PDA

View Full Version : SPS under 10K pics


hiepatitis
01/20/2008, 05:18 PM
Some people would argue that their SPS look better under higher kelvin bulbs but I've seen some really great colors under 10K in my buddy's tank. Anyone have pics to share?

Just Jim
01/20/2008, 05:35 PM
xm 10k before:



http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t215/jimang628/PICT0001.jpg




reeflux 12k after:


http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t215/jimang628/PICT0182.jpg



that should just about do it then, eh?

hiepatitis
01/20/2008, 06:52 PM
Have you seen the tank of the month? XM 10K with actinics. Amazing colors. This was grown under 10k Ushio with no supplementation.
http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb234/reeffragz/SPS04.jpg

Denadai
01/20/2008, 07:27 PM
2 x 400W XM 10K


http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/7233/color1gd3.jpg

http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/392/color2am1.jpg

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/5948/color3ic9.jpg

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/2639/color4cx9.jpg

Dave VG
01/20/2008, 07:41 PM
Denadai you have no lighting supplementation whatsoever.

Denadai
01/20/2008, 07:46 PM
I also have 2 x 54w T5 blue....but is so weak that I can´t see if the T5 is on or off

Dave VG
01/20/2008, 08:04 PM
Oh ok. I'm heading that way myself that is why I asked. Right now I run a 4 bulb t-5 setup. I have a duel MH 250 setup waiting in the wings with XM 10,000k bulbs. Guess I’ll add some actinic.

ycnibrc
01/21/2008, 10:37 AM
XM 10k give out different color with different ballast. Some will be very yellow some are not.

SunnyX
01/21/2008, 11:49 AM
I ran XM10k's for a while and then went with XM20k's for around 2 years. A month ago it was time to replace the bulbs again and i decided to go with the 400W XM10k's. My corals have responded very well and certain corals that were slow growers under the 20K are now growing almost before my eyes.

Here are a couple pics:


Older pic of my XM 10k's
http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/SunnyX_photo/FEB07.jpg

And here is a pic with XM 20K's

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/SunnyX_photo/DSC_0349.jpg

six.line
01/21/2008, 02:07 PM
Sunny, I almost prefer the 10K pic.

Was it a camera difference, or is the second pic really that much more blue?

Denadai
01/21/2008, 05:53 PM
20k is MUCH blue to my taste

bill-fit
01/21/2008, 11:52 PM
Sunny what ballast are the 10ks running on?

dadonoflaw
01/22/2008, 01:37 AM
thats what i like about this hobby. the difference in opinion. for me i could never go back to 10 k and the glow from the 20k pics makes the choice quite clear.

espenlg
01/22/2008, 06:02 AM
xm 10k before:
reeflux 12k after:
that should just about do it then, eh?
I see so many wicked picture here on RC that I just have to pitch in with a little comment;
When presenting picture as "evidence" you should really make sure that they are correct. I mean even a colorblind can see the whitebalance is totally off on your pictures.

Example:
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii20/espenlg/mod_PICT0182.jpg

Just make sure that grey is the same grey on both pictures when comparing them.. You see what I mean?

The difference is still there, but not as extreme as you like us to believe..

Same thing to you SunnyX; The two pictures you present here cannot be compared. The last one has much higher saturation then the first one. It's so extreme that you loose all credebility in my book..

jay24k
01/22/2008, 08:24 AM
You can't compare the way you are doing it. 10K and 20K is a COMPLETE different visual appearance. Same with reeflux and the 10K. I understand you are going by the rock but if a tank appears bluer, the coral is going to look different. Rock in a 20K tank is going to be more purple then in a 10K tank. So a picture is going to look different. Also some bulbs aka reeflux make blues pop so blue it is sickening. Definetly one of the most unique bulbs out there.

So when you see those high saturation photos, many times it is exactly what someone would see in real life regardless of white balance which you cannot compare UNLESS it is the same bulb setup in another persons tank.

Kip
01/22/2008, 09:40 AM
no comparison photos here.. .just a pic of my tank after TOTM when i'd rescaped and was running 400wEVC10k w/ 2x 140w vhos acts.... this is about the most happy with lighting and coloration i've been

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee69/Kip4130/FTS2-5-07.jpg

mcliffy2
01/22/2008, 09:47 AM
For PICTURE TAKING, 10k is the clear winner :) I like the way my XM 20k looks in person, but the pictures are hard to take, even after you correct the white balance they still seem too blue.

therman
01/22/2008, 09:49 AM
totally agree on reeflux 10ks...You can barely see any purple under the bulb because it makes them glow a very weird blue. I'm not a fan. The spectrum is still shifting after a couple months too, which sucks IMO...that's hardly a stable light source for corals.

So the short of it is that just because lamps are called 10k doesn't mean they are equal.

Ushio 10ks really seem to make the colors appear "real" (i'm a big fan of these) and not some weird purplish glow that would never occur in nature. Does anyone have any comments on Geisemann 14k's in comparison to Ushio 10k in terms of color rendition? I hear the Geisemanns are awesome bulbs too.

-Tim

LobsterOfJustice
01/22/2008, 10:22 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11658628#post11658628 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mcliffy2
For PICTURE TAKING, 10k is the clear winner :) I like the way my XM 20k looks in person, but the pictures are hard to take, even after you correct the white balance they still seem too blue.

Agree 100%

sniggir
01/22/2008, 10:27 AM
I my self love my reeflux 12k... I find the 20k way to blue, but my coral coloration has greatly increased since I switch from a Krystal star 11k to the reeflux 12k...I do like the coloration that I got from the XM 10k with my electronic balast it was more of a white blue color than yellow.

espenlg
01/22/2008, 10:53 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11658590#post11658590 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Kip
no comparison photos here.. .just a pic of my tank after TOTM when i'd rescaped and was running 400wEVC10k w/ 2x 140w vhos acts.... this is about the most happy with lighting and coloration i've been

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee69/Kip4130/FTS2-5-07.jpg

Now, this looks like natural colors to me. Very nice picture"

hagakure
01/22/2008, 11:09 AM
by jay24k
Also some bulbs aka reeflux make blues pop so blue it is sickening. Definetly one of the most unique bulbs out there

all shameful use of reeflux 10ks should be abolished:p

jay24k
01/22/2008, 08:46 PM
I like the bulb though but haven't had the guts to buy one yet.

Amphiprion
01/23/2008, 09:56 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11658590#post11658590 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Kip
no comparison photos here.. .just a pic of my tank after TOTM when i'd rescaped and was running 400wEVC10k w/ 2x 140w vhos acts.... this is about the most happy with lighting and coloration i've been

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee69/Kip4130/FTS2-5-07.jpg

I'd have to say that that kind of lighting color scheme has always been my preference. I do not like blue tanks for whatever reason.

SunnyX
01/23/2008, 11:45 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11657826#post11657826 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by espenlg
I see so many wicked picture here on RC that I just have to pitch in with a little comment;
When presenting picture as "evidence" you should really make sure that they are correct. I mean even a colorblind can see the whitebalance is totally off on your pictures.

Example:
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii20/espenlg/mod_PICT0182.jpg

Just make sure that grey is the same grey on both pictures when comparing them.. You see what I mean?

The difference is still there, but not as extreme as you like us to believe..

Same thing to you SunnyX; The two pictures you present here cannot be compared. The last one has much higher saturation then the first one. It's so extreme that you loose all credebility in my book..

I didn't know we were having a contest here. Both pictures I took were with two different cameras. I am by no means a photographer and can tell you that all colors in my tank are as accurate to the pictures as possible. Many people have been to my home and can attest to my tanks vivid coloration.

There is most difinatly a difference between 20K and 10K. Running them side by side the difference is unmistakable.

This here is an older pic with different lighting and no actinic. The 20K pic i posted above had 20K bulbs along with 480Watts of actinic.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/SunnyX_photo/full20K1.jpg

mcliffy2
01/23/2008, 01:45 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11668142#post11668142 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SunnyX
I didn't know we were having a contest here. Both pictures I took were with two different cameras. I am by no means a photographer and can tell you that all colors in my tank are as accurate to the pictures as possible. Many people have been to my home and can attest to my tanks vivid coloration.

There is most difinatly a difference between 20K and 10K. Running them side by side the difference is unmistakable.

This here is an older pic with different lighting and no actinic. The 20K pic i posted above had 20K bulbs along with 480Watts of actinic.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/SunnyX_photo/full20K1.jpg

your tank rocks no matter what photo you take of it.

I like the photo with 10ks better to be honest, but I'm guessing in person I'd go for the 20k look.

DT's_Reef
01/23/2008, 03:16 PM
I prefer lighting on the 10k-ish side if the tank is in super shape, with no algae issues.

Although blue lighting can provide some really neat looks on corals, I've had the best success obtaining intense coloration and growth from 10k-ish sources.

I'm currently using 2x250w Giesemann 14k bulbs.

The more blue the lighting scheme appears, the more it seems to "hide" undesirable algae.

phishlet
01/23/2008, 08:18 PM
DT's_Reef, I hesitate to even ask in this thread but do you have any pics of your tank with the Giesemann lamps? I've been an Ushio/AB 10k user for a long time and have always said I would try the Giesemann but the price tag has been holding me back.

DT's_Reef
01/30/2008, 11:28 AM
Phishlet, you can click on my gallery to see how different bulbs look, including the Geisemann 14k's.

I used a pair of AB 10k's years ago and other than they have a bit of a yellow look, my corals colored up fantastically under them. With the AB's, I really needed some strong true actinic to make it palatable.

ReefWreak
01/30/2008, 02:16 PM
I've been a big fan of 10k on my tank, but I also supplement actinic with 4x110w SuperActinc VHOs. The 10k really makes the pinks and purples pop out, where as I notice with 20k or other higher temp bulbs, the purple/blue tends to pop out. For example, my Superman Danae glows like crazy under the 10k, with a noticeable vividness brought to it, much more so than when I ran 14k bulbs. I guess it's all personal experience too though.

I don't think I would want to go to 20k, as it's just too blue. I did a side by side this past weekend with my 10k on one side and a Reeflux 12k on the other side, and though it was DEFINITELY more blue, I just didn't like the blue as much, especially when I've got the VHOs running.

If I remember later tonight I can post the 10k vs 12k pic over the same tank. you'll see how one is like baby-blue colored where as the other side is a nice pearly white. Colors pop very differently under the different lights too.

slobound
01/30/2008, 06:29 PM
I came from the other side of the world... I had 20K's and moved to XM 10K's. Still getting used to the color of the overall tank but I'm still able to get decent colors out of the 10K bulbs - no actinic at all.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v110/slobound/caps.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v110/slobound/gomezi1.jpg

Flatlander
01/30/2008, 06:41 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11669036#post11669036 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mcliffy2
your tank rocks no matter what photo you take of it.

I like the photo with 10ks better to be honest, but I'm guessing in person I'd go for the 20k look.

Agreed, on both counts. :)

adtravels
01/31/2008, 12:47 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11659075#post11659075 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by espenlg
Now, this looks like natural colors to me. Very nice picture"

Although I have never seen a purple regal tang b4:rollface:

Froggy
01/31/2008, 11:49 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11728722#post11728722 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by adtravels
Although I have never seen a purple regal tang b4:rollface:

:) Regals are notorious for photographing purple and not blue. That in no way is a reflection of the color representaion of the corals in the tank.

I am really a fan of the white light look of the tanks. I am sure the 20 K tanks look much better in person. Higher K bulbs are so hard to photograph.

ReefWreak
01/31/2008, 02:59 PM
Though it's not 20k, here is a comparison pic with a 250w Reeflux 12k bulb and the rest of the pics and other bulb are 250w XM 10k. The left side is run by a Coralvue electronic, which slightly overdrives the bulb compared to the right side, which is a new-style IceCap Electronic ballast, which is supposed to overdrive just a tiny bit, but it looks visually dimmer to me in pictures (you never notice when actually looking at the tank.

These pictures are also with NO VHO OR OTHER ACTINIC SUPPLEMENT. When I was installing my new LuminArc Minis, I ripped the VHO wiring harness, so the tank is without actinics for a while before I get home and fix it. The reflectors are Luminarc Minis that are not evenly positioned down, more are positioned towards the center by a very few degrees.

<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/EricDKlein/FTS/photo#5161743080413670066"><img src="http://lh5.google.com/EricDKlein/R6Ix-8njKrI/AAAAAAAAAUA/v8HS1bqYqvI/s400/DSC_0403.jpg" /></a>

<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/EricDKlein/FTS/photo#5161743235032492738"><img src="http://lh5.google.com/EricDKlein/R6IyH8njKsI/AAAAAAAAAUI/6H1tQd6esRc/s400/DSC_0409.JPG" /></a>

Sorry the glass was dirty on the second pic. it was a few hours after I just made about 70 frags for our upcoming frag swap.

TheCommersoni
02/07/2008, 03:13 AM
I personally like the actinic pop.

recife111
02/07/2008, 04:41 AM
Geisemann 14k's. are really bright , but i dont like them at all, they wash out all the colours. the Geisemann 14k's. and blv 14k seem to be the same bulb.

iwishtofish
02/07/2008, 05:59 AM
I would think that when taking pictures under different lighting, and if one has a tool as powerful as Photoshop, it probably makes sense to try to adjust each individual picture to match what it looks like to the naked eye under those conditions. This could include white balance, contrast, saturation, etc.

I know this can take considerable effort and time, but if one wants accurate input regarding comparison questions, it may be worth it.

I am kind of thinking out loud here before morning coffee kicks in fully, and by no means am I criticizing anyone's photography methods or intentions! Just wondering if this is the general consensus regarding photography - or not.

phishlet
02/07/2008, 08:35 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11785204#post11785204 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by recife111
Geisemann 14k's. are really bright , but i dont like them at all, they wash out all the colours. the Geisemann 14k's. and blv 14k seem to be the same bulb.

Really? I love the geisemann 14.5k and I don't think it washes out colors. I'm really pleased with the intensity and coloration. They look great with two actinic tubes for supplementation.

erendon
02/08/2008, 05:18 PM
I use Geisemann 14.5K's too. I also use the Geiseman Megachrome atinics as a supliment. My corals love it and the colors do stand out.