 5050 in a housing and I feel over burdened with that.

I would decide why you want one before you decide on whether or not, much less "which".

 

[mjh]

Thanks for all the input. There might be a couple of better refined follow-up polls. Keep the responses coming.

 

[Noboundaries]

Whether diving in Norcal, Socal, or Coz, seems we only see cameras in the hands of 20-30% of divers. I suspect that will grow dramatically as people realize the ease of shooting pics with the pocket size digital point and shoots, all most of us ever need.

I've been diving with a 5 meg Casio digital point and shoot camera since my first dive after OW. The only time I don't have one is when we're doing a class.

Actually the camera was my wife's and once she got comfortable with the basics (about 15 dives), she wanted her camera back! "Okay honey, here's your camera," then I went and bought a new 12 meg Casio.

RoatanMan is right, they each take great pictures. The 12 meg camera gives me a lot more cropping possibilities though.

Oh, one more thing, we cheat. We enhance our digital pictures with Adobe Photoshop 5.0 we picked up on e-bay for peanuts. Attached is the raw picture and the enhanced picture that really shows the capability of the software. Still didn't make me any perty'er though.

 

[alcina]

Unfortunately, there is another more insidious effect: the post dive de-brief has gone the way of all quaint practices. Gone are the moments when divers share a drink around the bar and discuss how the dive went and what could be better tomorrow. What has replaced it? The chatty post-dive crowd crowding around the laptop to see the startling images brought back from the deep.
That's really too bad! We always have a great post dive chat and look through books and just generally enjoy the heck out of ourselves. I never go through my photos at this stage - just sit around and chill with the other divers. It's rare that anyone has a laptop. We might check out a few photos on various camera backs, but really most of the time is spent face to face and excitedly talking about the next dives or reliving moments from these dives. I'd be really bummed if that ever went away.

There was no option for 100% - I can't remember the last time I did a dive without other divers having cameras

 

[djanni]

The poll question is:

"what % of the divers I dive with dive with a camera of some sort."

So I said 20-30%. For me, alone, 95%.

 

[vladimir]

I almost always bring the camera. My fellow divers--usually on liveaboards--generally do as well.

Roatanman makes good points. I have seen at least one name-brand professional photographer splayed across a formerly virgin reef. And it is much, much easier to get a good shot with today's cameras than it was with film. I still have a whole filing cabinet filled with slides. Most of them stink, but they were too expensive to throw away.

 

[vladimir]

Oh, one more thing, we cheat. We enhance our digital pictures with Adobe Photoshop 5.0 we picked up on e-bay for peanuts. Attached is the raw picture and the enhanced picture that really shows the capability of the software.

We all do. You'd be crazy not to. But you can't turn a bad picture into a good one. It has to be in focus, and your composition has to be good. Photoshop just gives you a stop of leeway and lets you clone stamp that one floater.

Still didn't make me any perty'er though.

It's only software.