Page 1 of 1
what kind of pleco do i have? please help me
Posted: 15 Dec 2003, 04:28
by grandmastr
got 2 of them for a buck each, they sold them to me as regular plecos,but they look alot different than normal plecos
is it a tiger pleco?
Posted: 15 Dec 2003, 04:33
by Rusty
From what I can make out, looks like
Panaque maccus.
Rusty
Posted: 15 Dec 2003, 04:56
by grandmastr
any tips on takin pictures
i just got my dig cam yesterday
kind of hard to get a good picture of fish
Posted: 15 Dec 2003, 05:28
by pleco_breeder
Hello,
The only tips I can give are not to use zoom since it tends to blur the pics. Much easier to blow it up on software. I usually try to use macro mode since it gets the pic closer to the subject and is a smoother transition. I also always clean the outside of the tank with a non-alcohol lotion free baby wipe and then a light rub down with a paper towel and r.o. water. It takes a lot of practice to get good at it.
BTW, I agree about Panaque maccus.
Best of luck,
Larry Vires
Posted: 15 Dec 2003, 06:02
by Barbie
The reason most digital photos of aquariums are blurred, is due to the reduced levels of light entering the lens. This can be combatted by using the flash, and angling the camera at a 45 degree angle to the glass, adding an extra light over the tank, or using a tripod to help stabilize the camera while its receiving the light it needs. The last method helps somewhat with the first two methods, but I personally can't get my dang fish to hold still long enough for it to be of much assistance on its own.
The zoom directly reduces the amount of light also, so if you're going to use it, plan on using the flash, and or supplemental lighting. Hope that helps 
Barbie
Posted: 15 Dec 2003, 19:06
by grandmastr
heres another way better picture wit more light
Posted: 15 Dec 2003, 19:30
by Yann
Hi!
Yeap I also think it is a Panaque maccus
Cheers
Yann
Posted: 15 Dec 2003, 23:43
by flyinmike
IMO definitely P. maccus. Here's 1 of mine..
This pic was taken with the room darkened (night time, lights off), 2 tube flor. light on the tank, zoomed 3x with the macro on, no flash, and manual exposure on a tripod.
Posted: 16 Dec 2003, 01:52
by Shane
I am not 100% sure that it is
P. maccus as it could also be LDA 68. How big is the fish?
P. maccus changes its pattern as it grows (as do many of the small striped Panaque). A good close up of the pattern on the head would help.
These are adult
P. maccus that I collected in the Rio Tinaco, Venezuela.
Here is a juvenile. Note that this was what was shown as LDA 22. A pretty fish at this size.
Here are some LDA 68 from further south in Colombia.
Sorry, FlyinMike, but your fish is not
P. maccus, although I am not sure what it is.
-Shane
Posted: 16 Dec 2003, 04:57
by grandmastr
3inches probably
heres more pics
Posted: 16 Dec 2003, 12:18
by Shane
Just one little hint on photography. One good clear close up shot is worth 50 blurry ones. Getting a good shot of a fish in an aquarium is hard even for great photographers. Catch the fish and either take a photo of it in your hand, set it on a shelf and take a photo, or even better, put it in a small photo tank. It is not worth the waste of film to do otherwise unless you are willing to take 100s of photos and maybe get one good one. Notice that in books like Aqualog 90% of the photos were taken in a photo tank or hand. This is the reason.
-Shane
PS I also would say that the fish is P. maccus now.
Posted: 16 Dec 2003, 13:47
by flyinmike
Shane wrote:
Sorry, FlyinMike, but your fish is not P. maccus, although I am not sure what it is.
-Shane
I was going by ID given here. When he was he young (1.5") he looked very much like your second picture. the stripes have broken apart as he has grown. He's probably 3.25" right now. He is still a panaque though, correct?
Posted: 16 Dec 2003, 14:35
by Shane
Mike,
My bad. My monitor at home has very low resolution. Now that I am at work I can see that your fish is P. maccus. On my home monitor he looked very different. When it gets to this point, it is really time to upgrade hardware! No laughing at me Barbie.
-Shane
Posted: 16 Dec 2003, 17:17
by Barbie
You should have put that disclaimer at the top of the message, I was already giggling by the time I got to the part where it said I shouldn't! 
At least that problem will be remedied soon. 
Barbie