Sea & Sea DX-1G Camera Update II
October 21, 2007
In my first Sea & Sea DX-1G Camera Update I talked about the “flash-like strobe triggering accessory”. Both B&H and Adorama are now carrying the DX-1G system but the magic triggering accessory seems to be missing in action. Adorama has the following as the last item in the “features” section:
An optional hotshoe mounted LED Strobe Adapter in order to allow continuous shooting without flash recycle delay.
Note the word “optional”. The interesting thing is that this optional item is not listed in the accessories anywhere. Without this accessory, the housing will use the built-in camera flash to trigger the strobes (via the optical cables). This is the traditional way compact cameras trigger external strobes and it is an inefficient kludge at best that generates excess heat, kills the camera battery, and results in slow recycle times.
The LED Strobe Adapter is key to the performance of this system. I’m very surprised that it was not released at the same time as the housing. Sea and Sea and Ricoh (holy ands batman) must have had issues getting this beastie to work correctly. This is not entirely surprising since this is the first iteration of what must be a proprietary flash protocol (you can see the connector clearly in this shot up at DPReview.com)
In my first DX-1G post I mentioned that the advantage of this system over other point-and-shoot underwater systems is the nifty LED Strobe Adapter (now MIA) and the relatively wide view (24mm in camera and 16mm with Sea & Sea adapter).
I would hold off purchasing this housing/system until the LED Strobe Adapter has been released and has been put through its paces by a third party reviewer. Your mileage may vary if you are comparing to other point-and-shoot systems.
Sapiens Sapiens Evidence Evidence
October 19, 2007
Two new pieces of evidence were announced this week that should shed some light on hominid evolution. First, researchers at Arizona State University have shown that anatomically modern humans exhibited advanced behaviors earlier than expected.
“Our findings show that at 164,000 years ago in coastal South Africa humans expanded their diet to include shellfish and other marine resources, perhaps as a response to harsh environmental conditions,” notes Marean, a professor in ASU’s School of Human Evolution and Social Change. “This is the earliest dated observation of this behavior.”
Further, the researchers report that co-occurring with this diet expansion is a very early use of pigment, likely for symbolic behavior, as well as the use of bladelet stone tool technology, previously dating to 70,000 years ago.
There is a boundary between “anatomically modern humans” (Homo sapiens) and the modern humans that left Africa approximately 50,000 years ago (Homo sapiens sapiens). The question is whether there was a true speciation event at this boundary or whether there was simply a kind of cultural renaissance.
Those that support the idea of a speciation event believe that a change in the brain accounts for the difference and that the most likely brain change involved language.
The second major piece of evidence may rule out the language theory. The analysis of Neanderthal DNA has shown that Neanderthals possessed the same FOXP2 gene as modern humans (i.e. us).
Neanderthals, an archaic human species that dominated Europe until the arrival of modern humans some 45,000 years ago, possessed a critical gene known to underlie speech, according to DNA evidence retrieved from two individuals excavated from El Sidron, a cave in northern Spain.
The new evidence stems from analysis of a gene called FOXP2 which is associated with language. The human version of the gene differs at two critical points from the chimpanzee version, suggesting that these two changes have something to do with the fact that people can speak and chimps cannot.
So that really throws a wrench in things. If the modern FOXP2 gene is an accurate test for advanced language then everyone and their sister with an over-sized brow had language. Perhaps another change independent of language occurred that can account for the explosion of advanced behavior in Homo sapien sapien 50,000 years ago or maybe we should send the “sapiens sapiens” name back to the department of redundancy department.
Us vs. Them
October 17, 2007
Paul Krugman, op-ed columnist for the New York Times wishes he said that.
Ezra Klein on the McCain health care plan, which — like all the other health care plans being proposed on the Republican side — basically says that the problem is that people have too much insurance, so they get too much Lhealth care:
It’s like if I tried to make food cheaper by encouraging you to diet.
I’m not exaggerating. Here’s what Mitt Romney said about what ails American health care, in his slide show:
-The tax code creates an incentive for over-insurance and over-use of the health care system
-Individuals don’t get the value they would otherwise prefer
-Leads to excessive, unnecessary health care spending
Actually, it is more like making people more selective at a buffet by charging them for what they eat vs. charging them an all-you-can-eat price. I don’t think the principle is as far fetched as Krugman’s “I’m not exaggerating” comment might make you believe.
Regardless, this is not a post about U.S. health care reform. When an economist uses “Us vs. Them” arguments rather than rational discussion what hope is there for the rest of us? Where are all the on-the-other-hand economists that we hear the jokes about?
Tools of Creativity
October 15, 2007
Ray Kurzweil of The Atlantic writes:
The means of creativity have now been democratized. For example, anyone with an inexpensive high-definition video camera and a personal computer can create a high-quality, full-length motion picture. A musician in her dorm room commands the resources once available only in a multimillion-dollar recording studio. Just a few years ago, a couple of students at Stanford University wrote some software on their personal computers that revolutionized Web searches and became the basis of a company now worth $150 billion. Individuals now have the tools to break new ground in every field.
And Nicholas Carr adds a healthy dose of cynicism:
Yep. Just as the invention of the pencil made it possible for anyone to write a high-quality novel. And just as that power saw down in my cellar makes it possible for me to build a high-quality chest of drawers.
There is a great deal of truth in both points of views. The class of creative tools impacted by Moore’s Law are becoming very affordable. Creativity, however, is not often limited by cost of the tools. The example of using a HD video camera and a PC to create a motion picture is unfortunately a bad one. Movie creation is a team sport. The creation of a movie is multi-disciplinary and seems more like a large scale engineering project than a creative exercise for one person. The cost savings of HD video and inexpensive non-linear editing are small in the overall cost of creating a movie.
As with all discussions about creative art, we lump creativity and craftsmanship together. In my view, the “democratization” of creative tools impacts two important dimensions:
- The tools allow creative individuals to accelerate their mastery of craftsmanship.
- The low cost allows more individuals to explore a variety of creative mediums.
What has changed in the dorm room musician’s case is the mastery of music production (a craft) not his or her ability to compose (a creative art). HD video and non-linear editing does the same for video production (a craft). Digital SLRs and photo quality ink jet printers have allowed photographers to create gallery quality prints. The tools help the artist spend less time and cost on the nitty gritty and focus more on the creative aspects of their work.
Creativity, however, is something that requires aptitude, passion, and practice. The advancement of the creative tools allow an individual to explore a specific discipline easily. The advances in video technology will do more to help develop/render budding movie makers than it will to allow more movie flowers to bloom.
I’m not sure if the “democratization” metaphor is a good one but I think it is hard to dispute that the new tools of creativity are changing the artistic landscape.
No Gnus is Good Gnus
October 11, 2007
Chimps Play Raisin Ultimatum Game
October 10, 2007
Primate researchers at the Max Planck Institute report fascinating results for a chimpanzee friendly version of the ultimatum game.
In each version of this mini-ultimatum game, the proposer could pull one tray with 8 raisins for himself and 2 for the other (an unfair split that people routinely reject). However, the proposer would have a choice. In one game, he could choose between this unfair offer and a fair one (5 raisins each). In another, he could choose a hyper-fair option (2 for himself and 8 for the responder). In a third, he had no choice (the second tray also had 8 for himself and 2 for the other). In the fourth game, the proposer’s other choice was hyper-unfair (10 for himself, 0 for the responder).
Unlike humans faced with these games, chimpanzee responders accepted any nonzero offer, whether it was unfair or not. The only offer that was reliably rejected was the 10/0 option (responder gets nothing). The researchers conclude that chimpanzees do not show a willingness to make fair offers and reject unfair ones. In this way, they behave like selfish economists rather than as social reciprocators.
Assuming that the experiment accurately mimics the human ultimatum game, this is a major finding (in my mind anyway). Humans tend to punish the proposer for deviating from an equal split while chimps will take any non-zero amount. How cool is that?
I hope someone tries this experiment with bonobos too. And children (against other children with raisins, not child vs. bonobo).
