Underwater?

[jetcode]

I have a friend who specializes in underwater photography and uses Nikon gear. He loads several cameras with 35mm film. Once the film is shot the camera is expired until it comes back to the surface. He also had a hammer-head shark try to consume his lighting system. He has a great shot of that.

I would think the sheer complexity of changing film and view camera settings would make the task difficult at best. I could see 4x5 being done in shallow waters around reefs.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Martha Casanave has been doing some underwater and partially submerged pinhole work with 4x5" pinhole cameras in lucite boxes.

There are a few underwater solutions here from Peter Gowland, including a Rollei Marine housing, homemade underwater housing, and a roomy homemade sub--that's the ticket--

http://www.petergowland.com/action2.html

[Kevin Crisp]

I have to admit I had thought about this. Film speed and holding still is a real problem, and LF would make it much worse. Slow lenses would make it much worse. And it all would get harder and harder the deeper you go. A lot of money can go into getting you to a place you want to dive and down there and if you're limited to one shot that's a problem. The Nikonos V prices have come down a lot and they do this very well, if you've maintained them properly, which takes about a one per year CLA, including quite a bit of disassembly. For LF you would need an incredibly expensive custom made housing that would be remarkably awkward to use. Except for flash photography this would be darned near impossible without an underwater tripod.

[jetcode]

Except for flash photography this would be darned near impossible without an underwater tripod.

Everyone I know uses a flash system underwater, the bigger the better. I would think a wide Fotoman type 4x5 rig would be the best solution as there is little need to do anything but snap the shutter. Changing film is THE challenge. If you could get a mechanism to work a 6 shot Graflex holder that could be the best way to go but definitely additional lighting is pretty much essential unless shooting very close to the surface.

[John Schneider]

I've thought about this many times over the past 15 yrs. I thought about using a K-20 or F-56 aerial cam with rollfilm to shoot u/w "landscapes" inside of shipwrecks. I was always put off by the complexity and size of the needed housing, in addition to the expense/effort to construct a proper one from marine alum., along with the huge dome port, and all the through-glands for the controls. Although the housing could be made neutrally buoyant, it would still have a lot of mass (imagine the effort to raise it onto a boat, especially in waves), and also lots of drag (it would be useless in any kind of current). I eventually decided my Nikonos and housed F2 were quite good enough.

I did buy a Pentax 67 housing when I found one, but as I have yet to swap MF systems, I haven't used that housing. But that housing is a beast compared to 35mm ones, so I'm sure a LF housing would be practically impossible in the situations I like to dive.

I'd recommend either a Nikonos system (w/ either a III or V camera), or looking for a 35mm or MF aluminum housing (Giddings, Dyfo, Hassie, Ikelite, or there were several other aluminum ones made by a few places in San Diego in years past). Rollei housings are collectible and they sell for far too much these days.

[ljsegil]

You know this underwater photography stuff is not easy, intuitive, or automatically productive of good results. It is not remotely like putting your camera in a box or a bag and taking some snaps while wading round the reef. At a minimum, you need to be an experienced diver as well as photographer. I would urge anyone who is seriously interested in taking it up to rent a basic Nikonos and flash setup to get a feel for what is involved in the endeavor (and using the Nikonos is much simpler than using a housed camera). If you are comfortable and like the experience and get some results that are pleasing, then by all means go for it. But beware of making a major investment (and it is) before you know what you are getting into. That said, it can be wonderful, though never effortless.
LJS

[Joseph O'Neil]

Thanks for all the weird and wonderful ideas. There is a used 35mm underwater film system at the local camera store, complete with electronics (flash) for a very reasonable price, as even underwater, everyone seems to be going digital.

Still film isn't that expensive, especailly if you only have the film developed and scan & print your own negative.

If I find a way to ever take my crown graphic underwater, I'll let you all know. thanks much
joe

[Robert Oliver]

Bruce Mozert....

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel...e-aquatic.html

[brian mcweeney]

Like David said, ... submarine.

[John Jarosz]

All of the obvious problems aside (changing film, etc), UW photography must be done with artificial light to get the colors. Below 10 feet reds & yellows start to disappear and by 30 feet everything is blue and there is far less light (even blue), so long exposures and lousy depth of field would result without a strobe.

You also would like to have as wide angle lens as possible so you can get close to your subject.

I shot UW for many years. I'd triy to get an all mechanical camera. Everyone uses the digitals these days, but one little leak and the electronics is toast. Toss the camera if that happens. The yellow Sea&Sea cameras are probably the most bulletproof these days. The UW cameras that use film or the UW housings for film cameras can be had for a song these days.