Digital Article in Nov 2002 Skin Diver

Did anyone out there read Marty Snyderman's article, "The Digital Dilemma," in November 2002's Skin Diver Magazine?

He makes digital underwater photography out to be a chore, and talks about how editing digital images will "probably be orders of magnitude slower [than editing film]" He also talks about only being able to share digital images via "expensive LCD projector and required software or e-mail," which is absolutely untrue, since you can print them out at home or through a local lab. Many of the new printing solutions don't even require a computer. I have prints on my wall -- and even though I have an LCD projector, they are paper prints.

I was a little upset to read an article like this, because many of the problems he mentioned can be overcome easily if you have even basic knowledge of the software tools available.

Marty writes, "To edit, digital files must be reviewed on the camera's preview monitor, or Liquid Crystal Diode (LCD) screen, or downloaded to a computer, then opened up. This takes time. Editing digital thumbnails is often trickier and more tedious than editing 4 x 6 prints or 35 mm slides with a loupe. If you choose to edit opened files instead of thumbnails, the editing process takes even longer."

I'm not sure how one "edits" a 4 x 6 print or a 35mm slide with a loupe, and I can't imagine that it would be easier (if possible, at all) than digital manipulation, assuming you have taken the time to become familiar with the tools.

I realized that I am biased in the other direction, and I realize that the point of the article was to state that it isn't absolutely necessary to switch to digital at this point in time, but I think that a more knowledgeable presentation of what it means to shoot with a digital camera would have been more interesting.

Skin Diver who?

I think it says it all.

For what its worth, my take on Marty's article, was that it was directed at the diver that hits the water once a year at some warm water destination and will only shot maybe 5 rolls of film a year underwater. These are probably the kind of people that still have half a roll of unshot film in the camera from the Yellowstone vacation 2 years ago.

Most of everyone that comes to this board and others like are serious about u/w photography, Not everyone else is. So for those, if its not broke, why fix it? Their film cameras do the job for them just fine, so why go to the expense of buying new gear for the once a year trip?

I personally plan on going digital sometime in the future, but for some applications I will still have to use film. Just as a side note, evidence photographs ( at least in Arizona) have to be shot on negitive or slide film. Digital is unacceptable in court.

Have a great day and enjoy life

Stephen

I believe he was focused on the occasional diver. I think that he also sees the advancements in digital photography coming so fast that it doesn't pay to buy one along with housing and all the accesories if you only use it once a year. Since it will be outdated after a few uses. - Unlike film cameras which I guess have come as far as they can!

I cant see anyone buying a new film camera now (unless you are a pro and take pictures for a living), much less five years from now.

Actually, I thought it was a great article because it demonstrated the "gap" between traditional photographers and pioneers.

The gap I am talking about is a Knowledge Gap between one generation "The computer/internet/email" types, and an older generation.

Many of the good amateurs and pros in my local UPS are over 50 and shoot film. For them to change to digital photography means that they have to learn how to REALLY use a computer, hook up peripherals like a camera and printer, learn how to manage and edit images, understand screen resolution, DPI, PPI, and the list goes on!

I think part of our job here as a group is to help close this gap - by educating and showing others how easy digital can be. I gave an overview to HUPS about the similarities and differences between film and digital to help close the gap.

Cheers

James Wiseman

I personally plan on going digital sometime in the future, but for some applications I will still have to use film. Just as a side note, evidence photographs ( at least in Arizona) have to be shot on negitive or slide film. Digital is unacceptable in court.

Interesting... What happens if I print a slide from my digital file?

I tend to agree with James' point of view, it just showed the gap. For many people, moving to a "digital world" is terrifying, whether it's photography or something else. I see it all the time at work, where my company automates processes that are typically paper-based, users get very scared, and as a result, very defensive to the extent of claiming that the digital version of the process will screw things up.

Anything we can do to educate people will do as James said and "close the gap". Just be aware that some people will never accept that digital could be as good or better than film. When you get that person on the boat with you, just smile and agree with them, confident that film is on it's way out!!!

Tom

If I was the occasional diver that you feel he is referring to then I would think I most definately would want digital.

You do not have the regular opportunity to get the good shots and practice so digital will allow you to go and take hundreds of shots. You can then delete the almost hundreds of unfocused too far away shots and then only have to pay to print the photo album keepers.

That aside you can also correct your errors while you are still there shooting. I would not even look at film if I was one of those people. And as for technological changes, if you are those people you are only looking for 4x6 shots or maybe one 8x10 and therefore, the technology is already there.

IMHO

Eric,

if you printed a slide from your digital work, it still would not work. In some cases juries/lawyers want to see the original slide/negative to make sure no manipulation has been done. I personally don't know if you can present something digitaly and prove to the courts sadisfaction that its the original and unmanipulated.

All of you dig shooters will have to let me know if the court system is in the stone age or if they have ( at the moment ) a valid point

Have a great day and enjoy life

Stephen