beefytang

You're really using tap water? Out of the faucet? Might be an issue. Theres all kinds of bad stuff in tap water. The alternatives you mentioned sound reasonable. I see in your badge you have a 30 gallon tank. There is a mini RO-DI unit that might be a good solution for you.

BTW I saw this chart the other day. Kind of depressing. I'm not sure how our region's water quality adds up but if it's like this, it couldn't be good for a reef tank without some serious filtration.

Ever been underwater on a dive? It get's dark fast. Now imagine a tropical storm. It is dark on land during one of those let alone underwater. There have been a lot of people that have used a time period of darkness with great success. Myself included. I personally think 3 days of total darkness is a bit excessive, but if it works for people why bash them?

Yeah I have. Buck Island/St. Croix. And I'm not bashing. I'm just offering dissent. Even in the RC thread it was evident the technique didn't work for everyone. I think it is important to acknowledge the power of suggestion in the herd and the possibility that our perception of success with given techniques like these are subjective at times. In the end, it's the long term success of said technique that counts. If said problems keep happening over and over using said technique is it really a cure or just a frantic patch? Also, I did mention early that I didn't oppose diffusing aquatic light to simulate clouds. I know weather conditions are not constant. But I also know that many corals are photosynthetic and rely on light for their sustenance. To me, shutting off the lights for 3 days, leaving corals in total darkness is akin to starving them of the energy needed to sustain their existence for the sake of a nuisance that wasn't their fault to begin with. And isn't it the nature of new tanks to have issues with imbalances like algae, cyano etc? Why not encourage people to cycle their tanks longer instead of rushing out and stocking them, causing even greater imbalances where they then resort to such extreme measures?

And put it where? Your place? OK! I guess we could all stand to dump everything back into the ocean. But what fun would that be? There are too many thrills to be had torturing fish and corals with sinister, unquantifiable methodologies that some perceive to have benefits. =P

Nice. A few of questions...what are the tanks for? Backup air supply for divers or just abandoned? And the plankton blooms...is that a seasonal occurrence in the area or was Al Gore in town? And of course, what kind of camera/gear did you use to take these? Do you have to use auto focus? I'm guessing it's pretty tough to try and use manual focus with plankton everywhere and extra glass in between your eyes and the viewer. TIA

What ocean has 365 days of 10 hours full light? My tank always receives ambient light.

Rhetorical, I can appreciate that. ;-) This is why we use timers with our lights. 10 hours on full blast can surely be excessive with some setups, especially with MH and I wasn't advocating such a thing to begin with. But you know the ideal scenario. Actinics on first, later the MH or T5 etc. Later turning off the MH or T5 then afterwards the actinics with maybe a little moon LED during moon phases. You know, trying the best one can to simulate real world scenarios. I'm just not an advocate of shock techniques such as the 3 day blackout. It seems reckless and unnatural.

Seems like misguided advice with no science behind it. I suppose one could argue it like this: My dog pooped on the floor because I didn't take him outside for his daily dump so all living beings within the domain are banished into darkness with no food until the mess goes away. In short, it's collective punishment for bad husbandry.

New tanks WILL have algae booms, cyano, and diatoms. It goes away with time and proper care aka water changes, good circulation, balanced parameters, etc. Remember, nothing good happens fast in a reef tank. That's reef keeping 101. BTW when in recorded history has there EVER been a 3 day solar eclipse? I could go along with diffusing aquarium lights in a manner that simulates a cloudy day but not a complete blackout for 3 days.

What a terrible waste.

Well Mike, at least you managed to have the meeting in Texas. LOL

Are you saying you have an aiptasia in a bucket? Are you trying to isolate and kill it?

I removed an aiptasia from a rock in my tank awhile back. I tossed it into a bucket I use for water changes (aka dirty water bucket) and it managed to survive. When I dump the dirty water, often there's a little water left. I guess it was enough water to sustain the aiptasia. What I learned is that these things are very resilient and can survive in really terrible conditions. Eventually, I'll clean the bucket really good in the near future but I'm kind of waiting to see how long it can live. Morbid, isn't it?

I actually just started up a 1.5 gallon pico, i upgraded from my 12gallon nano.

sorry for the double post my old rickity computer

Far out...got any pics?

What brand/type are your T5 bulbs?

I guess the only way you could effectively end the debate is to use a PAR sensor to determine the penetration rate of a given set of T12 VHO and T5 HO lamps. It would be costly and time consuming but at least you'd know for sure. I think most bulb manufacturers give this information on the packaging but who knows how accurate it really is...

I bet the LFS here in town would do well with propagating Berghias and selling them. Most everyone gets aiptasia it seems. The stuff is hard to kill. I have one in a 5g bucket I use for water changes. It's been living in about 1/4" of nasty water for over 2 weeks and still isn't dead.

Very neat. I agree the trim should go. Looks like the stuff that bordered the simulated wood grain paneling in my folk's old living room. 70's swank! If you kept dwarfs in it, would you need a pump to circulate the water?

Mushrooms are weird like that. I find them in the most unusual places. It might have dislodged itself then carried up by a current then decided to hold onto the rock. But who knows...cool, nonetheless!

You could always draw stick figures of the fish and corals! How was Darby's?

I may be wrong but I was always under the impression that T12 doesn't put out as much light per watt than T5. If that's the case, you might get more heat and less light than with T5. But the link you gave shows a nice retro with individual reflectors. Might work out well for you but the trend seems to lean towards T5 these days.

If I crop the fish eye in the RAW format, it looks pretty cool. You can see how smooth its around the eye....cool texture, that's the best I can describe it.

I'd love to see that...maybe you can save it as a jpeg and show us whenever you have time?

Drool! Jake, can you find pom pom crabs very easily? If so, do you know how much they cost? I've been thinking of getting one in the next month or so...TIA!

Yes, it is really tricky shooting through glass. I too have noticed distortion if I deviate at an angle. Often, I think aquarium photography is a game of chance. By that I mean having your subject matter come into a desirable view, then having your light and aperture/fstop just right at that exact moment, and finally, having it all in focus. All these things and more come together in a photo that is above average.

Often, I'll bracket my shots so I can increase my chances of having a decent exposure. And of course, keeping the camera steady on a tripod, sometimes using an infrared remote control. I'm finding most of my pictures are bad because my camera is old, the lens is weak, and I'm usually unable to tell if I really have things in sharp focus. So I'll lean on photoshop to get things looking more how I see the subject matter with my eyes. My camera and I don't always agree.

I'll use these PS filters & routines often: Unsharp mask (when scaling down an image), Reduce noise (if my ISO speed is too high) and Shadows/Highlights (if my shot is under exposed). Sometimes I will jack up the saturation just a tad because I notice the "Save for web" jpeg compressor will desaturate my photos for some reason. Personally, I have no aversion to post-production touch ups with photos. I did all kinds of experiments in real dark rooms in the past so it's quite natural for me to carry on with digital tricks. Healing brushes, etc.

The ring light idea in the article is kind of interesting. Might be really useful for macro shots. Anyway, looking forward to more shots from you. I'm off to the Gallery to see your new stuff. Good luck capturing that perfect harlequin shot!

I found this great link that describes some inexpensive tricks you can use to enhance your photos. Relative to aquarium photography, I like the flash diffuser idea.

Visit Gizmodo's camera tricks on the cheap

LOL whenever someone says "rule of thumb" it reminds me of that great scene from the Boondock Saints.

Nice shot of the fish. It has very unusual eyes.

I have one. It started out as a lime green/yellow version. Very brilliant but later dulled to a tan color. I'm not particularly attached to it if you're interested in it. Under better lighting it might color back up.