Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.

Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.

Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.

Click here to register!



Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.

Smartfind & Digital Mode Question

Travis. The two display modes are indeed based on the same data, so in their own way, they are indicating the same info. Thats the simple answer to your question.

To mention other associated factors, like the related AUDIO interpretation of the displayed info, is very significant, as is the underlying character of both visual presentations.

Smart says "look, I'm over here".
Whereas Digital says "I'm at 22 East, 33 North".
Which ever conveys the data best to YOU, is a matter for you alone to decide.
Both translate the same info, into differing forms.

I suspect that Smart is instinctively the choice of the majority, and Digital the choice of the inquisitive minority.

For my part, I think that the Audio presentation of target info, is more relevant. (And easily acquired by the brain.)
Why?
Well, the digital and Smart are 'Averaged info' and by definition 'history'.(But meaningful).
Audio is 'on-going' and even when very variable, telling you how it is, as seen by the detector, milli-second by milli-second.
The visual modes are a series of 'photographs'.
The audio, more like the sound track of the 'movie', so to speak.

The skill of the user, is in assessing ALL inputs.
The successful outcome depends on digging those targets that give consistent responses, rather than accurate screen readings.

These are just my person opinions, and not meant as a contradiction of other's comments...........mattR.UK
 
That's correct...it's two different ways of representing the SAME data.
 
[quote swingingmydfx]Sorry about that Tagment you will need to dig any thing that sh-owes up on the screen to be sure you get it all. You may want to look into a Whites DFX as the smart find screen on it is much more accurate. You will loose some on the depth though.[/quote]

Thanks for the condolences. I've been working my way through the MFG's and currently only have the Minelab and White's to go. The Tejon gave GREAT depth, but 18 inch deep square tabs get old very quickly. No real complaint about the Garrett, it just wasn't a good fit. I've liked all the Fishers, especially the C$ because they screen out iron so well. The ID EDGE is a nice "turn on and find clad" machine, but it doesn't do anything the C$ can't do. So, now ON TO THE EXPLORER!
Any and all suggestions on how to climb THIS learning curve are appreciated (and some will even be applied)(lol).
Thanks again,
Tagamet, the Deaf
 
First, are your hard of hearing, or fully deaf? Can you hear tones well? I know a couple hearing impared people, and they can do anything I can do (often BETTER LOL). I am new with the Explorer, but the feared learning curve really was'nt anything. I am still learning, and will be for some time, but, I use the detector and find things quite easily, as I suspect you will too. I think this machine is EXCELLENT for a hearing impaired person. Even if you cant use the sound tones as others can, the Ferous & Conductivity reading will give you more info visually than any machine out there, and YOU WILL be able to find targets with just the display. Sure, you wont find as many or maybe as deep, but you will find them.
Travis
 
Take a look at this:
http://mikesweather.metsite.com/detectin/html/explorer_xs___explorer_ii.html

Specifically, look at this too:

http://mikesweather.metsite.com/detectin/html/charles_rock_solid_setup.html

This is what I use most of the time and it works very well for me.

By the way, the site is not mine. People always assume it is when I link to it because of the name. But it's a good site and it helped me over the curve quite a bit.
 
Thanks Mike. Already had those two sites bookmarked. LOL
Great minds think alike, or at least SEARCH alike. LOL
 
Top