|
|
Post by angelminx on Aug 18, 2014 18:12:43 GMT -5
I couldn't get the Platinum Dragonscale that I wanted (since I had to choose between him and the Electric Blue Ram--both $19.99), but I did get a new betta. The other one I had my eye on, died at the store the day I went to get it, so I looked them all over. I could only consider the less expensive ones--they had a couple of beautiful Rose Bettas, but again, out of my price-range. I found 3 that I liked. A yellow Double Tail, a Copper Veiltail (another one in a violet-washed pewter), and a Red (?)Super Delta Tail "Dragonscale" with a body (depending on the viewing angle) of blue or turquoise. After looking them over for a while (I wish they were in a square container or something, the fish won't turn with the container when you try to get a better look), I decided to go with one of the last two. I managed to get them to "face" each other, but the dragonscale showed more interest than the veiltail--which only flared twice--so I decided to go with the dragonscale. Too bad you can't keep 2 males together; I would have splurged and gotten both.
I'll have to get some pictures to show you. His tail is not comepletely colored red--it goes out towards the edge about halfway, with a "crown" of red continuing towards the edge, and the rest of the tail is clear. I'm not really sure that he's really a dragonscale, but each scale is "outlined" with red.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonjohnsgard on Aug 19, 2014 16:45:03 GMT -5
pictures  |
|
|
|
Post by angelminx on Aug 21, 2014 16:37:16 GMT -5
I got some pics, but when I tried to post some others, elsewhere, I couldn't get them to enlarge where you could get a good look, so I'll have to come back later and try again. I promise, I do have them, and after fooling around with the camera, was able to get a couple decent "close-ups".
I was going to start a tank blog, too.... Oh, well.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonjohnsgard on Aug 22, 2014 22:07:51 GMT -5
I got some pics, but when I tried to post some others, elsewhere, I couldn't get them to enlarge where you could get a good look, so I'll have to come back later and try again. I promise, I do have them, and after fooling around with the camera, was able to get a couple decent "close-ups". I was going to start a tank blog, too.... Oh, well. Maybe start a photobucket or flicker account and add the pictures there. They make it pretty easy to link your pictures from those sites. Tank blog would be cool. Good to track progress. |
|
|
|
Post by angelminx on Aug 22, 2014 23:40:02 GMT -5
I'm hoping to check them out in the next couple of days. Do I still have to use the 160xwhatever pictures, or can I use the larger "normal" pictures? Also, is there a fee to use them? You do all the sizing and captions on them there, then attatch them, right?
As soon as I get that set up and everything worked out, I'll post my Betta's pictures. BTW, I haven't named him yet, sometimes a name just jumps out at me, but I have to sit down and study him for a while to see if he suggests anything to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonjohnsgard on Aug 23, 2014 12:49:31 GMT -5
I'm hoping to check them out in the next couple of days. Do I still have to use the 160xwhatever pictures, or can I use the larger "normal" pictures? Also, is there a fee to use them? You do all the sizing and captions on them there, then attatch them, right? As soon as I get that set up and everything worked out, I'll post my Betta's pictures. BTW, I haven't named him yet, sometimes a name just jumps out at me, but I have to sit down and study him for a whaie to see if he suggests anything to me. All are free and can have pretty big pictures. I know what you mean about names. I have a hard time sometimes. |
|
|
|
Post by angelminx on Aug 29, 2014 1:01:10 GMT -5
I thought of a name--actually, two. Because of the "design" in his tail, I'm probably going to call him "King". I thought about naming him "Prince"--still in the back of my mind--, but King came to mind just before Prince did. Here's a (small) copy of a couple pictures of him. Hopefully better comong soon.   |
|
|
|
Post by devonjohnsgard on Aug 29, 2014 8:36:48 GMT -5
I thought of a name--actually, two. Because of the "design" in his tail, I'm probably going to call him "King" That's a nice name. I like his big bright tail. |
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Aug 29, 2014 10:07:02 GMT -5
I thought of a name--actually, two. Because of the "design" in his tail, I'm probably going to call him "King" That's a nice name. I like his big bright tail. Nice new addition! I too like the name Carl |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2014 2:36:16 GMT -5
I thought of a name--actually, two. Because of the "design" in his tail, I'm probably going to call him "King". I thought about naming him "Prince"--still in the back of my mind--, but King came to mind just before Prince did. Here's a (small) copy of a couple pictures of him. Hopefully better comong soon. Handsome boy! Very similar in colouring to one I just *sniff* lost. I just finished commenting to your newer post about this fellow, also your question about my pics.. that you click on them and they enlarge. I see what you mean, these pics of yours don't enlarge when you click on them. I'll guess it's because the size of pic you're posting is quite small. Can you tell what size they are? The site asks for them to be <1 MB. I keep mine up close to that perhaps that's why it comes up bigger. I'd go with Devon's suggestion of photobucket or flickr if you can.. I should do that too.. but if you need a hand with sizing images, let me know and maybe I can help, but tell me how your'e taking your pics. |
|
|
|
Post by devonjohnsgard on Sept 4, 2014 9:55:49 GMT -5
You can also compress a picture without resizing it. You computer simple photo editor should be able to do it. It would keep it a larger size when you click on the attachment. Photobucket or flickr are nice though, because you can start a collection of pictures.
|
|
|
|
Post by angelminx on Sept 4, 2014 17:16:38 GMT -5
Devon, I'll check your suggestion out.
Seapetal, I'm not sure how to tell what the GB/MB size is; the camera (Nikon Coolpix) takes the photos as 640x480 (original image) and I have resized them on the camera (I go through batteries like crazy, doing this) to 160x120 because the book said that's what it had to be to post on email. My camera also has the option to make 320x240 sized copies. Is this the size I should use to get your results? Again, I don't know what those GB/MB would be.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonjohnsgard on Sept 4, 2014 18:03:25 GMT -5
Devon, I'll check your suggestion out. Seapetal, I'm not sure how to tell what the GB/MB size is; the camera (Nikon Coolpix) takes the photos as 640x480 (original image) and I have resized them on the camera (I go through batteries like crazy, doing this) to 160x120 because the book said that's what it had to be to post on email. My camera also has the option to make 320x240 sized copies. Is this the size I should use to get your results? Again, I don't know what those GB/MB would be. Leave it normal from the camera, transfer from the camera to the computer. Use the stocked computer program to compress (not resize) the photos. If you want to see the MB of the photo, right click on the image (wherever you store them at) and view the properties of the image. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2014 20:13:53 GMT -5
Devon, I'll check your suggestion out. Seapetal, I'm not sure how to tell what the GB/MB size is; the camera (Nikon Coolpix) takes the photos as 640x480 (original image) and I have resized them on the camera (I go through batteries like crazy, doing this) to 160x120 because the book said that's what it had to be to post on email. My camera also has the option to make 320x240 sized copies. Is this the size I should use to get your results? Again, I don't know what those GB/MB would be. Leave it normal from the camera, transfer from the camera to the computer. Use the stocked computer program to compress (not resize) the photos. If you want to see the MB of the photo, right click on the image (wherever you store them at) and view the properties of the image. Like Devon said. That's perfect. By now you've probably followed his directions and have found your sizes. Btw, it's KB and MB. There are GB's but that's ginormous. It goes like this: 1,000 KB (kilobytes)= 1 MB (megabyte), then 1,000 MB (megabytes)= 1 GB (gigabyte). I took a look at the first gravel shot I posted (other post on old gravel) and at 5 x 7/72 dpi, its a bit smaller than your 640x480, so that would work, also the 320x480. Only size thats too small is the 160x120. Would load, just won't enlarge the way you want. Basically, if you shoot for a 5" x 7" image @ 72dpi (resolution) you'll be golden. Still, I think you'll check out the photo sites like Devon suggested and never look back  |
|
|
|
Post by angelminx on Sept 5, 2014 1:17:35 GMT -5
I just tried printing this post so I would have something to look back on as I worked, and "page 1" (from Aug 18 to the 22nd) had a photo of some star (I don't know her name") overlaid on "half" the post. I went ahead and printed the rest, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by angelminx on Sept 5, 2014 1:22:59 GMT -5
I just pulled up "print" (and by default, print preview) for the 3rd time (out of curiosity) after leaving the thread, and this time, no picture  . So I went ahead and printed page 1. |
|
|
|
Post by angelminx on Sept 5, 2014 16:29:08 GMT -5
I've posted some pics under the "Fish Illness" board, under "Betta Fins"..
|
|
. So I went ahead and printed page 1.