Loading ...
Now, you would have to be very naive if you have never considered the notion of your favorite retailers (online or local) editing their images to sell corals or just lure you in. In fact, we have one once popular local reef store that does it so blatantly, it is eye piercing and laughable. Some like our local store, fool around the levels in PhotoShop to get that enhanced color look. Their excuse would be to ‘touch up the white balance’, which is miles away from the truth. The hues and saturation, among level balancing, are cranked beyond repair. Still don’t know what I am talking about? Lets talk basic editing:
Here is a photo of a beautiful Acropora sarmentosa that I have in my system.
Here is one with the levels (white and black) are enhanced where the white areas are getting erased (become blanks or screen).
Here is one with the hue and saturation fiddled to create a fake color look. Interesting isn’t it?
And this one made the famous PFE award. It is where you white balance is so off, that blue color is over-driving the entire image. Or, someone adjusted the blues in the picture to beautify the coral.
There are a lot of things to consider when looking at a coral photo. Look at the background color, if it is all too uniform, there is a chance that its been modified. As well, look at the white areas and black areas. Too white, or too dark and something may be off. Raise your red flag. Also, certain corals have a specific look under regular light. Use that as your gauge when you scan the websites for corals. The reason why the PFE even exists is due to the ability of retailers to con a lot of people with the help of the blue light (or PhotoShop). Its the sneakiest trick in the book, and will sell a lot of corals. The most recent notorious batch of corals to be edited this way are the echinophyllia, or chalice corals. Just look around the web, and you will see what I mean.
So before you drop 200$ for a small 1/2″ frag, ask yourself (or the retailer) if you can imagine that coral under 10K or flash lights. It can be the difference between your major disappointment, or bliss! Until next time!
Related posts:
- Photoshopping Corals 201
- The Art of Never Giving Up On Corals
- Reefy News: Sunscreen And Its Negative Effects On Corals
- Fragd.it Coral Profiles
- Back To The Future: The PFE
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Trained by the thirteenth ring master of the Sian Xiuang Coral Temple. Currently is apprenticing the art of Acropora shaping in the ancient tradition of Ninja Fragging. Known as the SPS hero! 
The 1st photo looks the best anyway. Not everyone loves actinic saturated look… !
FWIW, corals in aquaria don’t look anything like their wild counterparts. Whether you drown the coral in actinic light, or tweak your camera settings to get a desired effect before you snap the pic, digital imaging is still an ‘interpretation’ of the coral’s appearance. Using photo editing software is just another step in the interpretation process.
BTW, 99 reefers would agree that your coral is not a sarmentosa, much closer to an A. clathrata, the classic red table acro.
What about the other 1,000,000 reefers around the world
Taking pictures is the only way to show the coral to someone not in person. It is when people use photos to their gain or advatage is when things go south.
FWIW, another thing what is up to interpretation is calling a coral (or anything) classic.
And I am shocked that you can determine that this coral is a A. clathrata from not clearly seeing the coralite structure. In fact, I can guarantee that it is not a clathrata. It has much different coralite formation and structure.