Ultimate Antarctica
January 5–February 1, 2008
In Greek mythology the Sirens song lured enchanted sailors to destruction on the treacherous rocks where the Sirens dwelled. Their song was seductive, but deadly. I cant help but think of the Sirens song when I consider digital photography, because it is as photographically seductive as the most compelling song. The difference, however, is that digital isnt lethal!

Recently a photographer friend of mine commented that I am the only photographer he knows who shoots with a digital camera but still uses, and prefers, 35mm film. While Im sure there are plenty of others who share my predilection I, too, know of no one. Digital is compelling, and potentially addicting. While I was tempted to use a drug analogy with this addiction, I did not, because this digital addiction isnt harmful. Instead, it might actually be quite beneficial.



This fall, as Mary and I headed to Africa for 12 straight weeks of safaris, we carried along 500 rolls of film. Awaiting us in storage were another 300 rollsand more, if need be, that we could buy from our participants if they had any left over at the end of their safaris. We also carried along one digital cameraa Canon D30that we used on occasion, but our primary recording medium was still film.

Carrying 500 rolls of film aboard a plane will be a real challenge for the two of us. We'll have our photo vests packed, as well as whatever space we have on our single roll-along carry-on luggage that houses our biggest lenses. With digital, in contrast, several memory cards would accomplish the same thing. With my Canon D30 a one gigabyte card would give me the equivalent of approximately 5.5 rolls of film if shot on the raw format, and 17 rolls on the largest jpeg format. A memory card, regardless of storage capacity, is pretty small and thin, measuring slightly less than 1.5 x 1.75 inches, and is about 1/8th of an inch thick. A roll of film is about one inch in diameter by two inches high, so about 16 one-gigabyte cards would occupy approximately the same space as ONE ROLL OF FILM. That's the storage equivalent of approximately 88 rolls of film if shot on the raw format, and around 280 rolls if shot on the largest jpeg file. Using those figures, the space occupied by approximately six rolls of film would give me, via memory cards, the image storage capacity of over 500 rolls of film. Of course, with the latest models of digital cameras like Canon's D60 and 1Ds, or Nikon's 1DX, file size per image is larger so you'll get fewer images per card. Nonetheless, you can see how the space normally occupied by one roll of film provides for a heck of a lot of images. Space, for carrying a recording medium, suddenly is not an issue.

Storage of all that digital information could be a problem, however, and the biggest issues a digital photographer faces are storage, retrieval, and having free memory cards if the storage device(s) fails. There are several ways a photographer can store images. The two most practical options are Digital Wallets and laptop computers. Digital Wallets can store up to 20 gigabytes of memory. Storage capacity on a laptop is equivalent to the capacity of its internal or peripheral hard drive. By transferring images from a laptop to CDs, a laptops storage capacity becomes virtually unlimited.

The concern I have with this, however, is back up. What if the storage device fails? What happens if your computer gets damaged en route, especially if youre traveling overseas? What happens if your CD writers or your Digital Wallet or your accessory, peripheral hard drive breaks, or is lost, or just conks out? If that occurs, your images may or may not be recoverable. Furthermore, and perhaps just as bad, if you were counting on using some type of storage medium and a minimum of cards, reusing them after you download the days shoot, you might find yourself in a dilemma.



I see two possible solutions to this problem. One, have two independent storage devices so that if one goes down the other is still available. Of course, youll be counting on lightning not striking twice, but I think thatd be a fair assumption. If youre considering that route Id suggest either a Digital Wallet and some type of computer-interfaced storage mediumbe that a peripheral hard drive or CD writer, or two Digital Wallets. Once a CD is written it is pretty much safe unless the CD is damaged in some way. However, if your computer goes down, then an accessory hard drive or a CD writer becomes inaccessible, and your storage capacity is lost. Unless you use a Digital Wallet as your back up storage system.

Whats a Digital Wallet? Its a palm-sized mini-computer that stores your digital images. You cannot view the images; the Digital Wallet is merely a storage device for keeping digital images (or other files) until they can be downloaded to a computer for further work. Digital Wallets sell for around $400, and two wallets would be cheaper than the other alternatives.

Solution two is to have enough memory cards to cover your butt should your storage medium go down. A 512-megabyte card sells for around $450 dollarsabout the price of a Digital Wallet. Like the wallet, the card can be used again and again. The cards have another advantage, though. Theyre pretty indestructible, so unless you actually lose one, you should be in business. A story is going around right now about someone putting a memory card through a washing machine without harm to the card (once all the contacts had dried out).



Having two or more high capacity memory cards should solve your storage problems when afield, and as I stated above, a stack of cards equivalent to 1900 rolls of film for a large jpeg file will take up the space one roll of film occupies. Cards can be reused again and again, unlike film, so even though the up front cost of a card may seem expensive, its really not. A good friend of mine just downloaded over 400 images from his 512-megabyte card, the equivalent of 11 rolls of 36-exposure film. Im paying about $5 per roll of film, and another $6 for processing, for a total of $11 per roll. For 11 rolls, thats $121 for a one-time use. He paid around $450 for his memory card and remember, cards can be used again and again.

Conceivably, one could carry several high megabyte memory cards and not even bother to download the cards in the field. While 10 memory cards would be expensive, the storage available would amount to approximately 100 rolls of 36-exposure film with images shot on a raw format. Theres been a fair amount of discussion regarding whether shooting raw is even necessary, as the largest file jpegs also do a great job. Even with a D30 and its relatively small file, my 8x10 enlargements made at the largest jpeg file size produces prints that look just fine. With the Canon D60 or 1D or Nikons DX, all with relatively large file sizes, enlargements to 11x14 or greater shouldnt be an issue. And, on the largest jpeg size, a one-gigabyte card would yield approximately 25 rolls of film.

Remember, too, that a photographer need not store, keep, or download every image captured on digital. Film photographers have the habit of shooting several dupes in camera, if for no other reason than to insure that one or more of the frames will be sharply in focus and well composed. The same shooting strategy may apply to digital, but the advantage here is that you can edit out the mistakes before storing or downloading the ones you want to keep. Even on the relatively small LED screen on the back of a digital camera I find it easy and convenient to do a rough edit.



Editing in the field frees up memory card space, so that a one-gigabyte or 512- megabyte card may actually function as two as images are reviewed and edited out. If this is done on a computer the editing becomes easy, for even if you keep only the best images on a memory card you can first double check for sharpness on the computer before you delete unwanted images from both your computer and from the memory card. Correlating the two is easy, just check the file number and delete the images accordingly.

You might ask yourself why Mary and I are still shooting film even though Im expounding on the advantages of digital, especially in terms of the reduction in weight or mass that removing film from our packing would represent. We havent switched to digital yet for several reasons, including the fact that we do not have an image management system in place to handle storing and retrieving the digital images. Our sales files are composed of slides and our office staff knows these files and how to handle slide submissions. Digital will involve a whole new mind-set and information we do not currently have on storing images.

Markets are beginning to accept digital images but the vast majority are not. Some are accepting small jpeg files for image review, but after looking at the jpegs they still want to see the original transparencies. This will change in time.

There are a host of websites where you can find on-line discussions on the entire digital photography issue, with an equal number of opinions circulated about the pros and cons of this new medium. At a site I recently visited, the sites author examined how long it will it be before digital photography completely replaces film considering the current quality of each and the future prospects of the digital medium. The conclusion by that web author was that film has a viable future of perhaps four or five years before it becomes essentially extinct. I agree with that assessment.



For Mary and me, our switch will come when editors and top photography markets and contests, like the British Gas/BBC and the Natures Best photo competitions, accept digital files. In the meantime, well be shooting film, and using our digital camera for specific purposes. Those will be discussed in a future column.

Editors Note:With the continuing advancements in digital storage devices, the increasing ease of accessibility to images, and falling prices due to mass production, significant changes are inevitable. With new technology and hardware design for digital photography and digital storage evolving almost daily, an article such as this has a limited shelf-life." At the time this article was written, the technical information and estimated hardware prices were current.


Joseph Van Os Photo Safaris, Inc. P.O. Box 655, Vashon Island, Washington USA 98070
Phone: (206) 463-5383   Fax: (206) 463-5484    Email: info@photosafaris.com
Copyright © 2008, Joseph Van Os Photo Safaris, Inc.