my new corals
- Thread starter mskohl
- Start date
Lazyreefer
Premium Member
The second and fouth ones look unreal.
janderson8
Moved On
I have the Second one it is nice I would have frag it for 20!!!
janderson8
Moved On
He it is not doctored!!!
janderson8
Moved On
Charlie,
Did you not see the threas in SPS Forum a while back about RM and photoshop???????
Did you not see the threas in SPS Forum a while back about RM and photoshop???????
VCoo71
Active member
Jason
yes i know the thread....and a few quotes from a diffrent RM thread
"Two things to consider about our corals and how we represent them. First is that we prepare our photos on a CRT monitor and not a Lap Top or a LCD. We do this for two reasons, first is that a CRT lmonitor looks the same no matter what angle you are viewing the coral at, and because they have an average brightness/contrast output range the photos look reasonable on most monitors. But.... with these new and incredible CRT monitors coming out I am seeing problems with our photos. They look nuked, like we own stock in Photoshop! I am thinking that I have to remove saturation rather than leaving at zero in Photoshop. I just purchased a Samsung 931B and it is insane. I turned down the brightness and contrast by 30 percent because my website looked like a cartoon. "
"What folks have to understand is that in no way are we trying to misrepresent out photos. We set the white balance to what they look like in our system and we photoshop them to take out the blue. WE ARE NOT ADDING COLOR! Our bulbs are located out 2 to 3 FEET above our corals. Yes they are 1000 watt 20k's but at 3 feet away they have as much intensity as a 400 watter at 10 inches."
charlie
yes i know the thread....and a few quotes from a diffrent RM thread
"Two things to consider about our corals and how we represent them. First is that we prepare our photos on a CRT monitor and not a Lap Top or a LCD. We do this for two reasons, first is that a CRT lmonitor looks the same no matter what angle you are viewing the coral at, and because they have an average brightness/contrast output range the photos look reasonable on most monitors. But.... with these new and incredible CRT monitors coming out I am seeing problems with our photos. They look nuked, like we own stock in Photoshop! I am thinking that I have to remove saturation rather than leaving at zero in Photoshop. I just purchased a Samsung 931B and it is insane. I turned down the brightness and contrast by 30 percent because my website looked like a cartoon. "
"What folks have to understand is that in no way are we trying to misrepresent out photos. We set the white balance to what they look like in our system and we photoshop them to take out the blue. WE ARE NOT ADDING COLOR! Our bulbs are located out 2 to 3 FEET above our corals. Yes they are 1000 watt 20k's but at 3 feet away they have as much intensity as a 400 watter at 10 inches."
charlie
papagimp
COMAS Rocks!
fwiw, every coral I have ever purchased looks different in my system, colorwise. Even if I saw it in person, looking one way, it looks different in mine. Like all these zoo's of Travis's that I have, look so different from the pictures he took of em. I take that into consideration when purchasing corals online and only have their photo to look at.
captbunzo
Premium Member
I've gotta say a BIG Bull-shineonly to the "we are not trying to represent our corals bit". Do I think they are trying to cheat anyone? No, not really. Are they doing anything different then any other ethical online coral vendor (including Extreme Corals, I can say) - No.
However, they ARE skewing your impression of a coral when they put it under magic 20000K bulbs and take pictures of them in ultra-fluoresce mode. I mean, how many of us EXCLUSIVELY use actinic type lighting on our tank, or these 20000K bulbs only.
Sure, a few of us. But most mix something more daylight in color (10000K, 6500K, etc) with some actinic. And there is NO WAY that you are going to get as much fluoresce out of these corals when you put them in a more normal (10000K + actinics) lighting setup.
Now, do I think there is anything wrong with them taking pics in this relatively unrealistic lighting setup? No, not really. But I do think people need to be aware of what is really going on here. And I do think companies should be honest enough to admit that they are making their corals look "the best possible" by using blue light, basically.
Sorry, rant over, please continue...
And sorry to rain on your parade at all, Steph..... Merry coral Christmas. I hope these look and do GREAT!
However, they ARE skewing your impression of a coral when they put it under magic 20000K bulbs and take pictures of them in ultra-fluoresce mode. I mean, how many of us EXCLUSIVELY use actinic type lighting on our tank, or these 20000K bulbs only.
Sure, a few of us. But most mix something more daylight in color (10000K, 6500K, etc) with some actinic. And there is NO WAY that you are going to get as much fluoresce out of these corals when you put them in a more normal (10000K + actinics) lighting setup.
Now, do I think there is anything wrong with them taking pics in this relatively unrealistic lighting setup? No, not really. But I do think people need to be aware of what is really going on here. And I do think companies should be honest enough to admit that they are making their corals look "the best possible" by using blue light, basically.
Sorry, rant over, please continue...
And sorry to rain on your parade at all, Steph..... Merry coral Christmas. I hope these look and do GREAT!
Travis L. Stevens
New member
I have to agree with Paul here. I'm not a fan of people doctoring photos for commercial purposes, but I think a disclaimer should be added to places like websites that states what lighting the coral's picture is taken under. If the photo has been doctored to represent the true color, then it should say how it was done and what monitor it is viewed at. Now, I'm going to throw Reefer Madness into the fire just as an example. If I order some frags from RM, and I get them and they aren't the same color as what I wanted, but they are healthy frags, then I wouldn't fret. I might enquire what light they used so I can attempt to match it if I please. But really, the health of the coral is what matters to me. Now if it wasn't the exact color AND the coral was sick, dying, or dead, then I would raise a stink! So, you have to ask yourself when ordering corals, do you prefer an accurate representation of color of coral health, or coral health over the color representation?
BTW, Steph, the Rose A. millepora is absolutely stunning to me, and I've always been a sucker for pink S. histrix.
BTW, Steph, the Rose A. millepora is absolutely stunning to me, and I've always been a sucker for pink S. histrix.
VCoo71
Active member
and another quote from there webiste
"All photos are taken under 1000 Watt and 400 Watt SE 20 K Helios Bulbs. Corals will look different under 10 K bulbs. Wild colonies seem to need lots of blue spectrum to hold their phosphorescent qualities, and we recommend that the corals should be kept under 20 K Halides to represent their best colors"
they are stand up buch of people IMO just like when they ran FFE
i will be waiting on pics from mskohl come friday....
charlie
"All photos are taken under 1000 Watt and 400 Watt SE 20 K Helios Bulbs. Corals will look different under 10 K bulbs. Wild colonies seem to need lots of blue spectrum to hold their phosphorescent qualities, and we recommend that the corals should be kept under 20 K Halides to represent their best colors"
they are stand up buch of people IMO just like when they ran FFE
i will be waiting on pics from mskohl come friday....
charlie
Similar threads
