<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
The question is what's the resolution of that two inch screen and
is it good enough, and large enough, to see the details that you
might want to see in an H2O environment. Water is going to cut
down both visibility and overall lux so the specs of the camera
are important. It also depends upon whether you just want a
visual reference for surface obstruction issues or whether you
want to keep filming during the dive and record the results just
in case you bump into a real mermaid and want to have proof of her
existence.<br>
<br>
I've spent some time looking at this issue and found three
reasonable solutions.<br>
<br>
1) GoPro, Bullet Pro, or similar sport recording device. They are
small and take great images, and record to internal memory card.
The bullet in particular is easy to encase in a housing because of
its shape. The problem is that you can't get a live feed off them
(actually you can from the bullet but the image sucks) and battery
averages two hours duration, so on a long dive you won't have a
complete video. Most of the PC2013 underwater diving footage is
from these type of cameras.<br>
<br>
2) Webcam in waterproof housing. The microsoft lifecam webcam is
a "bullet" type camera, 720HD, and easy to house in a 1-atm can.
However, it is USB and requires external storage if you want to
record the video feed which means carrying a laptop, netbook, or
other device with enough storage for that data. If you use a
device with an OS you can at least start/stop recording when you
like and therefore be more selective with the recorded images.
I've been successful connecting up to three webcams into my
netbook and viewing them all at the same time. Benefit over the
sport device is that you get both live feed and recording
capability. They are cheap, averaging $79 (US) so if a housing
fails and they go kaput, no big deal.<br>
<br>
3) HD Video Cam, traditional consumer grade video camera. Most of
the newer models have internal recording and external feed so you
can view live plus record. These models provide the best image
but good ones are also still relatively expensive ($800-1200 US)
compared to sport cams and web cams. I haven't had the courage to
risk losing my video cam to water infiltration in a housing of my
own fabrication.<br>
<br>
Jon<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2/9/2014 10:25 AM, Joe Perkel wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1391959517.3063.YahooMailNeo@web161804.mail.bf1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff;
font-family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial,
Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:14pt">Vance,<br>
<br>
Everything is miniaturized these days. I just bought a flexible
inspection camera at Home Dept for a 100 bucks with a 2" color
screen that I used to locate a problem behind a wall. When I was
an aircraft mechanic, a similar bore-scope would have set you
back thousands.<br>
<br>
I'm thinking dual usage in recording HD video on a DVR of the
dive and critters, and a live feed from the bow camera to a 2" -
4" LCD screen mounted on one side of the forward facing port in
the tower. On the other side of the same port could the sonar
display. As an instrument rated pilot, I'm used to the notion of
developing a scan between instrumentation and the outside world.<br>
<br>
Everything's a compromise Vance. I'm struggling between an
elongated bow shape for surface transit, or a blunt nose draggy
type shape that tugs and dances on the towline. Everything's a
long way off down in the Keys.<br>
<br>
Joe<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>