Putting GARF to the test

[swreefer]

That's right. I am going to setup a bullet proof reef using their directions. I will post the progress for all to see. I am going to be objective, hoping that their tank works. The only difference I am making is that I will use a better skimmer. I hope the folks from GARF see this post. I emailed Leroy and Sally Jo to inform them of my plans. They say there are over 50 of these setups running. We'll see if I can make it work. If a 12 year old with no experience can do it, I should have no problem. Let's see how it goes. It will be stocked with LR this weekend. Wish me luck. Here is the link to the setup that I am following. http://www.garf.org/bullet.html

 

[skylsdale]

And when you post your findings, just make one really really really really long page that we'll have to scroll way way way way down to see.......

 

[Reeffreak]

I am very interested in the results of your test.

Oh yea, Garf really does need some help with their website. They may want to look into actually hire someone to do this......

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote

And when you post your findings, just make one really really really really long page that we'll have to scroll way way way way down to see.......

Also when you post your results you can make tons of links that open up annoying new windows.

Steve

 

[Mouse]

It should work fine aslong as you dont plan to stock it with fish. GARF dont have reefs they have coral gardens. (And a copy of Photoshop) artistic licence my A$$.

 

[Anonymous]

Have any of you photo experts ever visited GARF? Have you stood in the old house they are in and wondered if the floors might collapse. They have more coral growing then most of you will ever grow. Do they self-promote, yes. Are they worse for the hobby the most LFS? I don't think so.

 

[purple_tang2001]

cwa:

It doesn't take a photo expert to notice how they "doctor" up their pic's. But if you belive that those pic's are original, Then i ask you to show me other reef tanks that have that capability

I wonder how many .03 Bulbs it would take to get my 55 gallon that deep blue and purple to come out

 

[Joe_B]

Hold on!!! Before I write this post let me make sure I have my back against the wall.
-First let me say I have a system set up based on the GARF Bullet-Proof documentation. It is now 3 years old and going strong!!!!!
-GARF has always been helpful with any questions I might call with (haven't had to call in 1.5 years).
-I have read most of the GARF files on this board so I am well aware of the feelings you all have about them. I don't agree with everything they do and stand for, but the results they achieve are real and I have been able to duplicate this in my home.
-AND ARE YOU READY FOR THIS.....I AM THE PERSON WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM HAVING A COPY OF PHOTOSHOP 6.0 FOR MAC!!!!!!!!

-------I'm wearing a flame retardant suit-----please go easy---------

OneLove,
Joe_B

 

[Nathan1]

silly

[ July 20, 2001: Message edited by: Nathan ]

 

[swreefer]

Now, now people. Let's be objective here. I am doing this to see if it actually works. I think it would be great if you can have a reef without the huge expenses usually associated with it. I do have Adobe Photoshop but I won't be doctoring anything. I want the pics to be real. BTW, I do have different lights just in case it doesn't go as planned. I don't want to kill everything if the light is insufficient.

 

[SteveP]

I think it's a great idea, and worth trying. So what if they enhance their photos? Non-profit org notwithstanding, they ARE trying to raise funds so if their corals look a little more colorfull to sell a few more frags, who cares? We're being duped far worse by other ads.
Even if the colors are enhanced, they can't fake the incredible growth, polyp extension, and apparent health of the specimens in those tanks. (Can you say "Marc Weiss"?)
Keep us updated, swreefer.

Steve
8{I

 

[tlc]

i think you should try it. i dont think there methods are that much different than what many of us do. basicaly the bullet proof system is just a plenum, some powerheads, a skimmer, and vho lighting. they add reef builder to add alk, reef advantage to add calcium, and some reef plus to add other minerals. what is so unique about that? what i always find interesting about garf is how much people like to bash them for doctoring there photos. regardless if they do or not you cant deny that the specimens all look healthy. and occasionaly a hobbyist will actualy visit garf and give us details. everyone always reports there tanks actually do look as good in person as they do on there photos. who cares if its a run down old house in a crappy neighborhood.

 

[sawcjack00]

Heh heh...he said GARF

 

[Anonymous]

You'll need a good image-enhancing utility...

 

[liquid]

I know there's a big debate on whether or not GARF Photoshops their corals. I'd like people to read over this document: Photographing the Reef - A Roundtable Discussion. If you read thru this document, I believe it states somewhere that digital photos taken under VHO's and possibly PC's come out with a color shift -- especially w/ 50/50 bulbs and actinics. This might be totally offbase, but I think that a number of their shots come out so color shifted from the VHO's that they actually look touched up. I'm not trying to defend them or anything...I'm just trying to take an objective view of the argument.

fwiw,

liquid

 

[JeremyR]

I've taken photos under every light imaginable and not come up with the kinky colors they do shane. There is a difference between "color shift" and "totally wacked neon color shift". Heh. Sometimes you can take a photo of something under 400 watt halide and it comes out a little bleached.. in that situation, I don't have a problem with someone using photoshop to fix the photo a little if they are trying to make it look like it really does.. but extreme photo enhancement to make something significantly better than it really is amounts to fraud in my book.
Then again, have you ever bought a whopper or big mac that looks like what you see on tv or the menu board? Heh.

 

[liquid]

Hehe, Skel.

I have to do a little Photoshopping on my images but that's b/c they are taken directly under the 250's and they do come out quite bleached sometimes. I do however, try to match up the color rendition w/ what it looks like under my lights in the tank. I personally haven't tried taking pix under VHO only but I did look at some that Todd took under 50/50's and they looked color shifted due to the lights. You are correct pointing out that GARF's do look even more color shifted than I now remember looking back @ Todd's webpage. That's a big difference.

Heh, maybe the person editing the photos has trouble seeing certain colors so the colors are shifted somewhat?

liquid

 

[Healinbear]

Heard on NPR the other day that they have started teaching media savviness to children. What a great idea. The story did mention how biased the children had become by allowing them to see what could be done with digital "enhancement". These children when asked to estimate what number of photos in the New York Times had been digitally altered all estimated at no less than forty percent.

One wonders at journalistic ingegrity. One wonders at GARF's truly pro-reef, not for profit mentality. One wonders at a lot of things.

One thing that I do not wonder at is the way that these animals constantly amaze me with their variety, shape, form, and pattern. If I had to guess. I'd say they aren't changing their photos at GARF much at all.

 

[Barbie]

Just an idea here, but in all actuality their computer might just have a cruddy video card or monitor, which would make it easy for them to overdo the colors in trying to get them to look the way they do in their tank. I've had quite a bit of experience with receiving pictures that are really whacked looking to ME but looked perfect when I drove across town and saw the same pic on my friends Mac. Go figure

Barbie

 

[Anonymous]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Joe_B:
<STRONG>I AM THE PERSON WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM HAVING A COPY OF PHOTOSHOP 6.0 FOR MAC!!!!!!!!</STRONG><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I don't understand. What does that mean?

 

[Anonymous]

purple_tang2001,

So what if they are doctored? Have you seen LFS advertise with absolute truth? Are dyes added to food to improve its looks. Are oranges "waxed" to improve appearance? GARF may have upset you at some point, but does that mean they have nothing of any value to offer. Like I said before, have you been there to judge for yourself or are you just blindly biased?