Click here to make Reel-Time your homepage
Contact
Us
|
|
By Peter Patricelli |
||||
| introduction | ||||||
|
Editors note: Click photos for larger version - where picture numbers are referenced, you can see the picture number by hovering your mouse over the photos.
Two physical realities of fishing photography control and dictate the equipment. There is the little matter of water. Hard to avoid when fishing. Water will inevitably kill a camera. Period. Fresh water might take a little longer, especially for a totally mechanical camera (no battery and electronics), but rust and corrosion are inevitable. The fastest death is saltwater and electronics. The second factor is the uncontrolled and unpredictable nature of sunlight: clear or cloudy conditions, early morning, noon or late; and the direction of the light. We fish in not only a literally fluid environment, but a the fluidity and unpredictability of virtually ALL the variables except those within the camera. Unpredictability is the only predictable factor when it comes to angling photography. Here is a guide to the basics of camera selection and photographic do's and don'ts. |
||||||
What kind of camera ? |
||||||
|
The perfect, always there, fool-proof fishing camera must be:
Such a snapshot camera shouldn't require any special consideration. I have retrieved mine from floating around in the bilge innumerable times. It should always get the snapshot, yet will rarely capture a high quality photograph desirable or capable of great enlargement. Here is my snapshot fishing camera. It is several generations of technology old but The minimum requirements for a professional quality fishing camera consistently capable of taking a great photograph if one should present itself are: 1) high resolution lenses, preferably a zoom lense 2) high resolution recording medium, whether film or digital sensor chip. Resolution is like money. You can't ever have too much! 3) It must, absolutely must accept a polarizing 4) It must have a through-the-lens (and filter) viewing system (and that means a single-lens-reflex type or SLR) 5) It must have a built in or attachable fill flash 6) Must be protectable! By that I mean it must fit into a reasonably sized waterproof, hard sided case! (Picture 2) Not necessary but desirable would be auto-focus and auto-exposure. By this point forget small, light, foolproof, and inexpensive. Such a camera is expensive, heavy, fairly large, and requires protection and care. Photo #2 and #3 are of my camera case. Both the snapshot and serious cameras described above go with me everywhere. The water-proof, indestructible case filled with gear weighs 20 pounds. It is heavy, a constant hassle, especially in My waterproof point-and-shoot would seem likely to be the most used, but exactly the opposite. I leave the water after a successful day of fishing having caught fish and taken photographs. Within a few days I have forgotten the fish, and I deal with, use, look at, and in many different ways share the photographs for the rest of my life. |
||||||
|
Film or Digital? |
||||||
|
There are still a few situations where film is favored:
| ||||||
Types of Film |
||||||
Professional films are characterized by slower ISO/ASA speeds, finer grain (and that means resolution!), higher contrast and deeper color saturation. They necessarily have a narrower exposure latitude. The best are the most touchy. They are also chemically unstable, deteriorate month-by-month unless refrigerated, and can be completely destroyed by the temperatures in a hot car or trunk on a sunny day, before or after exposure. They are more expensive. In short, they are a royal pain in the neck to work with. But they can achieve what makes photography worthwhile. There are a few special things in life everyone should experience: unconditional love, the birth of their child, and the projection of their first well exposed, professional "chrome" slide. (Fujichrome Velvia and Provia, and various Kodachromes). Right now the photographic market is flooded with excellent medium resolution digital cameras, some of them waterproof, functionally bullet-proof, and otherwise satisfying all of the best characteristics of the snapshot cameras without the more onerous characteristics of the professional cameras. What about them? The biggest two problems, that, if solved, would let me stop carrying a 20-pound camera case all over the country are resolution and the polarizing filter issue, and I think it is only a matter of time before the resolution is solved (it is, but I mean affordably). So that leaves the polarizing filter problem. |
||||||
| If Digital then How BIG A Digital File ? | ||||||
Three to five megapixels is, in my opinion, a "medium resolution" digital camera and gives you the option of reasonable enlargements, say up to 8”x12”. Depending on the camera, the larger files might make the camera slower. You must try out the individual camera for speed and then decide if that will work for you. Try before you buy. Go to a store and shoot the camera. Ordering online without seeing the camera and determining its speed is foolish. |
||||||
| The mid-range digital camera | ||||||
A water-proof digital with all the other automatic bells and whistles with up to a 5 MB file capture size would, if the polarizing filter issue were solvable, be sufficient as a fishing scene camera for enlargements up to about 11”x17”. It was always more than sufficient as a "fish picture" camera. But without a polarizing filter it is inadequate about half the time or more for scenic or water shots. |
||||||
| Air Travel and Cameras | ||||||
The heavy duty x-ray scanners now in use for checked baggage make another strong case for digital cameras. Make no mistake. If you leave ANY film in your checked luggage it will be fried! Whether exposed or not, totally ruined. You won't know until after you pay for the processing and get nothing! There are leaded bags available but then you have to worry whether they are rated for the current generation of scanners and about the luggage being opened to see what's being hidden in the bags. Film MUST be carried with your “carry-on” bags. The screeners will tell you that their carry-on screening will not affect film slower than ISO 800. That may be true for snapshot intended film scanned once, but begs the question for professional use film that may be part of a large film stash and get taken (and scanned repeatedly) on multiple trips. There is only one way to keep film dependable, and that is to have a bag containing film that you remove from your carry-ons before they are scanned and ask the personnel to hand check it! They will ask you if the film is faster than ISO 800, tell them yes! |
||||||
|
About the author... Raised in Seattle, Wa, I began fly fishing at age 13 and now, 45 years later, I am still amazed at how much there is to learn and how many more horizons there are still to cross. During my college years in Cambridge, MA and medical school in Boston in the 1960's I fell in love with salt water fly fishing, Striped Bass, and Cape Cod. I eventually chose to live in Oregon primarily to take advantage of the, then (now long gone), world class Striper fishery in the Umpqua River and still be among the trout, salmon, and steelhead of my youth. As a “starving” student I simply couldn't afford to continue to pursue photography until it was simplified and made affordable by computers, even before digital cameras, and picked it up again about the time the striper population on the east coast rebounded. Now I fish the east coast on the Cape, NC, and Florida almost more than I do in Oregon
|
||||||
|
©1995-2005 Reel-Time.com - The Internet Journal of Saltwater Fly Fishing
|
||||||