# Crested gecko morph breeders



## intravenous (Dec 20, 2006)

I'm just wondering if there are any crested gecko morph breeders on here? Or can you even tell me who are the big US crested gecko breeders and does anyone import from them? I'm not looking to buy at the moment but am wanting to see who is out there for future reference. I'm especially interested in the blonde morph.


----------



## GlasgowGecko (Feb 23, 2008)

Hey, 
There are some very big breeders in the states, and in mainland Europe, but we also have some good breeders in the UK, most of which will have individuals of the vast majority of morphs available.

For me the best place to start is Scott at Captive Bred (in the UK). A fantastic guy (although I've only spoken to and emailed him briefly). He has probably the biggest Crested gecko breeding project in the UK, so he is a good point of call... oh, and he delivers...

Andy


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

blondes are getting fairly easy to come by however its not until a gecko is older u can tel for sure if its going to be a blonde...

so in a sense u may wish to buy as an adult.. true blondes are very very dark bitter chocolate brown and palest cream..

some people ive seen descruibe their cresties as blondes when really they arent dark enough in contrast to the pale or vice versa..

but the issue with crestie morphs is its so subjective as the description is visual only not inherited..

so one mans red is anothers orange etc etc so u wil see morphs being debated and argued about a lot in cresties


----------



## crouchy (Jan 14, 2008)

The problem with cresties is that things like blondes are not actually a morph, they a just a difference in colour. So because there is no definate line between a blonde and a high contrast harlequin many people sell cresties as blondes when they are really just a harlequin. This also happens with halloween harlys, moonglows, partial pinstripes etc.

There are quite a few people breeding cresties now so your best bet is to keep an eye on the forum classifieds and just choose one you like the look of. The biggest breeder in England is Scott from www.captivebred.co.uk
But theres also
Dean Rudman, he has some stunning animals
Treasurecrest
Rhacshack
and loads of others

Some of the biggest crested gecko "morph" breeders in america are Allen Repashy and Anthony Caponetto but Its very rare that people import animals from them so you will probably have to stick with the UK breeders.


----------



## Dextersdad (Mar 28, 2008)

Crestie morphs are weird.

You can put 2 parents exactly the same together and have a clutch of all different morphs.


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

I agree 100% with Crouchy (p.s. thanks for mentioning me!lol)

Blondes are a 'designer morph', that is the morph is defined by the very strict colour and pattern combination that was chosen by the person that created the term 'blonde'. As sparkle says, a 'Blonde Harlequin' is a very very dark base colour, almost black ideally, with extremely pale cream/white harlequin markings. Lots of people have started calling their regular dark coloured harleys 'blondes' to push up the price, but you'll be able to suss these people out by looking at photos. Also, as Sparkle mentioned, the adult colours will not fully develop until they are almost adult size, so a gecko that looks 'blonde' as the 3 month old may not as an adult. 

Also, the nature of cresties is that you cant really have 'morph breeders' as you do with Leos. There is no 'wild type/normal' morph in cresties, as they are polymorphic in the wild too, so as Dexters Dad said, you can breed any 2 cresties together and get pretty much any morph. There is however, still a tendancy for parents to produce offspring that are more similar to themselves so peoples breeding Cresteds that are good quality blondes will have more chance of producing a good quality blonde baby. This seems to be particularly true with colours, as adults with very strong good colouration seem to produce brighter babies.

Personally, I have what i guess would be called a 'blonde project', my male Blonde Harlequin 'Kurian' is bred to a group of 3 females of different morphs each year, with lots of variety which seems to throw a good amount of high contrast harlequins (inc. blondes, red harleys and true halloweens). In 2009 I will have a very exciting pairing of a female Halloween harlequin (bred by me in 2007, she's nearing 38g ish now so by summer she'll be a good size) who goes properly black and orange, and a male Blonde Harlequin from Dragons Den USA who was imported in 2008( he's got a ridiculous amount of cream and goes pretty much jet black too!) so needless to say i'm REALLY looking forward to that!


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

We breed various morphs, and try to develop the colours through breeding similar looking animals together, but as mentioned cresties dont breed 'true', for example we have two very plain buckskins with no dalmatian spots and this year they have produced all orange dalmations?!
This year we are hoping to breed pinstripes, part pins, extreme harlies (including blondes), harlies, reds, tigers, creams, dalmatians and whatever else our adults decide to throw at us lol.
We have been breeding for 8 years and have developed some really good lines in our opinion, the babies we bred last year were our best yet and this year should see some even better ones.
Anyway - there are other breeders as mentioned Scott W, Rudders etc.
The american imports are getting few and far between from the us, there used to be quite a few dragons den and pangea imports but these seemed to have dried up, plus with the exchange rate they will be a lot more expensive than they were a few years ago.


----------



## thomas (Jan 3, 2008)

so has any one got a pic of a blonde i have one that i thought was,but im not so sure now after reading this thread,sorry to hijack this thread


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

thomas said:


> so has any one got a pic of a blonde i have one that i thought was,but im not so sure now after reading this thread,sorry to hijack this thread


 
post a pic and we'll tell you! I'll get some of mine but i've got no fired up pics on this pc


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

arent blondes extremely dark black or bitter chocolate brown with pale cream or almost white colours>>

maybe im wrong..

if so ive seen a fair few but then since its visually subjective maybe the way i see colours is different..


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

Ok, this is Kurian my adult male Blonde harlequin dalmatian... *not fully fired* up. His sides go darker than this and his dorsal remains very pale cream










And this is Flint, my subadult male Blonde harley from Dragons Den USA. Again, he is not fully fired up, this boy goes black!


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

hes lovely..

so can a blonde be various markings as long as its dark dark brown or black against very pale cream


----------



## suey (Aug 21, 2008)

I will add a picture of my new, what i consider to be a blond, as soon as i can work out how to add a photo.:blush:


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

yeah the blonde harely piccie thats what i thought blondes were a contrast of palest cream and blacky brown... irrespecitve of pattern...

I had a male like that which I sold last year cos I wasnt really into that morph as such..

but they do look very striking :no1:


----------



## suey (Aug 21, 2008)




----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

sparkle said:


> hes lovely..
> 
> so can a blonde be various markings as long as its dark dark brown or black against very pale cream


 
Well in theory yes, seeing as 'blonde' is a colour combination, its usually blonde harlequins, seeing as they have the most pattern but in theory i suppose you could also have a blonde flame. 


Suey; he's gorgeous, does he fire up darker than that though? and how solid is the cream on his back? it looks like its mainly the pinstriping thats proper cream. If that's his darkest and its not just the pic making his dorsal look mottled then i'd personally call him more of a chocolate harlequin, but thats just because i'm super picky about what i call 'designer morphs'


----------



## intravenous (Dec 20, 2006)

Art_Gecko101 said:


> I agree 100% with Crouchy (p.s. thanks for mentioning me!lol)
> 
> Blondes are a 'designer morph', that is the morph is defined by the very strict colour and pattern combination that was chosen by the person that created the term 'blonde'. As sparkle says, a 'Blonde Harlequin' is a very very dark base colour, almost black ideally, with extremely pale cream/white harlequin markings. Lots of people have started calling their regular dark coloured harleys 'blondes' to push up the price, but you'll be able to suss these people out by looking at photos. Also, as Sparkle mentioned, the adult colours will not fully develop until they are almost adult size, so a gecko that looks 'blonde' as the 3 month old may not as an adult.
> 
> ...


Ooh, that sounds exciting . Can I be cheeky and ask how much true blondes and halloween harlequins go for? If you cannot tell if they will be a blonde until they reach adulthood how do you go about selling offspring that could potentially be blonde? Also do you know of anyone in the UK that has blonde fires/flames (would I be right in thinking these are like blonde harlequins but their sides are more of a solid colour rather than patchy)?

Also thanks to everyone else for your help .


----------



## suey (Aug 21, 2008)

Art_Gecko101 said:


> Suey; he's gorgeous, does he fire up darker than that though? and how solid is the cream on his back? it looks like its mainly the pinstriping thats proper cream. If that's his darkest and its not just the pic making his dorsal look mottled then i'd personally call him more of a chocolate harlequin, but thats just because i'm super picky about what i call 'designer morphs'


Thanks. I'll let you know about the firing up in due course, only had him a few weeks, so haven't even handled him yet, which i do of an evening, will do in the next few days though.

PS thanks for your web site, i've learnt an awful lot from their in the last 6 months! :notworthy:


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

intravenous said:


> Ooh, that sounds exciting . Can I be cheeky and ask how much true blondes and halloween harlequins go for? If you cannot tell if they will be a blonde until they reach adulthood how do you go about selling offspring that could potentially be blonde? Also do you know of anyone in the UK that has blonde fires/flames (would I be right in thinking these are like blonde harlequins but their sides are more of a solid colour rather than patchy)?
> 
> Also thanks to everyone else for your help .


It'll depend on the seller to be honest, I price my geckos in different 'bands' ranging from 'average quality' geckos which are pretty 'normal' looking, to 'holdback quality' geckos which have high contrast, good markings and exceptional colours. The blondes and halloweens and red harlquins i've produced i have considered to be 'holdback quality' so are about £75-90, but it depends on each gecko. In the UK, breeders seem to tend to price their cresties all the same regardless of colour or morph (very unlike in the US!) so you may get a real bargain by scouring the classifieds looking for pics of the young ones!

As for judging the morph of juvis as a seller, although you can't tell the true colours and patterns (esp. with reds and dalmatians) that a juvi crestie will have as an adult, I normally have a good idea by the time i sell them. For example, i look at the way similar looking previous hatchlings have turned out, and you can also look at the parents. Flame and harlequin markings are usually pretty obvious by a month old or so (if not straight out of the egg!) so if i've had a gecko hatch with a strong harlequin pattern, it will usually stay a harlequin. I've found over the time i've been breeding that you can get a good idea of the adult colours of a baby gecko by seeing what they look like fired up too. For example, i had a baby hatch this year who i saw fired up bright red a few times, and now its 6 months old and its new owner sent me a pic and its bright screaming red! I sell geckos at about 3 months + normally, so by that time they've lost the hatchling colouration (which is normally a muddy red) and ive seen them fire up a bit so i can predict what it'll be like when its older. That's how i base my judgements when i sell my geckos, and also people can see the parents. It is hard though, and especially with other breeders that dont spend as much time with their hatchlings as I do and make notes on parentage and colour changes etc, it can be hard to judge from a pic. 

I dont know of anyone specifically working with blonde flames, people probably have them but either don't care to advertise or dont notice that they have them. In general though, harleys seem more popular so people will always try to breed animals with more and more pattern


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

Cool i'll look forward to some fired up pics! He is GORGEOUS though whether he darkens up or not! Got LOTS AND LOTS of potential!.... but then i love this colour combo!

Thanks for the compliments on my site! It means a lot! :blush:




suey said:


> Thanks. I'll let you know about the firing up in due course, only had him a few weeks, so haven't even handled him yet, which i do of an evening, will do in the next few days though.
> 
> PS thanks for your web site, i've learnt an awful lot from their in the last 6 months! :notworthy:


----------



## Scott W (May 19, 2007)

crouchy said:


> Some of the biggest crested gecko "morph" breeders in america are Allen Repashy and Anthony Caponetto but Its very rare that people import animals from them so you will probably have to stick with the UK breeders.


I have imported nearly 400 cresteds from Allen over the last few years, unfortunately he is under supplied now and unable to export anymore but saying that the UK has enough bloodlines and morphs to be self sustainable and there is no reason import anymore ;o)


----------



## Scott W (May 19, 2007)

GlasgowGecko said:


> Hey,
> There are some very big breeders in the states, and in mainland Europe, but we also have some good breeders in the UK, most of which will have individuals of the vast majority of morphs available.
> 
> For me the best place to start is Scott at Captive Bred (in the UK). A fantastic guy (although I've only spoken to and emailed him briefly). He has probably the biggest Crested gecko breeding project in the UK, so he is a good point of call... oh, and he delivers...
> ...


 
thanks for the comments Andy.

Scott


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

We breed one of our lines specifically for blondes, although we wont be releasing any of last years blonde babies as they are all looking female bar one and we will be keeping them ourselves - they are going to be exceptional, but this year we will start releasing the blondes. Blondes do not show adult colouration until at least 6 - 8 months old so as already mentioned babies can look fairly plain until then. One of our breeders Lucerne is a gorgeous blonde, he fires up almost black and white. This isnt the greatest pic of him but you get the idea (sorry the pic is so big)









and the female we have put him to for the blonde project is Sage









I will get some pics up of the babies soon


----------



## crouchy (Jan 14, 2008)

Scott W said:


> I have imported nearly 400 cresteds from Allen over the last few years, unfortunately he is under supplied now and unable to export anymore but saying that the UK has enough bloodlines and morphs to be self sustainable and there is no reason import anymore ;o)


I know you have imported a lot in the past scott but i suppose a lot of them were for your own breeding stock?

Not many people import cresties to immediatly sell on. Well not in the last couple of years anyway


----------



## Philcw (Feb 7, 2008)

Just thought i would pop my head in :lol2: and say that i breed various crestie morphs. so urmmm HI! lol


----------



## thomas (Jan 3, 2008)

well thanks for the pics,after looking at them mine is a blonde but he goes a lot darker brown and has a few dalmation spots.


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

how bizarre according to some of these pics i have a blonde .. 

hes really dark brown and cream but i assumed for a blonde it needed to be blacky brown and pale almost whitish..



Hmm i really need to get elle ( montahe_morphs) round to get some decent fired up pics of all my cresties


----------



## chondro13 (Aug 18, 2008)

how odd.. according to those pics i also have a blonde harlequin.. (s)he fires up literally black and cream/white - with lighter partial pinning too.

will have to get some decent shots and see what people think..


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

chondro13 said:


> how odd.. according to those pics i also have a blonde harlequin.. (s)he fires up literally black and cream/white - with lighter partial pinning too.
> 
> will have to get some decent shots and see what people think..


 
I blooming knew they werent that rare...

I mean ive also sold two definate blondes in the last 12 months one a sub-adult and one an adult. I sold them as i dont want to breed blondes and I wasnt that keen on the morph as such.
I do agree their colours dont come through properly till they are older though .. 

hey ho..

ive also got a female that fires up blacky and cream ( but since the shades of cream are different and not a uniform pale white cream I didnt call her blonde) i just call her a harely... her creams are more mottled and have patchy shades through them

I thought with blondes that the cream had to be very uniform over the body irrespecitve of where it was placed.. and not lots of shades..



I far prefer my reds and oranges.. always will ..but blondes are a nice contrast


----------



## chondro13 (Aug 18, 2008)

lol weird!

we should all take the initiative to have a pic-fest this weekend and see how many 'blondes' we can find hiding amongst our collections..


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

> ive also got a female that fires up blacky and cream ( but since the shades of cream are different and not a uniform pale white cream I didnt call her blonde) i just call her a harely... her creams are more mottled and have patchy shades through them
> 
> I thought with blondes that the cream had to be very uniform over the body irrespecitve of where it was placed.. and not lots of shades..


I also wouldnt consider her a blonde from that description. One of the problems as you've said is that Cresties fire up and down, the pics i posted are pretty rubbish, both those males go pretty much black and white/v.pale solid cream and have lots of solid colour on them. Thats what make them blonde. Chocolate coloured harleys are pretty common, but IMO the thing that makes a blonde a blonde is the quality of the cream. But thats because its a 'designer morph' lol so people will always have diff opinions



> how odd.. according to those pics i also have a blonde harlequin.. (s)he fires up literally black and cream/white - with lighter partial pinning too.


She sounds like a promising blonde! post pics! The subadult male blonde i have has almost full pinstripe too, but his dorsal is so pale that its the same colour as the pinstriping so you cant really see it! lol


----------



## thomas (Jan 3, 2008)

i didnt think they were that rare,ive seen a few about,they are pretty tho,i love the colours on mine.


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

Art_Gecko101 said:


> I also wouldnt consider her a blonde from that description. One of the problems as you've said is that Cresties fire up and down, the pics i posted are pretty rubbish, both those males go pretty much black and white/v.pale solid cream and have lots of solid colour on them. Thats what make them blonde. Chocolate coloured harleys are pretty common, but IMO the thing that makes a blonde a blonde is the quality of the cream. But thats because its a 'designer morph' lol so people will always have diff opinions
> 
> 
> 
> She sounds like a promising blonde! post pics! The subadult male blonde i have has almost full pinstripe too, but his dorsal is so pale that its the same colour as the pinstriping so you cant really see it! lol


yes but some of the pics respected breeders call blondes ( on overseas forums and the likes too) seem to me not to have that PURITY of cream..

im picky like u..

if mine dont have a solid pale cream they just arent blondes.. ( to me)simple


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

The problem with crested morphs is that there is no known genes as such which 'sets' the colour and morph like in leopard geckos. Therefore most morphs are up for interpretation, I class Lucerne as a blonde but not Sage but she is an extreme harlequin with a pale background colour, more yellow than cream or white but we have used her in our blonde project as she is the palest backed female we had. In my interpretation blondes should be dark background harlequins with cream or white 'flames' down their backs. Lucerne is not fired up in that pic by the way he can go almost jet black with pale cream. 
The babies we have produced have very pale cream down their backs and going onto their head area.

A definition I have have found on a very well respected site says pretty much what I have said as well, I cant find anywhere where it says the dorsal pattern should be solid - if anyone can find a definatition stating that I would be interested to see it.
morphs_colors
"This is an often misrepresented morph. In order for a Crested Gecko do be considered a "Blonde" it must meet two criteria. The first is the Cream colored dorsal flame pattern, the lighter the better. The second is that a gecko of this morph, when fired up, should be incredibly dark if not black, on the sides and background. "


----------



## crouchy (Jan 14, 2008)

I think too many people are not understanding the true definition of a blonde. To be honest i doubt if many people in the UK have what id call a blonde. To be a blonde the dark parts have to be so dark it looks black and the light parts have to be a creamy white colour not a yellowy cream.

Ive had people say that this girl of mine is blonde but she isnt. she is close-ish but there is too much yellow in the head and top of the neck and the dark part is a dark brown not black


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

crouchy said:


> I think too many people are not understanding the true definition of a blonde. To be honest i doubt if many people in the UK have what id call a blonde. To be a blonde the dark parts have to be so dark it looks black and the light parts have to be a creamy white colour not a yellowy cream.
> 
> Ive had people say that this girl of mine is blonde but she isnt. she is close-ish but there is too much yellow in the head and top of the neck and the dark part is a dark brown not black


crouchy thats what i THOUGHT.. and what ive always said too.. but i still didnt think they were rare.. that was my only point but maybe thats due to so many people saying they have them without them really having a true blonde...

anyways.. im happy with the definition i thought was correct being confimred by people like yourself i consider more knowledgeable... to me a blonde NEEDS to be chocolate brown or black and the cream palest of pale...

but i have seen others.. my friend Andrea has one whos cream bits are almost white cream.. it was a lucky find she doesnt use the net or know any breeders .. think it was in a pet shop and again the brown almost black



anyway all that said yes i did sell ONE blonde.. the other was i think borderline... and i would say a possible no...
I checked where he came from ( the definate one) he was imported with a larger batch a while back


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

I'm starting to get a bit annoyed at this thread as it seems people are having a dig at my cresties, although my name and geckos are not being mentioned its how the other posts are written - sorry if im getting the wrong end of the stick but that is how it seems. It also is getting a bit tedious for me where people who haven't been keeping cresties for very long are being rated as experts, I'm not saying they havent got knowledge, far from it but surely experience counts, I have been keeping cresties for 9 years now and still would never consider myself an expert BUT what I have found is the last few years is that animals which were once considered to be a morph such as my Lucerne was classed as a Blonde a long time before most of the people on here were keeping cresties now suddenly he isnt because the definatition has suddenly changed??? I understand that they need to be chocolate and cream and I have said this in my posts BUT surely that only applies to cresties which are fired up, otherwise most morphs when they are fired down are not classed as what they looked like fired up (such as the reds/oranges which fire down very pale pink, orange or even cream). I would be interested to see what people would consider a blonde - I have only ever seen one 'white' back harlequin on the US forums.
I find it so difficult to get a good pic of Lucerne - I know Scott W saw him at Donny, and he was pretty fired up then. The best pic I can find is this one, his cream is cream and not yellow and surely therefore has to be a blonde. Sorry if I seem like I'm getting arsey but it slightly pisses me off :devil:









This is a blonde taken from Pangrea reptiles site - Luceren is actually creamier than this one.


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

I am NOT haveing a dig at your cresties!!



I did mention on sites abroad and other sites in the Uk i have seen blondes which dont fit into the category..
if i have come across at any stage in this thread that I am having a dig at anyones cresties I am genuinely sorry..

I stil maintain that morphs since visual only wil always be argued over this is not the first nor wil it be the last..

YES IT IS.. NO ITS NOT thread..

ive seen arguements over reds.. oranges.. pinners etc etc.. due to the fact its visual only.. noone perceives colours the same either thats bene proven time and time again in tests so as i said previously one mans orange os anothers red. one mans grren is another turquoise.. hence the reason why cresties have always had the issue of being only visually identified..

the thing is if u like an animal.. and u THINK its something then fair enough.. pay what u want for it and everyones happy.. noone is selling them at extortionate prices unless its something very special like a full pinstripe which again Im not that keen on..
I will always prefer reds and oranges.. and thankfully and hopefully they should at least be pretty easy to identify..
Everyone knows you have beautiful cresties.. again I appologise.. everyone knows you have excellent experience with cresties and have gorgerous animals and ive said in this thread i only have 2 yrs experience with them.. which is nothing really.. I just read a lot and try to understand and also stand corrected too.. when im wrong.. for example when art gecko explained about feeding banana to me.. i was happy to be corrected and learn..

I go on a lot of crestie forums and there are many breeders who have examples of blondes.. its debated not just here but everywhere.. .. and i think it always will be...

Also a few years back chevron and flames and harelys all changed too and some pretty respected breeders had a go at me for not keeping up with the changes in clasifications.. I was tolod those classifications were old and now didnt apply.. What is that supposed to mean but hey ho.. so there we go IF classifications change.. WHY.. and if people dont want to change along with it.. what do we all do.. theres no specific wrong or right as such.. only viewpoints regarding visuals with cresties

simple.. buy what u like.. pay what u want .. breed what youre happy with..


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

Right fair enough - but you can see where I am coming from though, it seemed comments were made after my pics were put up. I know sometimes morphs can be so difficult to describe correctly and with (usually) the Americans introducing new morphs etc. it is getting increasingly difficult to not try and name every one with a label, I have some babies I dont even know what to call them they are basically orange tigers with cream flames, they could be classed as creamsicles or orange/ yellow flames or god knows what else, I'm sure I could make a morph up and call it what I liked if I wanted to lol. BUt with the blondes the definition has changed so much (in some peoples eyes) since I got Lucerne in 2002 that who bloody knows. I will have to get some pics up of my babies - at 3 months old they are very pale cream and deep chocolate so I have very high hopes for them. But thanks you for your comments on my animals ;o)


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

Bloody hell I must have been annoyed my spelling was terrible on that thread lol


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

uroplatus said:


> Bloody hell I must have been annoyed my spelling was terrible on that thread lol


 
not good.. my spellings always horrific.. does that mean im always annoyed... :blush:


----------



## neep_neep (Oct 18, 2007)

I have to say, although I love cresties so much, the whole morph issue is one that really grates on me!

I like things standardised. I like solid definitions. Unfortunately, crestie morphs just don't want to play ball :whip:

And, indeed, neither do crestie keepers! There seem to be many many different definitions floating about for various morphs. For example, the creamsicle.
Some keepers say that a creamsicle is defined by being orange cream. Some keepers say that it can be any shade of either orange or yellow, plus cream. (Sorry, sounds like a bit of Stig intro there :blush

My personal opinion? The creamsicle was named after the ice lolly of the same name. Which is orange and cream. Not yellow and cream. So, these yellow and cream cresties should just be called 'yellow and cream'. Why is this such a problem? It doesn't change the way the gecko looks, it is a more accurate description of what the gecko actually looks like! I don't know why people get so hung up on trying to categorise their gecko so it has a 'designer' morph name. 

Funny thing is, I much prefer yellow and creams to orange and creams... doesn't matter to me that the orange and cream has a designer name.

It is just a colour combination with a label. I wonder when people will start selling 'Cappuccino' cresties - the designer, slightly paler buckskin for the more discerning crestie keeper 

Yet there isn't really any way of anybody saying which is correct or not, because now it genuinely seems it is down to personal opinion, following a very basic set of guidelines which has been flexed to suit. And because so many people say that their gecko is one morph, others follow, which means that the 'popular opinion' morph could actually be very different to the original description.

Equally, my personal interpretations of 'current' morphs may be very different from those (such as uroplatus) who have been into cresties for far longer than I have - presumably as I picked up my understanding of morph definitions from the point at which I started to learn them. And seeing as how they appear to have changed, even in the short time i've kept cresties, I don't think it's a system that is ever likely to just sit still and behave itself. As much as it offends my penchant for classifying things into defined little packets 

Not entirely sure what my point is - just having a little rant to myself. Thought i'd join in the fun  I think that my general conclusion is, as much as I hate it, crestie morphs and classifications are a dynamic system, which makes things difficult and tedious to classify, and inevitibly leads to arguments. There is no one reference point for new crestie morph definitions - the originals written by Repashy, de Vosjoli and Fast just don't cover the diversity we see nowadays, leaving it very much open to interpretation.


----------



## crouchy (Jan 14, 2008)

uroplatus said:


> I'm starting to get a bit annoyed at this thread as it seems people are having a dig at my cresties, although my name and geckos are not being mentioned its how the other posts are written - sorry if im getting the wrong end of the stick but that is how it seems. It also is getting a bit tedious for me where people who haven't been keeping cresties for very long are being rated as experts, I'm not saying they havent got knowledge, far from it but surely experience counts, I have been keeping cresties for 9 years now and still would never consider myself an expert BUT what I have found is the last few years is that animals which were once considered to be a morph such as my Lucerne was classed as a Blonde a long time before most of the people on here were keeping cresties now suddenly he isnt because the definatition has suddenly changed??? I understand that they need to be chocolate and cream and I have said this in my posts BUT surely that only applies to cresties which are fired up, otherwise most morphs when they are fired down are not classed as what they looked like fired up (such as the reds/oranges which fire down very pale pink, orange or even cream). I would be interested to see what people would consider a blonde - I have only ever seen one 'white' back harlequin on the US forums.
> I find it so difficult to get a good pic of Lucerne - I know Scott W saw him at Donny, and he was pretty fired up then. The best pic I can find is this one, his cream is cream and not yellow and surely therefore has to be a blonde. Sorry if I seem like I'm getting arsey but it slightly pisses me off :devil:


I hope those comments arent aimed towards me . At no point have i ever called myself an expert. Nor have i ever said that what i say is fact. I have my opinions on so called "Morphs" and i express them. My definition of a blonde is probably different to yours and thats fine. I probably have different opinions to you about partial Pinstripes too.

As numerous people have said on this topic before, crestie "morphs" are open to personal opinion because there are no set rules for each colour and pattern. What i see as a dark harley other people may see as blonde, what some people see as a halloween harley i see as a normal harley and what i see as orange other people may call red or vica versa (sp?)

Its just because we all read the definitions and see a few photos on the net (everyones screens, cameras and lighting are different so what i see on my screen is different to what you see on your screen) and then we form are own opinions of what makes each particular "morph". Its nothing to get worried about, its just something that happens and will probably always happen with cresties.


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

Lol I've chilled out a bit now and I do agree with you (neep nee). The morph issue will never go away until we can completely map the genetic codes, which since they are polymorphic will probably never happen, we cant say for certain what morphs are what just what they look like to yourself. I agree with the creamsicle comments, I have to admit I sold a gecko last year whihc was yellow not orange and should have been labelled as a yellow and cream flame not a creamsicle but I was having a dumb day when I labelled it and the people that got it were chuffed with it anyway so I dont suppose it matters too much. The Rhac book is well outdated now in reference to morphs, I'm sure newer books will be wrote giving better descriptions, but then again they are only written by people interpretting colour lol so who knows.


----------



## suey (Aug 21, 2008)

I suppose the idea being that the so called designer morphs fetch more money?

Wether my kin-da is called a blonde or a chocolate harlequin he looks the way he does. People will pay what they will pay for any off spring he may produce.

Designer or not i love him, as i do all my others.

As all you crestie people are on this thread not sure if i should thank you or curse you giving me this addiction i now have :crazy: lol!

Oh and what has happened to the person who started the thread? :lol:


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

crouchy said:


> I hope those comments arent aimed towards me . At no point have i ever called myself an expert. Nor have i ever said that what i say is fact. I have my opinions on so called "Morphs" and i express them. My definition of a blonde is probably different to yours and thats fine. I probably have different opinions to you about partial Pinstripes too.
> 
> As numerous people have said on this topic before, crestie "morphs" are open to personal opinion because there are no set rules for each colour and pattern. What i see as a dark harley other people may see as blonde, what some people see as a halloween harley i see as a normal harley and what i see as orange other people may call red or vica versa (sp?)
> 
> Its just because we all read the definitions and see a few photos on the net (everyones screens, cameras and lighting are different so what i see on my screen is different to what you see on your screen) and then we form are own opinions of what makes each particular "morph". Its nothing to get worried about, its just something that happens and will probably always happen with cresties.


Those comments were aimed at a few people not just yourself but I was annoyed, when morph definitions seems to change like the wind then none of us can have a cresty for very long before it either gets discredited as the morph you thought it was or it suddenly becomes a brand new morph and is worth a fortune now lol. In regards to part pins, in my opinion they should have pins on at least 50% of their dorsal crests, I have seen cresties with one or two dots of white being classed as part pins but there you go. I'm sure you would get annoyed if you had an animals which you had which had been clarified by top breeders as a certain morph for over 6 years then all of a sudden people decide it isnt?


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

lol i noticed the person who started the thread had gone too - lol starts a thread which starts a debate then leaves - how rude!!!!


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

Woa didnt see this blowing up! lol by I completely agree with Uroplatus as well as all the other great points that have been said. 

The reason i think i'm so anal about these 'designer morph' labels being used incorrectly is that people use them to bump up the price on their geckos and use the label to over-sell to people who are less experienced and willing to believe someone over their own eyes. It's very easy for someone who's relatively inexperienced to come on an internet forum and give advice to people as if they are an expert. I AM NO EXPERT, I know that and i hope noone else on here thinks they are also, because as the end of the day, we are all empassioned pet-owners/hobbyists. Lauren has been keeping Rhacs longer than most on here, and although that doesnt necessarily mean everything she says is the law, i think she's proved through her advice on here and experience that she's a good and knowledgeable keeper. 
I've seen pics of Lucerne before and i agree he's a blonde. The problem is evidently that people read a thread like this and think, 'hey my gecko looks a bit like that, its not quite as dark, or quite as creamy, but it is generally the same kind of thing' and whilst that works for many morphs, with these designer ones, there has to be a point at which the line is drawn. The blonde label was originally given to describe geckos that had an outstanding contrast of dark dark brown/black and a good pale cream patterning. To answer a question much earlier on, i think Lauren asked, by the 'solid' cream comments, i merely meant that the more cream the better the contrast, some flames/harleys have some bits of their dorsal which are really pale but most of it is mottled and so the overall effect of the really paleness is lost. To me, the quality of the 'blonde' morph is in that contrast between the light and dark, so a gecko with more pale cream is going to fit the description better. 

Oh and Lauren, the pinstripe thing REALLY annoys me too! To me, to call an animal partial pinstripe, the pinstriping would have to be pretty obvious when you glance at the gecko, not visible in tiny bits once you've searched for it! lol its another example of people trying to cash in on 'morph labels'


----------



## Fill (Nov 24, 2007)

So because the whole morph thing isn't genetic or whatever, would you prefer the price of cresties to be determined by something else? Age or weight maybe? Regardless of colour or morph.

For example...

Babies £40
Juveniles £60
Sub-adult unsexed £80
Sub-adult sexed males £100
Sub-adult sexed females and adult males £120
Adult females £150


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

Those prices are cheap! If you're selling for that put me down for some! lol

At the end of the day, 'morph' simply means a specific combination of morphological features, so it doesnt matter if its genetic or not. In the UK the pricing structure most people use isnt as 'morph based' as the US market, but there is obviously going to be more demand for 'prettier' geckos (e.g. the more popular morphs like harleys or pinstripes or reds) than there is for the more 'plain' looking ones, so it'll always affect the price. 



Phil1988 said:


> So because the whole morph thing isn't genetic or whatever, would you prefer the price of cresties to be determined by something else? Age or weight maybe? Regardless of colour or morph.
> 
> For example...
> 
> ...


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

Thanks for that Sarah - I probably shouldnt have blown up the way I did but I'm glad I did now lol, got some interesting comments lol.
I agree there are varying 'level' of morphs for example you get harlies then you get extreme harlies but peoples interpretations of them vary but usually people at least agree they are harlies, lol. With reds as well, most if not all the ones I've seen labelled as reds are in fact deep orange, my own Cherry included, she is labelled up as a red on the site but she is really a deep orangey red rather than pure red. I am still learning now about Rhacs, and I will freely admit it, afterall, especially with the cresties they have only been available to hobbyists for the last 14/15 years so there is no way we can know ecerything there is to know, plus with new scientific information and aslo new equipment, foods etc. we are learnign all the time.
Thanks for your comment on Lucerne - I am very proud of him (im sure everyone guessed that now lol), when I got him I was offered stupid amounts of money for him, I was also asked on several occasions to ship him to the USA, bear in mind at the time 'normal' harlies were hard to get hold of and he was an exceptional cresty at the time, with selective breeding now he maybe isn't as rare as he was but I still think he's pretty special (I know you shouldnt have favourites but he is mine :flrt
I agree that blondes should be as dark as possible and as cream/white as possible but as with all morphs they can be graded differently.
You do see so many people trying to cash in on the morphs - its buckskins that get me, you may have seen my post a while ago on the pangea forums? I hate it when someone has a plain brown gecko and they desperately want it to be a morph so they come up with all sorts of names trying to make it more 'special' I have 6 buckskins and I am proud to say so, I love my bucks and to be honest they always (for me) tend to be bigger with better heads than other morphs lol. I would never part with my adult bucks just because they aren't 'pretty' enough, some of my best babies eg my reds (oranges whatever lol), came from a pair of buckskins.

But yeah the part pin thing grates on me too lol :whistling2:


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

I always price my cresties by colour, it is the only way to do it otherwise the 'prettier' ones would go first and the brown ones would sell last. I noticed it when I had a table at donny last year that even though the harlies were sometimes £20 more than the plain ones they sold first.


----------



## Fill (Nov 24, 2007)

Art_Gecko101 said:


> Those prices are cheap! If you're selling for that put me down for some! lol
> 
> At the end of the day, 'morph' simply means a specific combination of morphological features, so it doesnt matter if its genetic or not. In the UK the pricing structure most people use isnt as 'morph based' as the US market, but there is obviously going to be more demand for 'prettier' geckos (e.g. the more popular morphs like harleys or pinstripes or reds) than there is for the more 'plain' looking ones, so it'll always affect the price.


Well when I first got into cresties and decided to breed them I had this vision of breeding nice reds (because my first crestie turned out to be a nice red flame) and then I would pick my prices depending on colour and morph. But then when I finally came to hatching and then selling my first lot of babies I couldn't justify selling the 'nicer' looking ones for a bit more money. They all take the same care, eat the same amount and so there's no reason to up the price because they didn't cost me any more. So I sold the 4 of mine for £60 each regardless of colour or morph. I think that's possibly the fairest way to do it so that's the way I chose to go.


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

At the end of the day its your own choice how to sell your babies. I have been selling mine using the same methods of pricing for 8 years and I am happy with how it works. I have personally had to spend more to get the morphs I wanted and therefore I feel I should price my babies in a similar manner, its not being greedy its just how things are. People price leo, royal python, beardy morphs etc. with regards to colour when at the end of the day a pied royal costing £2000 has cost the same to keep, breed etc. as a normal but it fetches a higher price for desirability. As I said it is personal and its up to you how you do it.


----------



## suez (Jul 8, 2007)

quote uroplatus
shouldnt have favourites but he is mine :flrt
i :flrt:him too


----------



## Fill (Nov 24, 2007)

uroplatus said:


> At the end of the day its your own choice how to sell your babies. I have been selling mine using the same methods of pricing for 8 years and I am happy with how it works. I have personally had to spend more to get the morphs I wanted and therefore I feel I should price my babies in a similar manner, its not being greedy its just how things are. People price leo, royal python, beardy morphs etc. with regards to colour when at the end of the day a pied royal costing £2000 has cost the same to keep, breed etc. as a normal but it fetches a higher price for desirability. As I said it is personal and its up to you how you do it.


Yeah, but you can't really compare it to leos or royals etc because they are genetic and we know what morphs we need to put together to get the results we want. So morphs that are harder or take more time to finally get to should come with a higher price tag because of the work needed. But with cresties being a bit of a mixed bag then I don't really see how they can be compared. You could get lucky and hatch 100% harleys or you may get all buckskins.


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

Thanks Suez :flrt:

Yes the genetic side of it is true, but to buy your breedersin the first place you generally have to spend more on harlies, reds etc. than you do on buckskins. I only charge £50 for bucks, £55 - £60 for tigers and £60 - £70 for harlies and other morphs such as pins will vary so I dont charge a fortune between the morphs, but just enough to try and ensure I dont de-value the morph. If I bred 100% pins I wouldn't dream of selling them for £50 the same as my bucks, mainly because it is a relatively new morph and it would become devalued. I price them dependign on what they look like, if I bred two harlies and ended up with bucks then the price would still be a buck price not a harley price. As I said its up to yourself how you do it I'm not saying its wrong, it obviously suits you, you are not under-valueing them at that price but your also not the most expensive so fair play.


----------



## Nic B-C (Dec 4, 2008)

What would you class this one as please, Im not fussed like but would just like to see what description people come up with

Cheers


----------



## uroplatus (Apr 24, 2005)

Its a little flame - its almost a harlequin up its sides buts ita back legs dont have enough markings to 'qualify' it to be a harley. Pretty little one though. I see the cresty bug has bitten hard Nic lol.


----------



## crouchy (Jan 14, 2008)

As uroplatus says its a flame.


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

awwww an ickle pretty flame


----------



## Nic B-C (Dec 4, 2008)

Thing is wheres the line drawn between a flame a harley and a tiger, if you look it has stripes but also has portholes and a red belly and also orange banding on the back of its legs.

See how difficult it is.

Went to see the ones Toms got for sale in Newcastle the other day and lord knows how you would describe his two younger ones, bit of everything really.


Also difference between fired up and not is amazing and also with maturity.

Got some American ones coming shortly and no idea what they are going to be bit of a lottery which kind of makes it more fun, ive asked for three totally different ones and anything totally unusual as I like querky


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

Nic B-C said:


> Thing is wheres the line drawn between a flame a harley and a tiger, if you look it has stripes but also has portholes and a red belly and also orange banding on the back of its legs.
> 
> See how difficult it is.
> 
> ...


its not really difficult.. not every crestie fits into definitive morph type.. I have one thats a crazy ziggy zag pattern of blacky brown and neon ornage all over her legs back etc... to answer the additional markings point you raised ( which I highlighted in red)
pothoples are not a morph-type so thats not hard either... they appear on any crestie morph.. non-specific ..same as a the red tummy which is actually called blushing... many of mine have this again it can happen on dals.. flames.. plain etc etc.. so the red blushing, portholes and leg markings is very basic stuff...

personally a-bit-of-everythings cresties I dislike asthetically, although of course they are all cute in their own way.. I far prefer properly defined morphs as I have said before... plains to be plain dalmations to not have a harley or flame underneath etc.. I dislike dal spots over anything but the plainest of backgrounds.. preferably not in the normal yellowed creams or browns either.. i tend toward the oranges and reds.. but this is what makes cresties wonderful there are so many extreme insane colours about... we dont just have browns or beiges or olives anymore...

its a very difficult thing to achieve solid plains backgrounds and dal spots without other morphs creeping in as cresties can throw just about any variation of babies... to keep the offspring solid plain.. or solid harely.. but its something I aspire to in line breeding whther its achievable or not is another thing entirely... Mixed muddled up patterns can be nice though... but i prefer really extreme solid examples of each morph type
as for the one you posted if u wished to call it harely thats fine but its VERY borderline so in the morph breeding worldit wouldnt be considered a very good example of the morph... so long term breeders would be unlikely to want to use him or her to breed from to produce harelys... thats why i feel its better to say a gorgeous flame than a mediocre harley...

I have a male who fires up paler cream on his back and kinda dark brown on his sides similar patterns to yours and i persobnally call him a flame.. but this is the thing with cresties its all in the way YOU THINK the look.. it can be debated till the cows come home.. what I personally think is not brigh torange someone else will see it as that.. what i personally think is a boring coloured crestie someone else will think its gorgeous...
heres the flame male I have...he also blushes VERY red on his tummy..


----------

