Crossing the lines.... Photo Editing, Lighting, Backround color etc.....

Yes, this is a touchy topic but I feel it should be addressed. There are a lot of camera's out there that tend to favor red more then other camera's as well as different modes on a camera that may make color's appear more bold. Ive seen hundred's of photo's where the white backround isn't even white but rather a light shade of orange. Theres a lot of pictures that are taken with a highly contrasting backround towards a gecko in order to add emphasis to a geckos color (ie. tangerines with green/black backround, snows with blue, etc....). Then theres even other things like taking pictures of blizzards while in shed to make them seem more white. Should a line be drawn???? Im not insinuating anyone of anything but with so many different ways to make a gecko look better then how they really look, Im suprised to see why there isnt some type of regulation set that was universal to the gecko community in order to regulate misrepresentation. One way to objectively represent a gecko is by showing a picture next to crayons which I've seen people do often. What are your thoughts on this topic???

Like anything that people try and regulate I believe that this would be very tough to enforce and violations would only be reported by a certain number of people.
Misrepresentation of coloration should be a serious thing especially in sales of Leos as the color usually defines the morph.
I have an old camera that I notice sometimes does add a bit of red tint (not always-mysteriously enough) to some of my pics. But I do usually check the white paper towel color to make sure that it appears to still be white.
Now I am talking about photos that i take for personal use- I have not yet been in the position to sell/trade any Leos and use these pics to represent them.
I would personally be very careful in posting pics under those circumstances as to represent a Leos true colors and/or state that the pic does exaggerate certain hues and tints and that this is the only camera that I have to use.
Reputation is everything in this business aspect of the hobby as it is in any business -whether it be a hobbyist just trying to sell some extra offspring or a full fledged breeder for profit and I still believe that word of mouth through forums such as this can make or break the ability to sell Leos as it would any other merchandise.
I do not think that using a certain color of background to show off a Leos coloration is an objectionable practice
However I do feel conditions such as a Blizzard or a ghost morph in shed should always be stated along with the pic in the ad simply because the pale aspect of the animal is desirable.
Any kind of fraud is always a bad thing that will eventually lead to a bad reputation by the seller and the consequences will be that people will tend not to buy/bid on their animals.
I would like to think that most people are honest-call me naive but I tend to give most people the benefit of the doubt-LOL!!
Sandy

The only way to address this problem is to leave feedback. If people buy something based on how the picture looks and then get something that looks different, they should probably mention it in the feedback.

Matt

I think there already is a line... however it's a very gray, very blurry line.

Personally:
- Taking pictures of an animal in shed in order to make it look better is wrong
- Taking pictures against different color backgrounds is OK, as long as the gecko in the picture (ignoring the background) accurately represents the color of the gecko in person under normal lighting.
- The use of colored lights is always wrong (AAA's blue blizzards for example)
- I like the idea of using crayons/sharpies/ect in the pictures to help prove the color is valid.

I see Garrick DeMeyer is working on this issue as well (see his hypos page). He's got a few pics of each leo under different lighting situations.

Basically, I think that as long as the geckos looks like the one in the picture (or close enough given certain lighting situations), I'm alright with the picture. I don't think there's really ANY way to police it, but as long as we keep using the BOI and the feedback systems we currently have available, people should stay in check. Reputation is bar far the biggest asset to anyone in this business. You can throw tons of money at reptiles and a nice store, but if you ever want to deal with higher end herps, you need to keep a good reputation, and that should be enough to keep people honest about their pictures.

for backgrounds with me pictures. I try to use natural light. The color of the fabric (usually blue, purple or black) does help the colors "pop". I don't think it misrepresents the animal. However, using photoshop is a huge no-no. I know i took 2 pics of the same ball python and they looked like different snakes. The pictures were taken outside within about 1 minute of each other. In one pic it was bright and sunny and then a cloud passed. I will try to dig those up and post them. Lighting does do some funny things!

Unfortunately there is no way to regulate the way an individual represents their animals. I believe that as responsible breeders, we must do our best to try to accurately depict the animal. I will personally never edit a photo for any purpose other than to add a watermark and for size. Some people feel that the only way to get the true colors of an animal is to edit the picture manually. I do not know where the line should be drawn in reference to color and lighting editing so I choose to not edit at all. I almost always try to use something (such as the sharpies) for size and color reference. I take most of my pictures in my reptile room under incandecent(normal bulbs) lighting (most buyers will be viewing the animal in the same conditions). I do my best to be able to represent my animals as they would look if they showed up at your house. I would rather have someone say that the animal looks better in person than to be disapointed. I expect the same of any animals that I see pictures of before I were to recieve them.


Robert this is a good topic, I feel that most of the people that frequent this board would always do their best to represent their animals honestly. I personally have a pretty short list of people that I would purchase animals from. All of them frequent this board.

Great topic! You are right, I think there are just too many factors involved when taking photos to try and set standards. Different cameras, different backgrounds, different computer monitors, different lighting, etc. I have even noticed that many photos posted here on this forum with it's light green background appear to have a 'pinkish' cast.

I think the whole spectral aspect of taking photos is the key element here. Incandescent lighting tends to be more yellow, fluorescent can give a pinkish-purple cast, aquarium lighting can turn things blue, and Ro's photo comparison of natural sunlight vs. overcast shows an excellent example of how the color of a subject is affected.

Background and contrast color has a direct influence on how things look. Ever notice how some folks just look great in red? Well, I am a redhead, and if I wear certain tone of red, it makes my hair look orange! We need to use complimentary colors to enhance the natural color of a subject. Yellow looks best against a purple background, orange on blue, red on green, etc. Using a black background does make things 'pop' out, and a white background will reflect light making the subject appear brighter.

I agree with Matt that the only way we can police this issue is to leave feedback if we receive an animal that was inaccurately depicted in it's photo... whether intentional or not. I also like the idea of using red, orange, and yellow crayons or sharpies as a great way to compare warm tones.

I haven’t seen too much of this lately. Several years ago it was a big issue. Sandy brings up a great point about reputation. A lot of people (including myself) are trying to build up a reputation and trust with our fellow peers. If someone buys an animal from us and it’s better than the picture, they now have trust in us and the word spreads. Without a reputation we’re nothing.

One thing I’ve really noticed is what kind of PC does the person have? Advanced graphic cards and monitors improve photos drastically. When I view pics on my computer I think wow that’s gorgeous. Then I go to school and use there graphics computers (better graphic cards and monitors) and I’m amazed at the difference in the photo. Pictures with different backgrounds and lighting all look better.

All in all I think there’s too much at stake for someone to be screwing with there photos. If they get caught they’ll loose the trust from everyone else and will have a bad reputation.

Lately I've been using a gray background more because the colors seem to be more accurate in most photos. So many times the animal sits still long enough for a good pose only to have the color wash out. I also hold the animal up to the screen to compare color before posting, lots of deletes and try again. The crayons are not a bad idea at all. Roy G. Biv