Genus Poecilotheria

[GoTerps]

P. rufilata

Female Poecilotheria rufilata

 

[shogun804]

4"+ female P formosa fresh after a molt, not the best pic but it shows the legspan fairly well.

 

[Phalagorn]

Poecilotheria miranda

 

[shogun804]

nice pics phalagorn, that female looks massive looks like the male felt her wrath.

 

[Palespider]

So he got munched huh? That's too bad.

 

[Andrew vV]

P. metallica

 

[GoTerps]

Very nice Andrew! Good luck!

My male is in premolt right now, I'm hoping he will mature with this molt... my girls are just waiting!

 

[Andrew vV]

Thanks! I have a male that should mature in a moult or two as well(I slowed him down quite nicely!),The one in the pictures belongs to Tarcan
Good luck to you when your guy matures

 

[shogun804]

thought i would post a pic of my little P subfusca, its still really tiny but im sure it will be putting on some nice size within the next few months.

 

[Sean]

Eric, is that from a fresh molt. I love my rufies, but mine sure dont look like that.

Female Poecilotheria rufilata

 

[GoTerps]

Eric, is that from a fresh molt. I love my rufies, but mine sure dont look like that.

Sean, she was about 10 days post-molt in that picture. All the colors are fairly accurate except those purple highlights mainly just show up with the flash.

I have a male coming tommorow for her and my other girl.

 

[Raqua]

Sean, she was about 10 days post-molt in that picture. All the colors are fairly accurate except those purple highlights mainly just show up with the flash.

I have a male coming tommorow for her and my other girl.

I think that your purple light changes the color quite a lot. My rufies have orange setae, yours has purple. It can be seen also on the overal coloring IMHO.

 

[GoTerps]

I think that your purple light changes the color quite a lot. My rufies have orange setae, yours has purple. It can be seen also on the overal coloring IMHO.

It's not a "purple light", just the flash from the camera... maybe that's what you meant? Taking pics at close range with a built in flash does that. But the overall color isn't much different to my eyes.

I much prefer the colors in natural light, but it's extremely hard for me to do with this camera, and w/out a tripod... and I'm lazy This species in particular gives my camera trouble... the greens are so fantastic in natural light.

 

[Raqua]

I saw your pics of E. cyanognathus and those seemed also too 'purple' I thought I red somewhere that you use some kind of purple light to lit your spider ?? Am I wrong? If this does your flash, then It doesn't look ok to me. Flash should give 'white' light .. No pic colouring should be visible.

 

[GoTerps]

I saw your pics of E. cyanognathus and those seemed also too 'purple' I thought I red somewhere that you use some kind of purple light to lit your spider ?? Am I wrong? If this does your flash, then It doesn't look ok to me. Flash should give 'white' light .. No pic colouring should be visible.

For reference sake... my E. cyanognathus pics are HERE and HERE . Both speciemens were photographed right after molting and are great representations of what the spider looks like IMO.

I know next to nothing about photography. I got my camera 4 years ago in 2001 (Olympus C-3000zoom).

I have NEVER in my entire life taken a picture with external lighting, nor do I have any plans/desire too.

All of my pictures are taken 8 inches (20cm) away from the subjects, and utilze the crummy built in flash. That's as close as my camera goes in manual mode.

 

[Steve Nunn]

Flash should give 'white' light .. No pic colouring should be visible.

Hi,
I disagree with that comment, many digital cameras are well known for giving a "blue" hue in certain light, may have nothing to do with purple lighting or any deliberate attempt to get strong colour.

Having used several quality and terrible digital cameras over the years, I can certainly tell you that depending on light, camera angle to the light, range and flash quality all have the potential to affect the colour.

When I shoot my spiders, I always look for the photos that have picked up the colours best. Are you certain this isn't the case here???

It seems you're insinuating that these photos are altered in some way. I'm just pointing out that may not be true at all

There are reasons many professional photographers still prefer standard film to digital in certain instances, colour is definately one of them.

Just IMO anyway, false accusations like that can be very damaging to credability, you should know your product before making such a call

I don't intend to offend at all, but I think these photos could be the result of natural digital photography!!!!

Thanks,
Steve

 

[Philth]

ultimate male

This guy recently matured, from the first batch that came into the U.S.

 

[Sean]

Sean, she was about 10 days post-molt in that picture. All the colors are fairly accurate except those purple highlights mainly just show up with the flash.

I have a male coming tommorow for her and my other girl.

Nice, I too have a male and a female, are they an easy spieces to breed do you know?

Great pics btw.

 

[Raqua]

For reference sake... my E. cyanognathus pics are HERE and HERE . Both speciemens were photographed right after molting and are great representations of what the spider looks like IMO.

I know next to nothing about photography. I got my camera 4 years ago in 2001 (Olympus C-3000zoom).

I have NEVER in my entire life taken a picture with external lighting, nor do I have any plans/desire too.

All of my pictures are taken 8 inches (20cm) away from the subjects, and utilze the crummy built in flash. That's as close as my camera goes in manual mode.

Hi,
I disagree with that comment, many digital cameras are well known for giving a "blue" hue in certain light, may have nothing to do with purple lighting or any deliberate attempt to get strong colour.

Having used several quality and terrible digital cameras over the years, I can certainly tell you that depending on light, camera angle to the light, range and flash quality all have the potential to affect the colour.

When I shoot my spiders, I always look for the photos that have picked up the colours best. Are you certain this isn't the case here???

It seems you're insinuating that these photos are altered in some way. I'm just pointing out that may not be true at all

There are reasons many professional photographers still prefer standard film to digital in certain instances, colour is definately one of them.

Just IMO anyway, false accusations like that can be very damaging to credability, you should know your product before making such a call

I don't intend to offend at all, but I think these photos could be the result of natural digital photography!!!!

Thanks,
Steve

I was not trying to accuse anybody or show any kind of offence. If you felt that way I am sorry for that it wasn't meant that way at all. I was jus curious.
The E. cyanognathus pics I was refering to were these:
http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=431384&postcount=103

Compared to my pics, where the color IMHO came out very well and really represent what I have seen:
http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=447858&postcount=108

Are there some diferent variations then ?
My rufilatas also have a bit diferent color. That's why I thought that GoTerps might be using some kind of specific setup that might make those pics look more purple.
Again, no offence meant.

 

[Steve Nunn]

Are there some diferent variations then ?

Only in the type of cameras you will use.

My rufilatas also have a bit diferent color. That's why I thought that GoTerps might be using some kind of specific setup that might make those pics look more purple.
Again, no offence meant.

None taken I just wanted to clarify your statement on how a camera flash will give off the same light in different models. I disagreed, that was all

I do not think your are trying to attack GoTerps, I just belive you are incorrect in thinking these photos may not have been taken in anything other then normal conditions. But no offense taken at all

Steve