scubamarli

I would recommend looking into a Photographic Society (underwater, if one is in your locale), as they often have critiques which are a great way to improve shots. Composition is the major thing that needsa improvement once the technical stuff is o.k. The other is shooting regularly...difficult if you don't dive locally. The more you shoot, the better you get, in my humble opinion. Cheers, Marli......still on the Nikonos V

I was recently approached to submit images for a new business. As it was dive related, and small, I agreed to charge less. When it came down to the deadline, the owner wanted me to give the image away for free. My attitude is, it is a business, and even if you are starting out, if you give your work away, you are putting a value on it: worthless. Don't ever expect to make what you pay out in time or expenses. The magazine publisher does not give away its product, neither should you. As mentioned earlier, perhaps you can barter for something other than cash, such as goods or services, if for a dive operation or store. Reputable magazines will freely give freelance photographers their schedule of payment. Payments vary substantially. For example, a magazine with a low circulation may pay $100 for a cover while major high circulation magazines may pay up to $1000. Magazines in Asia pay far less than the United States, generally. Unless represented by an agency, a credit should be given when a photo is used for editorial purposes. Editorial use generally pays less than advertising use. By the way, the same image that was wanted for free is being published for $400. Good luck! Marli

Hi, Great shots! They're always difficult to light...and always seem to have loads of backscatter. As your previous posts have been from the north-eastern Pacific, thought I'd have a look to see what it is. Looks to be a hydroid medusa from the Polyorchidae family. These are a stage in the life of athecate hydroids, though which one isn't stated. You'll find it (again, I think)in Pacific Coast Pelagic Invertebrates, by Wrobel and Mills. Just what everyone needs to know to get through life! Marli

Is it any wonder why we brave the cold waters up here? Nice shot! Marli

I agree about the Nikonos 20mm. It's a great lens. However the Nikonos viewfinder doesn't do great job of parallax correction at close distances. Marli

Hi, I still use a Nikonos (due to my lowly teacher's salary), and use a Sea and Sea 15mm lens. It costs a lot less than the Nikonos 15mm, and probably isn't as sharp, but hey, I've had some winners and published images with shots taken with this lens. I'm finally about to get a housing, but will still shoot with this combo in certain conditions. I agree however, that to start with, shoot macro to keep the frustration to a minimum. I don't recommend the S &S 16mm conversion lens. I had it first, and had a lot of trouble with lens flare. Cheers, Marli

Great shots, Herb...brought back fond memories from 2002. I have a title for #20: "Quick, cover your eyes! Here comes another photographer!" Cheers, Marli

It's a lined Ribbon Worm. Marli

Here's one more photo of the shrimp from Grenada. Marli

Here are some other shots of this mystery shrimp. It was always on Cassiopeia frondosa, although there were Cassiopeia xamachana present, there were no shrimp on them. It's eyes were quite striking as they were almost colourless. There are very fine white dots over the whole body, and the pattern found on P. rathbunae was not present. If some scientist wants to describe and name it after me, I'll tell you where to find it! Hmmm, Periclimenes marli, has a nice ring to it Cheers, Marli

Here's a good one for Indo-Pacific critters: http://www.edge-of-reef.com/ It's based in Bunaken Marine Park. Also another fish ID which is excellent and also out of the Aussie Museum, like the Slug Forum, is Identify a Fish: http://www.amonline.net.au/fishes/identify/ Marli

Me again...also it is in Coral Reef Animals of the Indo Pacific (Gosliner, Behrens and Williams) but it's lighter in colour. Marli

I found a reference on this corallimorph: it is also found in Indonesia (I found it at Celebes Divers Edge of the Reef website.) It is an undescribed Pseudocorynactis sp. It is related to the Caribbean Orange Ball "Anemone". Marli

I'll send in some others when I get back to work and the scanner...I shoot slides. It's pretty tiny, this was shot 1:1. It's not a Periclemenes rathbunae, as has been previously suggested. They were also present in the area, and haven't got the red spots. Marli

This commensal shrimp was found in shallow water off the front of our hotel in Grenada. It could be a Caribbean or Atlantic species, but noone that knows caribbean species has seen it. Rather than living on anemones, this one lives on upside down jellyfish: Cassiopea frondosa. Cheers, Marli

This looks like a corallimorph, rather than an anemone. Similar to an anemone, but a bit more primitive on the evolutionary ladder. Marli

Nice shots! Brings back good memories. Just a note re: your nudibranch gallery 1. The topleft and middle photos and third down on the right are actually flatworms. Still gorgeous critters, though! Nicely done.

I'm trying to find a lab to do hi-res slide scans at a reasonable price. My scanner only does scans to 30MB and I need 54MB minimum, with specific requirements for publishing. Up here in the Great White North, where it's currently 28C., the prices I have found are absurd: $25 for 1 scan. I could understand this years ago, but not now with the huge improvements in scanning devices. Anyone know of a good facility that can be trusted with originals and gives great results? ( At least until I get a new system?)

The choice of film is highly personal, but here's my 2 cents worth. I prefer Fuji Velvia for macro and Provia for wide angle, especially for blue water shots. The new Velvia 100 ISO, when available here in Canuck land may end up as my film of choice. I have used what is here called Kodak Elite Extracolour, and Ektachrome EVS with some inconsistent results. Often, I have found the Kodak versions look harsh, and very "orangey", rendering non-crystalline blue water somewhat greener than I would prefer. In fact, I can now tell, without looking at my notes, which film I have used because of the 'look' of the slide. However, if visibilty is excellent, I have had good results with both. For macro, I have found both to be too contrasty. So, try to find lab that will include processing in the cost of your film, and the small difference in price makes buying the "pro" version of Fujichrome only a dollar or so more than the consumer version. Hope that helps!

It's a Belted Sandfish. Serranus subligarius in Paul Humann's Reef Fish ID book.

I have had success getting Nikon manuals directly from Nikon. They charge you less than the CD versions on EBay. I've been dealing with Nikon Canada. Cheers, Marli

Lovely shot. My only suggestion would be to further edit by darkening the upper left corner. It's a little distracting. Otherwise, great! B) Marli

I am about to move into a SLR housing for a Nikon F100, and I was wondering if anyone has found a housing, aside from Sea & Sea, that accepts Sigma lenses. In particular, I am interested in using a 24mm EX and a 105 macro for 1:1. I'm interested in Aquatica, but I'm not sure it would allow manual focus with either lens. Any input would be appreciated!