Followup on the Bork Pictures
- Latest installment of the Mayland/Bork Book sage
by Dave Mosley <dxm1/calweb.com> (Mon, 18 May 1998)
- New Stuff on the Krib
by Mike & Diane Wise <apistowise/bewellnet.com> (Sun, 17 May 1998)
by Dave Mosley <dxm1/calweb.com>
Date: Mon, 18 May 1998
To: Erik Olson (e-mail)
First of all we would like to thank you for the your effort helping us
to sort out the problem. We would like to
comment Fredriks remark. Yes, he is right, sharpening the images is
doctoring. As we mentioned in our earlier
email we are a reference work publisher and we are fully aware of the
fact that we have to use the best photos we
can get but without doing any - I repeat any - manipulation on it. In
all of our AQUALOG books we have used
photos from different well-known photographers with excellent
reputation. We can ensure you that Dieter Bork is
one of the best! The reason why the photos in the book look sharper is
easy to explain. The photos you have are
not the best ones.(copies) As you can imagine, we don't give the
original or the best ones away. Secondly, we use
a high resolution scanner based on latest technology to ensure that
nothing is lost during the scanning process.
We hope this remark will convince Fredrik.
For those haven't seen the book yet we attach the address of our dealer
in US. Please contact
Hollywood, Florida 33020
Phone: (954) 921 9056
Fax: (954) 921 9075
Hope this is of help for you. We would like to thank all of you for the
frank opinion and the contribution to
sort out the unclearness.
I'm looking forward to hearing again from you some time.
Verlag A.C.S. GmbH
Marketing & International Sales
Von: Dave Mosley [SMTP:dxm1-at-calweb.com]
Gesendet: 16 Mai 1998 05:14
An: Franz Mollekopf
Betreff: Re: AW: Mayland and Bork "dwarf cichlids"
Franz Mollekopf wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> Thank you very much for your reply.
> I have mailed the slides to you today.
sorry it's been so long since our last our last conversation, but
a number of little problems have prevented the posting of the slides
on the web. everything has been ironed out, and the slides are
below i include some initial responses to the pictures from the
apisto list (these guys move fast!) the images had not been public
for more than four hours when these comments were made. ain't the
we would all like to thank you, Verlag A.C.S. GmbH, mr. mayland and mr.
bork for allowing this all to happen.
>From the Apisto mailing list, #138:
In celebration of our phone company finally getting off their *!-at-& and
fixing my service, I managed to get a few things updated on the Krib the
most amusing (for you) being the long-awaited Bork Outtake slides
obtained by Dave Mosley. There's also a few other new pictures here &
It was interesting to see the Bork slides. They are almost certainly not
manipulated. He seems to have used a flash from below and to the side of
the fish and timing such that he is capturing just the beginning of the
flash. Note how dark the background is and that the bottom of the fish
are better illuminated than the top. With such a method you can get
interesting reflections of the light. I have recently done very similar
shots by simply flipping my camera over so that the attached flash is on
the bottom, but wouldn't publish them as IMO they are an unrealistic
portrayal of the subject. I can't figure out how his luelingi looks so
washed out though. These are not gray fish!
Erik, that is the Nikon 105mm macro lens he used! I'm still looking for
I still think that the images in the book look a lot sharper than
the originals but some of this may be because of my screen (?).
Sharpening the images is still doctoring...
Anyone who has taken pics of fish or used some kind of direct light
on them knows that these colours exist. The fish display gorgeous
colours and a metallic glimmering. That's not bogus.
Doctored or no, many of the images are not very useful for ID-ing
fish, which to me is more important than showing off their colours.
I think Mayland/Bork could have done a LOT better with the images,
since they obviously spent a lot of time to take them (read the
email from Glaser telling how they set it all up).
Thanks for following through on this, I found the pictures most
enlightening, as well as beautiful. I unfortunately did not get the
book, after seeing these slides I am really regretting it.
I think the reason that many people thought that the pictures had been
digitally manipulated is that the photographers did such an outstanding
job, as well as using outstanding individual examples of the various
The blue shades , especially, are dependant on lighting, and the
photographers obviously did a knock out job showing the colors that are
Thanks again to all involved in getting these slides on the Web, and
clearing up the questions about authenticity that arose after the book
by Mike & Diane Wise <apistowise/bewellnet.com>
Date: Sun, 17 May 1998
Doug Brown wrote:
> . I can't figure out how his luelingi looks so washed out though.
> These are not gray fish!
What surprises me about Bork's photo of A. leulingi (and it appears to be A.
leulingi) isn't the washed colors, but the fact that the fish pictured has ONLY 3
ANAL SPINES! Most A. leulingi have 4. Kullander records only 1 of 40+ specimens
studied had 3 anal spines. This wouldn't be the ideal fish to use for IDing this
This is the apistogramma mailing list, apisto-at-majordomo.pobox.com.
For instructions on how to subscribe or unsubscribe or get help,
Search http://altavista.digital.com for "Apistogramma Mailing List Archives"!