<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">

    <title type="text">DIGIDEEP underwater photography &amp; video forum | Unterwasserfotografie &amp; Video</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/atom/" />
    <updated></updated>
    <rights>Copyright (c) 2008</rights>
    <generator uri="http://www.pmachine.com/" version="1.6.1">ExpressionEngine</generator>
    <id>tag:digideep.com,2008:05:23</id>


    <entry>
      <title>Looking for beta testers&#8230;</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/7472/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2008:go/forums/viewthread/.7472</id>
      <published>2008-04-14T21:20:45Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>antzero</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Hello there!
</p>
<p>
We are developing a software called AtomicView for managing digital assets (sorting video and pictures) for Mac OS X and Windows.
</p>
<p>
We are looking for beta testers, especially for the Mac OS X version right now. I think it could interest some people here.
</p>
<p>
The testers who provide us with valuable evaluation will receive a free AtomicView.
</p>
<p>
If you are interested, you can subscribe here :
</p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.digideep.com/go?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.antzero.com%2Fantweb%2Fen%2FsubscribeBetaTesterPhoto.php">http://www.antzero.com/antweb/en/subscribeBetaTesterPhoto.php</a>
</p>
<p>
You can find more informations about the software here :
</p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.digideep.com/go?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.antzero.com">http://www.antzero.com</a>
</p>
<p>
Thanks a lot!
<br />
Yves.
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>How do you store your pictures on a dive trip&#63;</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/4498/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2004:go/forums/viewthread/.4498</id>
      <published>2004-01-28T23:57:54Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Lars Kirchhoff</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>I was always curious if all our members and contest submitters are crazy  <img src="http://www.digideep.com/images/smileys/lol.gif" width="19" height="19" alt="LOL" style="border:0;" />&nbsp; as we are and take their complete digital equipment to their dive journeys? 
<br />
We are always travelling with a laptop, an external hard disc, cd burner and cameras to our trips. 
</p>
<p>
So how do you store the files?
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>AVCHD vs. MPEG&#45;2 or other Codecs&#63;</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/7361/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2008:go/forums/viewthread/.7361</id>
      <published>2008-03-02T16:18:25Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Andi Voeltz</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>I&#8217;d like to read some user comments on the recently introduced AVHCD codecs
<br />
in this board. Is it already worthwhile to go for that technology or do you still 
<br />
have to sacrifice a huge quality loss compared to HDV ?
</p>
<p>
Currently none of the introduced AVCHD camcorders can match the sensor-size 
<br />
of the tape based HDV models. That is effecting noise and low-light capabilities.
<br />
Two very important factors for uw-videographers.
</p>
<p>
What do you think?
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Help: video once edited is not clear.</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/7257/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2008:go/forums/viewthread/.7257</id>
      <published>2008-02-03T12:42:17Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>huffy</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Hi everyone!
</p>
<p>
I am having problems with my underwater footage once i edit it and burn it to a disk.
<br />
The problem is that alot of video that has alot of blue especially (fish swimming with no background, just blue sea) is not coming out clear at all. Although saying that all the video is not coming out as clear as i it should.
<br />
When i play back directly from my camera to the tv its looks good, but once it goes through the editing process it doesnt come out clear.
<br />
The program i am using is Adobe Premier Pro 2.0. 
<br />
at first i thought that the problem could of been the first step in Adobe where you choose the settings of video you are going to be doing. But i have played around with most settings and it still doesnt come out clear.
<br />
Could it be that because my camera is a HD camera, and im editing the disc in the HD format, that the footage will not come out clear unless its played on a HD tv?
<br />
Cheers
</p>
<p>
Huffy
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Lost picture files</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/6793/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2007:go/forums/viewthread/.6793</id>
      <published>2007-08-14T14:55:44Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Cheddarchick</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Hello all, Lurked here forever, love the site.
<br />
Now I have a problem. 2 dives on Sat using my SP350 and xd card. When I tried to download the picyures to my laptop. It wouldn&#8217;t recognize anything on the disk. No files shown, though in properties it had 480 MB of file usage. After fighting with it for hours, I defragged the xd card. SO now in properties it shows 9000 .chk file fragments and still no picture files. I know they are in there some where. Any ideas? I burnt the files to a dvd and reformatted the disk, and tried the camera and more pictures and they were fine after that. Popped right up in Oly master. Are the pix lost forever???
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>You TUBE</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/6600/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2007:go/forums/viewthread/.6600</id>
      <published>2007-06-17T00:54:08Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Derek Heasley</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Just wanted to show off my sideshow effort I have posted on <a href="http://www.digideep.com/go?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com</a>.&nbsp; Its another way of getting your images out there I suppose....Although I have to say, the quality sux <img src="http://www.digideep.com/images/smileys/grin.gif" width="19" height="19" alt="grin" style="border:0;" />
</p>
<p>
I created a collection of images using proshow producer. <a href="http://www.digideep.com/go?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.photodex.com%2F">http://www.photodex.com/</a>
<br />
Added the music (moby) and saved out custom divx size (240 by 320 I think it was).&nbsp; You can sync the slideshow to last for the duration of the music, which is pretty nice.
<br />
I couldn&#8217;t get the size smaller than 70mb.&nbsp; I thought it would have been smaller than that, given the dimensions.&nbsp; But it was my first time so maybe I was doing something wrong. 
<br />
Anyway, I uploaded it to you tube and some minutes later it was online.&nbsp; I originally planned to put lots more on one slideshow but the file size was just too big (over 100mb).&nbsp; Ended up doing two slideshows....Which I think was a better option..... <img src="http://www.digideep.com/images/smileys/wink.gif" width="19" height="19" alt="wink" style="border:0;" />
</p>
<p>
[youtube]<a href="http://www.digideep.com/go?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DF2VulXYsxgQ">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2VulXYsxgQ</a>[/youtube]
</p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.digideep.com/go?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fseapixels">http://www.youtube.com/seapixels</a>
</p>
<p>
Have a nice day&#8230;
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>vdr&#45;m30 software for win xp</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/6192/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2007:go/forums/viewthread/.6192</id>
      <published>2007-02-10T11:26:15Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>MARUFUDEEN</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p><span style="font-size:14px;"></span><span style="color:blue;"></span> <img src="http://www.digideep.com/images/smileys/surprise.gif" width="19" height="19" alt="surprised" style="border:0;" /> Hello Folks,
<br />
                 vdr-m30 panasonic camcorder driver wanted for my win xp
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Help using Photoshop to edit out backscatter</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/6435/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2007:go/forums/viewthread/.6435</id>
      <published>2007-04-18T05:49:43Z</published>
      <updated>2007-04-18T05:51:06Z</updated>
      <author><name>rwhitbread</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Here&#8217;s a sample of one of the shots a beginner friend of mine asked me to retouch in Photoshop.
<br />
I picked one with a lot of backscatter intentionally. 
</p>
<p>
You can see, by the exposure and backscatter that she&#8217;s using an onboard flash that is relatively close to the apature. She&#8217;s also a bit too far away from her subject, but that&#8217;s because I think she hasn&#8217;t invested in a WAL yet.
</p>
<p>
BTW folks, before you go overboard on the critique etc, this was her first tme shooting under water. For a first time effort it&#8217;s not too bad.
</p>
<p>
I&#8217;m hoping there some way to remove the backscatter. I&#8217;ve read somewhere that Photoshop is the way to go. My version of Photoshop is Photoshop CS2.
</p>
<p>
Thanks in advance
</p>
<p>
<img src="http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279/geochic73/IMAG0034-1.jpg"  alt='IMAG0034-1.jpg' />
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Image managment</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/4016/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2002:go/forums/viewthread/.4016</id>
      <published>2002-08-18T23:40:17Z</published>
      <updated>2007-03-23T20:10:45Z</updated>
      <author><name>Giles</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Digital Photography is not only different from the aspect you use memory instead of film. The after taking the photo process is different too. You don’t have to wait to get them processed, you don’t have to dig out the light box and eye piece.
<br />
Ok so the processing is connecting to your computer, and the looking at is done using a browser. Well yes, but what happens when you get too many photo’s to deal with by file name, or even renaming them to a description, that’s when you need a real image browser.
<br />
There have been a few out there on the market for a while. The first one, other than Camedia (although I have never tried the newest release I was never instantly impressed with it) that comes with Olympus products I came across was <span style="color:red;">Thumbs Plus</span> from Cerious software was one I was put onto by a digital photographer friend of mine. It was a good start, I now knew there were better products out there. The Mickey Mouse, kindergarten look of Thumbs plus though meant to be friendly looking looked bad, and the program lacked plug ins and add ons that would make for so much more fun to be had. I then found a company who impressed me with several products they had, so I thought I would try their image browser. FCoders <span style="color:red;">IBrowser</span> seemed to be a better step in the right direction.
<br />
I had now tried 3 products, each of which had their good merits and bad. I still wanted one that mixed up all the good bits. And left out the bad.
<br />
Enter <span style="color:red;">ACDSee 3.0</span> the first version I was to trial. It was fantastic it did everything, but no wait, my colleague gives me ACDSee power pack 4.0 just a week later. It’s like a Twighlight zone.
<br />
ACDSee has now got many power packs and suites, all containing more than the last but here is the basics.
<br />
ACDSee Image Browser.
<br />
  ·Browse manage and store images easily (I mean easily)
<br />
  ·Edit images easily, exposure (including Fuzzy Logic ..you’ll love it), 
<br />
   rotation, resizing … all Lossless as well .. so you EXIF data and image 
<br />
   don’t change in anyway .. they just end up looking the right way up, the
<br />
   right size .. with well some exposure touch ups.
<br />
  ·Group images into favourites folder, or create albums, both just link to 
<br />
   images no duplication, or extra MB needed to store the same image
<br />
   twice.
<br />
  ·Make Screen Saver with FotoAngelo
<br />
  ·Edit images (although not the best does a good job)
</p>
<p>
Basically if you are serious about digital photography you need a serious image management tool, and it doesn’t get any better than ACDSee.
<br />
<a href="http://www.digideep.com/go?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fhttp%2F%2Fwww.acdsystems.com">http;//www.acdsystems.com</a>
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>What software for exif/iptc management&#63;</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.digideep.com/go/forums/viewthread/6149/" />      
      <id>tag:digideep.com,2007:go/forums/viewthread/.6149</id>
      <published>2007-01-24T19:20:05Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Lars Kirchhoff</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Hi folks, 
</p>
<p>
I&#8217;m just curious what software you are using for your exif/iptc data? I had a quick 
<br />
view at the new microsoft tool and it seems to be very convinient to me? So let
<br />
know your preferences/workflows, etc. 
</p>
<p>
/lars
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>


</feed>