[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tank Sizes
I have a 1.75m (approx 6') tank and I can understand why you feel they
can lack focus. However, I think that this is probably more because the
eye has problems with details in this sort of format, especially when
photographed. In the flesh the size is much more impressive and allows
several points of focus. I wouldn't change mine for anything unless it
was bigger! My only significant point is that of depth, I'd try to find
something that was shallower but wider. Mine is 0.60m deep and can be a
bind to get to the bottom, whereas the width doesn't give enough "depth
of field". I think my ideal would be something abou 2m x 0.45m x 0.80m.
I'd dedicate it to Appistos and plants!
>Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 17:57:55 -0700 (MST)
>From: "Roger S. Miller" <rgrmill at rt66_com>
>Subject: tank sizes
>I have a beautiful place to put a big, new tank, but no big new tank to
>put there. I originally wanted a 6-foot tank - either a 125 or 135
>tank - but after looking through the results from the aquascaping
>showcase I'm having second thoughts. It seems very difficult to put
>together a cohesive aquascape in that size tank. The aquascapes often
>(as Karen Randall commented a couple times) "lack focus".
>Those of you who have 6-footers, do you think that's a problem, or was
>that just my odd sense of things?
>As an alternative I'm considering different sizes. I'd like to use
>something longer than a 4-foot tank because the space available is
>than that. I'm toying with the idea of having a 5-foot tank built for
>maybe 5 feet long by 22 inches high by 18 inches front-to-back - about
>gallons. Does anyone know of a company already making something that
>How about lighting? A five-foot tank seems like a natural for two MH
>pendants, but I'm not sure I want an open top. SAE's are incredibly
>expensive here (when I can find them) and I want them to stay *in* the
>tank. I assume the PCs give me good options, but I'm not sure what