Scuba Jim
Contributor
Found this pickie of a flatfish thingy while rummaging through some slides
There's no plaice like home
- Thread starter Scuba Jim
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
May I translate?
A very nice photo of a Flounder...maybe a Peacock Flounder.
A very nice photo of a Flounder...maybe a Peacock Flounder.
blacknet
Contributor
Hello,
Let me further translate. Syacium Micrurum Ranzani, i.e. channel flounder, a.k.a. lefteye flounder.
"peacock flounder" It has a gray-brown body covered with bright blue rings, blue dots on the head and fins, usually three dark mid-lateral blotches (the rearmost sometimes missing), and a long and often erect pectoral fin. Large adults usually have dark dorsal, anal, and caudal fins. The lower eye is about an eye diameter anterior to the upper eye. It grows to a length of 18 inches.
"channel flounder" It has an elongate brownish body, often with a scattering of brown or pale rings with dark spots at their centers, and often with 2 or 3 dark spots on the lateral line: one near the pectoral fin, another near the tail base, and sometimes a third one between them. The dorsal and anal fins have widely spaced vertical dark lines. The first (upper) two pectoral fin rays of the male are long. The eyes are closer together than in the species of Bothus. It grows to a length of 18 inches.
Ed
Let me further translate. Syacium Micrurum Ranzani, i.e. channel flounder, a.k.a. lefteye flounder.
"peacock flounder" It has a gray-brown body covered with bright blue rings, blue dots on the head and fins, usually three dark mid-lateral blotches (the rearmost sometimes missing), and a long and often erect pectoral fin. Large adults usually have dark dorsal, anal, and caudal fins. The lower eye is about an eye diameter anterior to the upper eye. It grows to a length of 18 inches.
"channel flounder" It has an elongate brownish body, often with a scattering of brown or pale rings with dark spots at their centers, and often with 2 or 3 dark spots on the lateral line: one near the pectoral fin, another near the tail base, and sometimes a third one between them. The dorsal and anal fins have widely spaced vertical dark lines. The first (upper) two pectoral fin rays of the male are long. The eyes are closer together than in the species of Bothus. It grows to a length of 18 inches.
Ed
clive francis
Guest
am i going colour blind?
i swear the description for the peacock matches the picture (blue dots and rings)
i swear the description for the peacock matches the picture (blue dots and rings)
blacknet
Contributor
Hello,
The 'peacock flounder' has a wider eye set than the channel flounder. From this image you can't get narrower eye set.
Bothus = peacock flounder.
Also from this image its' really difficult to get a 100% ID as we would need to know information about the fins.
Ed
The 'peacock flounder' has a wider eye set than the channel flounder. From this image you can't get narrower eye set.
Bothus = peacock flounder.
Also from this image its' really difficult to get a 100% ID as we would need to know information about the fins.
Ed
And all over a flatfish!!
So, to settle this, can you please all tell me where you find peacock flounders and channel flounders, and I'll tell you where I took the picture!
Also, is this an adult or a juevenile, and then I'll tell you what lens I used!!
Here is a scan of the entire image, as I had cropped in on his/her bonce. Maybe you can glean some more info from that?
Good luck!
So, to settle this, can you please all tell me where you find peacock flounders and channel flounders, and I'll tell you where I took the picture!
Also, is this an adult or a juevenile, and then I'll tell you what lens I used!!
Here is a scan of the entire image, as I had cropped in on his/her bonce. Maybe you can glean some more info from that?
Good luck!
blacknet
Contributor
Hello,
to determine those things you ask we need a better photo, there is entirely to much croping going on. I would have to guess a 35mm or maybe a 50mm lens was used.
Ed
to determine those things you ask we need a better photo, there is entirely to much croping going on. I would have to guess a 35mm or maybe a 50mm lens was used.
Ed
Is that a mixture between cropping and groping? Cut the edges off while having a good fondle?
Sorry I haven't got a "better photo" Ed, seems none of my photos meet your stringent criteria. Too much backscatter, colour film instead of b&w and now too much croping. I dunno. You're enough to make me give up taking photos. I'll have to think of seomthing else to do while I am diving next time. Perhaps some groping?
Can't help the croping, Ed. It was shot on a 105mm macro. Hence the croping - can't get your average halibut into a 105mm frame, I am afraid.
Anyway, at the end of the day, who cares if it's a peacock flounder, a turbot or a whale shark. It's only a darn fish picture!
Sorry I haven't got a "better photo" Ed, seems none of my photos meet your stringent criteria. Too much backscatter, colour film instead of b&w and now too much croping. I dunno. You're enough to make me give up taking photos. I'll have to think of seomthing else to do while I am diving next time. Perhaps some groping?
Can't help the croping, Ed. It was shot on a 105mm macro. Hence the croping - can't get your average halibut into a 105mm frame, I am afraid.
Anyway, at the end of the day, who cares if it's a peacock flounder, a turbot or a whale shark. It's only a darn fish picture!
blacknet
Contributor
Scuba Jim,
I'm sorry if I came across to hard. What I should have said was we would need a photo of the fins to make a good ID. For a non-ID photo the image is good.
There is nothing wrong with using color film underwater. I happen to be partial to b/w film but can enjoy color just as well. I happen to be 50% color blind which is why I prefer b/w film.
Please dont' stop doing photography based on my account. I have some extremely tough mentors, they put on the white glove when I show them anything and it's hard to not follow suit with others. It does rub off on you.
Ed
I'm sorry if I came across to hard. What I should have said was we would need a photo of the fins to make a good ID. For a non-ID photo the image is good.
There is nothing wrong with using color film underwater. I happen to be partial to b/w film but can enjoy color just as well. I happen to be 50% color blind which is why I prefer b/w film.
Please dont' stop doing photography based on my account. I have some extremely tough mentors, they put on the white glove when I show them anything and it's hard to not follow suit with others. It does rub off on you.
Ed
Similar threads
