Fwd: Re: [at-l] Trail Camera?

[vhoyt@mediaone.net (Victor Hoyt)]

> That said, I would strongly recommend _against_ a digital camera for a

Well, I gotta respond, but I also have to say at the outset that my choice
is an expensive one.

I think that digital is very practical if you're able to invest in the right
equipment, and have a little support at home. The camera I chose is pretty
expensive but the system I've been using can be tailored to a cheaper one.

> thru-hike. The battery requirements alone are too much for long distance
> hiking.

The Canon Powershot G-1 I have uses a Lion rechargeable, well known for
long, and deep life. I carry a backup as well. These batteries last several
days if one is careful with use of the LCD. The G-1 is very versatile, and
can easily be used without the lcd, just as if it was a point and shoot
35mm. One only needs to use the screen to edit out unwanted shots.

>Storage is another problem -- while it is nice to be able to reuse
> the memory cards, you have to download them to a computer or mail them
home
> to be downloaded, and these cards are quite expensive (and you need 3 or
> 4).

The G-1 is compatible with Compact Flash II, and thus an IBM microdrive. I
personally carry four 16 meg cards (about $40 each), and rotate them through
the mail, but I've talked to people who have used the microdrives in the
field and swear by their durability.

>Finally there is the issue of printing, archiving, and the longevity of
> the digital storage medium. I'd be happy to spend hours writing about all
> this, but your collective eyes would glaze over

I'd have to say that burning a cd is probably just as reliable as storing a
color print. I realize that there is some question about the longevity of
cd-r media, but I'm willing to take the risk. Further, color inkjet, and
dye-sub technology is leaping forward with reckless abandon.

Obviously there are some choices to make. If I'm willing to accept a 640 x
480 resolution, and high compression (lower quality) I can fit 161 images on
one 16 meg card. I prefer 1024 x 768, at medium compression so I get only
45, but I also get a reasonably good 4 x 6 color print (ok, it's not up to
the quality of a good 35mm color print, but I'm shooting for computer use.)

My dad was a semi-pro photographer, and when I was a kid we spent a lot of
time in a dark living room looking at his slides and movies. For me now, a
generation later, the computer is like my slide projector. I love it! And I
love to manipulate the pictures in Photoshop. So I guess a digital camera is
a natural choice, for which I'm willing to make some compromises.

Finally, I do still use my Minolta point and shoot, as well as my Nikons,
and my old Alpa, but more and more I rely on the digital for all my
pictures.

vic