sexycorals
Bringing Sexy BACK!!
hahah.. yes my degree was Business Management (MHR) with an empasis on entrepenurship. but also minor in your specialty, Marketing =)
Don't be fooled...Please.
- Thread starter uniquecorals
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)
OP
OP
..Which is precisely why you're a good marketer...Us marketing guys gotta stick together..Even though it was a minor for you, I'll give you cred.. LOL
Might be a tangent here, but when I was new...
I don't have the ability to turn my (LED) whites down, so I cannot look at my tank under just the blues. For the first few swaps I went to, I couldn't figure out why they just didn't look the same. Then I started reading about swaps in general and witnessed a fellow shopper ask for the whites to be turned up at the frag tank. Then it dawned on me, I'm looking at them under both white and blue and some other colors too, but I couldn't control any of the channels to get that blue only mode. Now I feel silly I thought that, but hey, whatever...I assumed something that was different.
Last edited by a moderator:
Lonelyreef
Well-Known Member
I always read Scott's rants and agree or disagree he always makes valid points. I admire a person that stands up for what they believe in. I to have been a victim of Photoshop. The worst part about this phenomenon is that when a truly unique coral....plug unique corals here. When a truly unique coral that has just amazing colors comes about so many people are worried about it being photoshopped that most just assume it is and are leary to buy it. I'm all for the naming of names and companies even sponsors on here that we know photoshop and over saturate there color. It would probably stop the practice that occurs quicker than you would think. It actually hurts honest buisnesses and vendors that don't photoshop and over saturate to unrealistic colors. Photoshop isn't the devil it's the people using it to scam honest reefers. We as hobbiest need to stick together and I wish the vendors would as well and call people out. Somebody need so start the revolution in this hobby and change the status quo. Get rid of all the bs hack and stack shops that are ruining a beautiful hobby. Good write up Scott seems like you angered at least one vendor that has a buddy or another screen name. Hate people like that that hide in the shadows using different screen names. How can he call you out for using your own name and forum to try to act like his guy doesn't do it or rather he doesn't. Super lame guy super lame. Don't attack a man that is consistently trying to further our hobby make you look like a ***********************************.
Keep on reefing unique corals and Scott. Plus all the other vendors that show real corals. REEF ON. The rest please close shop and become photoshop experts and stop ruining our hobby it's our not yours leave it.
Keep on reefing unique corals and Scott. Plus all the other vendors that show real corals. REEF ON. The rest please close shop and become photoshop experts and stop ruining our hobby it's our not yours leave it.
GHill762
Valuable Member
I'd frag that :heh:New marketing. all american coral.
Last edited:
paphioland
Community Member
Believe me, you have no idea who I am. I am no minion and have seen more coral in one year than you will see in your life. Sure he can rant all he wants and in a public forum I can respond how I wish following forum rules. Although name calling and self righteously baselessly degrading other vendors for his own benefit with no specific examples might not be following forum rules. I don't know. I am not a moderator. And by the way you just repeated my sentiments in the end of your minion post.
Last edited:
Squamosa
Well-Known Member
Well said Scott!
I only started to notice how images could be manipulated once I started shooting macro and doing post processing of my images in photoshop and then.....BOOM...so that's how the vendors get their corals to look so good!!
I call foul to all WYSIWYG pictures, your own eyes are the best filters to view corals with and I will never buy online again unless it is for a specific species and I could care less about the colour.
Another thing is, what's with the pictures being taken under actinic ONLY lighting? I run an LED program that simulates a ~20 000k spectrum and only have actinics on only just before my lights shut down, I think this is also misleading, marketing claptrap and the corals should be photographed at a light spectrum that is more inline with what the spectrum shows at 12 noon!
There, I feel better now :bigsmile:
I have included a picture of my favourite acan, with a little digital manipulation :wink:
I only started to notice how images could be manipulated once I started shooting macro and doing post processing of my images in photoshop and then.....BOOM...so that's how the vendors get their corals to look so good!!
I call foul to all WYSIWYG pictures, your own eyes are the best filters to view corals with and I will never buy online again unless it is for a specific species and I could care less about the colour.
Another thing is, what's with the pictures being taken under actinic ONLY lighting? I run an LED program that simulates a ~20 000k spectrum and only have actinics on only just before my lights shut down, I think this is also misleading, marketing claptrap and the corals should be photographed at a light spectrum that is more inline with what the spectrum shows at 12 noon!
There, I feel better now :bigsmile:
I have included a picture of my favourite acan, with a little digital manipulation :wink:
Attachments
OP
OP
Thanks much for your views and opinions, and your kind words. In the end, it's important to have a dialogue about stuff like this, and the person in question was apparently speaking from his heart, which I respect, although I may not agree with all of his points. And you're right- Photoshop is not the evil- it's the people who abuse it. So true. Interesting point that, when a new morph of incredibly colorful coral comes out, the first assumption that we make is that the colors were altered. Reefkeeping is tough enough without us having to face such low expectations from our vendors and fellow hobbyists. To me, the main thing that we need to do is to raise our standards as vendors and hobbyists. We should always speak our minds, no matter how unpopular, or no matter how opinionated we may seem. To do anything other than that is to cower and agree "just to keep the peace."
Thanks again to all who read and engaged in dialogue about this "moronic" post in the spirit in which it was intended. :tongue:
OP
OP
If stating one's opinion- yours or mine- and telling it like it is- becomes a problem on ANY forum, then we have a lot more to worry about than just Photoshopping corals. You are correct- you can "rant" (it's not ranting- it's disseminating opinion) all you want as long as you keep things nice. And, yeah- pointing out bad practices and and not naming names is NOT a violation of a forum rule.
And finally, before you tell FishLipz, myself, or anyone here that you've seen more coral in a year than he or she will see in his/her life, you should really get to know that person, their experience, and their background. Your rebuff to his/her comment sounded, for want of a better word- arrogant...you might even say, in your own term- "moronic."
And you're right- no one here has any idea who you are. And it doesn't matter who you are- everyone's opinion is equally valuable here. No one is impressed by vitriol and arrogance...For that matter, no one should be impressed by someone who's "seen" tons of coral. You're not all that unique in our field/hobby/industry- many people have seen a ton of coral. They should be impressed by your logically expressed, well thought-out opinions and deep knowledge, and the courage that you show by expressing your beliefs.
Again, thanks for participating.
Last edited:
paphioland
Community Member
My problem is that not all corals are equal. There is a real supply and demand that exists. There are Kate Upton corals and 85 yo grandma corals. No offense to grandmoms. They have other skills like cooking but many many more people want Kate Uptons assets over grandmom's cooking skill. One it is more valuable and rare. So there are rare beautiful sick corals. Sometimes you need photoshop to accurately capture the coral. Not everyone is the best photographer in the world. By just throwing out a blanket statement that any coral with hype or looks amazing or has some purple in the backround or is expensive stay away that is almost slander. There are corals that really are that much better than others. It depends what someone is willing or can afford to pay for kate upton. Maybe someone would pay more for a date with Jessica alba. The point is that there is some subjectivity but not all if it is. Kate upton is hotter than your grandma. Kate upton vs some Brazilian bikini model that might be taste.
Thank you again Scott 
I knew it............... we ended up back to the bikini girl and corals, LOL!
Btw, can we have a 4th of July UC non-photo shop coral live-sale, PLEASE?!?
Btw, can we have a 4th of July UC non-photo shop coral live-sale, PLEASE?!?
OP
OP
Dang, a really rational argument...Complete with good analogy, I should say. Please understand- I never said or implied that utilizing Photoshop and post-production to "clean up" a photo is unethical. In fact, it's often necessary to bring it to acceptable standards for web site publication. What I DID say is that the excessive use of saturation in order to make a coral look "like it isn't" in order to generate a sale is an unethical, deceptive, and misleading practice. I advised that one of your tipoffs to possible excessive saturation is unnatural color of background objects. I never stated that every pic with a colorful background is evidence of sinister photo post production. And before you throw out terms like "almost slander", please understand the definition and application of the word. Now you made me have to look up this stuff, which is REALLY boring:
There are two torts that involve the communication of false information about a person, a group, or an entity such as a corporation. Libel is any Defamation that can be seen, such as a writing, printing, effigy, movie, or statue. Slander is any defamation that is spoken and heard.
Collectively known as defamation, libel and slander are civil wrongs that harm a reputation; decrease respect, regard, or confidence; or induce disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against an individual or entity. The injury to one's good name or reputation is affected through written or spoken words or visual images. The laws governing these torts are identical.
To recover in a libel or slander suit, the plaintiff must show evidence of four elements: that the defendant conveyed a defamatory message; that the material was published, meaning that it was conveyed to someone other than the plaintiff; that the plaintiff could be identified as the person referred to in the defamatory material; and that the plaintiff suffered some injury to his or her reputation as a result of the communication.
(I have the advantage of having an attorney/criminal prosecutor as a significant other, so when people throw around big legal talk it is...entertaining.) So far, the only person who is attacking an "identifiable" person in a public manner that could be construed as "injurious is....?"
My point is- you are correct- you can't state that EVERY expensive coral or any hyped coral is somehow evil. Not every expensive coral is a ripoff. These things were not discussed or even implied. Of course there are rare and beautiful corals out there, some of which are truly outstanding, and warrant, for various reasons, a more expensive price tag. We've already covered that and we agree. It's getting boring already.
Bottom line is this: I think photoshop abuse is a problem that can mislead unsuspecting hobbyists. It's wrong. People who believe that this practice is okay are, in my opinion, wrong. Why would anyone defend an unethical practice?
I'd like to think that we're on the same page about several things, but you seem more interested in pointing out what you feel is my perceived arrogance and industry position than you do about addressing the topic at hand- excessive saturation in photos, which are misleading to hobbyists.
:closed_2:
sexycorals
Bringing Sexy BACK!!
Can I add my educational 2 cents to this?
although Kate Upton is a great choice I would prefer nina agdal. .
That's all I got.
although Kate Upton is a great choice I would prefer nina agdal. .
That's all I got.
Midwestclownfish
Active Member
This made me laugh. Hard. What a ridiculous thing to say, not even knowing who you're talking to.
OP
OP
Yeah, I agree that the Kate Upton thing is far more interesting than the original topic...I want to hijack my own thread now!
:heh:
:heh:
Similar threads
