AD 2015 Q4
This is the “not do” component. It is also somewhat harder to define. After all, who determines the duty to care and the non-compliance thereto in unique emergency situations? Still, this component is more likely to lead to a recovery of damages. Put differently, when you are under a legal duty to take reasonable care and you do not do it, then you could be held liable for damages that are directly caused by the breach of that duty. The key elements are “reasonable care” and “directly caused”. Let’s break that down, starting with directly caused. This means that the damages are linked directly to the failure to perform the reasonable duty. This is called a causal connection. In other words, there must be a connection between the duty not complied with and the damages. deep diving are so hazardous that it may well be better to only jeopardise the life of one individual rather than two. That is, of course, as long as no one is put at risk during the subsequent body recovery or rescue efforts! Well, as a qualified instructor and dive leader, I shall continue to teach and advocate the buddy system. I do not like the idea of diving alone anyway. I prefer to share the joys of diving with someone able to share the memories of the dive. To me, diving is, and remains, a team sport. Which introduces another consideration: How would the principle of duty to take care be applied to children who dive? Training agencies impose age and depth restrictions on children who enter the sport before the age of 14. Depending on the age and diving course, a child may be required to dive with an instructor or at least another adult dive buddy. If the adult were to get into trouble, the child would not be expected to meet the duty of care of another adult. He/she would be held to an age appropriate standard. What about all those waivers? As mentioned in the previous article, waivers define the boundaries of the self-imposed risk divers are willing to take by requiring that they acknowledge them. Waivers do not remove all the potential claims for negligence and non-compliance with a duty of care. As such, it is left to our courts to ultimately interpret the content of a waiver within the actual context of damage or injury.
This is the “not do” component. It is also somewhat harder to define. After all, who determines the duty to care and the non-compliance thereto in unique emergency situations? Still, this component is more likely to lead to a recovery of damages. Put differently, when you are under a legal duty to take reasonable care and you do not do it, then you could be held liable for damages that are directly caused by the breach of that duty. The key elements are “reasonable care” and “directly caused”. Let’s break that down, starting with directly caused. This means that the damages are linked directly to the failure to perform the reasonable duty. This is called a causal connection. In other words, there must be a connection between the duty not complied with and the damages.
deep diving are so hazardous that it may well be better to only jeopardise the life of one individual rather than two. That is, of course, as long as no one is put at risk during the subsequent body recovery or rescue efforts! Well, as a qualified instructor and dive leader, I shall continue to teach and advocate the buddy system. I do not like the idea of diving alone anyway. I prefer to share the joys of diving with someone able to share the memories of the dive. To me, diving is, and remains, a team sport. Which introduces another consideration: How would the principle of duty to take care be applied to children who dive? Training agencies impose age and depth restrictions on children who enter the sport before the age of 14. Depending on the age and diving course, a child may be required to dive with an instructor or at least another adult dive buddy. If the adult were to get into trouble, the child would not be expected to meet the duty of care of another adult. He/she would be held to an age appropriate standard. What about all those waivers? As mentioned in the previous article, waivers define the boundaries of the self-imposed risk divers are willing to take by requiring that they acknowledge them. Waivers do not remove all the potential claims for negligence and non-compliance with a duty of care. As such, it is left to our courts to ultimately interpret the content of a waiver within the actual context of damage or injury.
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
PARTING<br />
SHOT<br />
By Clark Miller<br />
AQUATERRAIMAGERY.COM<br />
Adriana Basques and<br />
I have been working<br />
on a photographic<br />
technique we call wideangle<br />
mixed fluorescent<br />
photography.<br />
Wide-angle fluorescent<br />
photography requires a<br />
lot of light, typically four<br />
or more light sources.<br />
One method of shooting<br />
fluorescence is to use<br />
high-powered LED video<br />
lights with filters, but most<br />
video lights (except for very<br />
powerful and expensive LED<br />
lights) have insufficient<br />
power to bring out<br />
fluorescence because of<br />
the filters used. This leads<br />
to turning up the ISO to<br />
a point that introduces<br />
too much noise. However,<br />
strobes with properly fitted<br />
diffusers can do the same<br />
thing but with significantly<br />
more instant light. The ISO<br />
can remain much lower,<br />
and noise can be kept to a<br />
level that can be addressed<br />
in postprocessing.<br />
We use a variety of<br />
colored lens filters and<br />
strobe light diffusers<br />
to shut out specific<br />
wavelengths of light and<br />
capture the florescence.<br />
With the right amount<br />
of light and careful<br />
postprocessing of the<br />
RAW image, it is possible<br />
generate significant<br />
fluorescence and reveal a<br />
variety of colors. There is no<br />
one way to accomplish this,<br />
and the process continues<br />
to be a fascinating<br />
experiment. <strong>AD</strong><br />
116 | FALL <strong>2015</strong><br />
EQUIPMENT: Canon EOS 5D Mark III, 8-15mm fisheye lens at 15mm; amber filter;<br />
Sea and Sea YS-120 strobes (2) and YS-D1 strobes (2) with specially fabricated<br />
prototype blue CM dome diffusers; Aquatica housing with 9-inch glass megadome<br />
SETTINGS: 1/60 sec. @ f/5, ISO 640<br />
LOCATION: Liberty wreck, Tulamben, Bali
Change language