<story><title>How ultra-black fish disappear in the deepest seas</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/science/ultra-black-fish.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>krisoft</author><text>How can you publish an article about ultra-black fish without putting a picture of a fish in some recognizable environment?&lt;p&gt;Put it on a lab bench, next to a human hand and some printer paper. Or a banana. Anything the reader might recognize.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;While some ultra-black fish might appear brownish, it’s the product of camera overexposure and editing&amp;quot; Great. You know what does that mean? You need to find a better photo. That&amp;#x27;s what it means. What kind of lazy caption that is.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>grawprog</author><text>&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.sciencealert.com&amp;#x2F;one-of-nature-s-blackest-colours-makes-fish-invisible-deep-in-the-ocean&amp;#x2F;amp&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.sciencealert.com&amp;#x2F;one-of-nature-s-blackest-colour...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Incidentally, this is what initially piqued Karen Osborn&amp;#x27;s interest. As a research zoologist at the Smithsonian&amp;#x27;s National Museum of Natural History, she grew frustrated trying to photograph a striking black fish that had been pulled from the deep sea.
&amp;quot;It didn&amp;#x27;t matter how you set up the camera or lighting—they just sucked up all the light,&amp;quot; says Osborn.</text></comment>
<story><title>How ultra-black fish disappear in the deepest seas</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/science/ultra-black-fish.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>krisoft</author><text>How can you publish an article about ultra-black fish without putting a picture of a fish in some recognizable environment?&lt;p&gt;Put it on a lab bench, next to a human hand and some printer paper. Or a banana. Anything the reader might recognize.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;While some ultra-black fish might appear brownish, it’s the product of camera overexposure and editing&amp;quot; Great. You know what does that mean? You need to find a better photo. That&amp;#x27;s what it means. What kind of lazy caption that is.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>marcosdumay</author><text>If there wasn&amp;#x27;t overexposure and editing, the fish would be just as black as the background, and you wouldn&amp;#x27;t be able to see them. Also, there may be none of those fish living in a more recognizable environment. A dead fish is too different from a living one, so it&amp;#x27;s not worth picturing them.&lt;p&gt;Those photos are actually very good. They show in clear detail how those fish look like, including colors (not all entirely black). They are indeed missing a clear indication of their size (that could be artificial), but otherwise there isn&amp;#x27;t much to improve.</text></comment>