Parachute Adams

[vicrider 0]

At certain times, with certain fish, color...both above and below the water surface...has made a difference that is truly remarkable. This is not always true and there are a huge amount of variables but my opinion (yes, we all have one) is that changing light conditions account for the change in color preference because of the way fish see the color in the water. I believe that the color change making a big difference in fishing is more the effects of light and contrast than anything else.

 

Fishing a charter boat on Lake Superior for several years I had the chance to see colors make a huge difference to steelhead and salmon and it always seemed more a case of light condition and penetration than anything else, and my belief is that it is more to visibility than a real color preference at any given time.

 

As for the floating hackle fly, this is a world I have only limited time in and try to find a color and combo that will work but have never had the banner days others have experienced on top. Fishing lakes and streams in northern MN I made things easy by just using different size Muddler Minnows from Dan Gapen or Mickey Finn or Royal Coachman. Usually kept the frying pan going thru the year for me.

[SilverCreek 0]

 

Secondly, light is reflected up to the water surface from the rocks, vegetation, and the river bottom. So this REFLECTED light comes up from below and illuminates the underside of the hackle. If it were not so, everything that is above a fish lying on the bottom would be just a black shadow. Clearly it is not.

I agree with part of your statement, but I have to disagree with this conjecture. The underside of a fly is lit not by light reflected from the bottom structure, but by the diffraction of light through the water. Even in deep water, where the bottom cannot possibly reflect all the way back to the surface, the underside of a fly is still lit up by light reflecting all over within the water column.

 

 

I guess I should have said reflection from small particles in the water also illuminate the under surface. I am not sure that diffraction is the correct term for what occurs since I do not think diffraction cannot reverse the direction of light while reflection can.

[mikechell 0]

I will agree with that.

[SilverCreek 0]

Mike, the term we were both searching for is diffusion.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_diffusion

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffuse_reflection

[barrytheguide 0]

 

 

 

 

Secondly, light is reflected up to the water surface from the rocks, vegetation, and the river bottom. So this REFLECTED light comes up from below and illuminates the underside of the hackle. If it were not so, everything that is above a fish lying on the bottom would be just a black shadow. Clearly it is not.

I agree with part of your statement, but I have to disagree with this conjecture. The underside of a fly is lit not by light reflected from the bottom structure, but by the diffraction of light through the water. Even in deep water, where the bottom cannot possibly reflect all the way back to the surface, the underside of a fly is still lit up by light reflecting all over within the water column.

I guess I should have said reflection from small particles in the water also illuminate the under surface. I am not sure that diffraction is the correct term for what occurs since I do not think diffraction cannot reverse the direction of light while reflection can.

Divers have a term for this reflected light, it is called "back scatter"

In bright light if you look from the mid water up, all you see is bright white light and see very little of anything on the surface. Maybe that's why dry fly fishing is usually better early and late in the day when the sun is low

 

But going back to the thread, good Cree hackle reigns supreme!

[jfinn 0]

Wisconsin brown trout liked it, caught over Labor Day weekend with the Adams parachute shown.