Enhancing photo's

[Paul B]

Now I realize that there are some really beautiful tanks on here out of the thousands of tanks we have featured, but I also notice that many of the photo's are enhanced through photoshop. Many corals are really colorful as are our fish but some of the shots are over the top. I see a lot of purple hippo tangs, fluorescent clowns and glowing mandarins A mandarin is arguably the most colorful fish and hippo tangs are certainly the nicest color "blue" but I have spent time under water with almost all the fish we keep and those fish are no where near the colors represented on some of these forums. Corals either. I even see photo's of my own tank posted in different places on the web and they are enhanced by others.
It certainly makes it look more beautiful and the corals are radiant. But that is not how any of these things appear in nature.
I just would like Noobs to realize that some of the tank photo's are photoshoped and your real life tank will never normally look like that.
This is a real coral reef in Bora Bora with just the camera flash.

This is that same reef under the Tahitian tropical sun with no flash.

I recently took this in Hawaii in shallow water with no flash.

 

[bkstang]

Unfortunately in this kind of photography, enhancement or I would call it in this case, correction is necessary. Your eyes see things differently than your camera. Human eye is much more sophisticated than the digital media or film. It can adjust to the color temperature and other factors very well, so to show what human eye should see, some correction in many cases is necessary.

 

[Paul B]

I see your point. But in many cases the "correction", although looks great is not a true representation of what that particular creature really looks like and some Noobs may get the Idea that that is what their tank is really supposed to look like in person. And unfortunately, it never will.

 

[mbg75]

My uncorrected tank

 

[Paul B]

Now that looks natural. :biggrin:

There is nothing wrong with enhancing colors in pictures, all magazines do it as do painters. When I worked Penthouse Magazine I used to see the models come in and watch as they took the pictures. (only for the artistic value of course) and those girls coming in looked nothing like the girls in the photo's. Not that I am complaining, just the opposite. But we don't want noobs to get the wrong Idea that that is what these tanks look like because some of them have some really garish colors that although look beautiful, are not what the tank looks like in person. Besides, I don't even know how to use photoshop. If I did, I would always have hair

 

[jerl77]

ask the vendors here they do it all the time

 

[jerl77]

Here's mine

 

[strgazr27]

Was that pic taken in 1987? Lol

 

[Paul B]

I like this picture of my tank from many years ago. I don't remember when I took this but I think it was a film camera. I could be mistaken and I am sure you guys would know how to figure that out. I don't think there was any SPS in the tank then but I don't remember. The purple looks to be enhanced as does the green codium seaweed that I collect. If it is a film camera, it was slightly enhanced in the developing and if it is digital, someone did it for me as I don't know how to do that although maybe at one time I did. I am old now so I forget what the heck I did. This obviously is not a reef tank that would appeal to a lot of people as it more resembles a lagoon and not really a coral reef. I like it and feel it is more interesting than the normal, common, cookie cutter reef that is common now. I still strive for this look and in a few months I will again collect codium. It only lives a couple of months but I think it is really nice looking.

 

[skene]

Paul, you would be mistaken. Here is the information on your photo.
These are the exif data(signature) that is put into each and every digital camera image taken. :p

Camera Maker: SONY
Camera Model: DSC-P10
Image Date: 2005-10-12 04:08:21 (no TZ)
Focal Length: 7.9mm
Aperture: f/2.8
Exposure Time: 0.033 s (1/30)
ISO equiv: 100
Exposure Bias: -1.70 EV
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: program (Auto)
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB
GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined

 

[mbg75]

2005 was many years ago

 

[edd]

Paul, you would be mistaken. Here is the information on your photo.
These are the exif data(signature) that is put into each and every digital camera image taken. :p

Camera Maker: SONY
Camera Model: DSC-P10
Image Date: 2005-10-12 04:08:21 (no TZ)
Focal Length: 7.9mm
Aperture: f/2.8
Exposure Time: 0.033 s (1/30)
ISO equiv: 100
Exposure Bias: -1.70 EV
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: program (Auto)
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB
GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined

tell me your kidding, that you can get that info from a photo.

 

[Paul B]

Wow, that's cool. I still have that camera. So it was taken in 2005? I thought it was a lot older than that, but what do I know? I still have that fireclown but I think he is about 21 years old.
Now this one I know was a film camera because it was about 1971. I don't think you can pull any specs off this one, can you?

 

[skene]

That goes right up there with this...