|
|
| last season only 18 nights... ; ( but about half were all nighters...
the guys I know that live there and do well can put in a lot more than 18 in a season and they have seen color matter...
just like some nights they want big and loud, or some nights small and "quiet"...I think color ( or contrast) is just part of the equation...maybe only 1% of it...or maybe 10%...just something to think about and pay attention to...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
I don't think it's nearly as important to try and figure out why muskies may prefer a certain color after dark as it is to realize that it can make a huge difference.
When you have several guys out on the same lake for an all-nighter and one guy in one boat with a certain color is catching fish then I don't care what the explanation is, I'm switching. I've seen it to many times where 3 guys in a boat start out with different colors and by the end of the night all the guys are catching fish on the same color lure (not the same lure) and no other color has had a hit.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | One thing I should have noted is that my saying color doesn't matter is based more in the topwater genre. I do have bucktails in certain colors that seem to get cracked on certain nights/certain waters. I've always based that on vibration, size, depth:speed etc moreso than color. Then again, I usually stick with the color that was working well that day(or historically good on that lake). Do you see more color preference with your bucktails at night vs. your topwater vs cranks, rubber etc? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | My all time favorite color lure at night is a blue body/earthworm pearl tail Big Joe, especially on one or two lakes! I know it isn't do to a certain lure having the mojo since I have gone through a good dozen of these the last few years, and everyone has it. As last mentioned I may start one guy with this color, but by the end of the night all three of us are throwing it. I don't know what it is, but that color has it at night!
Other colors I really like and do well with are Chartreause/white and black/white. Brown/white was good last year. What is interesting is I have done much better with baits that have a lot of "flash" either from white paint or prism than with baits that are darker in color. Really love prism/holographic baits at night.
Perhaps I am dense, but if there is no color at night why can I see the color on my baits coming through the water? Also to assume how a musky sees a bait is..well..you know what they say about assuming. 
I will also add that the majority of what is thrown at night is cranks and rubber.
Edited by CiscoKid 1/26/2010 7:47 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
Topwater colors don't seem to matter as much as blade colors can on tails or spinnerbaits IMHO.
I couldn't tell you why, just seems that way.
JS |
|
| |
|
| I throw whatever I have confidence in. Basically switch it up with 3-4 basic colors at night, a few bright and a few dark. How bright the moon is on a given night also plays a role in the color I pick as well as the water clarity. I think color is pretty important in fishing in general, no matter the specie. Often times, I will match the color to what I think the fish are feeding on the most. I have seen it where fish will prefer a certain color, other times it doesn't matter. If anything, I think topwater lures are the least important when it comes to color.
Edited by Baby Mallard 1/26/2010 9:27 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'Perhaps I am dense, but if there is no color at night why can I see the color on my baits coming through the water? Also to assume how a musky sees a bait is..well..you know what they say about assuming.'
The science behind what we know about what fish see at night is far from an assumption, so you can put those concerns to rest. Muskies are on full bore rod vision at night, and can't see any color at all, even from the light from your boat or headlamp, because rod receptors do not allow the fish to SEE any color even if it was available which it is not in any reasonable sense. And no, I'm not sure what they say to you about assuming, but I do know what folks say to me about the value of studying one's quarry and the environment in which they live while assuming very little in the process.
From 'Fish of the Great Lakes' an example:
On color and perfectly clear water:
//'But light behaves differently in water than it does in air. The various colors of light travel at different wavelengths. The longest wavelengths are the reds, followed by oranges, yellows, greens, blues, indigos, and violets. When light travels through water, some of its energy is absorbed, and the longest wavelengths are the ones absorbed first. Thus, the warmer colors fade out and gradually appear black as light penetrates the water column. Red light is almost completely absorbed within the first 15-20 feet. Orange penetrates to 30-40 feet, and yellow to 60-70 feet, while green and blue remain visible for as deep as the light penetrates.'//
And that at sun noon, high light, perfect water clarity, and we all know how rare perfect water clarity is. Also, the water column distance between the lure and the fish is acting as a prism.
//'Total light intensity is also important. On a cloudy day, colors will not penetrate as deep as they will on a sunny day. At dusk, as light intensity falls, reds are the first color to go, followed by orange, yellow, green, and blue. As total light intensity decreases, the fish's eye switches to vision with rods, and the fish is no longer able to distinguish colors. After dark, fishermen should choose between a light lure or dark one. At dawn, as light intensity increases and fish switch back to cone vision, the order is reversed, and blues, greens, yellows, oranges, and reds appear. At early dawn, some anglers are successful with a red J-plug near the surface. To fish striking from below, it shows up as a dark lure against the lightening sky. As the day gets lighter, red no longer works well, and anglers must experiment with more visible colors.' // There's far more technical information available that says the same thing.
An experiment. Go into the bathroom, and close the door, dark city style. Look in the mirror. Hold up a few baits and look at the reflection. Look for flash when you move the lures. No direct light source to create a reflection, no 'flash'. Holographic finishes that are able to 'grab' diffuse light may have some value, but the ones I have seem to be truly effective only under pretty bright conditions.
I use a lot of Glowin' Outdoors products ice fishing, and have watched literally hundreds of hours of fish behavior after dark on the OFM Aqua Vu and MarCum cameras, and using an IR array on a pretty impressive security camera that penetrates about 15' to 20' in clear water. The fish don't like the lure to be charged up hot, in fact, most seem to shy away and move out of sight which is supported by the fact rod vision is very light sensitive and the lure might actually be TOO bright for the fish to see it comfortably. Once the lure settles down to a soft glow, the response is excellent, even by Pike; glow lures will outproduce non glow using the same lure and the same bait big time. What does that mean here? I don't know, I haven't messed with the Glowin' Outdoors stuff fishing at night for muskies, because my time is way more limited than when I was guiding full time.
If you can see the actual lure color of a lure in the water from above in your boat, there's a light source available other than the moon unless it's a truly remarkable moonlight and a truly bright lure reflecting back that light to....where? Shoot me a photo of that with no flash, please, and make sure all the lights in the rig are off. Sure, one can see the lure pattern if it's disticntive enough.
I've recreated the low light conditions in the classroom and on stage for twenty five plus years in fishing courses and seminars and held up dozens of popularly colored baits, and no one...not a soul..in the audience could identify the colors, even though they could clearly see the bait and patterns on each lure. And we see in color 24/7.
If the water is calm, we also have the mirror effect in play. And Periscope vision. And maybe Gerry's UV vision. And a bunch of other variables, all of which add up to why fish behave the way they behave.
So I look to contrast for my night fishing trying to do my best to make sure the fish can see my presentation. That's what's worked for me, and that's not an assumption.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 742
Location: Grand Rapids MN | I personally don't think color is that big of a factor, especially at night, other than contrast. I know people have experienced a 'preference' with a bait or color in a boat but I'm starting to think its usually a little more behind it than the obvious.
I mean one person can be working the lure a little different than the other guy either slower/faster, counts it down or starts their retrieve right away, or hitting different casting angles. These things makes a difference.
I had noticed this a few times during late fall fishing with dawgs this past year. I gave my boat partner the exact same bait since I was getting action and he couldn't even move a fish on a different color dawg. I later noticed I was working the lure a little slower and counted it down a few seconds longer than him. My lure would come up with a few piece of weeds while his was always clean. I ended up switching dawgs after my tail was ripped off to a completely different color and it wasn't long before I moved a fish. I ended up with a number of multiple fish days while he still had not even a follow to show for. This really started me thinking that there are more important factors before color comes into play.
Edited by Targa01 1/26/2010 11:37 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Steve, again there is an assumption that the fish’s brain is processing info the same as a humans. Is there evidence that suggests that?
Perhaps I missed it but if I can see flash/color at night in the water wouldn’t a fish as well? I don’t care if in a completely dark night you don’t see color/flash as more often than not I can see a hint of color/flash while fishing. This is without lights from the boat or headlamp.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 968
Location: N.FIB | after reading all of these post,makes me want to go night fishing,I love fishing at night.If I have two days off in a row and go fishing the first day off,I like to leave late so I stay fishing after dark.I do hate some things though,bugs really bad,bats flying around your head,but the sound of that topwater splash when a fish hits is awsome. |
|
| |
|
Location: SE Wisconsin | Wow. . . I feel like my IQ just jumped X2! This is really good stuff! Thanks Steve for the info, BTW - I've been thinking about the "glow" concept for a while now, too, so good touch. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Cisco,
Fish's rod vision is B&W, no color receptors available, so the only information that can be processed is B&W. No assumption there.
Shoot me an image of what you are talking about with color and flash at night. I'd bet a steak dinner if there's nothing but moonlight, you are seeing the lure but not much, if any, color unless your night vision abilities are exceptional. As far as 'flash goes, do the convex mirror exercise, and you'll see what I'm getting at.
It figures that since color is unavailable after dark evolution would improve the fish's vision to B&W at much higher light sensitivity. The number I've seen used is 30 times more sensitive, which is a bunch. Think about increasing your night vision sensitivities by 30 times. Purple vision, what we humans use to see after dark, is also rod cell driven. Here's a short article that explains it really well:
Question: Why are we unable to see in the dark?
C. Valliammal, Kanyakumari, T.N.
Answer: Cells in the eye which aid in vision are the rods and cones. There are about 250 million rod cells and 6 million cone cells. These cells are found in the inner layer of the eye called the retina.
Cones are the photoreceptors that respond differentially to light across the visible spectrum, providing colour vision and visual acuity in bright light because of higher light threshold simulation. They contain a pigment iodopsin which is a conjugated protein of photopsin and retinal.
The rods help us in scotopic vision or night vision. Each rod cell has a pigment called rhodopsin (visual purple) which is a conjugated protein of opsin and retinal.
The rods and cones are present around a small yellow pigmented spot called fovea centralis which is the area of greatest visual acuity of the eye.
At the centre of the fovea, the sensory layer is composed entirely of cones. The cones become fewer towards the periphery. At the outer edges only rods are present. The cones help to distinguish very fine details.
The rods do not have the ability to separate small details of the visual image. So in the visual field of the eye a small central area of great sharpness is surrounded by an area of lesser sharpness.
Just in front of the fovea centralis is the pupil, which is a contractile opening in the iris (pigmented diaphragm). The amount of light falling on the eye is regulated by the pupil. The pupil generally dilates in the dark and constricts in brightness.
Every object the eye perceives acts as a source of light. Generally in the dark the intensity of the source of light is lesser than the light minimum (minimum amount of light energy which can induce a visual sensation).
Therefore we cannot see till we get used to the darkness. Moreover since only the rod cells are stimulated in dim light we are unable to discriminate colours and also far less quanta of light falls on the retina, out of which a fraction falling on just one or two rods is sufficient to initiate a visual response.
Dim objects can be seen at night on the peripheral part of the retina when they are invisible to the central part. The seeing mechanism in the dark involves a resynthesis of rhodopsin. Visual purple is bleached by the action of light and is reformed by the rod cells under conditions of darkness.
So it takes time for the pigment to begin to form. When the pigment is formed the eyes are sensitive to low levels of illumination and the eyes are said to be dark-adapted.
Under normal circumstances, there is a routine & rapid process of rhodopsin synthesis in the dark, because an equilibrium is maintained in the retina such that the rate of breakdown of rhodopsin is equal to the rate of its synthesis.
Vitamin A plays a major role for dark-adaptation. But if there is a deficiency of vitamin A, the rate of resynthesis is delayed or there is a delay in the dark adaptation. This is the defect in night blindness (Nyctalopia). — The Hindu S & T Desk
--------
One difference between human and fish's vision worth noting is the fish's eye is like a camera with the iris open wide all the time. What light is there is used. Again, and adaptation selected by available light being much lower in the world of the Muskie than it is in ours. |
|
| |
|
| Lee, since you have spent a ton of hours after dark in WI and MN....what is your take on color at night...do you think it can make a difference on subsurface lures at night? have you seen a night where one color got all the action etc? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 124
| BN, I somehow knew you would ask me that. Well, I like to throw whatever color got the last strike! 
All kidding aside, my top three pics of Double 10's at night are pink/pink, white/nickel, and blue/silver. Have I seen it make a difference... though I am not completely convinced color was the determining factor. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. I would be more confident in saying I MAYBE have seen a difference with painted blades vs. metal plated (no paint). It seems to me that metallic blades seem to run slightly higher and slower, and painted blades seem to run slightly deeper and faster. Maybe I'm crazy? One thing I like for sure, is having either a light colored skirt or a large grub on the back treble (like Figure 8 Lures brand) in a light color so I can easily see the rear of the bait, so I can watch it disappear at boat side. Watching your lure at night is something many people miss out on.
Many, many, instances I have been the one (in back of boat) that catches a fish on one color, hand that rod to someone else so they are confident with that bait, and take their rod (different color), and i end up catching a fish on that different color. Was my retrieve the the correct speed? Most often reason I believe. Perhaps it was the lucky cast onto the fish? I gotta believe that could be the case up to 50% of the time. You are only dealing with so many chances per night. If you bait does not land in a fishes strike zone, no dice.
To answer you question, I don't know. I do know CONFIDENCE matters probably more than anything. That is why I will switch people in my boat to whatever color they are most confident in.
As for any other lures, there is almost always some form of white on my baits at night.
Lee Tauchen
http://LeeTauchen.com |
|
| |
|
| when you spend a fair amount of time in the woods at night trying very hard to see things, you learn a few "tricks".
the common theme for me in those experiences is that your eyes are very good at noticing things that aren't natural.
- sharp edges/straight lines stick out, there is very little in nature that's straight
- black sticks out, there is very very little in nature that is black
- even bright colors don't stick out very much
- movement sticks out the most
- if you unfocus your eyes and just "perceive" (ie., use your rods), you see a LOT
it strikes me that each of those things relates more to contrast than to color. but...i'm left wondering about the distinct color preferences people have observed at certain times, maybe there was enough ambient light? maybe it created the right amount of contrast for the water/sky conditions?
interesting stuff and a great discussion, for sure. my take-away from it at this point is that starting with contrast first (movement, profile, dark/light) and then experimenting with shades of color would be a good progression at night?
|
|
| |
|
| this is what has what I have noticed...
bright night (lots of moon/stars) use brighter colored blades, the chartreuses, oranges, pearls, pinks, have done better
dark night, darker bait...golds, silvers, and even black or black nickel blades have been better...sure they are harder to see coming in but there are tricks to that too
not a new concept by any means but one that seems to hold for the most part night fishing for ski's...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | It simply can't be a 'color' preference, because there is no color to be seen by the Muskie. It's a preference for whatever the footprint of that lure was overall including sound/vibration/speed/position in the water column/contrast against the background/silhouette/ length of the cast/position of the cast and retrieve and more, and only some messing around trying the same lure/same presentation in different color patterns while running one control and as many as two experimental lures against that control to ATTEMPT to see if it's a contrast/visual issue( all sorts of other variables here, including self fulfilling prophesy), a sound/vibration issue, or a combination of all the stuff creating the footprint that's getting the attention. Cisco mentioned assuming in an above post...assume nothing, test everything against what is proven fact, question everything all the time, or your assumptions will pigeonhole your presentations. Even 'known facts' are a constantly shifting landscape as we get better at understanding what makes our quarry tick, so keep up with the literature out there. What seems obvious based on assumption (like color when there isn't any in play) may not be the obvious at all. IMO that ain't good.
Bright moonlight creates a couple interesting things in calm water, next time it's warm out go underwater to the bottom in 5' on a calm moonlit night and check it out. Some mirror effect will take place reflecting bottom objects on the underside of the surface, so the 'color' lure most visible against a light mirror background will be dark, and against a dark mirror background will be light; and...the background will be the opposite of what seems obvious. Some surface refraction will be in play, too, comes in to play when the fish makes the final attack. If they are missing it or following it allot without committing although they seem to 'want' to, they probably can't see it.
lambeau and bn have some great observations posted, lambeaus's observations show he's spent some time afield at night where it really matters what one is able to see...or not see. ( Pity the poor fellow who has the best purple vision, he's likely to take point as a result) Now it's the why of it that matters. Lambeau is right, darn few true black things in nature. Motion is visible, camo masks it. Alive stuff that is prey to other alive stuff usually implement a camo of some variety, as do predators to mask the attack. Interesting we try to imitate that camo in some of our lures in an assumptive attempt to be 'natural'...it's a good thing we are not very good at it.
Waves change everything. Even little ones.
It's down that rabbit hole, Alice. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| I've noticed that same thing Lambeau mentioned. You often have to look "near" something to see it in the dark, because when you look directly at it you are unable to see it. Having some degenerative issues with my eyes, I always thought it was just me, and quite frankly it scared the crap out of me.
Regardless of color, the most contrast you can get is either two colors opposite each other on the color wheel, or if there is not enough light for colors to be seen? Black and white.
I think that's what Steve is getting at here. Essentially, under extreme low light conditions, it all boils down to contrast. Dark sky, moonlit sky, ambient light...
I've never thought color mattered much at night, and I still don't. I do think contrast might be important, though. Steve, let me guess... Your choice of color at night? Black and white.
Edited by esoxaddict 1/27/2010 5:25 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 264
| No moon in the sky- brights like chartruese, red, orange, etc. Moon in the sky- black, black and white. My Favorite nighttime baits are double cowgirls and topraiders. |
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | So... Doesn't this simply come down to color can make a difference at night (I've seen it too) but not because it's chartreuse or ornage or red but that because it is a certain shade of gray? If everything appears as shades of gray then it would seem obvious that various colors may be prefered to the fish because of the shade of gray they appear. Red isn't red but a certain shade of gray... Colors:
 In gray: 
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| Will, if my thinking is correct here, the combination of blue and yellow would provide the most contrast, and therefore be most visible to the fish. But if it all boils down to shades of gray, why not just go with black and white lures and be done with it? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Steve you will have to wait until the summer time for me to get pictures of baits flash at night as well as the color deal. That is if I warrent it being worth my time to try and set up a camera, without flash, and capture the picture you request.
I agree with Will. Color, or the shade of gray, IS important. So to those of us who see color (not color blinded humans) it can be important but not like we are thinking. Throw in the mix the more in tune the rods are of a fish at night and we humans can't even begin to guess on how fish are seeing our baits. Sure there is all kinds of studies done on fish's vision, but to truely KNOW how a fish sees something boils down to assumptions unless you yourself have fish eyes. Lambeau's observations are good ones and interesting, but because he or any other human may have difficulty picking out an object at night doesn't mean a fish has the same difficulty.
I live in a colored world thankfully. And instead of trying to decide and learn the shade of gray that works for the fish, I would much rather keep it simple and go with the "color" I KNOW works.
Now if I was color blind perhaps I would be more interested in the absence of color deal. I have several brother in-laws that are color blind, and it is quite interesting to discuss with them how they see color, and how they know what shade of gray is what color. Perhaps I should take them nightfishing more and have them pick out the colored lure for the night!
Perhaps contrast isn't all that important to fish at night like is being assumed. Perhaps baits that more mimic the shade of gray of the preferred baitfish that night is important regardless of how much contrast there is.
All I know is this. If I fish a blue/earthworm pearl Big Joe 20-30' down at midnight on a particular lake it gets eaten. If I fish a silver/earthworm pearl big joe with the same conditions it rarely gets eaten. If I fish a solid colored Joe, including black, in these same conditions it rarely gets eaten. I have fished numerous colored big joes at night in all kinds of conditions and none of them produce like my Naked Lady! If you (whoever doesn't agree) don't want to believe color doesn't matter at night that is fine with me. I could care less what others think works or doesn't work because of some evidence/study proving their point. Finding what works for yourself in the real world regardless of science IS what matters. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
Travis makes a good point. While we may be able to identify rods and cones, and colors as we "know" them, but that is only through our own eyes.
How do we know for sure that the rods and cones of fish function exactly like ours?
It's kind of like religion in way, blind faith.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | esoxaddict - 1/27/2010 7:20 PM Will, if my thinking is correct here, the combination of blue and yellow would provide the most contrast, and therefore be most visible to the fish. But if it all boils down to shades of gray, why not just go with black and white lures and be done with it? I wasn't thinking contrast with the above simply posting the two wheels as an example of how colors would look if they were simply a shade of gray. Contrasting colors have a lot to do with avialable light black/white might be high contrast in bright light, green/red might be high contrast in bright light, chart/black is really high contrast in low light (especially if it is bordered by white. The reason not to go with just black and white is illustrated in the gray wheel above and why I think many people have seen specific colors matter at night. However, someone could have a bunch of gray lures by matching the shades of gray you can achieve by various colors. Maybe that is the next big craze in muskie fishing, the night fishing set of lures that starts at black and ends at white with six shades of gray inbetween? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | lambeau makes observations on what we see after dark based on lack of ambient light and what rod vision is designed to do and actually does.
Will's 'shades of gray' are pretty much what happens when colors are lost to low light and rod cell vision and the prism effect of the water. The color wheel he has in his post is representative of what happens in a literal sense to the spectrum, but leaves a little to be desired when considering solid colors like those we find on our lures. But conceptually, it's pretty good. Red would not be a shade of gray in very low light, it'd be a shade of black. Semantics, but important to understand how dark red gets down 15' on most lakes at high noon, much less after dark.
And far from blind faith or 'religion' ( nice comment), what rod cells are capable of and what they do in specific species has been proven. Scientists know what each cell type in our eyes and those of other critters are for, how they function, and what the critter can see as a result. If one chooses to ignore that information, that's fine...I choose not to.
The rod cells in a fish's eye don't work 'exactly' like ours; the fish's eye is structurally different in a couple ways. As indicated, the fish's rod vision is approximately 30 times more sensitive to light than their own color (cone) vision. Why? Because it's dark down there a volume of the time, and fish are out there amongst their predator associates 24/7; that's how evolution worked for both the predator and the prey.
'Perhaps contrast isn't all that important to fish at night like is being assumed. Perhaps baits that more mimic the shade of gray of the preferred baitfish that night is important regardless of how much contrast there is.'
Muskies use sight in the final attack(established behavioral trait), and it's pretty important for them to do so to reduce wasted energy chasing food about. If the object of the attack disappears or is poorly defined against the attack background, it's a bad deal for the attacker, that should be obvious if one thinks about it. In order to see the prey, the prey must be defined well against the background. Again, not an assumption, a matter of much study producing numerous papers, books, and more since the 60's in 'the literature'.
I submit finding out what works and why is the GOAL of science in 'the real world', and applying that which has been studied and proven out by science to my own experience has made me a more efficient angler.
As to Travis's last paragraph, I'd take it a few steps further and suggest that understanding the WHY of the observations may then allow for better, faster, and more productive decisions by us anglers on what might work under similar conditions OR differing conditions in the future. Been there with the 'I know what works here', and decided to do my best to figure out WHY. I've been tossing multiple colors of soft plastics in deep water and shallow, at night and during the day, in cloudy and clear lakes, for over 35 years. Made a few observations myself, believe it or not. I never said what you observed works for you is wrong; on the contrary... I was attempting to get to the why of it.
Will, that's a part of where I was going with all this. Instead of trying to get a gray that works through lost light and color combinations, why not use the shades of gray? If a red lure is 'black' in low light, why not use black? How about combinations that accomplish a wider spectrum possibility? Probably wouldn't sell for crap, because gray/black/white combos are not real pretty.
I've tried the shades of gray with jigs/creatures, and it worked for me back when I used to fish at night allot.
All this has given me an idea. I think I can show the effects of low light on color, and use 30X infrared to at least give folks an idea what enhancing light sensitivity that many times can do. It will be an indication, not exactly what's gong on, but should be relevant. I shoot lots of underwater video, and....there's darned little color down there unless the light is very high and water extremely clear. As the sun sets, the color camera becomes absolutely worthless, and I go to B&W enhanced by a 30X Infrared display.
All I gotta do is stick a few muskie lures in front of that camera and watch as the light falls to night. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | sworrall - 1/27/2010 8:53 PM
As to Travis's last paragraph, I'd take it a few steps further and suggest that understanding the WHY of the observations may then allow for better, faster, and more productive decisions by us anglers on what might work under similar conditions OR differing conditions in the future. Been there with the 'I know what works here', and decided to do my best to figure out WHY. I've been tossing multiple colors of soft plastics in deep water and shallow, at night and during the day, in cloudy and clear lakes, for over 35 years. Made a few observations myself, believe it or not. I never said what you observed works for you is wrong; on the contrary... I was attempting to get to the why of it.
I guess I missed it, again. WHY is it my blue/pearl is top dawg, or should I say Joe, in my scenario.
Steve, what "color" creatures did you find produced best at night in those 35 years of experience, and did that color differ from what was productive during the day on the same body of water?
I'd be interested in your underwater camera study with lures. Please teach us.
Edited by CiscoKid 1/28/2010 6:20 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Travis,
I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding why your tone is so caustic. If it's not intended, no worries, but it sure seems to be. The information I've collected about water and light regarding fish vision and color selection has been a serious interest of mine since reading 'Through the Fish's Eye' by Sosin and Clark back in the 70's. Mark Sosin is a saltwater guru, and I've always been a serious fan.
In the spirit of this place, when I see a conversation where I can share some of what I've learned over the 30 years I've been reading and experimenting about fish vision et al, I offer that info as a short cut for folks interested who may not have the time I did to look into it. So it isn't 'teaching' tome, it's sharing info. Take it...or leave it, I really don't care.
Since that publication I've read everything I can find on the subject, and took it a little further attempting to show folks what actually happens to the pretty colored lure they see in the boat when it's perceived by the fish they are trying to catch and the information just might allow one to know why a color works under one condition, yet is not effective under another even though it seems it should be.. Call it a hobby, I guess.
What I can share as to perhaps why one lure you mention is hot and the other not:
Two lures, exactly the same except for color.
Down over 20 feet at midnight under a full moon.
What's different between the two lures?
blue/earthworm pearl--- hot
silver/earthworm pearl
Known difference is..one has blue (hot) the other has silver(not) as the leading color in your description
Conditions fished above, moonlight and deep water. Don't know the clarity, but you report fishing 20' to 30' down.
OK, looking at the two, the hot lure has quite a bit of blue. Looks like the not lure is primarily violet or purple mixed with a brown, hard to tell. I suspect more purple than violet and more brown that either, hence the earthworm mention. let me know if I'm correct.
I'd look at the colors and see what happens under your listed conditions.
20' to 30' down, on a moonlit night--It's dark down there. If the water is at all murky, most color won't be available at 10 AM sun-time, much less at night. If there's lots of plankton and other little critters, they also dampen the light, that I've learned from shooting underwater video under the ice at night. The primary colors of light are red, blue, and green, and the secondary are yellow, cyan, and magenta. It is very important to know that mixing pigment and mixing light are very different. Red and green paint, for example, make brown paint, but red and green light make yellow light.
Oversimplified...projected VS reflected.
Blue--hot--the shortest wavelength of light, last left as the others are bent and absorbed as heat energy. Holds identity well into the depths. Contrasts against the available background as a light shade. Silver mixed in or added might accentuate the effect, as silver is light gray down there.
purple-ish brown-- Purple is red and blue mixed, and brown can be a combination of many colors including red and green. Red is removed quite quickly from the spectrum. The blue used to make the purple is masked by the mixture unless the soft plastic is translucent, that lure appears opaque which allows for light to pass through to some degree, changing the landscape some. Either way, much less blue available. That lure will be dark, the level of that somewhat influenced by the amount of yellow in the green which is blue and yellow combined, as yellow does really well in low light. And red and green make brown.
My initial reaction is that the hot lure provides a light contrast, the not lure and the black lure you mentioned earlier, darker. Are those the only known differences? If so, I'd start there in any attempt to optimize the selection.
Answering the question, yellow/gray or yellow/orange was hot for me at night for Walleyes, best I could find. Muskies and Pike liked the light grey(almost looked silver, but wasn't) with a fl. orange or white jig. I did OK with all of those fish using blue/silver with a Fl Orange jig. This is against a weed background of green/brown or very dark.
On the rocks and sand, black was my go to, against a light background of sand and rock.
Day VS Night...couldn't be expressed better. The daytime colors I use have everything to do with color and contrast against where the lure is in the water column and the direction the fish is looking.
Clear VS turbid, 10AM VS Noon sun time, rocks VS weeds, I use different colors to match the conditions.
If the fish is looking up (and Pike and Muskies do, allot), Jason Lucas was dead on. Bright day, bright lure. Dark day, dark lure. On a dark day, it's dark because it's cloudy. Clouds are white to gray, so a dark lure will stand out nicely. On a bright day, from underwater, the sky looks deep blue to violet depending on turbidity and depth of the fish. A light colored lure as long as it isn't all blue fits the bill for me.
(BJ.Blue.Pearl [640x480].gif)
(BJ.Silver.EPearl [640x480].gif)
Attachments
----------------
 BJ.Blue.Pearl [640x480].gif (38KB - 208 downloads)
BJ.Silver.EPearl [640x480].gif (62KB - 213 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Steve my tone is not to be caustic as you suggest or take it as such.
Quite simply by questioning what you are saying is forcing the hand of you posting more information that you say you are glad to post for all of us to learn. I could have taken the easy road way back in the beginning and say “I agree”. Now if I would have done that would you have posted the same information that you did after my questioning? I hope it has also made you think about the topic at hand a little bit more. Aside from that I still don’t believe everything you have posted, and I intend to research further as I always do, in the off season.
Your observations about the lures I brought up are correct in “color”. What I am interested in knowing is the difference in the two in the black/white world since color doesn’t exist as you suggest.
If it may be of help the water clarity is very good at 15’+, and I am not talking about any moonlight being present as my best luck is in dark nights (no moon).
I am still curious in you creature findings of productive colors during the day vs at night.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Latitude 41.3016 Longitude 88.6160 | I have been using Dawgs at nite with a lot of luck, Guess I will try this color out this summer. Tackle Booty Slv Dawgs
(obj3772geo3173pg17p9.png)
(obj4566geo3174pg17p9.png)
Attachments
----------------
obj3772geo3173pg17p9.png (44KB - 193 downloads)
obj4566geo3174pg17p9.png (44KB - 187 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | OK, cool, as I said, no worries. I seriously enjoy a challenge or debate, but really have problems answering questions and comments that are little more than a 'Oh yeah? I don't care what you think!' Sort of stalls the sharing of information, if you know what I mean.
I used a lab room at Nicolet where I could obtain complete darkness in much of the stuff I did in the off season back in the late 70's, and used filters that mimicked water prism effect filtering direct, indirect, diffuse, and all sorts of light sources attempting to get as close as I could to the prism effect of water. I compared all my lure patterns and colors in low to no light against the colors of the backgrounds I encounter on the water, from the fish's perspective. I then applied all of what is known about each fish's vision, and talked to LOTS of folks who know about that subject along the way. I studied how light penetrates the water, what turbidity does to that process, and what the angle of the sun/moon from rise to set means to available light under the water. I also did some swimming and checked out what I thought I knew against what was actually going down there, but only to about 15'.
Real revelation occurred when I got my first color underwater camera. Wow. I built a studio this fall that is a serious machine, and Aqua Vu and MarCum make advances every year. One thing that's certain, by 4:30 PM right now under the ice in 5' of water, a color camera...even a good one...is useless. Can't see a darned thing. Black and White without an IR array or other lighting is useless by 4:45. I find the white LED array to push the fish off to the edge of the light, if anyone else is using white LED lighting I'd like to hear from you as to how you do with it, drop me a PM. I'm acquiring add on IR lighting for each of the OFM cameras. Fish do not react to IR light, as it's not in the visible spectrum, but the magic of cameras sensitive to IR allows me to watch what they do in total darkness.
Yeah, I'm nuts.
Here's a night time example. The Darter is Perch pattern, same lure as the day time example in the same depth water on Pelican in the same 'spot'. Notice the perch coloration on the Darter is pretty good, they spent allot of money developing the patterns for the lure, and did a great job IMO.
Night:
http://icefishing.outdoorsfirst.com/watch.asp?id=2084
Day:
http://icefishing.outdoorsfirst.com/watch.asp?id=2086
|
|
| |
