Colors in water confusion

[micropterus]

Here’s something to consider. In the 1980’s a biology professor from Oklahoma University spent over 10 years developing a tool for fishing called the Color Selector (mentioned in a reply above I believe). He was Director of the Biology Research Department for 33 years. His name was Dr Loren Hill (passed away in 2008). The purpose was to provide the most visible colors under the existing conditions for the body of water being fished. It provided a range of choices for lure color selection. Dr Hills research identifies 26 colors. Here is a link for the Color Selector product. Guess what there are several shades of blue. Ronje, please explain. I think I’ll go with the PHD Dr Hill’s extensive Research.

https://www.google.com/search?q=color+s ... 9dTmghVKDM

[micropterus]

Here’s something to consider. In the 1980’s a biology professor from the University of Oklahoma spent over 10 years developing a product for fishing called the Color Selector (mentioned in a reply above I believe). His name was Dr Loren Hill. He passed away in 2008. Dr Hill was the Director of the Biology Research Department for 33 years. The purpose of the Color Selector was to provide a range of color choices based on most visible to least visible for the current water conditions of the body of water being fished. Dr Hill identified 26 different colors and shades that bass can see. Below is a link for the product. As you can see there are several shades of blue. Ronje, please explain. I think I’ll go with the PHD in Biology Dr Hill’s 33 years of research

https://www.google.com/search?q=color+s ... 9dTmghVKDM

[Ronje]

I've heard of the name Loren Hill. A fisherman/scientist who passed away early in life.

Here's a link to an invention for which he applied for a patent in 1986.

https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4693028.html

A poster on here a while ago (Whoopbass on June21) didn't seem too impressed with the invention.

To be honest the compulsory description of the technical description used to underpin it the application didn't do his patent application justice.

Have a read through the compulsory description that he had to write up about it.


What is it that you want me to explain to you? That there's more than 1 blue color in this world? (there are heaps of them).

Or do you want me to tell you what I think was wrong with Loren Hill's technical description and basis of his invention?

What I am a bit reluctant to indulge in is publicly pull apart the ideas of anybody who has passed on even if I disagree with them.

Let Loren Hill and his family memory be ?

[micropterus]

My request is pretty straight forward. I asked you to explain why a credentialed scientist who spent over a decade developing a tool to help fisherman AND identified 26 colors that fish, largemouth bass included, can see. This list of colors includes the color BLUE. Why would Dr Hill include Blue if fish can’t see it. Again, Ronje, please explain.

My reference to the Color Selector device was primarily to point to a body of research that encompasses over a decade of effort culminating in this device.

By the way, what are your credentials? One of them must be Artful Dodger as you seem very adept at confusing what I am saying.

You say “Leave Dr Hill and his family be”. What the h___ does that mean?

Meantime I’ll continue bass fishing using blue baits, especially Hematoma as a jig trailer and for super clear water, a six inch worm Texas rigged; color: Electric Blue.

[Ronje]

Micropterus

This may come as a surprise to you but I don't care what you do.

If you don't agree with anything, don't read it.

If you had a good look at what I've put up here, you'll see that I expected establishment pushback and I also expected a "shoot the messenger" response at times.

You'd have to ask Loren Hill those questions. I might have a variety of different skills, my friend, but those of a medium isn't one of them.

[micropterus]

I must have missed it in the multitude of previous screen shots, photos, graphs and charts. But I don’t recall the reference to the source of YOUR basic theory and the common denominator of your presentation: fish cannot see the color blue. I do remember you stating that this fact has been out there for years, I’m paraphrasing. Please provide a reference (link). I would be very interested in reading about this. You cannot expect all readers to swallow your theory hook line and sinker do you?

At this point I’m calling major “male cow excrement “ on this particular point that you are attempting to expound upon.

[Ronje]

Now we've added how bass see those same colors as a color contrast.

We're still in the Sunlight zone here so there's a color contrast with the water color backdrop and (in the case of a multi-colored lure) there's a color contrast between colors on the lure itself.

Bass can see a lot more than 26 colors. Some better than others so there's pretty good scope for color contrast on multi-colored lures themselves.

What happens when the lights go out? Early morning, late afternoon, night or an overcast day. The Sunlight zone becomes shallower as visibility drops and the Twilight zone rises higher in the water column

Anglers cope with those circumstances all the time.

One minute we're vision fishing with color and then suddenly the visibility drops and our lures underwater have faded to gray (or black if at night) and we're lateral line fishing.

I mentioned earlier that each color has its own "fade to gray" characteristics. That's next.

[Ronje]

Perhaps its time for a reminder that none of us should take the fishing scene, ourselves and others as seriously as we sometimes seem to.

LMB fishing isn't on the same priority level as financial, personal relationships, health, happiness and social importance matters are.

Hell no. Its more important than those!

Anyway, here's a combined view of a couple of the points I've been trying to get across.

But be warned: Never go fishing anywhere near the Twilight zone alone at night.

A picture is worth a thousand words so I'm going to "make one" to help show some of the stuff that I've put up on here.

[Senkosam]

Color (hue) is not easily proven as one of the most important strike producers - if it ever was. The only way it could be proven statistically is if 100 pairs of anglers fish different colors, in different waters, at different times of day (including after dark), in different seasons and carefully noted catches numbers by comparison on that outing.

Of course, the angler pair-up would have to use the same lures at the same time using the best presentation at the right depth, which is possible when fish are in a pattern predictive of where they are.

The above criteria is something we all take into consideration with color a not-so-distant last of predictive importance. Unless Ronja has done the above, no amount of lab-recorded statistics matters one bit because not one of us catch fish in a fish tank (or at least shouldn't).

Aside from the environmental variables we encounter, we base our selection of lures and presentations by casting and then limiting the use of other lures vs specific lures based on fish are caught casting them. What would be the point of casting more lure types and in more colors when a few will do? I have personally because I am keenly interested in what catches fish on any day from top to bottom, recording with my camera all fish caught by example.

So in conclusion, color may be important but by far less important than the other factors I mentioned. Lure color and action in-combination matter more than just color especially when it comes to the lateral line, seasonal pattern(s), weather and fish activity in general. Fish don't consider color alone, but depend on the combination of senses as well as what they detect which always matter.

[Brassmaster]

That's fascinating - thanks for sharing. Though I tend to agree with the view that at the end of the day what really matters is what colors trigger bites. Would be great if someone had some data on that - how different colors perform at different depths in terms of getting bit.

[Senkosam]

That's fascinating - thanks for sharing. Though I tend to agree with the view that at the end of the day what really matters is what colors trigger bites. Would be great if someone had some data on that - how different colors perform at different depths in terms of getting bit.

Even if there was, I doubt it would be useful to all waters in all states or pertain to all anglers that fish different lures in different ways. Color - particular hues - can not IMO be as important as the other lure-related stuff. Examples of modified lures taking into consideration color and color combinations:





Are there color similarities and dissimilarities? For sure, but all caught fish on the SAME DAY IN DIFFERENT LAKES all through spring! Why were the colors chosen? Mostly because I like those color combinations and those colors in specific. Would other colors have worked for each lure shown? No doubt!

BTW, the lures caught fish in 2' down to 8''; over 60 fish/ 4 species were caught on the same outing and over or in different structure areas.

Certain colors don't appeal to me though fish would probably disagree much of the time. Color science underwater is a course fish never took or has ever proven predictive. (i.e. Color C Lector)

[Ronje]

Good to see discussion.

I don't believe that vision is the prime sensory tool that bass use to obtain food. To me that job resides with the lateral line. It works no matter what the conditions.

In addition, a fish doesn't simply rely on one sensory organ alone to find food.

Food for survival is too important to rely on one sensory system alone, so fish use ALL of their sensory organs in combination and simultaneously for that task.

The most important LMB sensors available for survival purposes are:

. hearing (via the inner-ear/swim bladder);

. water movement sensing via the lateral line system;

. vision via a couple of different types;

Each of those sensors undertakes certain tasks for which it has evolved.

Hearing (which isn't as we humans know it... bit like vision) is the prime alerting mechanism for the fish that something (potentially food related) is happening in the bass's near environment. That something which generates noise is in the area. Could be food. Could be a predator so the fish needs to have its attention drawn to whatever it is.

Low frequency audio (which is what "noise" is), has long range characteristics.

Lateral line signals are of even lower frequency than audio signals and therefore are capable of even longer range (distance) underwater.

The lateral line sensors (called neuromasts) have evolved with reduced sensitivity (they're deaf). Contrary to popular belief that's how normal radio direction finders actually work.

If you want to hear as many sources of radio signal on a frequency for maximum distance, you use the most sensitive receiver that you can find.

However, if you want to find a signal source nearby (as bass do), that same sensitive receiver would be overloaded to the point that its useless. Even disconnecting the antenna doesn't help, its still overloaded and useless.

So, you need a deaf receiver.

A fish direction finder (lateral line) is no different. Its evolved over thousands of years as a "deaf" receiver.

Humans have only been invented similar devices over the last 75-100 years. Fish d/fs have evolved over thousands of years AND built into their body. So where does that leave humans in the evolutionary stakes?

Ever noticed from underwater videos that a suspended bass will rotate in the water column to face something which has attracted its attention but hasn't actually alarmed it?

How does it know firstly that something is nearby and secondly in what direction that "something" is so that it can face it (bring another sensor into play....its vision)?

The fish's hearing operates only on part of the frequency range that a human's does ( the bottom part) but is a "long range" sensor for early alerting purposes. An audio "early warning" device/system if you like.

Once alerted, the fish's "direction finder/homing" system (the lateral line) comes into play. Its the D/F (the lateral line) sensor which tells the fish which way the signal is coming from so it can rotate to face that source.

Its a simple d/f that tells the fish to steer right or left as its moving. Minute differences in signal processing between the left side and right side lateral sensing mechanisms give the left/right steering instructions.

The lateral line system differential signal processing between sides also sorts out the 180 degree ambiguity issue of in front/behind question.

But the fish has to be moving for that to happen. Rotating in the water is sufficient movement.

By steering right or left or right as it heads off in search over the source, the fish will eventually "run right over" the it. Simple concept but very, very effective.

Once pointed in the direction from which the signal is coming and "homing in", the fish can then bring another sensor into play.

Vision.

If conditions don't allow the fish to see the source, it will move towards it until it can (directed by the "homing/direction finder" sensor).

So ALL sensors are/have been brought into play. Once alerted to something (via the inner ear mechanism), the lateral line and vision then take over.

But we digress.

I've only looked at the vision side of things on here as that's where most of the confusion lies (particularly in relation to color). We're nearly finished now so can afford to look at other senses perhaps.

I won't be joining in as I only wanted to look at the confusion-plagued subject of colors.

Once completed, I'll leave the forum with some actual facts for you guys to think about rather try to sort your way through some of the myth and b/s that's abounded for many years.

Allow guys who've worked stuff out for themselves to maybe see why their methods work and also maybe give newbys a better understanding and starting point than what's been available in the past.

[Ronje]

A P.S.

I see another mention of Loren Hill's patented invention. He had more patents than that for the automatic lure color selector ( three or four, I think).

Nor was he the only one. Nor was he the first.

Names like Scheer, McLaughlin, Harrow, Greiner, Wilbourne and Glick date back to 1950.

These guys did the best they could with the technology that was available at those times.

The matter of LMB not having a blue cone receptor caused a guy some grief a few posts ago.

I hope that he's settled down a bit now that he knows about Lisa Mitchem's scientific work at the University of Virginia a few years ago about that subject. The link I gave him:...

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... mouth_bass

I couldn't find that link in my previous posts so maybe I didn't put the link in like I thought. Maybe he was right about that. An example of the expected "push back" I talked about?

Anyway, I've got this little picture to finish that I promised before I go.

[Whoopbass]

No offense Ronje but you kinda come off as someone fresh out of college with a masters degree that was hired on to manage a team of men with many years of actual field experience.
You do seem to be very knowledgeable on this subject and I have learned a few things from you. Maybe you can figure out a way to make money from your color knowledge.
I'm not worried too much about color as long as its something I have confidence in. My days of having every color of every worm in the boat are long over with.

[Ronje]

No offense taken.

as someone fresh out of college

Whoopbass, u're a silver-tongued devil. I wish.

I don't need any money especially from fellow fishermen who would be the market base. I enjoy fishing and

I'd Iike to see other members of the fishing family enjoy it as much.

I "signed on" to clear up some of the confusion about color. Present facts. Facts supported by technical research.

That's all. Help people better understand things. Just laying out stuff that people could make up their own minds about.

I'm not trying to teach anybody anything. Help experienced guys maybe better understand why they've arrived at conclusions that they have. Give newbys the opportunity to have a more informed start perhaps.

Despite having experience, if I'd fallen back onto it, then I'd be contributing opinion and not facts.

I do have formal quals in electronic/communications engineering but alas....not in fishing.

I see claimed experience as mostly an ambit claim for credibility. How do you measure it? There are some guys with genuine experience around (like you and I of course).

Mostly though, you find that 20 or 30 years experience is actually 1 years experience 20 or 30 times over. There's more of that around than genuine experience. Why on earth would anybody keep doing the same thing over and over for 20 or 30 years unless they like doing it? It sure wouldn't be 'cos they're expecting a different result.

So how do you determine which is which? I've worked out my own way of doing that.

Ironic I guess if I'm telling you that I've worked it out from my experience with people, isn't it?

Anyway, as long as I've put up stuff that's helped and not threatened anybody's years of experience.

I've got one last little task to do then I'll pull the pin on this exercise.

[Ronje]

Now that we know all about zones, go-to shades-of-gray fading for different colors and contrast fishing:

Here 'tis. A conundrum.

How will the color violet appear to a bass in the Twilight zone?

A or B

Remember that A is the fade-to-gray color for violet and B is the fade-to-gray color for red.

U're allowed to "phone-a-friend" who specializes in contrast fishing for bass.

Promise to give an answer in a week.

Cheers

[Ronje]

I believe that its A.

I also believe that whoever practices "contrast fishing" in the Twilight Zone is kidding themselves.

They're actually lateral line fishing.

[gabuelhaj]

Certainly interesting and intriguing aspect on bass vision/colors. Thanks for that!

I do have to say that a black/blue tail worm got bit at night while other colors were not. I cycled through several colors and each time I put that black/blue tail worm it, it out produced the other colors I was using! It may be lateral line fishing but color still has a role at all hours, albeit more or less as the day wears on.... That's been my experience anyway.....

Good luck!

[hydro]

My 3 most important factors in lure color selection

A) You have the faith to keep throwing it cast after cast expecting to get bit at any time .

B) The fish will readily bite it

C) It's not out of stock everywhere when you need to buy more .