It's the same as finding a good mechanic or dentist.  Word of mouth.
The problem is that anyone knows when their car isn't running right or
whether their teeth hurt.  Diving is different.  You might have some
people rave about a certain instructor and find out that their skills
are crap.  Also, everyone needs a dentist or mechanic at some point.
There are fewer certified divers to ask and it's not always easy to
find them.  One can hang out at dive club meetings or find a local
scuba BBS, but how many newbies will do that before signing up for a
course?

We have opinions of everything.

Actually, there's been quite a bit of discussion on this.  One of the things
a non diver should do is talk with the instructor.  You can generally tell
those that are interested in their subject and in their students.  They
should be personable and willing to make time to help the non diver
understand what he will learn and how it will be taught.  People tend to get
more from an instructor they like than from one they they don't care for.
When you've found an instructor you like, ask for the names of some of his
students.  Ask them what they thought of him.  If possible, try to find some
of his old students that have experience, either before or after, with other
instuctors.  They'll be better able to judge his performance.  Finally, get
on this group and ask those that live in the area the instructor serves what
they think.  Someone may very well know the person being considered.

Lee

"Kari" <karibelle2001@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard
resulting in:

Closest to where you live is a good start.  The dive shop at your
resort is another good choice.

Dan Bracuk
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.

My generell impression is, that those crossovered are better
instructors. Especially when they have a CMAS/NAUI affiliation.

Matthias

They guy's not telling the whole story.  You plan the maximum depth and time
to keep you within the limits of what your computer says is OK.  While it's
not a lot, it's a lot more than no planning at all.

Beyond that, what is best for you is largely a matter of preference and
expectations.  An increasing majority of divers don't ever use after they
complete their first open water course.  They use computers.  Most of them
learned to use tables at least well enough to get through a test, but it's
been so long since they last used one, they can no longer do so reliably.
This not a problem as long as they understand the limits of their computers
and stay within them.  When they don't have a working computer, either
because one is not available or because theirs fail, these divers are out of
luck . . . if their smart.  This dependence on computers is one of the
reasons that computers have gotten increasingly conservative.  When the
computer is the only tool divers have to plane and execute their dives, the
computer had better be right every time.  The only way to do that is to make
it so conservative that almost no matter what variables are involved, it's
conservative enough.  To judge which, between the conservative, very
conservative and too conservative computers, it helps to have some standard
tables for comparison.

A small number of divers don't have, or don't understand computers and
either dive shallow or depend on someone else, a DM, for example, to plan
and monitor their dive.  In my opinion, which I think is shared by many of
the people here, these are not divers. They lack the ability to plan and
execute a planned dive safely without support.  They should not have cards
that certify otherwise.

Traditionally, those that venture beyond recreational diving, have returned
to tables, usually tables quite different from those they initially learned.
These tables are generally optimized for gases other than air, including
nitrox, trimix as well as some combinations that most of us will never
consider, let alone use.  As the number of more technical divers has
increased, so has the sophistication of computers.  I currently have a
computer that handles several different gases and allows me to tell it when
I'm changing gas during the dive.  I probably could do technical dives
without referring to tables, but as a member of the old school, quickly
becoming the very old school, I won't.  I plan my more advanced dives using
tables, computerized ones these days, check the plan against what my dive
computer thinks is OK, and then use the computer to monitor and manage the
dive.

So, theoretically, and increasingly, you can dive, cradle to grave, entry
level to technical, without needed tables as long as you limit your diving
to what your computer can handle.

Here's the other side of the coin.  Tables are an excellent tool for
understanding diving.  The act of planning a dive with a table, whether for
air, nitrox or trimix, forces you to focus on time, depth and gas issues.
As a learning tool, it's hard to beat.  Even for those that use a computer
for all of their diving, knowledge of the tables and the issues, gives a
much better chance to sense when something is wrong with the computer or
simply with the dive being planned or executed.  It also tends to give the
diver a better basis for dealing with problems that occur during the dive
and, of course, the ability to plan and execute a dive safely when a working
computer is not available.  In my opinion, a diver that knows the tables and
keeps his ability to use them current, is likely to be a better diver than
one that doesn't.  YMMV.

Lee

As Lee and VK point out, there is still planning involved, and I think
it is wrong to imply - even to a beginner - that planning is eliminated.
For every dive there are depth and time factors that must be considered,
even those hard-bottom shallow dives.

What has changed is the tools used to monitor the execution of the plan:
the computer, using real time measurement of depth and time and
calculation of the results, is far more accurate and error free than the
old tables.

The equipment may be more up to date, but the principles of depth and
time planning are still essential.

esg

Both statements make perfectly good sense.  Alcohol isn't any worse
than coffee physiologically, and there's no reason why an experienced
diver/drinker should have any problems with an easy dive even with a
little inebriation.  And unless there's some sort of surface conditions
warranting coming back with a reserve amount of air, why not run the
tank down to 200-300 psi?