Slashdot Mirror
Storing Pictures While Backpack Travelling?
"He hasn't yet purchased a digital camera, so any camera or convergence device to be available in the next 6 months is fair game.
We've thought of a few scenarios. Bringing along a ton of CF cards is neither cheap nor reliable -- suppose the media gets lost or damaged. An ideal solution might involve being able to mail media home, while still having a copy 'on the road' in case that media gets lost in the mail.
And isn't it about time we see consumer devices with support for firewire drives, such as the iPod? I envision a digital camera that can talk (and backup) to an iPod -- this would be more than enough storage in a 15gb model, and small enough to take backpacking painlessly. However, the new models feature a proprietary dock connector, which makes one the iPod's old great advantages -- charge from any firewire port! -- a thing of the past.
A camera that burns images to a CD would be nice, but only if the CD was secondary storage -- ie, save pictures to internal buffer, burn to N CDs, erase internal buffer. This would allow the easy creation of duplicates, but might require a lot of CDs.
How would you plan your gadgets, given 6 more months of advancement of new technology (and price-cuts on old tech)? There's a whole lot of neat camera-ready devices coming about about now, so there could be quite a few creative ideas. Winning solution is the simplest and most portable."
The problem with stuff that is "just about ready to come out" is that you never know the quality or durability of something that has just come out. Going with an established product, especially when your friend will be away from civilization for considerable stretches of time, is what I recommend.
While buying a lot of CF cards is not a great solution, it doesn't have to be too expensive. 10 256MB Sandisk CF cards will run you approx $650. That would store approximately 3500-4000 images - based on how I use my Canon Powershot A40 camera in "Fine" (medium lossy) format.
10,000 images is, in my opinion, somewhat unlikely to occur. Sure, you can take 10,000 pictures. But 9,000 of them are probably going to suck. Maybe just 8,000. Thus the bane and beauty of a digital camera. You can instantly review a picture or simply review the whole lot later, on your down time. Backpacking should have it's share of down time, unless he's pushing pretty hard.
Additionally, CF cards are very, very hardy. My 64MB Sandisk CF card spent 30 minutes at the bottom of a river when I dropped my camera. The card - and pictures - were perfectly ok after recovery.
Your friend will also want to pick up some hearty rechargable batteries - I suggest the new PowerEX 2000mAh NiMH batteries in conjunction with the Maha C401FS rapid, 100-minute charger. Your friend may also want to consider picking up a flexible solar panel to charge stuff while "on the road".
Lastly, camera-wise, I personally recommend the Canon Powershot A40. It can be had for about $200 now. It is "just" a 2 megapixel camera. However, the output is very nice for consumer level camera.
Exocet Industries - Taking over the world, one computer at a
Actually a lot of it depends on the resolution he wants to capture. At a fairly low resolution (640x480, encoded as average quality .jpg files) he could capture 8,000 pictures on a single 512M CF card. Even 1MP high quality .jpg files from my Kodak DC210+ (fairly older 1MegaPixel camera) run about 200k per picture, so with four 512M CF cards he would still be able to capture 10,000 pictures of with this camera set to max quality.
512M CF cards cost +/- $100 apiece, maybe a little more, so he could hold 10,000 one megapixel pictures on about $500 in media. CF seems pretty indestructable, if he keeps it on his person (in his pocket or whatever) I guarantee it will survive way more than he can. He can also get a cheap $20 adapter to pop the CF card into a PCMCIA slot on a laptop, so with even a little luck he will find someone with a laptop that can burn him CDs for a couple of dollars, somewhere in his travels.
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
Pick up a couple of MicroDrives. These are the ~1GB hard drives that fit in some CF slots. Drop one in the mail every few weeks to you or someone, and be done with it.
There's also the possiblity of using a film camera. Film should be available everywhere, and it's much safer to mail back home. Digital isn't always the answer (OTOH, I just bought my first digital camera today:)
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Depending on just how serious you are about being without power for that long a period you may really need to consider an all-out power consumption analysis, as well as other more conventional factors.
;-)
One thing that I really noticed was your thought about writing CDs, which consumes a non-trivial amount of battery power.
I personally know almost nothing about how much power it takes to take one picture, or write 256MB onto a compact flash, or run a laptop, but you might need to find out. Batteries are heavy and basically dead weight (no value beyond their storage capacity), so you will want to minimize what you need to carry. Coming up with a fancy solution that requires thirty pounds of batteries to run for a week without contact with civilization is probably not useful. Also, you may get into trouble if you need fifty hours to recharge your battery set.
Just a meta-thought.
There's this amazing new technology that have been called 'optical cameras'. The idea is an interesting one: a lense refracts light onto a piece of photosensitive material known as "film". This film can then be developed into regular pictures, with qualities far surpassing any of their digital counterparts.
In other words, get an optical camera, and mail the film to yourself. Have it developed when you get home.
You could just as easily say "If someone is truly serious about photography, he isn't doing 35mm." Or medium format. If you're not lugging an 8x10 camera everywhere, you aren't serious.
Hint: welcome to the 21st century. There are serious digital cameras out there. They just cost a lot.
When travelling, I've found it best to make extensive use of the IYH network. ( International Youth Hostels ~ www.iyhf.org ) They often have Internet access and they often have the most practical and reasonable accomadations. The fellow travellers that you'll meet at the communal kitchens are a wealth of info.
Get a good travel pack, one that is both an internal frame pack and a suitcase with wheels. Pack light, get a money belt. Never display american money on the street if possible. Beware of black market money changers. If you buy soveniers, ship them home from the country of origin. It's best to check your passport into the embassy in some countries.
As for photos, don't buy a brand new spiff camera or other flashy equipment. It's far, far better not to display any signs of affluence. You'll encounter far less problems if you dress locally (trade at used clothing stores) and blend in. You're need a good universal current adapter kit and consider web email account as the most reliable way to get the pictures home. Internet cafes abound and there's always someone who has a fairly new pc or laptop somewhere. Also try searching thru or posting to the relevant newsgroups, many travellers and professional photographers have discussed these concerns in great detail.
One last, somewhat strange piece of advice, you may also want to sew a small Canadian flag to your pack. I've had far less problems since I did.
Main rule: get down, get local, that's where it's at. Happy trails.
Words to men, as air to birds.
There's all sorts of arguments on this issue. I traveled Europe last year in the manner that I expect the article is intending. Hostels? Bah, I slept in the park. Or a beach if it was available.
Anyways, as a high level amateur photographer, I took 3 cameras with me. 1 Fuji digital, 1 Olympus OM-1, 1 Nikon F (The original, built like a tank, when you're not taking pictures, you can use it as a weapon in a bull fight). Guess which one didn't make it back? The Nikon. I fell in an irrigation ditch in rural Italy and broke the viewfinder and shutter speed dial. I could have used that camera as a weapon later on in my journey too.
Anyways, my point. They all have their advantages. Using digital (and I would have loved a pro digital outfit on the trip) you get an immediate response of what the final image is doing. However, I like to do a lot of high-speed/low-light situations, and most digital (even the high end) can't handle what I like to do with 3200 speed T-Max.
My suggestion: If he's serious about pictures, take both, and take extras. Get used to buying film along the route so it doesn't age in your pack before you expose it. Mail it back, *after processing it*, when you're in a reasonably sized and responsible city.
If all you're doing is taking snapshots, I highly reccomend digital, and as many CF cards (I'd go solid state, they're more durable than the microdrives). On rare occasion, you might find a hostel or internet cafe with a burner. Even better, I used a friends shell account that I could upload all my pictures to. Carry all your software with you so you can get the pictures off if you find a friendly computer somewhere.
I'm paying close attention to this thread. I intend to do a 3-4 month journey through South America in a couple years, and will be looking to take two cameras with me. Most likely a digital and a film, both probably nikons.
One last, somewhat strange piece of advice, you may also want to sew a small Canadian flag to your pack. I've had far less problems since I did.
Do this if you're a Canadian. If you're an American, why not see how well your foriegn policy flies overseas? Or are you not proud of the red, white and blue. God knows I see enough of that shit when I go to the US.
I -AM- a Canadian, and when I see arrogant americans doing this, it makes my blood boil. There's a reason that flag gives you less problems, idiot. If I ran into someone doing this, you would be mocked, and depending on how drunk I was - beat down.
Insightful my hairy white ass.
The traveller needs to decide what his/her priorities are. Personally, in my experience, which includes 6 months of backpacking the Appalachian Trail in the US in 1999 and 5 months travelling overseas in 2000 (Asia, OZ, NZ), film is the way to go. The way I travel, the less shite I carry, the happier I am. With an SLR with one 50mm lens I didn't have to worry about batteries, or power adapters or even the value of the camera. When you start humping around a new digital camera, plus battery chargers, cd burners, laptops and the like, you're spending more time guarding, packing and unpacking that crap than you do enjoying the trip.
Internet cafes are shockingly ubiquitous in other parts of the world (easily more prevalent than in the US). But I wouldn't want to rely on them to upload my photos to home; how much time do you want to spend waiting on a 28k shared connection while it tries to send a couple megs of photos home? Yeah, there's a risk to sending film home. But I didn't lose any, whether shipped home from Podunk, Tennessee or Northern Thailand. When overseas, I usually developed the film locally & shipped the prints home. Negatives are pretty small & light & easy to carry in a backpack.
The camera itself is one I bought used for a girlfriend about 10 years ago for something like $200. She later bought a better one for herself & left this one behind when moving out. Takes great pics & for a reasonable price can be replaced on the road if it gets lost or broken. I can't imagine taking a brand new $1400 digicam as one poster recommended. a) thats a huge portion of most folks travel budgets and b) if you lose it, you're potentially in a hard spot; obliged to buy another unit that works with the storage media you've invested so much money in. Or start over with another media family. 35mm film is available everywhere, doesn't require much for a battery and takes a pretty decent picture. So thats what I'll keep using.
For what its worth, I do have a digital, that cost me over twice as much as my SLR, plus batteries & charger & storage media. It works great as a point-and-shoot camera. But for travelling, I don't trust its reliability or durability. If I scratch the SLR lens, I can replace it for as little as $30, though I'd prolly spend more like $60 for something at least half way decent. On a digital camera, what's it going to cost to fix that? They're certainly cool & serve a purpose, I just think a person talking about such an extended trip ought to consider all the ramifications of their decision.
To summarize:
There're other factors worth considering too, posted by other folks. This isn't an issue where one solution is perfect for everyone; do what you want. I know what works for me.