# Hau Coast: Final Photos



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

You may remember this lay out, and that it was originally called "Naupaka Coast." The HC that was supposed to represent Naupaka did not make it, so I filled the area, and you get "Hau Coast" (the hawaiian tree that the umbrossums are representing). 

Anyway, these are not really "final photos." I will continue taking photos of the tank all the way up until it has to be taken down (I return to Hawaii for winter break on Dec. 16). I will keep trying to get better and better photos for future contest use. But enough explanation, here are the photos:





































An overhead shot:










Close ups:

My Checkerboard Cichlids:





































Botia Sidthimunki  :



















Despite having botias, I still have a sizable snail population:



















It seems like the Spakling Gouramis show more interest :hihi: :




























M. Umbrossum Pearling:










Hope you enjoy the photos, and keep looking cause I may post more here as I take more photos.opy.jpg[/url]


----------



## Jdinh04 (Oct 7, 2004)

Nice tank there Steven, I think it looks better without the HC ... love the grassy feel to it, and your fish stock is amazing! Keep it up.


----------



## Sudi (Feb 3, 2005)

Nice setup!
I really like those fish, and the photo quality is just amazing (A+ work!)

Only thing that cought my attention is the fact that the set up goes from tall plants to sand without and intermediate plants, but it still looks very good, because the rocks make up for the intermediate level 

regards,
Matt


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Thanks for the feedback guys!

Jdihn-- I'm not sure which is better. They are different though. In a way, I feel the scape loses some of its creativity using sand (my concept of using the smallest foreground plant as a mid-ground plant was lost) but on the plus side, I got to try using the sticks as "debris" on the "beach" which is also cool I think . . . It certainly feels more open, but I can't help but wonder if I lost some "depth" with it.

Sudi-- This is a common gripe I have with tanks too. "lawn" infront of "wall of plants" is an issue a lot of people have. If I had HC, there would have been more continuation into the background. I think one of the issues is that the plants I have growing in the background ARE mid-ground plants. M. Umbrossum, e. tennellus, b. australis, r. rotundifolia "green" and even star grass could all be considered midground plants but in a tank of this size, IMO, work out as background. Especially since the original plan was to use HC as the predominant midground plant. One of the other issues was how tall the e. tenellus got. I had no idea! If I knew they were going to grow this tall, I'd have moved the b. australis to the midground and filled the back with e. tenellus!  

Well, i guess it can't be helped since I'm still inexperienced, and have never worked with a tank over 7g for a long duration before. This is my first time with almost all the plants except for stargrass and b. australis.


----------



## Fome (Oct 29, 2006)

beautiful

Tank specs please


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Sure Fome

Size: 60cm x 30cm x 36 standard, it's just an ADA 60cm
Light/schedule: 2x55 watt PC. I run 55 for 10 hours, and 110 for the middle 4-5.
Filtration: Eheim 2213
CO2: 2bps (about)
Ferts: I'm dosing dry ferts, nothing special except no Excel since it seems B. australis is really sensitive to it and melts. In fact, even though I started half and half, the bushes are almost all umbrossum because I lost a lot of australis to excel.
Materials: Aquasoil, Lava Rock, River Twigs, and I switched from Bright Sand to Nile Sand. I wanted a cooler look. If you hunt down the construction thread, you'll find that the structural integrity of the lay out has nothing to do with the "inlet" at the front of the foreground.


----------



## wiste (Feb 10, 2006)

How did you arrive at the sand distribution pattern on the rocks?
Is this based on a photo or sand placed on the rocks and partially blown off with water current, etc.?


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

I used a small tupperwear to pour in the sand and aside from controlling how much sand went in general areas, I basically let it fall wherever including on the rocks. I then evened out the sand in its areas, and brushed off the excess from the rockwork.

What I was trying to do was just have enough sand on the rocks so that it would look natural (at the beach, the rocks are usually not pristinely un-sand-covered) and highlight the character of the rocks. If there's sand in the grooves etc., you will have contrast, and show better the texture of the rocks.


----------



## dennis (Mar 1, 2004)

I'm not so sure about the sand thing. The sand on the rocks was the first ting I really noticed (dialup sucks) and I found it to be a bit distracting. A little may be ok but I think there is too much "accent" in this case. Also, to my eye I see the size of the sand grains in comparison to the rock, which makes everything look smaller. I would clean off most of that sand especially on the two rocks touching the front glass. Very distracting.

Other thank that I like this tank. Kudos! It seems about done when the stargrass and bacopa in the back get about .5-1" taller. The E tennelus works very well, IMO and I think it is more effective in this tank than if you had used it strictly as a background plant. Something about the very vertical stick in the moddle of the right mound is not right. Its just too straight and linear. Also, loose the 3 sprigs of HC

My last comment would be to try for more depth of focus in the photo itself. The front is clear but the background is a bit out of focus. I am not a photographer so I can't advise how to do that but a higher f-stop may help. What kind of camera do you have?


----------



## turtlehead (Nov 27, 2004)

Nice little twist to the scape, nice job. You always have you own special touch to your scapes steven, that's great. Still a photgraphy noob like me?  Going to that Scape meeting this saturday before you leave?


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Thanks for the feedback Dennis. I'm suprised how many people talk about the sand on the rocks! This was a concious decision on my part, and one made for the sake of innovation and "natural" feel. On one hand, a lot of people have commented about it in a somewhat negative sense, but on the other hand, I can't help but wonder if it's a bias resulting from ADA's (IMO) over-neatness with sand.

Dennis, what do you mean by "small"? Do you mean the rock-work looks small or the whole scape? I was of the mind that, for a 60cm tank (of course the only comparison I have readily available are photos from Aquajournals etc.) this tank felt very big. If the rockwork feels small, than that's good-- it means that the whole tank feels big, right?

I guess it can't be helped. When it comes to me, I'd probably always choose innovation and my own sense over conforming for the sake of being liked by judges. On the other hand, I will definitely _take_ photos of the tank without sand on the rocks just to see what it looks like.

As for the HC, my American Flags ripped it out again. It's just not meant to be. XD

I'm using the EOS 10D. The aperature was at 4.5 so it was the very lowest setting. I'll try it higher. I did take some at 5.6 and 6.1. See if I like the photo with a clearer or blurrier (is that a word?) background.


----------



## SUBORPHAN (Apr 20, 2006)

very nice tank as usual Steven. by the way how many M. Umbrossum plants have you planted in the left hand side corner?


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

I wouldn't be able to say dude. There's a lot of 'em. The overhead I think give a better idea of the umber of stems in the back than the front shots do as the e. tenellus is really monstrous!


----------



## dennis (Mar 1, 2004)

Re: sand,

In some ways-places- it works. In others it does not. For example, the bing rock on the left has sand on top. To me that looks very natural and helps to emphasize the rock and its position. What I have trouble with are the smaller rocks with individual grains of sand. It looks messy but more importantly, since I have a general idea how big a sand gain is, I know that that rock must be a certain size. In this case it makes the rock look small and that smallness actually serves to separate the rock, at least to me. I think the sand on top of the larger rocks keeps them from getting lost in the shadows of the plants, which is good; however, it distracts from the smaller ones which should be "accents" anyway. 

The tank does look big and it has a lot of depth. Nice job there!


----------



## gf225 (Mar 26, 2005)

Hi Steven,

I love this aquascape! The scale is excellent IMHO and I think it looks more like a tall 90cm.

I also really like the sand on the rock, an innovation that works very well and appeals to my personal sense of "nature".

The plant choice works really well and compliments the fish selection to create a wonderful overall balance.

All this topped with your excellent photography adds up to a very nice display of skill and talent. I'm finding it hard to find fault, as much as I would like to give you a critique.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Dennis, I fixed some issues with the sand line in regard to the rock touching the glass on the right side. I also see where you are coming from with the sand on the smaller rocks. I will try adjusting it on the smaller rocks so individual grains are not as visible, and take more pictures to see if it improves the look. Right now, it's a good time to try all these little variations to see which ones work better. Plenty of time to try them out even with only 2 weeks left.

Oh and thanks for taking the time to go into such detailed specifics to explain your thoughts to me! It's really helpful! Dial-Up sucks. 

George, positive feedback is feedback too. Knowing you like it and why is very helpful. Thanks


----------



## Moody (Sep 14, 2006)

Hi Steven,

Im not sure about your design.There is no real sence of depth or shape which is a great shame. I haven't seen the coast line you are refuring to but to me it looks like a grassy bank on the edge of a river. Last time i saw your design it was with the HC and it looked like it had real potential its a pitty you cant grow HC.

I think the main things my eye picks up on is that the design is flat and you are greeted with a flat wall of plants that are very similar in color, shape and size.
So there is no curves, lead in lines nor focal points.

On the other hand its wild and earthy with a good compliment of fish and snails, I also like your sand idea. *There is beauty in imperfection!!!*" WABI SABI".

Regards,
Graeme.


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

Steven,

It's definitely an eye-pleasing scape. I agree with Moody's comments about it being wild and earthy. You might get more depth/definition if you opened up/thinned out the middle alittle to expose more of the big rock in the midscape. Didn't you mention the importance of the big rock in your intial setup?


----------



## Moody (Sep 14, 2006)

Agreed.
Thin the plants in the middle to draw the eye through and define your stem plants some what buy carful trimming.

R,
Graeme.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Thanks for the help.

Let me sort it out so I can understand it, and tell me if this sounds what you meant:

Moody:
-The design may be a complete failure (design is questionable?)
-It has no depth or shape
-Looks like a grassy river edge
-I have no ability to grow HC (which is not the whole truth but . . .)
-The lay out is flat, with no variation of shape
-Plant choices have are all too similar
-There is the sense of natural disorder.

House of Cards:
-It is a visually pleasing scape.
-The Main Rock is not expressed enough.
-Ultimately, some more careful trimming should be tried.


Hmm . . . :-k 

Moody:

Well, I don't have much to say about the scape being a failure or having no depth or shape, because I'm not quite sure I understand those assertions. I am not seeing the same thing in that regard because I see both a very beautiful scape that does have a lot of size and depth.

Looks like a grassy river edge . . . there is definitely a problem here about the author's memories not being expressed to the viewer. My opinion, a strong scape should be able to take a viewer places but it may be inevitable that the viewer's memories will be stronger.

I think it's a bit much to assert that I "can't grow HC." I can. I just had an accident half-way along, and wasn't able to fill it back up again in time.

I don't quite understand the statement that scape is flat or monotonous since I see a lot of visual complexity. It may just come down to opinion and varied thoughts on what "high visual complexity" is. 

In regard to the plants being of similar shape/color/etc., doesn't that make sense? After all, the plants are all living together on the beach, and enduring the same salt-air and salt-water conditions, so that many evolve into the same shapes and patterns. I could spend all day trying to sort through the number of different round or oval shaped green species growing on the shore line in Hawaii. The answer to your question is that for my vision, the plant choices are pretty much the best possible.

I am glad that you sense a natural disorder, though it interests me because I never thought of this lay-out having "wabi-sabi" which is more of a Japanese visual taste. :-k 

House of Cards:

Glad you find it pleasing.

I said it at the start-- this is not an iwagumi. The rocks are here to build up the structure of my vision and for that regard, I'm not trying to bring attention to the "main rock."

However, I will try taking some photos with it more exposed to see if that is an improvement.


Thanks all for your responses! I hope I understood them . . . I'm pretty stupid after all.  

In any case, I have great interest in finding what others have to say in regard to these issues. I kind of have an understanding of what's being said, and it's very interesting. :-k


----------



## Moody (Sep 14, 2006)

Hi Steven, i feel as though you may have taken my critique to heart, all most as if you don't like what i say.



> The design may be a complete failure


That is something i was not referring, you miss read what i was saying.



> Well, I don't have much to say about the scape being a failure or having no depth or shape, because I'm not quite sure I understand those assertions. I am not seeing the same thing in that regard because I see both a very beautiful scape that does have a lot of size and depth.


Here is what i think about your design regards shape and depth.
Here is a picture of your tank.


First the red area. This is the biggest point of critique. IMO i think removing these plants will give your design more shape ( note the yellow ), a point of focus and will get the viewers eyes swinging from right to left but always going back to the Central point in the effort to get drawn in and see past the the for ground arangment.
The green areas are to show that i think buy defining your stem plants it will give a greater sense of depth.
The blue is representing my initial thought of a flat wall of plants. To me it may benefit from having a plant that bridges the gap from rock to tall grass!



> I think it's a bit much to assert that I "can't grow HC." I can. I just had an accident half-way along, and wasn't able to fill it back up again in time.


A passing comment that i sympathized with you!



> I don't quite understand the statement that scape is flat or monotonous since I see a lot of visual complexity. It may just come down to opinion and varied thoughts on what "high visual complexity" is


This may just be the photograph, or it could be how i see things. This result may been by design, I am mealy pointing out what I see.



> In regard to the plants being of similar shape/color/etc., doesn't that make sense?


It sure does make sense. Thats what I love about nature.



> After all, the plants are all living together on the beach, and enduring the same salt-air and salt-water conditions,


This is clearly what you see. I see a mix of plants at a grassy river bank.



> I could spend all day trying to sort through the number of different round or oval shaped green species growing on the shore line in Hawaii. The answer to your question is that for my vision, the plant choices are pretty much the best possible.


Again this could be because of how i see it...... Photography etc. I cant see much of your stem plants ,which is generally where we will get contrast in our designs.As for the plants are right for the representation of the Hawaiian coast you refer to. I really cant comment. I see something els.

With your photography. Try using an aperture of around 10-12 and an ISO of 100, you may need to use a tripod ( slower shutter speeds will be needed ) this may help give a clearer picture for the rear as well as the for ground.

Kind regards,
Graeme.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

To start off, let me say as to not be mistaken, that I was not offended by anything said, nor upset or emotional. That is not the purpose-- the purpose is for me to interpret all the information I can get from others and use it as best as possible whether I change my decisions or not.

It sounds to me that the main problems involved result from a difference of experiences-- essentially, my work is unable to take the viewer to the place that I want to take them to. Similarly, Justin Law's "Walking Aoyama" has a strong impact on me because of it's similarities to some parts of Hawai'i. In fact, I preferred that lay out strongly over any of his others.

This is a complicated problem that I will have to deliberate over more. In the end, it might not be possible to effectively bring the viewer to a place he's never been before.

I also believe I am able to understand your points about the shape of the tank. However, I am sure you are aware that altering the shape of grassy plants like E. tenellus is not a simple task-- especially considering the remaining time constraints.

Nor am I certain that I would alter it if I could. I have some other reasons but . . . well, I have to get to my Morality and Religion class. I will respond more in depth later.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Having given a bit more time to digest-- I've made some decisions.

Actually, it's crazy but-- I think hacking out the red area is actually possible! After looking at the shapes of tenellus more closely, and considering my own ideas about Moody's suggestion . . . I think it's not only possible, but a very good idea to try!

Regarding the right side tenllus-- AT first I was concerned by that "wall" issue myself but . . . I think it actually works. Not only that, but that there's really nothing I can do about it. XD

I've made some changes to the sand distribution, and added a small school of emerald eye rasbora.

I'll take photos again tomorrow morning. Then, after the shoot, I'll make an attempt to hack out the back layer of plants in the red area, making the top of that area defined by the shortest e. tenellus closes to the front. Then I'll take another photo shoot on sunday.

I've also bought some aquatic-form ludwigia arcuata-- I was at the shop today buying my rasboras and they had quite a few bunches. I thought to myself: "What the hell-- it's better to have photos of all the variations than to not have them whatever one I decide is the best."

It may be dirty to stick high-light plants in at the end and take photos, but I'll do it anyway. I'm not above it.

Moody-- I just want to say that this advice has been a great help, since I'm actually deciding to act on it.

Trying these types of crazy last-minute schemes is all new to me-- but I'd rather take some risks than not try. That's the way an artist learns too.


----------



## Moody (Sep 14, 2006)

Thats great to hear Steven.

The ludwigia potentially could be a permanent feature so i wouldn't worry about its late arrival.

I'm glad that my advice may have helped you in some way, and i look forward to seeing you progress.

Regards,
Graeme.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Photo Set 2:










+ Arcuata:










This after noon (after the scape meeting), I'm going to hack back the "red" area and then take photos again tomorrow.


----------



## gf225 (Mar 26, 2005)

Man, I'm in a little bit of shock in that a fellow Englishman has critiqued so well. Only kidding Graeme (Moody)!

Looking even better Steven. I'm glad Moody helped, he's good eh!?

What light are you running BTW? I grew arcuata (slowly) with 2wpg.

I think the arcuata may look very good once it's matured a litte.

I look forward to more shots mate.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

George, I got 110 watts-- basically over 6wpg during the high lighting period.

Anyway, it's not like I got time to develop the ludwigia arcuata (nor do I really want to-- it's just for experimenting).

Here are the set 3 photos:










+ Arcuata










As you can see for the arcuata, I'm just sticking them in the umbrossums where they might look good. They're too short anyway. I think + arcuata definitely has much more of an Amano-esque feel to it . . . but I just don't sit well with it.


----------



## turtlehead (Nov 27, 2004)

Arcuata for sure, good job on thinning out the e. tenellus, now there is depth to the tank and it's not as messy, but your style is still there. Great. I like it. Maybe a trim on the left wouldn't hurt. It would make the red stand out a little more and not hidden. And maybe some e. tenellus in front of the left bunch like the right wouldn't hurt too, just not too much e tenellus there.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Thanks for the feedback John. There probably is enough time for 1 trim and wait for re-grow.

For me, I really dislike the arcuata version. It just doesn't feel right no matter how I look at it. It's not even that the plant is immature-- just that it's just so so so so SO wrong to see a plant like that in this landscape. It's just "stuck in to look pretty." It's just being subjegated to Amano's defined styles. I really do hate it-- that alone feels like a true heteronomous subjegation of my will to an outside force.

I'm just doing it to see what it looks like. For contests, and for myself, the green-only version will ALWAYS be the true version of this aquascape. Ultimately, that is my automonous decision. 

I'm glad you enjoy the arcuata version though. I realize it might be impossible to give people my memories of Hawaii. That's a sad truth, but I'm glad that I can still give you a scape that you enjoy looking at.


----------



## turtlehead (Nov 27, 2004)

Hey it's your tank, go for what you think is best. You decision is the ultimate decision anyway, still a great scape, faved. haha.


----------



## DJKronik57 (Apr 17, 2006)

Wow, much better after the "red" part was trimmed back. It creates a whole "mystery" element (wanting to see what's through the dip) that didn't exist before and makes the tank look larger by eliminating the wall of plants. I do like the version with the arcuata, it adds contrast both in color and leaf shape. I agree with Dennis about the sand on the rocks though. If you think about it, these are supposed to be boulder sized rocks. So the sand is the equivalent of having gravel all over the rocks, which isn't very natural, unless there's just been a big storm. That's why it looks a little awkward to me. With the trimming, you also focus a lot more on the foreground, and it helps create depth without the HC. It's a great little aquascape, and I think you should be proud!


----------



## gacp (Sep 11, 2006)

Man, I just have to say *how much* I love your little tank.

While not wholy new to aquascaping (I got a prize as a teen at a local show ca. 20 years ago!), I came back in earnest only recently. I've seen a lot, in many styles, and I am rather pleased as how my own tank is coming along (69x40x25cm Amazonian creek; no photos  ), and I've probably seen most by Amano-san and admire his work greately, I just love _your_ creation. It's so simple, simply beatiful. You can be proud of it, and I hope you get the awards you deserve.

I love the _D. filamentosus_. I have planned to get some myself for my tank, but never could so I compromised and added a trio of _A. trifasciata_--- wrong river, but close enough, and gourgeus critters


----------



## turtlehead (Nov 27, 2004)

The sand is Steven's twist, I like it. It's pretty original in my opinion. Half river bottom and half nature. Good.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Thanks for the feedback. I'm also glad I decided to take the initiative to give moody's advice a try. To be honest I think the main thing that kept me from seeing it before was that I was scared to mess with it that much but getting feedback from an outside force let me find the thinking and guts to give it a shot! 

DKronik57-- I'm never going to be an Amano-clone scapist. It's pretty apparent that I somewhat affiliate with the more Japanese/Nature style but . . . whether it's sand on the rocks, or out right refusal to use red plants that don't belong there . . . "ADA Style" is just not me. If that's what you want to see, I'd pick up a Aquajournal (or for that matter a 2006 contest book and look at the first few top rankers). I'm always going to be the kind to be about breaking rules and rocking the boat-- that's just my personality. :lol: Thanks for your opinion though. Good to know.

gacp-- Thanks man! Dicrossus are cool, but not as cool as those tank dimensions. 69 x 40 x 25? Lots of depth-- that's just cool! I'm also going to be getting a new tank with depth next semester (12"x12"x8"). Really looking forward to it!

Turtlehead-- thanks for chiming in about the sand on the rocks . So far, I've gotten about a 50/50 split on opinions about it I think.


----------



## Dewmazz (Sep 6, 2005)

VERY NICE! Great work Steve. It does remind me a lot of Hawaiian coastline. Get some Opae!


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Dewmazz! How are you doing bra? Thanks for the imput-- doubly valuable from a fellow local who knows what I'm going at.

(Please back me up and explain how there are no spiky red thin-leaved plants poking out of the Hau and Mangrove trees on the beach) Just kidding :yawinkle:

Next semester I'm going to send myself a bunch of the wild neocaridinas but I couldn't get any this semester (my buddies too lazy to send them *roll eyes*)


----------



## turtlehead (Nov 27, 2004)

Good that you are very adamant about your "own style". Makes we want to redo my tanks making it not as Amano-like. Stop Steven STOP!! I was planning a rescape on all my tanks around spring break anyway.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Good! I'm getting John off his back-side and making him show us more tanks.  X3


----------



## standoyo (Aug 25, 2005)

Hi Steven,

A very good effort and I think it's probably not easy for some of us to relate it to something as big as a coast because of the immense scale shrinking to be done in the mind.
I think you've done well to take in the suggestions.
As for me adding to it...er, I thought that the success of you growing HC would have helped the sense of scale to the scape with its smaller leaves.

For the record, I find B japonica blah as it doesn't look good in my photos, not helped by the fact it's weedy! It's just a personal dislike for the time being! Originally I thought the hardscape layout with the wood branches looked good but I thought it's a pity the B Japonica has covered the nice knots and kinks in the wood.

Finer 'topping' for the sand would also be nice to contrast with the rocks.
I thought punching a hole thru the middle made the layout dynamic in terms of perspective and depth.

Lastly I respect your creative vision and resistance to conform!


----------



## gregorsamsa (Jan 19, 2005)

i agree with stan pertaining to the blyxa japonica. before yuo made the trim in the middle, the overall scape looked really monotonous and without depth.

after the trimming, there is some sense of perspective. i think you can work on that. either that or you could restart your whole set up keeping these lessons in mind. cheers


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

Steven,

I like it alot better with the mid-area thinned out alittle. Seems other's have agreed as well with this prospective. It might also be a matter of light. If more light is available to that mid-area it could probably be kept thicker since the eye would pick up more of the little elements you have going.


----------



## Craig Tarvin (Jul 26, 2005)

The tank looks great with the new trim job Steven.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Stan-- There's no Blyxa, that's e. tenellus. Thanks for the helpful imput. In the future though, I'd appreciate if you don't speak for others with phrases such as "not easy for some of us to relate." I'm more interested in just you-- and want to hear other opinions from individuals as well.

Greg-- There will be no restart on this layout-- at least not for years to come. I'm moving on next semester. This is just the start of my serious scaping.

House-- I know what you mean. Looking at some of my earlier photos (like from the 3 wk photoshoot) I had the midground a lot brighter. It's just a matter of playing with it in photoshop some more. I made only slight modifications to these versions from the original photos.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Craig-- Thanks. I'm glad I was able to use my feedback as well as I did. It tells me I'm growing up more as an artist.

BTW all-- This will be the last photo you see of Hau Coast with l. arcuata. I'm tossing the plants today. They won't live if I leave them in a bucket until the shooting in a couple weeks, and I can't stand seeing them in the tank everyday. So, I hope you arcuata fans got your fix with these photos.


----------



## slickwillislim (Oct 11, 2005)

You Couldn't have decided you didn't like the arcuata before the last scape meeting. 

I have to agree with house I can't really get past the darkness in the front and midground. It also adds to the wall effect that was noticable before you trimmed the "red" section. The lighting also makes it very difficult to discern the fish. If you hadn't posted earlier pictures I would have no idea what they where. 

I think the sand on the rocks is a little excessive, it looks almost poured, on not natural at all. I think a light dusting off of some of the rocks would do wonders. I like the idea of a sand foreground but when its on the rocks to that extent it stands out to me in bad way. 

I know you are trying to not conform to amano... but I like the red that that the arcuata brings, it brightens the whole tank. The uniformity of the plant colors makes it a little dull, imo. I think if the tennellus could be reddened up a bit it might have a similar effect without having to have the Arcuata or any red stem. I know you won't keep the arcuata but I thought I would share my opinion.

In general I am just nitpicking. I reallly like the growth of the tennellus very bushy and wild looking. It seems like a wilder version of blyxa when it gets as dense as you have it. I understand how some people got confused. I say this is a job well done. I admire your determination in the face of a time limit. Its a shame we wont be able to see it again and you won't be able to enjoy it much longer. I wish you luck on your next tank, I can't wait to see what you come up with.

Edit: I forgot to mention the background. I really like the white with the light bouncing off it combined with the blow dryer it adds a lot to the tank.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Slick: Thanks for the feedback.

Just for your info, the picture with the arcuata is actually quite a bit brighter mid-tone wise-- it's not just the arcuata doing that. 

BTW-- that photo is also just lucky to have better fish distribution.

Well, you're wish is my command-- let there be light:










Photo-shop is love!! eace:

For all of you un-photo experienced, a darker, under-exposed photo is always better than an over-exposed one because the details will still be captured by the camera.


----------



## Troy McClure (Aug 3, 2005)

I hope this isn't a hijack, but I'm always curious about Photoshop...what did you do, Stephen?


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

I did a number of things:

-I combined the two photos so that the fish from the arcuata photo would be in the non-arcuata photo. That was pretty simple-- a cut and paste job with selective erasing, and then adjusting the colors so that the two layers would match, then flatten the image.

-I decreased the darkness of the shadows using the shadow/highlight tool. I could have brightened up the mid-ground even more if I wanted to. The detail is all there. The problem is noise. Too much noise to brighten it well-- especially in the full sized version. I might try this again, and then just blurr the photo a bit with a filter to eliminate some noise.

-I lowered overall saturation of the photo

-I changed quite a few things about the over-all color scheme. Increased green in the midtow, I boosted yellow a bit in the high-lights, and increased blue in the shadows.

-I also slightly upped contrast to balance out the brightened shadows. This photo has a higher f-stop and ISO than my originals, so in exchange for the increased detail, the noise got worse. A darkened shadow was necessary to hide some of the noise.

I was trying to get a similar dream-like feel as my original photo, but with the increased amount of contrast inside the photo and added noise, it just wasn't possible to do. I'm not sure if that's bad because the original photo might have been too dream-like in comparison with a real coastline.


----------



## ranmasatome (Aug 5, 2005)

Steven... nice to see one of your scapes again.. i have always enjoyed them..
Keep up the great scaping and sketches..


----------



## Mellonman (Nov 2, 2005)

Great-looking simple natural tank...

Is it on purpose that you left some sand on the stones ?


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

-thanks ranma!

-thanks mellon! sure is-- we've been having a big debate on that as well as some other things.


----------



## ranmasatome (Aug 5, 2005)

some other things?? you mean theres more??? kekeke


----------



## schaadrak (Aug 18, 2006)

Excellent job, Steven. Extremely nice layout.

I like the sand on the rocks, but only where it pools together in the dips and crevices. The individual grains are rather distracting. I would also like to see more of the driftwood on the right, but I'm not sure that could be done without losing some of the bushiness of the e. tennellus.

Bravo, man. Bravo.:clap2:


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

schaadrak-- Thanks for the imput! really, the sand doesn't bother me too much because that's also something easily fixed in photoshop.


----------

