Jump to content

uwxplorer

Member
  • Content Count

    312
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

uwxplorer last won the day on December 8 2013

uwxplorer had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About uwxplorer

  • Rank
    Eagle Ray

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.uwxplorer.net
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    United States
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Sony CX550V/Olympus TG-4
  • Camera Housing
    Light & Motion Stingray G2 Plus/Ikelite housing for TG-4
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Big Blue VL7500 (x2)
  • Accessories
    ULCS strobe Arms, Fathom WA 90 lens/Dyron SWAL13
  1. Not using the TG5 but the TG4, so this might totally irrelevant, but I have had similar experience there. However, my understanding is that you are talking about the jpg version of your shots (as I am doing). Using the raw data, you can indeed adjust the WB as you see fit (I suppose that that is what you are doing above), provided obviously that you have enough signal. I don't think you can expect a preset WB to get it right in all circumstances. In very diverse environment, you should expect to WB each shot specifically. I personally don't bother, as I am using my camera mostly for memory snapshots, but that's in principle feasible. This being said, I am using video lights as well (no strobes). If close enough from my subject (I have 15,000 lumens of light), the UW mode does indeed seem to not get it right. I am too lazy to switch back and forth between mode, so I just use the raw version. Another issue you might have is that you are apparently using your zoom lens (10 m, 15 m for the critter shots). I don't think you should expect anything vivid at these distances. Too much water between the sensor and your subject. Your lights are powerless at these distances. Get closer, dim the lights if that frightens the critters, but reduce the color absorption by water. Good luck!
  2. I don't have a 3D TV myself, but in my recent experience with 3D video uploading to Youtube, I used a friend of mine as a beta tester. One thing I discovered (reading on the web) is that the Youtube "this is a 3D video" checkbox needs to be unchecked for some 3D TVs to actually do their job of expanding and alternating frames. Sounds counterintuitive, but I confirmed this in my case. The problem is that this is an option which is set by the uploader, not the viewer... All this to warn you that, even though Barry's video is probably perfectly fine, your friend's TV might have some troubles recognizing it as such.
  3. @trimix125: you will need to watch that specific video on a 3D TV. This will have its own glasses requirement depending on the technology used. The simplest way to watch a "3D" video on Youtube, say on your computer, is when the video is exported in "anaglyph" mode (left image is red, right is blue+green). There you will have to use one of these cheap red/cyan glasses. Another option is, for a side-by-side "unsqueezed" video, to use a Google cardboard device and your phone. But in this particular example, since the left and right views are squeezed in order to fit into the HD format (they are then expanded and alternated by a 3D TV), trying to watch it with a Google cardboard device would result in... a squeezed aspect ratio. Not very enjoyable in my experience. Unfortunately, Youtube doesn't convert videos from one format to another anymore (I guess it turned out to be too taxing on their servers), which makes exporting the different versions of a video and uploading them quite painstaking.
  4. Very nice footage and edit! Thanks for sharing. The whale doesn't look very large (although quite impressive already), or is it just me? A little detail I noticed is that there seems to be what looks like a fish trapped in one of its right gills... It so nagged me, I was wondering whether a diver would try to grab it. I wonder whether that why it came close to you several times?
  5. When there is no tip jar, something is fishy... best to tip each individual separately.
  6. You learn. Remember that there is no health insurance paid for for these seasonal and temporary jobs (in addition to all the horror stories you have already heard about the US working class). When you are a local, you come to appreciate a boat that goes an extra length to find the better spot. When you have expensive or heavy gear, you appreciate that they help you with it and take special care of it. And when you are a rude, ignorant and arrogant European, you should acknowledge that it takes a special kind of zen attitude to overlook your pettiness :-) [Edit: I realize some might be missing the humor. This is not, I repeat, not addressed to the OP]. Even boat owners rarely spend their holidays on the Riviera (if they take any). Just take a different look at the country you're visiting and leave all these comfortable prejudices back home...
  7. The formal document was pretty much the same as the one I posted above. This is my little contribution to upholding the quality of BBC productions for years to come... :-) PS: I received the payment but am still waiting for the DVD of the show...
  8. I have provided the requested info as an attachment, which they say they will not keep a copy of. Nothing has happened one week later. I am not in a rush...
  9. That is certainly a possibility... And I may add that if I ever lose the original footage, I will never be able to enforce my rights, not mentioning that if I stop using the email address the exchange took place through...etc, etc. Probably one more reason I will stick to doing things I like as a mere hobby, and never try to make a living out of them!
  10. Good thinking except that a heavy camera on a light tripod is not going to be very stable. Flooding the tripod leg is going to make it heavy and my experience is that it is very cumbersome to haul around. Unfortunately, I don't think there is a one seize fit all solution... I have a hard time picturing juggling with floats, but I'd be curious to see your solution when you have put it together (and tried it!). :-) My only point was that, rather than investing in a"dedicated" underwater tripod, which might be far from ideal in any case but definitely very expensive, a home-made tripod can do a pretty descent job at a more reasonable cost. I wanted to experiment with macro before I committed to an expensive piece of kit and it appears that this might do the job in the foreseeable future. It is definitely more tedious than wide-angle though.
  11. +1 As a side note, where I dive, the line is often blurry and green! :-)
  12. Revisiting this old thread to conclude. The permanent weights idea was a bad one. Way too heavy to carry along and a potential buoyancy hazard. Instead, I strapped one metal ring to each leg and carried 3 clippable two-pound weights which I have on my BCD when swimming around (after removing the corresponding weight from my BCD pockets), and clip onto the tripod when setting up a shot. The weights are not necessary for my buoyancy at depth, so I simply need to dump some air from my BCD when I set up the tripod. When I want to move to some other place, I unclip the weights one at a time and add a bit of air in my BCD to compensate. I suppose that in a less surgy environment, less weight would be necessary to stabilize the rig.
  13. Bought the GoPro dessicant tablets after trying the toilet paper trick: too much risk to pinch TP with the housing and flood the unit. Those tablets fit perfectly. I just need to go back to some hot and humid destination...
×
×
  • Create New...