When did You decide ..Digital...?

I'm new to this forum, but I can see this is the place come to hear from the digital experts!

I'm an amateur that has been using a MMIIEX for a few years, and wanted more. I just got a NX90 and nikon; and tried my NX90 rig in the pool once, and was reminded I have a new learning curve here from the MMIIEX, in terms of handling, composing, and making it an "extension of the eye". Plus I have always used Canon cameras before. So then I started wondering if it might be wiser to skip this step and invest that learning curve in just going straight to a Digital camera.

I do something like one major dive trip, and a couple shorter ones per year. Its not a lot, but taking photos is a key part of every dive for me. I don't do much with them, except try to get a better shots everytime. I like 11x14 prints of the better ones. In the better locations I usually run out of film on each dive.

I have a price of $3800 for the Canon rebel in an Aquatica. But can I justify it!??

So I would like to hear some of your stories of being at this decision point. What was the key point for you, that made your decision to start investing your dive time with a digital camera?

Do you find your digital images as satisfying or better than what you were accustomed to on film?

And once the dive is all over, how much time do you spend in loading, arranging, sorting, and archiving your images versus the old film process? (I got a film scanner to archive my boxes of negatives, and realized this could be quite a boring project!)

Thanks for your stories! Larry

Hi Larry,

I'm sure you will hear lots of opinions, but I will kick things off with the point that learning a camera and honing your UW photo skills and techniques is so much easier with a digital than a film camera.

You will see your results after each shot you take and you will learn so much more quickly how to get the images you want.

I'll leave others to answer some of your other points.

Alex

Alex has mentioned one of the main advantages, the ability to more quickly hone your skills.

I will add that the post-trip processing with digital takes a lot more time, and you had better be comfortable with a computer! I came home from a trip to Thailand with over 1400 images (land and underwater) and spent a LOT of time on the computer "optimizing" ones to put into an "album" on the web, etc. Much more time than when I was using film. The actual cataloging can go quite quickly, once you determine what software you want to use and get a workflow going.

On the other hand, it is nice to be able to slightly optimize shots by taking out some backscatter or cropping, so I have more shots that are "keepers".

Plus, I found the drag-along for a big trip to be much greater. I travelled with a laptop computer, loaded with the necessary software, a DVD burner, and blank DVDs. The boat had a CD burner, but if you are shooting large RAW files, a CD just doesn't hold enough. And that still left me needing something for the land portion.

But I feel that the advantages still outweigh the disadvantages .... you just need to plan a little differently for a trip. And plan on spending more time on a computer!

Linda I.

Good post Linda.

I think using a digital camera helps you learn faster as you don't have to wait for processing to see your results. In fact, you see them instantly, like - right after changing a setting on the camera. That's the perfect "stimulous-response."

As for "post" dive trip time, I don't agree with Linda. I think the amount of time depends on what you want to DO with your photos.

If you just want to look at them then stick them in a drawer, then yes, slides are easier. If you want to do a slideshow, then it's actually the same. With digital, you have to do some "processing," but you have a much easier time putting the images in order and sync'ing to music.

If you want to do a web gallery to share your photos, then digital is easily 2x faster. You completely cut out the scanning step, so instead of shoot, develop, edit/cull on lightbox, scan, process, websize, upload you have:

edit/cull on lightbox, process, websize, upload.

That's fast, or it is for me now that I'm used to it. I had all of my photos culled and processed by the time I returned from the trip AND I had something to entertain me while waiting in the airport, flying, etc.

Cheers

James

The overwhelming reason to go digital is the shorten learning cycle. You can get going in a dive or two. The first 5 photos in the Thailand album I posted:

http://wetpixel.com/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-5447.phtml

were taken on my first day with an SLR underwater (D intentionally left out).

As far as travel, a laptop may weight a little more than 40 rolls of film, but it may be less hassel if you are one who worries about how many times can you send a roll of unprocessed film through an X-ray machine.

You can get most of the benefits by just shooting JPEG and not post processing. However, to get best dynamic range out of your setup (one of the weekness in digital) you'll have to shoot raw and spend some time adjusting the images.

You can also get in more shots per dive. A 1GB card will hold ~ 150 shots. The instant feedback will also let you know when you got the shot you want on a given subject so you can move on and find another one instead of spending more time bracketing.

Last but not least, you can post cool pics here right after your trip.

Well thanks Herb, and all the other replies. It looks like the instant feedback is a common selling point for all of you. Makes sense! You're making me more comfortable with the idea!

I just got back from Office Depot, looking at the various software for photo image management. I immediately decided I didn't want to spend $600 on PhotoShop. Started looking at MS Photo Image Suite and something by NOVA. Their glossy ads sounded good, but any suggestions on basic but functional image management software?

Oh, and Herb, I see you are using the same camera/housing I am considering. Been happy with it? Any downsides worth mentioning?

Thanks again, Larry

 

 

Oh, and Herb, I see you are using the same camera/housing I am considering.  Been happy with it?  Any downsides worth mentioning?

Overall I've been happy with the camera and housing. There are a couple of minor issues. I'll writing a mini review. Hopefully, I'll have time to finish it by early next week.

 

 

I just got back from Office Depot, looking at the various software for photo image management.  I immediately decided I didn't want to spend $600 on PhotoShop.  Started looking at MS Photo Image Suite and something by NOVA.  Their glossy ads sounded good, but any suggestions on basic but functional image management software?

I wouldn't waste your money on the software you've suggested above. Start saving up for photoshop - anyone who's serious about digital imaging uses it eventually. Don't be fooled by the glossy adds - check out the imaging forums here or at other sites and you won't see much discussion about how to optimise your images in MS Photo Image Suite.

Try the free trial of breezebrowser if you're shooting Canon - it works fine for sorting images. Then try and find a bundled/cheap version of Photoshop 'limited edition' (preferable) or elements.

Whitey, have you actually used those packages? The Microsoft one, at any rate, is just fine, though it's more comparable to Photoshop Elements than Photoshop CS. The Digital Image Library software in the Suite version is fairly good (it sounded like larrym was looking for library management software) - I've used it for about a year to organize my photos. However, and this is a big one, it doesn't handle RAW, or 16-bit-per-channel color TIFFs - which may force me to change my library software.

Disclaimer - I work for Microsoft, though not anywhere near the photo suite guys.

I wasn't that coherent in my last post. I should have said - you probably don't have any need for something like MS Digital Image Pro if you got a copy of PhotoShop Elements with your camera (and you probably will). The MS Digital Image Library software is fairly nice, in my opinion, but I'd caveat that by saying it does not support RAW images or TIFF.

Well thank you all for your input. I wound up getting a copy of Photoshop Elements, which came with Photoshop Album (same $ as the MS suite) since it seemed to be more commonly used. Just starting to learn it - seems it may have a lot more features than I want to tinker with.

I got this so that I could manage my old film I'm scanning with a new Nikon scanner. Learning the software, terms, procedures, etc of this whole process has shown me that this will easily fill my tolerance for computer time (all day at work, etc....) So given this consideration, I have decided to stay with the film camera, ast least for another season.

In another year or so, obviously the technology will advance some, but more importantly I think I will have caught up in my experience with just managing digital images. I don't want to come back with from a trip with a drive full of dive shots, and then still invest computer time in fumbling with them. Reading all the input on this site will certainly help with that!

Chris, I haven't used the Microsoft offering. I didn't mean to hurt your buddies' feelings, tell Bill it's OK I'll still keep browsing the web with IE

There's a number of graphics packages that will work well for consumers, but my argument would be that most digital imaging enthusiasts will end up using photoshop at some stage of their lives, and therefore Elements is a good starting point as the interface is similar. The cost of photoshop is a real disincentive for sure.

So given this consideration, I have decided to stay with the film camera, ast least for another season. In another year or so, obviously the technology will advance some, but more importantly I think I will have caught up in my experience with just managing digital images. I don't want to come back with from a trip with a drive full of dive shots, and then still invest computer time in fumbling with them.

Throw away your scanner and film. The digital age is here! Enjoy it.