|
|
Posts: 100
| How long do you think this fish is? Im doing a little research to see how much camera trickery goes into everyones pictures without them even knowing it. ie. fish appearing smaller than they are or larger.
Attachments
----------------
 watermark.jpg (16KB - 60 downloads)
watermark2.jpg (19KB - 56 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1185
Location: Iowa | 46" x 19"...kinda hard to tell but that is my best guess...
Big Perc |
|
| |
|
| 47 x 20 max I would say |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1316
Location: Madison, WI | I like the 47" think it's alittle chunker i'll go x 21"
Nice gallery BTW. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 176
Location: Tomahawk, WI | Look at his hand. than the distance between the pectorial fin and bottom fin compared to his hand. That fish is no longer then 44" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 53
Location: Tomahawk, WI | I'm gonna go with 43" to 44". That second pic does a good job of making it look longer.
Cameron |
|
| |
|
| 45 1/4" x 19 1/8" |
|
| |
|
| 44.5
Girth doesn't matter |
|
| |
|
| 49 28lbs |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2015
| 42" 44 max |
|
| |
|
| 42-43 |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | 43 inches and chunky....no way that fish is even close to being upper 40's.
Pantlegger nailed it. The size or lack of size of a fisherman can give the illision of the fish being larger or smaller....but an upper 40 inch fish has a lot more distance between the fins than this fish has. |
|
| |
|
| love this game -- I say 46 ManitouDan |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1937
Location: Black Creek, WI | Well.... its as big as you say it is.
But if we gotta guess... I'd toss out 43 inches. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1080
| 45 x 22...around 27 lbs...give or take...
Edited by MACK 8/23/2006 3:08 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 654
Location: MPLS, MN | 45 * 20.5 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 699
Location: Hugo, MN | The secod picture makes the fish appear much larger i'd guess between 43-46" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1335
Location: Chicago, Beverly | i'm goin with maybe a 37" or 38" |
|
| |
|
| This is great!! A few more replies and ill give you a few percentages on how much camera trickery actually effects the looks. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1057
Location: Medford, WI | I would have to go with 41" x 21"
-Jake |
|
| |
|
Posts: 661
Location: Roscoe IL | Guessing here but looks like 47"
Nice fish though! |
|
| |
|
| 38 inches |
|
| |
|
Posts: 229
Location: Plover, WI | 44 to 45. I have a similar picture. A 44 that looks like a 47-48"er. |
|
| |
|
| Alright guys, heres a lesson learned for ya. In the picture I am holding a 43.5 inch fish, quite stocky fish though which may have made her look bigger. As you may have noticed in the top picture I am holding the fish horizontally which allows your mind to compare her girth to my height much easier. In the second picture I am holding the fish more vertically making it harder to judge the girth but much easier to see how long she is compared to my height. Not knowing my actual height makes it hard to judge with actual inches, but based on knowledge assumed by previous catches etc. you should have a good general idea of how big a fish is by looking at them. As said before the two hold positions allow you to judge different measurements making it hard to see a fish in its whole. With calculating all SERIOUS results, omitting the two 38" guesses, the fish appeared to be an almost 10% larger than it actually was.
There will be a few more pictures up soon for you guys to judge the size.
Thanks for the help on my research, as I will be looking for more responses in the future! |
|
| |
|
| whats your point? Everyone knows pics can be mis-leading...i mean really??????????????/ |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1430
Location: Eastern Ontario | Just looked at it and automaticly tought 42 then looked at the fingers and say 11 times 4 ( whith of hand ) = 44. |
|
| |
|
| My point was to give someone an actual number on HOW MUCH camera trickery could play a factor and why. I wasnt trying to tell you something you already knew nor was I assuming that no-one knew about camera trickery. I was just giving an example of exactly how much it actually did for a fish. If I offended anyone, it was farthest from my intent on this research. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i'd guess 44" ... by making the judgement on the distance between the lower fins and the bottom tail fin .... |
|
| |
|
| How big is this one?? 
Attachments
----------------
Weston 37 lber.jpg (90KB - 44 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1937
Location: Black Creek, WI | Hey Donnie... I'd guess that Weston's fish was 37 pounds!!! Heh heh... via the file name. 
Yah... you can play games with the camera. I did the same thing last season just to demonstrate it as well..... with an obvious tiny tot too.
(5-7-05 Opening Day Giant.JPG)
Attachments
----------------
5-7-05 ODG2.JPG (31KB - 50 downloads)
5-7-05 Opening Day Giant.JPG (30KB - 47 downloads)
|
|
| |
