Is That Shiny New Gadget Really Worth Investing In?

Is This An Investment Opportunity?

In the olden days, if you had invented a new revolutionary device that would allow someone to breathe underwater or even a couscous based beauty product, you only had a few ways of raising the necessary finance to get your shiny new product from the drawing board to the shop shelf. You could ask your friends and family for the money but then you wouldn’t have any friends or family.  You could remortgage your house, sell your kidneys or your children or as a last resort you could sell your soul to a bank and take out a loan. The result of this was that a lot of houses got re-possessed, people were sent to work houses and very few shiny new products ever made it onto those shop shelves. Nowadays though, thanks to the idea of crowdfunding, wannabe entrepreneurs everywhere from Tokyo to Timbuktu have the opportunity to pitch their idea to millions of potential investors around the world. Crowdfunding has been a great success but let’s be honest, for every brilliant idea out there, there are thousands of really, really bad ones. For just as crowdfunding is an opportunity for inventors to showcase their revolutionary new products it also offers the opportunity for the more delusional among us and, of course, the downright dishonest to pry some money out the over trusting and unsuspecting alike. 

Is It An Underwater Gill Or A Motorcycle Handle?

Take for example the case of the Triton Underwater Rebreather. Some time ago this idea appeared on the Iniegogo site. The South Korea designer, Jeabyun Yeon, claimed he was inspired by the breathing apparatus that first appeared in the James Bond film Thunderball and described the concept as a future product that one day, would end the need for complicated SCUBA gear. The device was marketed on the Indiegogo site as:

“A state-of-the-art oxygen respirator, that allows you to breathe underwater up to 45 minutes and at a maximum depth of 15ft by utilising our ‘artificial gills’ technology & liquid oxygen technology. Swim among tropical fish, marvel at exotic coral and experience the serene beauty of marine life without having to come up for air. Welcome to Triton." 

To use the Triton rebreather, swimmers would bite down on a plastic mouthpiece. Two arms, which branch out to the sides of the scuba mask, would then function as efficient gills to deliver oxygen. The scaly texture on the devices arms conceals small holes in the material where water is sucked in. Chambers inside separate the oxygen and release the liquid so that the user could breathe comfortably in the ocean. Using a very small but powerful micro compressor, the concept system would compress oxygen and store it in tanks. The entire gadget is powered by a micro battery, which is around 30 times smaller than a current battery and can charge 1,000 times faster. Wow. That sounds amazing doesn’t it? Of course it does. In fact too amazing to be true. Even those without advanced engineering degrees could quickly recognise that such a product would burn your face off, freeze your lungs and then explode –not necessarily in that order. Whatever it did though, it wouldn’t let you breathe underwater. Now, you might think that even the most gullible investor out there would raise an eyebrow at the description of the device and how it worked. Yet despite the Triton's claims being roundly discredited as a scam, the device was soon all over the media. In seemingly no time at all, the team behind the Triton had raised $900,000 in investment. One Indiegogo user, Hovnimrsk Prdelac, from Marseille France, was so upset with Indiegogos apparent refusal to stop collecting money for the Triton device that he launched his own campaign to raise awareness of the scam. In that campaign he brilliantly dissected the claims made for the Triton and debunked each one before ending his critique with this eviscerating statement: 

“So, we have a designer, a salesman, and a marketing expert who claim they invented a device worthy of four Nobel Prizes (impossible molecular filter extracting dissolved oxygen from water; micro compressor with the power of two trucks; mini battery powering it for 45 minutes, "30 times smaller and 1000 times faster than current batteries"and cheap Dewar flasks surpassing the evaporation rate of thousand-dollar laboratory cryogenic containers by three orders of magnitude), yet they have no engineer, no scientist, no technician, and no expert in cryogenics, chemistry, nanotechnology, or hyperbaric medicine. Amazing results for three young lads with no degree in science, and just some experience with marketing and design!”

Fortunately in May 2016 the people at Indiegogo, having made numerous unsuccessful requests for the Triton team to substantiate their claims, suspended the campaign and refunded all the contributions made (although they have relaunched a new campaign explained in the link). Which was good news for all those investors that, despite the quite obvious flaws in the claims and the fact that a revolution would need to take place in the fields of engineering, materials and molecular chemistry for the Triton to actually work, parted so easily with their cash. 
Obviously the Triton case is an extreme example but scams and dodgy inventions are not the only thing the wannabe investor should be wary of. Sometimes it is not the product that is the problem, but the way it is being marketed. Take for example an idea that has recently caught the attention of snorkellers, freedivers and bubble blowers alike. The device is called Scorkl and has recently appeared on the Kickstarter site. According to the marketing blurb, Scorkl is a self-contained breathing apparatus that offers anyone the chance to breath underwater for up to ten minutes at a time, longer if you buy more than one. Hey you could even buy six or seven and stay under for sixty or seventy minutes and you don’t need a compressor to fill these things up, since you can buy a hand pump that will do it for you. 

Now let’s make it clear that, unlike the Triton, the Scorkl does actually work. The reason we know this, is the fact that it is what is known as a redundant air supply system and looks remarkably similar to SpareAir, which is offered by submersible systems and has been on the market for 25 years. In fact the Scorkl looks so much like SpareAir that trademark and patent infringements are very possible. 

Scorkl then is not a new idea as such; it is in essence a small SCUBA tank fitted with a regulator, which as mentioned above has been on the market in the form of SpareAir for 25 years. What is new is the idea of using a hand pump to fill up the tank and there are some rather big questions on whether that actually works or whether it’s a safe idea at all. There are also some issues surrounding the claims made about the amount of time you can spend underwater using the Scorkl or how deep you can go. According to the Scorkl inventor, David Hallamore, "it's easier to say 'up to 10 minutes' because it's easily understandable, but it's a complex equation and how long you spend underwater on a Scorkl full of air will depend on how fast you are breathing, how big your lungs are, how hard you're working, how cold it is, ... so it might be less than 10 minutes. It might also be more, and maybe a lot more depending on how you use it. The Scorkl, Hallamore explains, contains 3 cu ft when filled to 3,000psi or roughly 60 breaths. The "up to 10 min" calculation works as follows: At 3,000psi the Scorkl holds the equivalent of ~60 breaths. An inhale/exhale cycle of 10/min (1 every 6 seconds) allows for ~6min underwater at 1 atmosphere. A slower cycle of 6/min (1 every 10 seconds) allows for ~10min. 

The problem with this calculation however, is that according to health professionals everywhere, the average person takes 16-20 breaths per minute, more on exertion. That means that at 20 breaths per minute the Scorkl will last just 3 minutes. At 16 breaths per minute it will last an extra 45 seconds and since everyone is already under 1 atmosphere of pressure before entering the water, both of these calculations are based on surface breathing without exertion. So the 10 minutes of air claim only makes sense if the user is a very fit and very experienced diver sitting on a beach or maybe a hibernating tortoise. Then there is the question of the hand pump used to fill the Scorkl. How long do you think it will take an average person, breathing averagely, to pump enough air to fill it to 3000psi?  Well, according to Hallimore, it takes around ten pumps per breath to fill the Scorkl (600 pumps). It gets harder to pump as the pressure in the tank increases but it is manageable for an adult. A steady pumping rhythm of 50/min fills the tank in 12 minutes. Most people will want to rest intermittently though which allows the tank to cool down. Ah! so you might not want to pump too vigorously or persistently just in case the damned thing explodes before you actually pass out from exertion.

Now, despite the Scorkl’s similarity to another product, the questions of how long it will take for an average person to run out of air or whether you’ll suffer a coronary whilst trying to refill the bloody thing, the real problem is none of these. The real problem is that the Scorkl is seemingly being marketed at snorkellers, swimmers, boating enthusiasts and everyone in between. The problem with that is that no matter if you fill the Scorkl with a hand pump or a compressor, it will contain compressed air and if you are not aware of the dangers of using compressed gas underwater there is a good chance your lungs will go pop.

If you’re a bubble blower please bear with us, if you’re not a bubble blower please pay attention because here comes the science bit. Boyle's law explains why changes in depth while in shallow water can be more hazardous than equivalent changes of depth in deep water. In essence, British physicist/chemist Robert Boyle discovered that at a constant temperature and mass, the volume of a gas is inversely proportional to the pressure exerted on that gas. When the pressure is doubled, the volume is reduced to one-half of the original volume. Conversely, when the pressure is reduced by one-half, the volume doubles. While exposed to atmospheric pressures at sea level, our lungs are in a state of equilibrium as we inhale and exhale. Slight pressure changes occur as we change elevation, yet equalisation of the pressures inside and outside the lung is a passive and inconspicuous event with each breath. During descent into water, all gas-containing spaces in the body tend to shrink as the pressure surrounding the body increases; for example, the lung volume of a breathhold diver becomes smaller with the descent in the water column. Because scuba regulators deliver breathing gas at the ambient pressure of the diver, a higher concentration of the breathing gas enters the lungs, preventing the reduction in volume that would otherwise occur.

If the diver does not exhale during ascent, the lungs will progressively increase in volume until the elastic limit of the alveoli is exceeded and lung injury occurs. This forces gas into one of three locations: 1) the space within the chest cavity (pleural space), a condition known as pneumothorax; 2) the tissue planes within the lung itself (interstitial space), from where it may travel into the space around the heart, the tissues of the neck and the larynx (mediastinal emphysema); or 3) the blood. In this latter condition (arterial gas embolism, or AGE), gas bubbles can then pass from the pulmonary capillaries via the pulmonary veins to the left side of the heart and then to the carotid or basilar arteries (causing cerebral arterial gas embolism, or CAGE).

It is important to note that a breathhold ascent after inhaling from a scuba tank from a depth as shallow as 4 feet (fsw) may be sufficient to tear alveolar sacs, causing lung injury and one of these three disorders mentioned above.

In short, it is a very good possibility that hordes of Scorkl users, unaware of the dangers of holding your breath on ascent are going to turn up in hospitals around the world with frothy red goo jetting out of their noses. Consequently there will be bad publicity, recriminations and the inevitable lawsuits. Which is not exactly the sort of investment most people are looking for, particularly if the company is already facing legal action for patent infringement and the myriad injuries caused by overheating tanks exploding on beaches everywhere. David Hallimore obviously recognises the dangers of lung expansion injury as he points out that the “misuse of the Scorkl can be dangerous. Whilst decompression sickness isn't much of a risk because of the depth and time restrictions of such a small cylinder, pulmonary damage (chest expansion injuries) is nevertheless a risk if a user holds their breath during ascent or ascends too quickly
Non-scuba trained users should not use the Scorkl below 3m depth or more than five times in one day. Staying above 3m dramatically reduces this risk of pulmonary damage (although does not eliminate it entirely). Each purchaser will be provided with an information kit informing them of this (and other) risks and strategies to avoid them, even within the 3m limit (for example, not holding one's breath and/or exhaling during ascent, not ascending too quickly)
Scuba-trained users will be able to use the Scorkl below 3m at their discretion but they too will be warned of the same risks”

Well, you might say! That’s all right then. People are going to be informed of the risk. After all what sort of person would misuse a Scorkl anyway or ignore a warning? To which we would reply, perhaps the sort of person who doesn’t read or even ignores information kits. After all, people have been warned of the dangers of smoking for decades and yet people still smoke. And then there are the sorts of people who invest nearly a million dollars in a device that was, and still is, even less genuine than an Estate Agents smile. There is a solution of course and that is not to sell the Scorkl to non-SCUBA trained people but we suspect that is not what the company is going for. So any investors out there might want to think very carefully about the safety implications of such a device being available to everyone, everywhere, before handing over their money.

So what have we learned? Well what we’ve learned at the DSC is that a fool and his money is easily parted and that if we were going to put our money into a crowdfunding project we’d take a long look at what the idea is, whether it is feasible or plausible and not likely to explode in ours or anyone else’s face for that matter. And, if it sounds too good to be true it probably is. If you didn’t already know this then we’re happy to impart our advice. If you did know, we’re sorry to have wasted your time and suggest you get back to your beer, Cheers! 

Arrggh! The Intova’s Gone Pffttt. So We’re Gonna Need Another Action Camera And That’s Giving Us A Headache

Intova Edge X

The Intova Edge X was made for the water. It was the first completely sealed action camera, it was waterproof to 60 metres and was protected by a tough rubber armoured shell. It also had everything that any water fanatic or adrenalin junkie would want including GPS, WiFi and an array of other technical things to excite the amateur underwater photographer. It was great and we liked it so much we bought one. Now though, our beloved little armoured friend has developed the rather irritating problem of freezing up. Yep, just when that huge barracuda came into the view or that massive shoal of fish headed straight for the lens, the Intova decided to throw a wobbly and froze. Now, due to the fact that the camera’s warranty had expired, the only way to solve this problem was to open it up and carry out a reset procedure or hurl it hard against a wall. Neither though, are very practical solutions when in the water. So as we begin planning our trips for 2017 we’ve come to the conclusion that we are going to have to relegate the Edge X to a minor supporting role and give the lead to another camera but which one?

A few years ago buying an action camera was easy; you walked into a shop, asked for an action camera and were promptly sold a small box called a GoPro. Nowadays though, there is so much choice out there, it is hard to know which camera is best. Fortunately however, there is a font of knowledge within easy reach. Just a few clicks on the old trusty computer and hey presto the interwebby gods will present you with a cornucopia of reviews. In fact, there are so many reviews out there you might start to think that you are the only person on the planet who hasn’t looked at, compared, tested and studiously examined every inch of every camera that has ever been made. Which presents another problem. Which review do you believe? Is the reviewer really independent or are they being paid to review the camera, in which case was it an advertisement masquerading as a review? And, perhaps more importantly, does the review actually help the decision making process?

Well let’s put it the to the test. We’re going to look for a new action camera and buy the one the reviews say are the best. As we liked the Intova Edge X so much, we should probably start with the Edge X’s direct replacement the X2. The X2 is a striking looking camera and if looks alone were what we were going for then we would already have hit the add-to-cart button on this one. But looks aren’t everything are they? So what do the reviews say. All the reviews highlighted the X2’s inbuilt flash/video light and the fact that it can take 16mp photos as opposed to the 12mp that is common for this class of camera. The X2 also has a 2 inch LCD screen so you can see what you’re shooting, is waterproof to 60m and like the Edge X is surrounded by an almost indestructible rubberised shell. Priced at £300, give or take a few pounds, the X2 isn’t the most expensive camera out there and every review seems to be in agreement: The X2 is a small, rugged camera designed to go anywhere and capture that “adventure”. In short, everyone seemed to like it. Which doesn’t really help does it? Then there is the niggling thought that although Intova have added a light and made the camera better looking, the software issue that affects the Edge X may also affect the X2. And, it will probably affect it exactly one day after the warranty expires too. That said though, we like Intova and as all the reviews confirm, the X2 is a well-designed camera that seems to suit our needs. But, before we calm our niggling doubts over the software with some cold beer and part with £300, is there anything else out there that’s better?

 

Intova X2

Well Intova isn’t the only manufacturer we like. Last year we bought an Olympus TG-4 and we liked it a lot. Now Olympus has launched its own action camera onto the market. It’s called the Tracker and unlike most manufacturers in the sector, Olympus have not decided to follow the GoPro box design but have gone for a smaller version of a traditional camcorder design. Being part of the Tough range of cameras the Tracker is freezeproof, crushproof, shockproof and waterproof to 30m. The Tracker has an inbuilt light for shooting in low light and has an auto detect feature that automatically senses it’s underwater and switches to optimal mode for shooting beneath the waves. It also has a wide angle lens and one of the fastest shutter speeds of any camera in its class, which means it’s great for action shots. The Tracker looks good too. So what do the reviews make of this camera? Well, everyone liked it. They really did, it got a 5/5 in some ratings and depending on the retailer, you can pick up a Tracker for less than £270, which makes it cheaper than the X2. The Tracker also has 4k video resolution unlike the X2. However, the X2 has 16mp resolution whilst the Tracker has only 8mp. Now some reviews pointed out that the Tracker’s LCD screen only flips out rather than flipping out and rotating. Now if we had a problem with flipping screens not rotating then this could be deal breaker but we don’t. So there you have it. We are going to push the X2 aside and buy a Tracker. After all, the reviews all say it’s great. But then they said the X2 was great as well didn’t they? Err… This is getting confusing. Maybe we should look around a bit more. See what else is available.

Olympus TG-Tracker with pistol grip

After all, we haven’t even considered the elephant in the room yet have we? We are of course talking about the GoPro Hero 5 Black. The Hero 5 sits like a smug cat atop the ever-growing pile of GoPro imitators that exist in the action camera sector, according to some reviews at least. Now we have never really liked GoPro’s. We never liked the boxiness, the lack of a view screen, the unbelievably expensive range of accessories and the sense that if we ever bought one we’d have to grow our hair long, dye it blonde, take up snowboarding, start using the word “radical” in everyday conversation, change our name to Tristan Hansard-Faffyman and become friends with Gareth “I own a fairtrade coffee shop” Beardybloke. You know what we mean here. GoPros' were for Lycra-clad nutcases on overpriced bicycles or baggy trousered snowboarders that hurtle down the slopes knocking everyone else over. They were not for snorkellers, freedivers or bubble blowers. But GoPro seemed to have picked up on this and made the GoPro Hero 5 more appealing to people who don’t shout all the time. Firstly it has an inbuilt 2 inch LCD screen so you can frame the shot. It has 4k video resolution, shoots 12mp photos, has an easy to use touch screen menu and comes complete with all the usual accoutrements of WiFi, GPS, video stabilisation and the rest. What makes this model really appealing is the fact that it is waterproof to 10m without a separate housing, making it perfect for snorkelling. Anyway what did the reviews say? Well, rather disappointingly, they all loved the Hero 5. Praise was universally gushing and it even got 5/5 on some reviews. People even praised the box it came in. It’s like wanting a sports car isn’t it? If you can afford a Ferrari why buy a Porsche. Likewise, if you can afford an expensive camera, why buy anything other than a GoPro Hero 5. Unless of course you realise that the GoPro 6 is due out later this year and in the world of shouty Tristan’s and lycra-clad cyclists, owning a 5 when a 6 is available is like getting your coffee from McDonalds rather than Beardyblokes Shangri-La Native Coffee Emporium. It’s just not fashionable and not being fashionable means that Tristan’s sister Jemima, nor any of her friends, will want to sleep with you. Yet the Hero 5 is still very popular and there is no doubting the quality of the video or photographs that are produced, so maybe it’s time to swallow our pride and join the shouty set. After all, all the reviews recommend it don’t they? So it is the one for us.

Buy one of these and Jemima might sleep with you

But wait. Maybe our prejudices run too deep and maybe we’re happy to be the only people in the pub who haven’t slept with Jemima and her friends so surely there must be another camera out there that stands up to the GoPro? What about the SeaLife Micro 2 HD or the new DC1400 or the DC1200 elite? What about the Nikon KeyMission 170 and then there are the cheaper versions like the Veho Muvi series, the Garmin Virbin or even the iSaw Edge? What do the reviews say about them? Well, that’s the problem really. All the reviews like all of them. So we’re back to square one really. We want to buy a camera but are not sure which is the best so maybe we should ignore the reviews altogether and just set some parameters.

The camera should be waterproof without a housing. It should be easy to operate underwater. It should be able to take 12mp images or above. It should be compatible with Intova and GoPro clips and accessories and it should be less than £500. Right, that’s the Intova X2 then. Oh, but wait, that doesn’t have 4K! Well it’ll be the Hero 5 then… But wait, do we all want to change our name to Tristan? It’s the Olympus Tracker then. But wait that doesn’t do 12mp and the screen doesn’t rotate and maybe that will be a problem. Ohh…. This is becoming ridiculous… We’re going to need to read some more reviews. Visit some more photography sites and do an in-depth comparison. Barman, we’re going to need more beer… Or maybe… We can get the Edge X fixed.

Right… Camera repair shops; which is the best one?

Is this any good? How should we know?

What The Heck is That? Or How Do I Find Out What That Strange Fish Is Called?

 

Okay, So I Don't Know The Name Of The Fish. But! Don't Call Me Stupid

It's a common problem. There you are happily playing about in the water with your new all-singing, all-dancing underwater camera when you catch sight of an exotic marine dweller. You snap away madly and are pleasantly surprised to find that one of the twenty images you’ve taken is actually in focus and captures that exotic specimen in all its glory. Now, you want to show this brilliant picture to other people, you want to explain how, in order to get that perfect shot you had to learn all about apertures, lenses, white balance, strobes, up-lighting, down-lighting, ISO, filters and well, just about everything. But no matter how expert in the field of underwater snapology you sound, you know that someone is going to ask you those killer questions. What is it that you've actually photographed? What's it called?

Clearly, if you've bored everyone to death about the finer points of underwater photography but have no idea what the yellow fish in the photograph is actually called, you're going to look a complete spoon! Worse still, concerned about your lack of knowledge in marine life identification, someone might begin to challenge your photography knowledge as well. Which of course means that you going to have to admit that your new camera does everything for you at the click of a button and your only real role in capturing that brilliant image was to make sure that the lens cap was off and the camera was pointing in the right direction.

In normal circumstances this is a disastrous situation but in the pub with your mates, where such expertise is normally spouted, this can easily become social Armageddon. Before you know it you've gone from the David Bailey of the underwater world to Nobby-no-mates faster than you can say “mine's a pint”. So how do you avoid this horny dilemma. Well, years ago, if you wanted to know the name of every fish in the sea and be capable of telling the difference between a Gastropod and a Cephalopod, you had to become a marine biologist. This meant spending an awful lot of time sitting in stuffy lecture halls and worse still, having to talk to sociology students in the University bar. Neither activity can be called interesting and of course it took three years and who has the time for that? After all, you've got 500 friends, you've never actually met, on facebook and they need to be kept up to date with what you had for breakfast this morning. Fortunately we now live in a wonderful cyber-age where if you don't know anything about anything you can still appear to be the font of all knowledge by simply pulling whatever Internet enabled device you have from your pocket, holding it high in the air and shouting, “I'll google it”.

Obviously, if you do this, you'll find there are a whole host of resources available to you via the Internet but how useful are they? Firstly the most comprehensive and authoritative site on the web is the World Register of Marine Species or WoRMS for short. The aim of WoRMS is to provide an authoritative list of names for all marine species globally and is primarily aimed at experts (real ones, not those you meet down the pub) who want to identify and catalogue every marine creature that exists or existed for that matter. To use this site you really do need to have a solid foundation in the field and you'll also need to have a masters degree in Latin just to know how to use the search feature. Not that useful then for those of us who want to know what that yellow fish is in our photograph. 

If you live in the UK there is the British Marine life site run by photographer Jason Gregory. This site has some excellent image files and a search feature is available, however the use of Latin in the description without the common and garden names means that although interesting, this site is not going to be of much use to you. Saying that it's a picture of Piscus Yellocus Finnius to your mates is always going to illicit the response “yeah but what does that mean”? Answering “yellow fish” is not going to improve things either. Fortunately other individuals have decided that they don't know Latin either and have created sites that use common names. There is Jason Flower's (why are they all called Jason?) Mediterranean marine life ID. This site is, as the name suggests, specific to the Mediterranean and has a limited number of pictures but does provide a reasonable starting point for those looking for the name of that critter they snapped off the coast of the Greek Islands etc. Another area specific site is the excellent Snorkel St John which covers the Virgin Islands but obviously is a good resource for the whole Caribbean. The site uses common names and currently has 5000 photographs broken down into easy to navigate galleries. For Hawaii and the pacific region there is the Marine Life Photography site run by Keoki and Yuko Stender. Although the site does concentrate on the species indigenous to the pacific it also has a number of galleries that feature species from other areas. The Galleries are easy to navigate and both Latin and common names are used. This is a superb site and has a huge number of images of fish, coral and other marine life and is well worth a look.

Of course not all of us have the time to leave our facebook page and go searching through all those location specific sites. So are there any comprehensive sites that cover the world? Well, thankfully there are. First there is the What's That Fish site. This is a huge site that allows you to search by colour, species or region. Galleries can also be searched alphabetically although this isn't very helpful if you don't know the bloody critters name in the first place. This is a community based site where anyone can join and upload their photographs to get the information they need. The galleries are fairly comprehensive and the site provides some interesting background information on individual species. There are a few issues though. The site is a little cumbersome and navigation is quite poor which makes it rather irritating to use. There also seem to be a lot of poor quality images on the site which doesn't make identification easy.

Fortunately though, there is another site. ReefID is the brainchild of the guys at the Underwater Photography Guide online magazine and they have hit upon the idea of making the process of searching the images as easy as possible. Which is nice. You start by searching the region, then by whether the critter you want to find is either a fish, an invertebrate or a mammal. Then you are presented with sub menus in each category. In the fish category for instance, you continue your search based on whether the fish is flat, slender or standard bodied etc. Results can then be filtered by colour, size, markings or all three. This is also a community based site that relies on members to upload their own pictures and as it has only been up and running for a year it is hardly comprehensive. However the simple navigation and the ability to filter by specifics means that as more and more pictures are added this will almost certainly become one of the best ID sites on the web. If you haven't joined ReefID we recommend you do and get uploading.

Of course there are other ways of identifying those exotic creatures you might come across beneath the waves. You could buy a book for instance and do some background reading before you actually visit the snorkelling or dive location. That way you'll know exactly what you've seen when you see it. This is also a good way of knowing what can be harmful to you before you find yourself screaming in pain and trying to access the web from a deserted beach in order find out what to do when an orange slimy thing stings you. Preparation, preparation, preparation really is the key here. Another way is to go and buy some simple Hinchcliffe marine identification slates which you can carry with you. These are region/ocean specific cards that show between 40-50 of the most common species in the location and are relatively inexpensive. Most good dive and snorkelling stores always have a good selection of these or you can get them online.

So there you have it. Now you'll never have to worry about not knowing the name of that fish, you saw and photographed, ever again. And, your mates will once more think of you as the local Jacques Cousteau and start buying you beers again....

You're welcome.

Olympus TG-4 Camera – Designed For Untidy, Accident Prone Nudists Who Live In A Freezer, But Great For Snorkellers Too

The first camera that we took underwater was an Intova IC-14, which was marketed as a simple point and shoot camera for snorkelling. The IC-14 wasn't waterproof and utilised an underwater housing. This wasn't a problem as the housing was small and lightweight. What was a problem however, was that The IC-14 was quite simply awful, in almost every way. The next camera that took our fancy was a Canon G16. which although a brilliant camera, needed a very heavy and cumbersome housing. The G16 also suffered from shaky results when shooting video. So we were looking for a reasonably priced camera that was simple to use, preferably didn't need a housing and could cope with getting banged about underwater. We could have bought a Nikon Coolpix but anything that has “cool” in its title is always, always, uncool. Also the Coolpix only seems to be sold in the UK in a horrendous camouflage colour, which makes it even more uncool Our attention was therefore drawn to the Olympus TG-4. 

 

Not that the TG-4 doesn't have its own advertising issues. The blurb on the Olympus website claims that the TG-4 is designed for rough-nature explorers. We'll let you think about that for minute.... If that description conjures up in your mind an image of extreme skiers hurtling down mountains, a vapour trail of powdery snow trailing in their wake or surfer dudes weaving beneath a curling wave while scantily clad surf-bunnies wave adoringly from the shore, then the Olympus advertising team have earned their money. If however you think like us, then you are probably imaging a pot-bellied German nudist rolling around in stinging nettles yelling “Ja, Ja, Ja”. Seriously. Rough-nature explorers! What were they thinking? Anyway, bad advertising aside, let's get to the camera.

 

Lizard Fish Shot With The TG-4

The TG-4 is the latest in the Tough range and to be honest it hasn't changed much from the original TG-1 version which was released in 2012. There are however some new improvements. The TG-4 can now go deeper, it's waterproof to 15 metres without needing a housing and has dedicated underwater modes. It also now supports RAW and has a higher resolution 16 megapixel sensor. The TG-4 also boasts a rather neat microscope mode (macro) which allows you to focus on subjects 1cm away. Like its predecessors the TG-4 is freeze proof to -10 degrees, drop proof up to 2.5 metres, crush proof up to 100 kg and dust proof. Which is nice to know if you live in a dusty freezer and consequently your frost bitten fingers are prone to dropping things. If you're the type who gets all hot and bothered over specifications, then we recommend you google one of the many photographic websites or go to the Olympus website, where you'll find all the specifications you need to get your knees and other things trembling. We however, are now going to concentrate on whether the camera is any good for snorkelling. 

 

Coral Shot With TG-4 In Microscope Mode

There are of course two types of snorkelling. There is the face down, Easybreath full-face mask wearing, bobbing about on the surface type and then there is the breath-hold, dive-down, bottom-skimming, rock-weaving type and if you do either, the TG-4 will meet your needs. The TG-4 is all about speed, it locks focus in less than 0.1 seconds and starts, focuses and fires in less than a second and can shoot full resolution J-PEG images at 5 frames per second. So if you're floating like a drowned rat on the surface, you should still be able to capture images of all those other snorkellers having a much better time below you, as well as the odd fish that flashes past your face. The speedy operation will also allow dive-down snorkellers to capture the far more interesting marine life that dwells on the seabed and amongst the rocks.

The microscope mode is also great for getting those close up shots of coral polyps, starfish and all the other things that lurk in the nooks and crannies that surface snorkellers probably don't even know exist - if you can get your buoyancy right of course. The TG-4 also lives up to its “tough” moniker. Ours got battered against rocks, was dropped down some steps (not deliberately mind) and easily coped with depths of 10 – 15 metres for up to two minutes at a time without any issue. The TG-4 can capture video up to 1080p quality and gives pretty sharp results, although we'd recommend that you fit it to a stabilising grip handle to prevent jittery results, particularly if snorkelling in anything other than dead calm conditions. If you want to go deeper or are looking for a camera that can be customised then the TG-4 can be fitted with an underwater housing for depths up to 50 metres and Olympus manufacturers various interesting accessories than can be added. 

 

Anemone Shot With TG-4 In Microscope Mode

There are of course some downsides. The buttons, like all Olympus cameras, seemed to be designed for people with very thin fingers and can be a bit fiddly when wearing gloves. Some may also consider the lack of a stand alone charger an issue, the company only supply a USB cable, but we didn't find this an issue. We did find though, that the TG-4 does suffer from condensation forming inside the lens when switching from sea to beach. The condensation does clear but it can take some time and can be irritating if you want to quickly switch from sea to land shots. There are, of course, better cameras on the markets but these are also much more expensive and much more bulkier. If you're a professional photographer then you'll probably shrug your shoulders at this rugged little offering from Olympus and move on. If you're one of those fanatical photography hobbyists, with a photoshop course under your belt, then you'll probably take delight in pointing out all the flaws with the TG-4 and would no doubt bore everyone in ear shot with pontifications on ISO, compression, zoom characteristics, noise and muddying of edges et al. If you however, are the type of person that believes a photograph is less about technical settings and more about the story it tells, the adventure that lays behind the image, the memory of the moment that it evokes then you'll probably not be bothered about all the technical downsides the TG-4 has. Besides your hobby is not photography is it? Whether you're a SCUBA diver, freediver or snorkeller, you have enough to think about when you're in the water than which ISO you should have selected. Photography is just a way for you to freeze that adventurous moment in time, to record a reasonable image of that strange creature you, and no one else saw, and occasionally to allow you to pull out your laptop in the pub and bore your mates senseless about the trials and tribulations you underwent to get that interesting snap of the barracuda that just attacked your fins.... To do that you don't want, or need, to be dragging around a camera the size of a small child, along with the accompanying six hundred page user manual. No. What you'll need is a smart, quick, point and shoot camera that doesn't mind getting knocked around. In short you'll need a TG-4. A stylish, tough,easy to operate camera that you can use anywhere – even if you live in a freezer and like whipping yourself with stinging nettles. 

 

Dive Down

As we write this, Olympus have a new camera on the market called the Tracker. Intova have released the new Edge-X 2 and there are new offerings from Nikon and Sealife. Which means of course that the TG-4 has probably already become old hat sigh... However this will probably mean that the TG-4 will drop below the current price of £280, which is another reason to go buy one.... We did.

It’s Not Snorkelling. It’s Not Bodyboarding. It’s The SnorkelBoard – The Sporty Toy That Ruins Two Activities In One Go!

There is a vast array of snorkelling equipment available on the market to buy. This is mainly due to the fact that there are a veritable horde of global manufacturers happily designing, re-designing, innovating, improving, and generally coming up with new products at such a frenetic rate that your bank balance shrinks just thinking about it. Such is the depth and variety of all this manufacturing that Santa Claus and several billion of his little helpers would have a hard time coming up with anything new in the world of snorkelling or diving equipment. And yet, it seems that there are a number of entrepreneurs out there who still think that snorkelling equipment needs a radical overhaul. In particular, these entrepreneurs appear to believe that if you could only get away from the problem of putting your head in the water or having to breath through a snorkel, the whole act of snorkelling would be made much, much easier and in turn would be more enjoyable. The people behind the Easybreath Full-Face Mask for example, believe that their invention has opened the up the underwater world for all those unfortunate individuals who find it impossible to breath through their mouth. They also believe that they’ve eliminated the problem of mask fogging. We on the other hand believe they haven’t done anything of the kind and you can read why we think that here. 

The Easybreath Full-Face Mask now has an unexpected competitor in the I-don’t-want-to-get-my-face-wet snorkelling experience, one which gets rid of the palaver of wearing a snorkel and mask altogether. In other words snorkelling without snorkelling! The snorkelboard (as it’s called) is the brainchild of Murray W. Scott (great American name) who in 1998 had what he calls a “eureka” moment. While clearing his snorkel mask in Bermuda at Tobacco Bay Beach, he noticed that when the mask was no longer on his head and placed on the surface of the water, he had a crystal clear view of the fish and coral beneath him. He thought that if the mask could be placed into a bodyboard, he would no longer have to worry about his snorkelling experience being consistently interrupted by a leaky or fogged up mask. This then, was the birth of the Snorkelboard. Now there are probably some of you who would say that putting a hole in a bodyboard is a bit of an extreme response to a bad fitting mask. Some would even go as far to say that it would probably have been much cheaper and much less effort to simply pop down to the nearest diving shop and found a mask that actually fitted. Murray W.Scott would no doubt disagree with such suggestions, and might point out that he was never going to get rich by telling people to buy better fitting masks. 

So what is a snorkelboard? Well it’s an EPS core board encapsulated in EVA. Which as everyone knows, means that it is made from polystyrene foam encapsulated in an ethylene-vinyl acetate case with, and this is the clever bit, a hole cut in it. Into this hole, Murray has inserted a pair of anti-fog goggles. The company advertises the board like this: Introducing The Snorkelboard®, your personal body board fully equipped with embedded anti-fog goggles! With excellent flotation, stability, and ease of paddling, the Snorkelboard® enjoys a smooth entry line for maximum glide style. No longer will you have to worry about your mask filling up with water, blocking your view with fog or pressing up against the bridge of your nose. Gone are the days of re-breathing spent air left in your snorkel tube or interrupting your experience to equalize(sic) because, with the Snorkelboard® your head never touches the water! This all-in-one thin, sleek design allows for easy storage and leaves carrying heavy equipment in the dust! Available in a wide range of designs and colours, your “at-the-beach-riding-waves-look-at-me” Snorkelboard® experience can be as personalized(sic) as you want. Yes, we know, it does sound like something you’d read in the pages of the Hitchhikers Guide to The Galaxy but that’s advertising for you. The company has also released an advertising video, which you can see below. 

 

Now let’s be honest, despite a number of bemused looking adults using the board in the video, the snorkelboard is almost certainly aimed at kids. In a press release for the 112^th Annual American International Toy Fair, Murray W. Scott said, "We're thrilled to be able to celebrate the close of another successful year.  Looking ahead, we anticipate an exciting 2015 beginning with the Toy Fair.  My team and I look forward to a great show this year. So the snorkelboard is a toy, designed to give children a better experience at the beach and in this respect it appears to have had some success. "I can’t believe my young daughter had the confidence to go in the water at all! The Snorkelboard gave her the stability she needed to try snorkeling(sic) in deep water for the first time. It can now be a total family experience!" was one of the comments used on the company website. The Snorkelboard retails at around $40, which is a reasonable price, and you can customise the colour. There are a few issues however. Firstly, this is a board that glides over the water, and as everyone knows water will lap on and over such boards, which is demonstrated in the video. This means that you will get water in your face – and even with the smallest waves, that will mean a lot of water. This combined with the limited view the anti-fog goggles offer, means that the “snorkelling” experience will be highly compromised in all but the clearest of waters. Secondly, the Snorkelboard does not seem to offer anything remotely innovative for the young snorkeller, rather it takes two separate activities, bodyboarding and snorkelling, and ruins them both. If you want to teach your child to swim (learn flutter kicking) then the Snorkelboard offers a tiny bit more interest for the child, but as a serious piece of snorkelling equipment it is rather lame. If you’re an adult, you are going to look very stupid on one these! There is a third problem as well and that is that Murray W. Scott has created a product that is already eclipsed by the big boy in the market place. The Zayak Sea Sled is vastly more expensive than a Snorkelboard, it’s a lot heavier as well and will give the cabin crew a coronary if you try to shove the thing in the overhead locker but these are not problems, as just like wetbikes and jet skies you can rent Sea Sleds. In the type of crystal clear water that you’ll need to have fun with the Snorkelboard it is highly likely that Sea Sleds will already be there on the beach waiting for you. And that brings up a problem for you parents. Because your child is going to quickly lose interest in their brightly coloured foam bodyboard with the hole in it, when they catch sight of the brightly coloured, super-duper-look-at-me-riding-waves-in-the-Zayak-experience. 

So what’s the conclusion? Well, if you want your child to have a rather tame snorkelling experience, we recommend you rent a Sea Sled rather than buy a Snorkelboard. If you want them to have a slightly better experience, then buy them a Tribord Easybreath Mask, since that’s as much a toy as the Snorkelboard. If however, you want your child to have a good snorkelling experience and perhaps get them interested in skin diving or SCUBA, then we recommend that you take your time and teach them to swim, build up their confidence in the water and then buy them a mask that fits, a snorkel with a purge valve and some fins. Alternatively, if you think your child would prefer to gaze at fish from behind a pane of glass without getting their face wet, take them to an Aquarium. At least you won’t have to worry about them getting sunburn. Oh one last thing for all those entrepreneurs out there, if it doesn’t require a mask, a snorkel and putting your head in the water, it’s not snorkelling!

Fourth Element Pro Dive Amphibious Shorts – Your Grandad Would Love Them

Fourth Element began their mission to create a range of casual and technical diving clothing in 1999. Since then this company with it’s pro-eco philosophy has taken the diving world by storm. Quite a few people even believe, with good reason, that Fourth Element may soon become the predominant player in the dive clothing market. Not bad for a company that was formed over a few beers in Sharm-El-Sheikh. We like Fourth Element. We’ve bought their t-shirts, hats, rash vests and more and all of these products have never failed to impress so we were rather looking forward to trying out their Pro Dive Amphibious Shorts on our recent trip to the Canary Islands. The company blurb states that the shorts were designed for use in and out of the water. The Amphibious Pro Dive Shorts are ultra quick drying with quick draining mesh lined pockets; cargo and back pockets with hook and loop closure (that means Velcro to the rest of us) as well as a crotch gusset for superior comfort. The shorts got a big plus in the looks department, at least from the men. The women, however, were not that convinced. “A bit wannabe SAS” and “too James Bondish” were just some of the comments. Still, since they weren’t designed for women we ignored the smirks and raised eyebrows from our female brethren and proceeded to put the shorts to the test.

The material is indeed as soft as a bunny rabbit’s tail and on land the pockets do what pockets are meant to do. Meaning you can carry keys, a wallet and whatever else you stuff in your pockets. In the water, the large cargo pocket comes in handy for carrying a spare camera lens or torch, as long as both are small. The material did indeed dry fairly quickly, but not as quick as we imagined. There are a number of other problems too. The shorts we tested were medium size (mainly because the guy who bought them swore blind that he was a medium) which equates to a 32-inch waist and yet, the fit was significantly tighter than was expected. So significant in fact that we had to check his other clothes just to make sure he wasn’t telling fibs about his girth. We checked his jeans; his other shorts and even his underwear (much to his protests) and all clearly indicated that he did indeed have a 32-inch waist. Odd then that the shorts were so tight at the waist. The problems didn’t stop there however. The waist may be tighter than a girdle, but the legs flared out at the bottom to an alarming degree. James Bondish they may look in the marketing pictures, but wearing them in reality, our man looked more like Lofty in It Ain’t Half Hot Mum. When snorkelling, this flaring also led to a significant amount of drag. So what do we have here? The shorts are only available in black, which is a touch unimaginative and you’ll pay around £50 a pair, which is a lot of money for shorts that don’t fit very well. Then there’s the flaring cut of the legs that not only looks rather silly on land but also becomes a significant irritation in the water. It was, our man informed us, like swimming with a sail flapping around your legs.

Of course our man may have fallen foul of the problem of Internet buying and should have gone to a shop to try them on – but who has the time? There is also nothing to suggest that buying a larger size would have meant a better fit. Then there is the issue of flaring, if the medium size makes you look like you’ve got a coat hanger in your pockets, the larger size would no doubt double the “billowing problem”. If you have a waist like a wasp and thighs like a Rhino then these shorts are a perfect buy. For the rest of us however, appearing as if we’re wearing our grandad’s shorts on the beach is not the look we want for £50. So we hope that Fourth Element get their fingers out and do something about it – better sizing, better cut and more choice of colours please chaps. 

I like the design Smithers, but they simply aren't baggy enough. Make 'em black and make 'em very baggy d'ya see