• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

First Post-Shed - Sunglow (maybe)

Weebonilass

Weebonilass

New member
This little gal just finished her first shed for us (probably her second ever shed since she was born the end of Oct). She's currently 11.2 inches and weighs in at a whopping 8 grams... she thinks she's big stuff :)

It was only 16F outside, so went with undiluted lighting from the big window in the kitchen :)

PostShed_07Dec06.jpg


http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y128/Weebonilass/Ashlei/PostShed2_07Dec06.jpg
 
Well, I'm hoping that I'll picked up a few hints from Dean and she'll grow up big and long :) You don't realize how bright she is in this place until you get her in real light and then it's dang. I sure look forward to seeing what she changes into as she matures.
 
DEFINATELY a Sunglow... no maybe about it. Stunning lil' one :cheers:
 
Lore said:
DEFINATELY a Sunglow... no maybe about it. Stunning lil' one :cheers:
Click to expand...


Thank you, thank you, thank you :) Not bad for a petstore purchase. I'm glad that I went back for her. Plus, it's nice to have the daughter back into the snakes again :)
 
Wow. So beautiful. I think Kathy Love either in her book or on her site was talking about the amazing difference lighting can have on photographing snakes...I think she had two pictures of the same snake and in one he was all dull and plain looking and then in the other he was bright and amazing. She looks great! Good decision going back to the store for her.
 
Weebonilass said:
Thank you, thank you, thank you :) Not bad for a petstore purchase. I'm glad that I went back for her. Plus, it's nice to have the daughter back into the snakes again :)
Click to expand...


Petstore purchase? You are so lucky! I'd say sunglow definitely by the way...
 
What excactly is the difference between a Sunglow Motley and an AmelMotley? I think there are not much AmelMotleys with a noticable amount of white out there...
 
Must be the brightness if you really wanna be neat with definitions.... but lots of people would say amel motley's are sunglows mostly indeed...
 
Blutengel said:
Must be the brightness if you really wanna be neat with definitions....
Click to expand...

I don't wonna be neat - I want to know how a specific name is used. I am not a fan of fancy-hupsi-dupsi names, so thats why I'm asking.

It makes sense to me to call an Amel Sunglow when there is no white in an animal. But I see less sense in defining a new criterion of "brightness" connected with the same tradename "Sunglow". So, next question would be why this animal specifically is "SUNGLOW FOR SURE". It looks like a very nice Amel Motley to me, like a common Amel Motley that I called Amel Motley in the last years. So, I'm interested why some animals now change to be Sunglow Motleys were others are not.
It would make sense to me if these animals bred to a Sunglow would produce Sunglows het. Motley - but is it possible to judge that by the look of an Amel Motley? :shrugs:
 
I don't think brightness is a new criterion for sunglow, it is ignored by lots of people IMO. I'm not sure, but I think for example Kathy Love defines sunglow as 'bright/vibrant orange besides the no white criterion and other respected breeders do too. If you ignore brightness, any amel mot is a sunglow. If you don't, only some are... IMO this amel mot is very bright, hence sunglow.

I'm sure you remember the 'sunlog' thread where the brightness factor has been discussed I think.
 
Gorgeous snake! What a strange belly though. I'm not used to seeing that level of orange saturation on the belly of a non-blood. My amel mot has almost zero red/orange on the belly.

Menhir said:
It makes sense to me to call an Amel Sunglow when there is no white in an animal. But I see less sense in defining a new criterion of "brightness" connected with the same tradename "Sunglow".
Click to expand...
I feel the same way. It seems that a sunglow has always been a no-white (dorsally) amel. But in the past few months, people seem to be adding that brightness criterion. I don't agree with it. Like every type, there are different levels of quality across the morph. :shrugs:
 
Roy Munson said:
I feel the same way. It seems that a sunglow has always been a no-white (dorsally) amel. But in the past few months, people seem to be adding that brightness criterion. I don't agree with it. Like every type, there are different levels of quality across the morph. :shrugs:
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with you. Sunglow was created as a MAINLY no-white amel morph that should have bright colors - the brighter, the better. Just like saying okeetee means red,orange and bright border - the brighter and the clearer the borders, the better.
If someone wants to call especially "bright" animals different - maybe like Abbotts, one can easily do that. But I do not appreciate to use a name, that has a different meaning when a different Genotype is in the game.
 
Menhir said:
I don't wonna be neat - I want to know how a specific name is used. I am not a fan of fancy-hupsi-dupsi names, so thats why I'm asking.

It makes sense to me to call an Amel Sunglow when there is no white in an animal. But I see less sense in defining a new criterion of "brightness" connected with the same tradename "Sunglow". So, next question would be why this animal specifically is "SUNGLOW FOR SURE". It looks like a very nice Amel Motley to me, like a common Amel Motley that I called Amel Motley in the last years. So, I'm interested why some animals now change to be Sunglow Motleys were others are not.
It would make sense to me if these animals bred to a Sunglow would produce Sunglows het. Motley - but is it possible to judge that by the look of an Amel Motley? :shrugs:
Click to expand...

So, what do you mean with this comment on your own site;
'kräftig orange Grundfärbung' about the sunglow morph? Ok, it might not mean bright exactly but it 'saturated orange' sure comes close, right? And the more saturated orange, the brighter, don't you think :shrugs: It shows that the definition is not 'amel without white' only...

I'd hesitate to call this one a sunglow, not very saturated/kraftiges orange background IMO...;
http://www.kornnatterlexikon.de/index.php?action=3&section=31&fid=110&page=12&buchstabe=19&alterx=0

This one has.... and it is bright...
http://www.kornnatterlexikon.de/index.php?action=3&section=31&fid=110&page=14&buchstabe=19&alterx=0
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top