copperband butterfly diet

[mcktan]

hi,

Need advice.
Bought a copperband butterfly yesterday, didn't eat pellets, flakes and frozen bloodworm. :(

Any bro/sis here successfully rear copperband what is the diet given?
I still not yet try tuberflex worm, baby brine shrimp and mysis shrimp.
which one is better?

Thanks

[flame angel]

hi,

Need advice.
Bought a copperband butterfly yesterday, didn't eat pellets, flakes and frozen bloodworm. :(

Any bro/sis here successfully rear copperband what is the diet given?
I still not yet try tuberflex worm, baby brine shrimp and mysis shrimp.
which one is better?

Thanks
Though I've not kept any copperband, but advice that u don't buy any of them in future, cos they r very difficult to keep. Most of them would not survive if not readily to train them take frozen, pellets food etc. Try whatever u can feed it for the time being especially live food. Adding frozen food towards a blowing powerhead can tantalize the appetize of the fish, so try it. Good luck!

[kyo_k81]

hi,

Need advice.
Bought a copperband butterfly yesterday, didn't eat pellets, flakes and frozen bloodworm. :(

Any bro/sis here successfully rear copperband what is the diet given?
I still not yet try tuberflex worm, baby brine shrimp and mysis shrimp.
which one is better?

Thanks

U might like to try New Life Spectrum Product.

Pablo's 2000 Gallon Aquarium
http://forums.spectrumfishfood.com/viewtopic.php?t=66

For those of you who have never seen Pablo's 2000 gallon marine tank.

This little show tank is approx 10ft long, 8ft deep, and 4ft high.


Pablo's saltwater aquarium contains species such as; Butterfly Fish, Parrot Fish, Philippine Regal Angels, Majestic Angels, Rock Beauty, Moorish Idol, Achilles Tang, Cuban Hawkfish, Clown Tang, Blue Ring Angel, Blue Face Angel, Trimaculatus Angel, and the list goes on and on ..... and they all eat New Life Spectrum exclusively.

Some of these saltwater species only feed on specialized foods in the wild, such as Coral Polyps and Sponges, and will usually turn their noses up to commercial foods. These finicky species not only accept New Life Spectrum, they are thriving on it!

Before NLS this was unheard of, and many of these species would die within a short period of time once placed in captivity. No other commercial food can produce results like you see below! The only people that will tell you that you must feed a varied diet, is people that do not feed NLS exclusively. With NLS food there is no need to vary the diet, everything they need is already in the food.

This is what you can expect to see when you feed your fish NLS exclusively! :cool:

http://www.ida-may.com/image/pab1.jpg

http://www.ida-may.com/image/pab2.jpg

http://www.ida-may.com/image/pab3.jpg

http://www.ida-may.com/image/pab4.jpg

http://www.ida-may.com/image/pab5.jpg

http://www.ida-may.com/image/pab6.jpg

http://www.ida-may.com/image/pab8.jpg

http://www.ida-may.com/image/pab7.jpg

RD

Hope that helps.

[cci[RR]us]

Good luck to you and your butterfly! They are extremely difficult to keep. I tried 3 times and they refused to eat. They died after week or 2 :( I give up on keeping them liao.

[flame angel]

Hi Kyo,
The pic look great, but no offence it looked like the photop has been edited in some software. Especially the fish look unnatural in the tank.

[cci[RR]us]

I really don't think the photos are digitally mastered. You can see the blurring of fishes at the left-right sides / background of the photos due to the aperture not being able to provide the fullest depth-of-field. The fish shadows cast on the sandbed are too real to be fake.

Some of the fishes that appear to be sharp and clear, and "too good to be true", can actually be attained through the use of high-end DSLRs. I've seen a lot of amazingly sharp and clear fish shots taken from high end cameras, and they are looked almost unreal.

We can post this in the photography section and hear what the pros say.

[flame angel]

us']I really don't think the photos are digitally mastered. You can see the blurring of fishes at the left-right sides / background of the photos due to the aperture not being able to provide the fullest depth-of-field. The fish shadows cast on the sandbed are too real to be fake.

Some of the fishes that appear to be sharp and clear, and "too good to be true", can actually be attained through the use of high-end DSLRs. I've seen a lot of amazingly sharp and clear fish shots taken from high end cameras, and they are looked almost unreal.

We can post this in the photography section and hear what the pros say.
Only the last pic look real to me!
Look at the rest of the photo, rough edges of the fishes can't blend well with the environment.
If u do editing in photoshop then u'll get what i mean.
Let's analyze the 1st pic. The background & water surface were dark, it suggests that ambient lighting was poor. But all the fishes from front to back have great sharpness(good depth of field), high contrast, color, & freeze on their moment without a single blurr!
To capture this kind of photo, a faster shutter speed & smaller aperture have to be used. But considering the poor ambient lighting & shooting through glass, we know that it's impossible to achieve that.
Further more DOF will get shallower if u r shooting real close to your subject.
In fish photography, generally u will always need a wide open aperture & faster shutter speed no matter what the lighting condition is. A wide open aperture will make the background blurr, & freeze the fishes on action by
a faster shutter speed.
Of course u can say that additional flashes or lights can be set up to aid the photographing, But look at the last pic, too much light. Image overexposed! Fishes look like exposing on a big head light!
There r really lot of factors to consider for good exposure through glass. :)

[cci[RR]us]

Actually I wanted to post my counter-arguments, but I decided to refer to the EXIF for stronger points:
Filename : pab4.jpg
JFIF_APP1 : Exif

Make : FUJIFILM
Model : FinePix2600Zoom
Orientation : left-hand side
XResolution : 72/1
YResolution : 72/1
ResolutionUnit : Inch
Software : Digital Camera FinePix2600Zoom Ver3.00
DateTime : 2005:07:06 13:12:14
YCbCrPositioning : co-sited
Copyright :
ExifInfoOffset : 254

FNumber : F3.5
ExposureProgram : Program Normal
ISOSpeedRatings : 100
ExifVersion : 0210
DateTimeOriginal : 2005:07:06 13:12:14
DateTimeDigitized : 2005:07:06 13:12:14
ComponentConfiguration : YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel : 30/10 (bit/pixel)
ShutterSpeedValue : 1/64Sec
ApertureValue : F3.5
BrightnessValue : EV1.8
ExposureBiasValue : EV0.0
MaxApertureValue : F3.5
MeteringMode : Division
Flash : Fired
FocalLength : 18.00(mm)
MakerNote : FUJIFILM Format : 238Bytes (Offset:724)
FlashPixVersion : 0100
ColorSpace : sRGB
ExifImageWidth : 640
ExifImageHeight : 480
ExifInteroperabilityOffset : 954
FocalPlaneXResolution : 1221/1
FocalPlaneYResolution : 1221/1
FocalPlaneResolutionUnit : Centimeter
SensingMethod : OneChipColorArea sensor
FileSource : DSC
SceneType : A directly photographed image
Vendor Original Information
Version : 0130
Quality mode : NORMAL
Sharpness : NORMAL
White Balance : Auto
Color : NORMAL
Flash mode : Red-Eye Reducing
Flash strength : 0/10
Macro mode : Off
Focus mode : Auto Focus
SlowSync : Off
Mode : Auto
Unknown (1032)3,1 : 1
Sequence Mode : Off
Unknown (1200)3,1 : 0
Blurring warning : No
Focus status : Nice
Exposure status : Nice
The pictures are taken from a 2 megapixel Fuji point-and-shoot camera, at 640x480 resolution? :eek: I think you may be right. :)

[dinosor]

wow.. that is a very stylo setup..
those rock at the side is it stack up 1 ? or is those "fake wall" that is sold in lfs.. ??
the fishes are very nice but is that consider over-crowded?

[KaLiB]

wow.. that is a very stylo setup..
those rock at the side is it stack up 1 ? or is those "fake wall" that is sold in lfs.. ??
the fishes are very nice but is that consider over-crowded?

Looks to me those rocks were stacked up and stuck to each other and possibly the glass as well.

The tank is severely overcrowded, something we should never do. The bioload is very high and there is no room for error. Although its still possible to maintain such a population of fish, its unwise due to the very small margin allowed for error.

[kyo_k81]

Hi flame angel and cci[RR]us,

You might like to ask Pablo personally if still have doubt regarding the photos.

check this out,

photo editing??????
http://forums.spectrumfishfood.com/viewtopic.php?t=78

Mikey,

Thanks for the heads up on this......without people like you watching the forums out there...I would never find out about things like this.

Firstly, I did not even take the pictures you are referring to. I can't think of why someone would be confused and think I edited these at all anyway.
Without "tooting my own horn" here I would like to remind people that I have published FOUR aquarium books personally. Being envolved in really every aspect of the production of these books along the way (from taking the actual pictures....to laying out the actual pages.....and any editing that may have been necessary along the way). Taking this into consideration, I have obviously become very proficient in Photoshop. Not trying to be overly critical about these pictures....but since it was brought up.... these pictures are , in fact, not up to my personal standards. But my secretary had wanted to take pictures of my aquariums to send to RD and RD in turn posted them to MY photo gallery in MY web-sites Q&A section. If I were to edit any picture....I would certainly not allow the fish to have "shiny" eyes because of the flash used. Why is someone asking about this anyway??...Is it the fact of the brilliant color of the fish???...Or because someone thinks I am "pasting" fish into the picture??? Boy....another example of someone with a little knowledge being a potentially dangerous thing I guess. If I thought it were not going to be a problem with that sites administrators I would go there myself and reply....but it has been brought to my attention that they have had some problems lately with people promoting my products on their forums. Thanks again for letting me know whats going on out there. I certainly like to help out on situations like this as much as possible....but I hope you can appreciate that I am a very very busy man these days.


Sincerely,
Pablo Tepoot

Hope that help.

[kyo_k81]

http://www.cichlid-forum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=87036&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=75

Honestly not sure what all the fuss is about with these pictures. Keep in mind that the tank has probably got a lot of artificial sunlight coming down from above and with a flash pop from the front (look at the EXIF info embedded in the photo) to really make the colour saturated. It shows the make of camera (Fuji) as well as ASA and flash setting. The lighting is quite well balanced (eg flash vs available light from a colour temperature standpoint), if it was enhanced (as opposed to edited) then it was a pretty good job because it wasn't overdone.

Whoever took the photos realized that they would have a lovely hotspot from the flash so they shot all the pix (at least the ones I saw) from a slight angle to the tank.

Not familier with the particular camera but it seems to be pretty good in terms of sharpness and I don't see any signs of artifacting or hints of oversharpening. In terms of colour and saturation, keep in mind what your eyes would have seen if they were looking into a very well lit marine tank with crystal clear glass and nice colourful healthy fish. Would it be that much different than what you saw in the photos?

Other tricks, look at items in the tank you are familier with such as the substrait and fish. That's how we would enhance a photo for the newspaper. Basically look at what is there and see if it looks right and makes sense. In our case we have one other factor to add to the mix and that is how our presses will reproduce the image. But the main thing is, do the colours look right, is the contrast good, is the photo sharp.

So basically these are just nice photographs, nothing sinister about them.

niteshooter

[flame angel]

us']Actually I wanted to post my counter-arguments, but I decided to refer to the EXIF for stronger points:
Filename : pab4.jpg
JFIF_APP1 : Exif

Make : FUJIFILM
Model : FinePix2600Zoom
Orientation : left-hand side
XResolution : 72/1
YResolution : 72/1
ResolutionUnit : Inch
Software : Digital Camera FinePix2600Zoom Ver3.00
DateTime : 2005:07:06 13:12:14
YCbCrPositioning : co-sited
Copyright :
ExifInfoOffset : 254

FNumber : F3.5
ExposureProgram : Program Normal
ISOSpeedRatings : 100
ExifVersion : 0210
DateTimeOriginal : 2005:07:06 13:12:14
DateTimeDigitized : 2005:07:06 13:12:14
ComponentConfiguration : YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel : 30/10 (bit/pixel)
ShutterSpeedValue : 1/64Sec
ApertureValue : F3.5
BrightnessValue : EV1.8
ExposureBiasValue : EV0.0
MaxApertureValue : F3.5
MeteringMode : Division
Flash : Fired
FocalLength : 18.00(mm)
MakerNote : FUJIFILM Format : 238Bytes (Offset:724)
FlashPixVersion : 0100
ColorSpace : sRGB
ExifImageWidth : 640
ExifImageHeight : 480
ExifInteroperabilityOffset : 954
FocalPlaneXResolution : 1221/1
FocalPlaneYResolution : 1221/1
FocalPlaneResolutionUnit : Centimeter
SensingMethod : OneChipColorArea sensor
FileSource : DSC
SceneType : A directly photographed image
Vendor Original Information
Version : 0130
Quality mode : NORMAL
Sharpness : NORMAL
White Balance : Auto
Color : NORMAL
Flash mode : Red-Eye Reducing
Flash strength : 0/10
Macro mode : Off
Focus mode : Auto Focus
SlowSync : Off
Mode : Auto
Unknown (1032)3,1 : 1
Sequence Mode : Off
Unknown (1200)3,1 : 0
Blurring warning : No
Focus status : Nice
Exposure status : Nice
The pictures are taken from a 2 megapixel Fuji point-and-shoot camera, at 640x480 resolution? :eek: I think you may be right. :)

Yes, the EXIF is a good info., it proofs that the shooter is just a point & shoot photographer! :)

[Man Utd]

maybe I'm just lucky but my CB butterfly already started to eat brine shrimp on the 1st day I bought it. I got it from coral farm & its very cheap too :p

Till today its very healthy & active

[mcktan]

hi,

just a feedback that my copperband butterfly finally eating frozen brineshrimp for the past few days :D hehehe

[Man Utd]

hi,

just a feedback that my copperband butterfly finally eating frozen brineshrimp for the past few days :D hehehe

Congrats! ;)

[flame angel]

hi,

just a feedback that my copperband butterfly finally eating frozen brineshrimp for the past few days :D hehehe
Do take note that brineshrimps have very little nutritional value, so it might not able to sustain its healthy. Provide a wider variety of food is the sure bet to keep them alive. :)