|
|
| Steve, some good stuff here. Do muskies see the same as other freshwater fish such as walleyes and panfish? I only ask because I am almost certain color has played a role on these other species. Also, what is your opinon on "glow in the dark" lures? Not for muskies, but glow in the dark jigs certainly work better than non-glow in the dark jigs at night at times for species such as crappies and walleyes. If muskies see the same as these other fish, I don't see why glow in the dark lures wouldn't work for muskies (I have never tried). I have always thought that not all species of fish see everything in the same way. For example, for years I have always thought pike have very poor sight at night. Reason why it is rare to catch a pike at night. Same with sunfish and perch, rare to catch them at night, but crappies and walleyes will bite all night. Seems some fish see things differently than other fish. What is your opinion on this?
Edited by Baby Mallard 1/28/2010 10:44 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Muskies and Pike see color really well.
There's quite a bit in the literature out there regarding night feeding fishes, and the subtle differences of the cell structure in the eyes. I believe it's proven walleyes see better than some other fish in relative darkness. Crappies and gills are similar, but the crappie has larger eyes by my observation, maybe that's why they follow the edge of the available light like they do and the gills are more tolerant.
Muskies and Pike have very similar vision, so I'm not sure why muskies move better than Pike at night. Some of the work out there shows a trend toward yellows, but I'm not sure what that means after dark if anything. I believe Pike see just fine after dark, from watching them hit lures and minnows under the ice after dark, if they want it, they have it. May be a behavioral thing not necessarily a result of the fish's vision limitations. |
|
| |
|
| Thanks Steve. Gives me a different perspective of things. Black, gray, and white is all you need. I'll still stick with my confidence colors regardless.:) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Steve thanks for answering the questions I had on creature color that worked daytime vs nighttime. 
Steve, I AM CURIOUS on your finding of what color creatures worked during the day versus those that worked at night. I am sure in 35 years you have come to some pretty conclusive findings.
Knowing this may aid in corelating the colors of those creatures to shades of gray in Will's color wheel.
An interesting thought on musky sight at night versus other fish, and I will take it a bit further in questioning can some muskies have genetic traits that allow them to see better at night than others? I have caught several muskies that are very intriguing to me in that their pupils were gold in color!
Edited by CiscoKid 1/28/2010 12:19 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'Steve thanks for answering the questions I had on creature color that worked daytime vs nighttime.'
I did. You missed it.
Posted 1/28/2010 9:05 AM (#420186 - in reply to #420167)
I have read some material about the gold pupil thing, seems those papers indicated a trend to seeing yellow better if I remember right, I need to revisit that stuff.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 468
Location: Not where I wanna be! | Get a lure in front of a hungry fish and get bit.....
 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1
| Lee,
What color would you use on this spot after dark?
Attachments
----------------
 last_chance.jpg (62KB - 218 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 124
| Well, that depends on what your name is?
Lee Tauchen
http://LeeTauchen.com |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| So... It's all shades of gray, and in Travis' example, the blue big Joe that has had the best result would appear as a very dark shade of gray, almost black, accoding to the color wheel Will posted anyway... If you had a charcoal colored Big Joe, with that same tail, then wouldn't that have the same effect?
And let's presume for a moment that color matters as much at night, because of Will's "preferred shades of gray" theory. If it comes down to trying to match the color of the preferred forage, than wouldn't a perch colored lure still resemble a perch even at night? And what about the fact that prey fish have developed camoflage as a way to avoid predation? Matching the color of forage in that lake would then make your lures LESS visible.
So perhaps in the case of the Big Joe example, it's not a preferred shade of gray that the fish are used to seeing and eating, it's just simply easier for them to find that color in that environment.
Interesting...
Edited by esoxaddict 1/28/2010 3:01 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | EA, you are thinking about like I did when I first started looking at this all, thanks to Sosin and Clark. I like figuring things out, just wish I had more gray matter between my ears to ease the process. Some folks call it over-thinking, I prefer to see it as understanding. But that's me...and as I said, I'm nuts.
Be careful not to confuse mixing colors of light and mixing pigments and creating paints or dyes. The purple/brown more solid color will be darker than an opaque middle blue against a dark (basically lightless) background, and not show up as well. Against a lighter background, the darker lure will show up better in a 'figure-ground' relationship.
An achromatic progression shows white to gray to black, no reflected colors. The world of the rod receptor, so to speak.
A chromatic progression shows the color from light to dark.
Each color has it's own representation on this progression when perceived in B&W or as the color is 'darkened'. Light blue will look ALLOT different at 30' than it will on the surface on a nice sunny day. So will dark blue.
Gotta know the background too. Place the presentation in front of the background. Does it contrast? Allow for good depth perception in the figure ground relationship? Yes? Bingo.
Good article to get your arms around what light is, and what it all means to understanding color.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/light2.htm
What does camouflage do? Good article that will help you avoid throwing a lure that basically is 'hiding' from the fish in the strict visual sense.
http://animals.howstuffworks.com/animal-facts/animal-camouflage1.ht...
(Bb263947.hess0800-12(en-us,VS.85).gif)
(Bb263947.hess0800-13(en-us,VS.85).gif)
Attachments
----------------
Bb263947.hess0800-12(en-us,VS.85).gif (1KB - 205 downloads)
Bb263947.hess0800-13(en-us,VS.85).gif (1KB - 206 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | sworrall - 1/28/2010 9:05 AM
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.
In response to the edited (added information above) to post #420186
Thanks Steve for adding the information to post #420186. It gives me the info I was looking for in terms of your creatures.
sworrall - 1/28/2010 9:05 AM
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.
I would have to disagree with the all blue based on my experience fishing suspended muskies. One of my favorites in a cloudless, windless day is all blue lures in very clear water. Take the big Joe I mentioned earlier that was blue and earthworm pearl, but make it all that blue. A gem on clear days and clear water. Several cranks as well. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Travis,
Good point, I didn't address 'deep water' angling in that paragraph, I was talking about Jason Lucas's axiom. Most of the lures we used until plastics came about ran in the first couple feet of the water column, and Jason Lucas on Bass Fishing was written a long time before the Big Joe showed up on the Muskie scene.
If you are fishing suspended or deep muskies (12 to under 60 feet, say), and presenting the lure at or very near the depth they are holding, the line of attack will be nearly horizontal; I've seen 3' above the fish work really well. Background will be a slate to violet hue dependent upon water chemistry. Blue would be OK, because it's not directly contrasting with the sky...which is blue. if blue was the choice I'd throw a combo white or silver and blue with a black stripe or spot, but that's my personal preference. If it was a creature, it'd be blue with a silver or white tail and a black jig head. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| So... Let's back up. We're talking about deep water at night in this example. No reflected light, hence no color, only shades of gray. Since a Muskies vision under these conditions would be some 30 times what ours is, I presume they can see something, but only if it provides contrast against whatever background it is seeing. If there's no light, which presumably there wouldn't be in deep water at night, you'd want something that... provides contrast against the background, which is water in this case. If you're fishing off the bottom, muskies aren't looking at your lure from underneath, so...
So something. I'm not sure what, yet! So the blue, appearing as a lighter shade of gray in this case than the background, which is water and is nearly black, would be more visible than the tail... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 244
Location: Mallard Island Lake Vermilion MN | Like no one can tell that is a map pointing to a place we call "BIG FISH." since 1996 .......T-5 community drive by .....off Ely....come on...to easy.
Us old guys been around.....enjoy seeing everyone wait to get on that one...geezzzzz.
If a guide was to take you there you should seriouly ask for your money back.......but then why hire a guide round here any more...just drive around a couple hours marking spots then past a lunch an have at it.
It is fishen, not to hard to find them if ya have even the simple stuff down.
If it looks fishy, FISH IT!
Color? Hmm.....way me would say to look at it is.....Grab four different topwaters you know how to work very well, that you like to toss and go have some fun on spots you found fish on at some point during the day......then you have different conditions covered..wind, cold, rock, weed, pressure, quiet...bla, bla, bla.....
Color is for fun..not so much for the hooken u part we feel...but I'm from Pluto so what do I know.
Rip some lips.
An pleaze...TURN ON YOUR LIGHTS!!!
Tommy
Enjoy reading all the fact stuff on color....from a few of you...very intersting.
I LIKE IT!!
Thanks for sharing it all. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | sworrall - 1/26/2010 3:53 PM
Then, of course, there's Gerry Bucholtz's ideas that UV may be a factor...
Steve alluded to it very briefly, and that is UV. Unlike humans fish like other predators can see in Ultra-violet as well as with rods and cones. So I would think the UV throws a whole new twist into the shades of gray deal, but I am only guessing. Here is a few sentences from an article I found that peaked my interest.
"Fluorescent colors have the added advantage of reflecting ultraviolet. Remember, most predators can see into the ultraviolet range. We can't even imagine what the color values are to them, but we can observe and deduce what attracts them. As an old fly-tier, I have the disgusting habit of scrutinizing road kills. I've noticed, at night, that on fresh ones the blood fluoresces. Experimentation has convinced me that there is an ultraviolet marker in fresh blood. It makes sense that predators would both be able to see this color and be attracted by it. I believe that this phenomenon accounts for the fabulous attraction of the color chartreuse. It may not look anything like blood to us, but to a creature that can see into the ultraviolet range, it very well might."
An explanation of why I have great luck with Chartreause/white Jakes and Warners at night? Perhaps an explanation for the Big Joe since I believe the blue that it contains is actually a fluorescent? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | If Gerry is right, and I think he might be, and Pike and Muskies have the cellular structure in the eyes to perceive the UV spectrum, maybe...just maybe that would allow them to see lures that are UV enhanced a bit better. Only about 9% of the UV light that makes it to us is absorbed by clear water, so this one is interesting to say the least. I can't find anything other than my conversations with Gerry quite a time ago to suggest Muskies DO see in the UV spectrum, but...everything I can find indicates the trait is through the cone cells, which are not in play after dark.
I understand some Goldfish can see in the UV spectrum. Not all fish can.
The concept does create some interesting potential left turns in the understanding of fish vision and color during the day. |
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | TK - I had to order some of this stuff when I saw it... I know, there's a sucker born every minute! But what if?
Edited by Will Schultz 1/28/2010 9:53 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | In unpressured water I go with high contrast and very visible lures. When dealing with pressured fish or gin clear water I lean toward lures that are less visible to the fish or camoflaged. Do I want them to see it or do I want them to make a mistake because they can't see it. I've got a couple ernies that are unpainted/clear plastic that catch fish, even at night. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Will,
Take that clear plastic lure outside tonight in the full moon and take a look against a couple available backgrounds except the snow. It'll surprise you, I bet. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| Will Schultz - 1/28/2010 9:57 PM
In unpressured water I go with high contrast and very visible lures. When dealing with pressured fish or gin clear water I lean toward lures that are less visible to the fish or camoflaged. Do I want them to see it or do I want them to make a mistake because they can't see it. I've got a couple ernies that are unpainted/clear plastic that catch fish, even at night.
I've struggled with this concept from day one... "Match the hatch" is a very popular phrase, and some of the best anglers I've come across do just that -- they match their lure selection to the size and coloration of the baitfish that are present in that water. I think it makes perfect sense in clear water because in my opinion they're used to feeding primarily by sight. In stained water, bad algae blooms, turbid water I'll go with brigher colors and more contrast -- I love the Perkunje Perch pattern in those situations.
But I still can't shake the feeling that picking a lure that looks exactly like something that has evolved to have camoflage to avoid being eaten is costing me fish sometimes. I WANT the muskies to see it. In clear water I always figure they see it and I ought to make it look as natural as a lure that behaves nothing like prey can.
|
|
| |
|
| ok so with all this...it seems to me that color (or contrast) actually can be seen by fish...as what some of us who do a lot of night fishing have noticed, that color does matter...I'll stick to my guns and think it does...as there are nights they have preferred certain colors on blades over others....contrast or color or whatever we want to call it..we may think science can tell us exactly what a muskies eyes can see..but then do we know how their brain is going to interpret that? I don't think so...?
I kind of agree with TKoepke too..I don't care if others don't agree..it's only more fish for those of us that do to catch! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | EA.
Oxymoron, that last line is.
bn,
The only visual information the rod cells can transmit to the muskie's rudimentary brain is B&W. Makes sense, too, since light is low under the water as a rule, that evolutionary trend would lean towards seeing better in low light, and seeing very well in what we humans consider darkness. It's simple survival.
It's not all that complicated really. No light, no colors. Rod cells, much better vision after dark than we have, no colors. Water acts as a prism. We all already KNOW this stuff....just forget to apply it or don't care to try. That's pretty much it. Even our sophisticated brain doesn't tell us what color objects are perceived by our rod cells in the dark, that's just not the way it works. All sorts of chemical reactions are going on, but it's all in B&W after dark.
Each daylight color pattern you have in use has a definite visual signature at night...no question. Knowing what that signature is can be very valuable. So if one is working and another isn't, it's at least to me a good idea to figure out why. if one doesn't understand how light, water, and the fish's vision interact down there, one won't figure it out.
I don't see it as a matter of agreeing. It's a matter of understanding, and if one wants to challenge what's considered proven out, one needs to come up with a challenge that holds water. I ain't the one who did the research and did the science and hard work to figure this all out, I just read the stuff those folks published, try to understand what it all means, and experiment with it...allot...to try to prove to myself I do 'get it' at a level that allows me to apply the knowledge to my fishing. I make allot of mistakes along the way, that's part of the fun for me. I bet I tossed out a thousand odd colored creatures over the years....
Some are OK not caring about the why of things and that's really just fine; I have no clue how fuel injection works, I just want my truck to run. About fishing, though, I never have been and no apologies there. Keeps the old brain clicking along. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Under certain conditions, I also like to use lures that I think are more difficult to seek out. That in itself, whether color related or not, is a whole other topic, and a good one!
As side note, remember the clear Zara Spook?? Always laughed at the one that somehow made its way into my tackle box as a kid(dad prolly threw it in there and took one of my fat-raps). Got bored or low on topwaters for bass one year back in the day, and low and behold it got smacked around a bit.
Edited by Reef Hawg 1/28/2010 10:31 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| So I did a little experiment. White background and black. The first two pictures were taken using a flash. The second two were taken without a flash, and the third two without a flash in very low-light conditions. It's a gross oversimplification of what happens in the water, but it is interesting nonetheless.
Edited by esoxaddict 1/29/2010 12:19 AM
Attachments
----------------
white BG flash.JPG (82KB - 205 downloads)
black BG flash.JPG (136KB - 211 downloads)
white bg no flash.JPG (71KB - 227 downloads)
black bg no flash.JPG (44KB - 218 downloads)
white bg dark.JPG (52KB - 215 downloads)
black bg dark.JPG (33KB - 205 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | sworrall - 1/28/2010 11:05 PM Will, Take that clear plastic lure outside tonight in the full moon and take a look against a couple available backgrounds except the snow. It'll surprise you, I bet. Full moon? Couldn't see it, I'm on the other side of that big snow machine called Lake Michigan. However, I have looked at those baits against the night sky (I do that with everything) and there is only an outline of the lure shape where the horizontal plastic doesn't allow the background to be visible. |
|
| |
|
| Lee I have the answer to this question and it will end all problems for everybody. CATCH THEM DURING THE DAY-LIGHT HOURS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol lol lol !!!! I do !!!! Ron |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Will,
That's it, alright. Makes a sort of 'hole' in the background, and any moonlight makes it sorta white in the center. When the lure moves, it sticks out pretty well. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1425
Location: St. Lawrence River | interesting esoxaddict. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
So at what point does the vision of the muskie go to "night" mode? And can it go back and forth somewhat or is it just an "on" "off" thing?
What I'm wondering is for example on a full moon night, when the moon is high and the water is calm there is a lot of light out there. I know I can see colors in those conditions after my eyes adjust to the low light.
A lot of my best night fishing starts about an hour after it's dark in full moon conditions, and seems to be good until moon gets lower in the sky. If I can start to see colors again as the moon gets higher, can the fish?
I'm talking about in the 1st foot of the water column if that makes any difference.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The transition from cone to rod vision begins before the sun sets. By dark, the fish's eye is adjusted to 100% rod vision, and no color is available. The transition back to cone vision begins around dawn and is at 100% color receptor around sunrise or so. This process happens on a biological clock for the fish, and doesn't change as the days shorten in the fall through winter, which is interesting. |
|
| |
