Fly Fishing Magazines

[DavidR 0]

The Drake is enjoyable, though seems to be losing some of its edge.

 

For good reading and quality content with few ads I reall like The Flyfish Journal.

[Goats 0]

Most magazines last me one good ---t and then they just collect dust. I would think that magazines made out a toilet paper grade material would be beneficial. Read 4 page story and then flush it with last night's burrito.

[GdubyaSmith 0]

Most magazines last me one good ---t and then they just collect dust. I would think that magazines made out a toilet paper grade material would be beneficial. Read 4 page story and then flush it with last night's burrito.

LMAO

[JSzymczyk 0]

I still subscribe to Fly Tyer, and that is it. The new generation mags such as Drake are not talking to me AT ALL. I've picked up two issues and tried to read it and, just, nope, I don't have time for s**t like that. Same for several of the online new mags, "fly fusion" , and most laughably "Southern Culture on the Fly" .... folks I lived in the REAL south for 4 long years--- whatever the hell they are portraying in that thing is not southern "culture".

 

Has anyone else noticed that in the last several years, all the outdoor magazines (with few exceptions) have gone to a very shallow, quick, format? Articles used to go in depth about things, lots of details, anecdotes, and experiences which tied all the information together. Now, most "articles" are a half page of text with a few pictures and just a jumbled collection of "facts" and bits of information.

[TheBigHenderson 0]

Just picked up a Drake and a Fly Fusion...both great magazines. Nice articles and of the few ads, they're interesting. The Drake currently has a cool article and video on their site (drakemag.com) about the Golden Trout of the Sierras.

[switch10 0]

Just picked up a Drake and a Fly Fusion...both great magazines. Nice articles and of the few ads, they're interesting. The Drake currently has a cool article and video on their site (drakemag.com) about the Golden Trout of the Sierras.

 

The photo on the cover of the summer Drake issue is some of the best photography I've ever seen. The picture on the cover is larger than this one, and you can actually see the fly too.

 

Taken from www.drakemag.com:

[TheBigHenderson 0]

Yeah. I really enjoyed this issue...there was a hilarious article where they just hybridized a bunch of random fish and gave a short description about their made-up history/range and what they're like. Really funny article. And again, everything about it is aesthetically pleasing and the authors/editors really seem to know what they're talkin' about.

[flytire 0]

i just cant bring myself to drink the drakes koolaid.

[JSzymczyk 0]

Switch, that perspective (fish in the foreground, fishermen in the background) has been staged for eons. Fisherman appears to be all zoned-in and concentrating on a perfect presentation, trophy fish in range, but not at all spooked by the big fool with a camera up close and just in the exact right place and time. As it is a wide field of view and the background is not compressed, the photographer was very close to the fish. In fact 20 some years ago there was a "how to" article in a photography magazine I used to read which detailed exactly how to set up a shot like this. Basic equipment included several feet of heavy monofilament and a way to anchor it to the bottom, then somebody needs to catch a fish...

[switch10 0]

Yeah, I don't know much about photography, but I don't think I've seen a shot like this on the cover of a fishing magazine before.

 

Usually I see the classic "guy with a big dumb smile holding a fish" on the cover of most fishing magazines.

[TheBigHenderson 0]

I still subscribe to Fly Tyer, and that is it. The new generation mags such as Drake are not talking to me AT ALL. I've picked up two issues and tried to read it and, just, nope, I don't have time for s**t like that. Same for several of the online new mags, "fly fusion" , and most laughably "Southern Culture on the Fly" .... folks I lived in the REAL south for 4 long years--- whatever the hell they are portraying in that thing is not southern "culture".

 

Has anyone else noticed that in the last several years, all the outdoor magazines (with few exceptions) have gone to a very shallow, quick, format? Articles used to go in depth about things, lots of details, anecdotes, and experiences which tied all the information together. Now, most "articles" are a half page of text with a few pictures and just a jumbled collection of "facts" and bits of information.

 

Yeah I feel ya. I think it's for more appeal to readers with ADD, which seems to be more commonly diagnosed by the minute

[netabrookie 0]

The main thing that I don't like about most magazines is that they are often misleading. I have never read or seen an issue of Drake magazine, but after seeing the photo posted it seems to just strengthen my point. Maybe I am missing something somewhere, but I thought a Drake, either green, brown or yellow was a mayfly, and what does that have to do with a fellow going after a trophy bonefish? A while back I was really anxious to get my first issue of an eastern fly fishing magazine. I am not wealthy and can't afford to visit all the popular western streams and rivers and get tired of all the magazines just focusing on them mostly. When my issue finally arrived I was very disappointed because it was mostly about saltwater fishing and even had an article about Cuban fishing. I thought that the magazine was going to actually be about fly fishing for trout and other fresh water fish along the eastern seaboard. I guess it was my mistake because they didn't really specify how far to the east they were talking about. That magazine doesn't visit my mailbox anymore because I figured they would just keep pushing the limit and I would be reading about Asian fishing in the far east. I completely agree with everyone about the shorter articles that now appear and they just touch the surface of a subject instead of the old magazines that really tried to give an in-depth view of things. I reckon its just the modern world showing its face in everything now. Most are too lazy to actually write something without trying to condense or abbreviate it. I am sure that some would argue with me about their being lazy and use the excuse of it being such a "busy" world now, but the generations before us didn't have all the fast and easy modern gadgets at their fingertips and they did a heck of a lot better job with what they had to work with than all of the ultra fast electronic stuff out there today. I am stepping down now and will put the soapbox back in the closet for future use...

[switch10 0]

The main thing that I don't like about most magazines is that they are often misleading. I have never read or seen an issue of Drake magazine, but after seeing the photo posted it seems to just strengthen my point. Maybe I am missing something somewhere, but I thought a Drake, either green, brown or yellow was a mayfly, and what does that have to do with a fellow going after a trophy bonefish? A while back I was really anxious to get my first issue of an eastern fly fishing magazine. I am not wealthy and can't afford to visit all the popular western streams and rivers and get tired of all the magazines just focusing on them mostly. When my issue finally arrived I was very disappointed because it was mostly about saltwater fishing and even had an article about Cuban fishing. I thought that the magazine was going to actually be about fly fishing for trout and other fresh water fish along the eastern seaboard. I guess it was my mistake because they didn't really specify how far to the east they were talking about. That magazine doesn't visit my mailbox anymore because I figured they would just keep pushing the limit and I would be reading about Asian fishing in the far east. I completely agree with everyone about the shorter articles that now appear and they just touch the surface of a subject instead of the old magazines that really tried to give an in-depth view of things. I reckon its just the modern world showing its face in everything now. Most are too lazy to actually write something without trying to condense or abbreviate it. I am sure that some would argue with me about their being lazy and use the excuse of it being such a "busy" world now, but the generations before us didn't have all the fast and easy modern gadgets at their fingertips and they did a heck of a lot better job with what they had to work with than all of the ultra fast electronic stuff out there today. I am stepping down now and will put the soapbox back in the closet for future use...

 

You have to remember that these companies that publish these magazines are in the business of making money. If a magazine only covered one topic, like only eastern streams, or only one type of mayfly, it wouldn't sell well. They know that, that's why they try to cover as many topics as they can per issue to appeal to as many people as they can.

 

The Drake is mostly just well written fishing stories, and that's why I prefer it to all other magazines in print (there are no how-to's, or "best fly" articles, etc in The Drake). I don't saltwater fish at all, but I really enjoy reading about other people having fun doing it.

[Peterjay 0]

Switch, that perspective (fish in the foreground, fishermen in the background) has been staged for eons. Fisherman appears to be all zoned-in and concentrating on a perfect presentation, trophy fish in range, but not at all spooked by the big fool with a camera up close and just in the exact right place and time. As it is a wide field of view and the background is not compressed, the photographer was very close to the fish. In fact 20 some years ago there was a "how to" article in a photography magazine I used to read which detailed exactly how to set up a shot like this. Basic equipment included several feet of heavy monofilament and a way to anchor it to the bottom, then somebody needs to catch a fish...

 

I hear ya Joel - the odds of getting a "shot" like that in the real world are about the same as hitting Powerball twice. It it happens at all, it's usually a once in a lifetime opportunity. I've been a pro off and on for 40 years, and you can take it to the bank that most of the fishing stuff you see in magazines and on TV is either staged or tricked up in some way. I don't buy that tarpon pic for a second as a legit action shot. As you said, that fish had to be either at the photographer's feet or a composite. (check out the sharkpic here http://www.flytyingforum.com/index.php?showtopic=74409) That kind of stuff isn't really unethical as long as the picture is labeled as an illustration or a photo illustration, but passing it off as an action shot is another matter. (and we all know that fishermen are inherently as honest as the day is long)

[netabrookie 0]

After reading Peterjay's post and then looking at the picture more closely I do realize that I was wrong and that isn't a bonefish. I do realize that the magazines are in the business to make money. I also realize that they can't concentrate on just one or a few subjects either if they plan on selling issues to a broad spectrum of people in the future. After second thinking what I wrote earlier, I still hold the same thoughts that the magazines concentrate mainly on the well know and already famous places and give little or no attention to the other less known destinations. While doing that second thought thing I realized that is a good thing. If all of the good fishing places are featured in the popular magazines then it would no longer be a good place to go any more because a good percentage of the people reading said magazine would now be in the water right beside me.

I will have to get an issue of Drake magazine because I like to read good stories and could care less for the majority of the how-to's that fill up way too many pages. Some how-to-do-it articles are great and a lot of folks, including myself, learn a great deal from them but they are probably just old news for a lot of the been there and done that professional know it all fly fishermen.