ShadowAceD
Lagniappe Exotics
This thread is about more than just altered images of boas, it is also about the lies that this man keeps spewing forth. I am about fed up with it as I am sure many others are.
I will present all my evidence here while leaving this BOI as an Information Thread so that all who read it can decide for themselves.
On 03 April 2011, Mr. Taracena posted a new thread in the "Boa Discussion Forum" to inform the community that his Salmon Het. Albino Boa gave birth to a litter of possible super hypos, possible super hypos DH Sunglow and normals het. albino the day before.
He posted numerous pictures of the litter, three of which are the very reason I have started this thread:
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=236342
There were three animals (two possible sunglows and an albino) that supposedly came from this litter looking "sunburnt". He posted their images and immediately red flags went up in my head and the head of others, but no one made mention of it. I was content not to until it came to my attention that Mr. Taracena had put up an advertisement in order to sell off the possible super hypo DH sunglows from the clutch while using photos of these "sunburnt" animals to imply that all of these offspring hold the potential for these insane looking animals.
If anyone implies they wish to purchase on of these "sunburnt" animals, his response is that he is going to hold onto them for at least six months to see if the color intensifies or dulls.
The ad can be found here:
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237013&highlight=luis
I decided to take some time out of my day to look at all the images he offered. The first thing I noticed was that the image size was incredibly small but the resolution was huge, in the art world, this is typically done to avoid content theft as magnification is incredibly difficult without severe distortion. However, it is not in possible. The second and third things I noticed was that I was able to find the "sunburnt" animals in multiple pictures he posted without that coloration before they were posted as "sunburnt". The EXIF data shows on the camera that he took the pictures on 01 April 2011 a mere two hours apart, so the odds of them gaining such coloration, especially since they had not shed just seems next to impossible. So ... to prove this, I put the photos side by side and began marking out the points of familiarity in the animals that show there is no doubt they are one in the same.
These are those references:
The animal I cropped this picture to represent was the one that I have confirmed is the supposed sun burnt looking Sunglow. As you can see, I have pointed out numerous points of familiarity to provide evidence that these boas are, in fact, one in the same. How this animal acquired such coloration ina 24 hour period is beyond me.
Same Animal:
Next, I have cropped the picture once again to represent yet another animal that I have confirmed to be the second sun burnt looking sunglow. Again, I have provided points of familiarity to show evidence that these boas are, in fact, one in the same.
Once again, I did this with the albino. This one was a bit more difficult due to the fairly bland pattern, but the tail pattern is identical and evidence enough.
Initially, my belief was that he was using Photoshop or some other type of sophisticated digital graphics program to single out the animal in the picture he wished to alter and then using the "Color Balance" function to shift the Red, Green and Blue values of the photograph. However, I soon realized I was incorrect in that belief.
Luis claimed that he used flash on some pictures and no flash on others and that was the reasoning behind such extreme color difference. Upon looking at the EXIF data in length (as you can see below), that is not the case. The flash was fired and present in all the photos.
I then wanted to investigate the digital program Luis used in order to just resize his images as he claimed. I discovered it was a program called Microsoft Windows Photo Gallery. I knew nothing of this program so I Googled it and discovered is was an unsophisticated editing/organizing program for digital photos for the casually user. However, the program is fully capable of adjusting the color balance of a photo by toying with the RGB values.
It was then that I realized that the green background/carpeting he has those animals on differs from the normal appearing animals to the "sunburnt" ones. Immediately I was reminded of the stunt Darrin Brasher had pulled back in day regarding his so called Blood Red Brasher Boa. It was discovered that all he had done was adjust the RGB values of the entire image instead of just selecting the animal only to increase the red pigmentation. I have evidence that Luis has done the same.
Now ... please direct your attention to the left side of this collection of photographs. You will notice that it is the same photograph, just stacked. The top photograph is the unaltered version as provided by Luis, note the color of the carpet. Now, pay attention to the pic below, a version I altered myself with the RGB values, not the color of the carpet. Now, direct your attention to the right side of the collection of photographs. Again ... same photograph. Again, the top version is what Luis offered, note the color of the carpet. Now, look at the picture below it, I altered this and reverted it back to the values it should be, note the color of the carpet.
Yet another example. Photo edited by me on the left, photo unaltered from Luis on the right. Again ... color of the carpet.
And a final image ... where I had not previously noted that the normal was quite discolored as well compared to the picture of the entire litter. Again, my reverted version left, his altered version right.
So, there you have it. My evidence against his ... whatever it may be. Judge for yourself, but as of right now, I see Mr. Taracena to be a liar, which is unfortunate, because really, the sunglows are really good looking without his need to modify them.
Now, that aside ... Luis, I would like for you to share with the class exactly who is the father of that litter. Why? Because you have failed to provide images of him and I have a few images I have discovered to discredit you.
First, in the "New Babies!!!" thread, Luis claims the father of the litter is a Coral Sunglow, however, when he posts the code for this animal, it is broken.
Luis also shows a supposed hold back female from the season before in the "New Babies!!!" thread that is female. However, the EXIF data shows that the picture was taken in 2008. In fact, the first pic was taken in August with a Sony Cybershot and the second was taken in November with his Kodak.
[IMG]http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa279/agreyshade/Sire3.jpg
Now, on azreptiles.com( http://www.azreptiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13882 ) Luis claims that the father is a sunglow (no longer coral) from "Swedish" stock. Guess what picture he shows? The supposed hold back female from his previous litter.
Want proof? Here you go:
I will present all my evidence here while leaving this BOI as an Information Thread so that all who read it can decide for themselves.
On 03 April 2011, Mr. Taracena posted a new thread in the "Boa Discussion Forum" to inform the community that his Salmon Het. Albino Boa gave birth to a litter of possible super hypos, possible super hypos DH Sunglow and normals het. albino the day before.
He posted numerous pictures of the litter, three of which are the very reason I have started this thread:
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=236342
There were three animals (two possible sunglows and an albino) that supposedly came from this litter looking "sunburnt". He posted their images and immediately red flags went up in my head and the head of others, but no one made mention of it. I was content not to until it came to my attention that Mr. Taracena had put up an advertisement in order to sell off the possible super hypo DH sunglows from the clutch while using photos of these "sunburnt" animals to imply that all of these offspring hold the potential for these insane looking animals.
If anyone implies they wish to purchase on of these "sunburnt" animals, his response is that he is going to hold onto them for at least six months to see if the color intensifies or dulls.
The ad can be found here:
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237013&highlight=luis
I decided to take some time out of my day to look at all the images he offered. The first thing I noticed was that the image size was incredibly small but the resolution was huge, in the art world, this is typically done to avoid content theft as magnification is incredibly difficult without severe distortion. However, it is not in possible. The second and third things I noticed was that I was able to find the "sunburnt" animals in multiple pictures he posted without that coloration before they were posted as "sunburnt". The EXIF data shows on the camera that he took the pictures on 01 April 2011 a mere two hours apart, so the odds of them gaining such coloration, especially since they had not shed just seems next to impossible. So ... to prove this, I put the photos side by side and began marking out the points of familiarity in the animals that show there is no doubt they are one in the same.
These are those references:
The animal I cropped this picture to represent was the one that I have confirmed is the supposed sun burnt looking Sunglow. As you can see, I have pointed out numerous points of familiarity to provide evidence that these boas are, in fact, one in the same. How this animal acquired such coloration ina 24 hour period is beyond me.
Same Animal:
Next, I have cropped the picture once again to represent yet another animal that I have confirmed to be the second sun burnt looking sunglow. Again, I have provided points of familiarity to show evidence that these boas are, in fact, one in the same.
Once again, I did this with the albino. This one was a bit more difficult due to the fairly bland pattern, but the tail pattern is identical and evidence enough.
Initially, my belief was that he was using Photoshop or some other type of sophisticated digital graphics program to single out the animal in the picture he wished to alter and then using the "Color Balance" function to shift the Red, Green and Blue values of the photograph. However, I soon realized I was incorrect in that belief.
Luis claimed that he used flash on some pictures and no flash on others and that was the reasoning behind such extreme color difference. Upon looking at the EXIF data in length (as you can see below), that is not the case. The flash was fired and present in all the photos.
I then wanted to investigate the digital program Luis used in order to just resize his images as he claimed. I discovered it was a program called Microsoft Windows Photo Gallery. I knew nothing of this program so I Googled it and discovered is was an unsophisticated editing/organizing program for digital photos for the casually user. However, the program is fully capable of adjusting the color balance of a photo by toying with the RGB values.
It was then that I realized that the green background/carpeting he has those animals on differs from the normal appearing animals to the "sunburnt" ones. Immediately I was reminded of the stunt Darrin Brasher had pulled back in day regarding his so called Blood Red Brasher Boa. It was discovered that all he had done was adjust the RGB values of the entire image instead of just selecting the animal only to increase the red pigmentation. I have evidence that Luis has done the same.
Now ... please direct your attention to the left side of this collection of photographs. You will notice that it is the same photograph, just stacked. The top photograph is the unaltered version as provided by Luis, note the color of the carpet. Now, pay attention to the pic below, a version I altered myself with the RGB values, not the color of the carpet. Now, direct your attention to the right side of the collection of photographs. Again ... same photograph. Again, the top version is what Luis offered, note the color of the carpet. Now, look at the picture below it, I altered this and reverted it back to the values it should be, note the color of the carpet.
Yet another example. Photo edited by me on the left, photo unaltered from Luis on the right. Again ... color of the carpet.
And a final image ... where I had not previously noted that the normal was quite discolored as well compared to the picture of the entire litter. Again, my reverted version left, his altered version right.
So, there you have it. My evidence against his ... whatever it may be. Judge for yourself, but as of right now, I see Mr. Taracena to be a liar, which is unfortunate, because really, the sunglows are really good looking without his need to modify them.
Now, that aside ... Luis, I would like for you to share with the class exactly who is the father of that litter. Why? Because you have failed to provide images of him and I have a few images I have discovered to discredit you.
First, in the "New Babies!!!" thread, Luis claims the father of the litter is a Coral Sunglow, however, when he posts the code for this animal, it is broken.
Luis also shows a supposed hold back female from the season before in the "New Babies!!!" thread that is female. However, the EXIF data shows that the picture was taken in 2008. In fact, the first pic was taken in August with a Sony Cybershot and the second was taken in November with his Kodak.
[IMG]http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa279/agreyshade/Sire3.jpg
Now, on azreptiles.com( http://www.azreptiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13882 ) Luis claims that the father is a sunglow (no longer coral) from "Swedish" stock. Guess what picture he shows? The supposed hold back female from his previous litter.
Want proof? Here you go:
