Jump to content
Fly Tying
Mark Knapp

What is an original

Recommended Posts

Please let me first say that this thread is in no way meant to be antagonistic or adversarial, we all have our own opinions on this subject and these are just mine. It's also not meant to be a challenge for everybody to try and find examples of flies that I thought were originals that someone else tied before me. I am quite sure it's possible that someone, somewhere may have done similar things. If you find some please share them with me, it will be interesting to see how others approached the same patterns that I did.

 

Next let me say that I'm writing this in the middle of the night because 1) the subject has me so excited I can't sleep (no really, all I can think about is answers to this question) and 2nd) this is a huge subject and it's likely to take me awhile to get all my thoughts down. My wife and I run our own business, (a custom knife shop and art gallery) If I spent all the time tomorrow during working hours that I'm going to spend writing this tonight I would be subject of many scowls and frowns because we have way too much work to get done before Christmas and I shouldn't be spending so much time on this. I am the master of my own domain, that's why I'm doing it while she's asleep.biggrin.png

 

Some of you may know that six years ago I challenged myself to catch each of Alaska's game fish with an original fly pattern of my own. It's a tall order but first we need to know what an original is. I knew that if I saw examples of what other tiers tied to imitate a particular food of a targeted fish, I couldn't help but emulate that tier. I purposely didn't seek tying recipes, look at flies or read fly tying books. I approached it from another angle.

 

When I decided to become a custom knife maker I did the same thing. I purposely didn't take classes in knife making, apprentice under established makers, watch you tube videos, or read books about it. I knew that if I did, I couldn't help but emulate what I saw. Instead, I just started making knives. I established my own style first, then got the necessary training to make quality knives. As you would expect, I broke a lot of rules at first.

 

Back to fly tying. My approach was simple, find out what a targeted fish species liked to eat, research that food item and tie something that looked like it.

 

What is an original Since there's no way for me to know weather or not someone has tied a pattern like mine before or not, I will say that my originals are original to me. That's to say that I tied them with no help from anybody else. I didn't look at recipes, or examples of fly patterns. I looked at the organism and tied what I saw.

 

I had very limited "formal" training in fly tying. I had just gotten one of those rudimentary fly tying kits for Christmas (you know, the ones you can get for about $30.00) and spent all Christmas day tying flies, I was 51 years old, but I had been an artist and craftsman my whole life. This was just another medium to be creative in. Being un-schooled in the art, I broke a lot of rules though. It helps that the fish I fish for most of the time have never seen another fly, lure or human being.

 

One more thing I never went into this project wanting to develop new patterns to license or sell. I'm doing it just for me, for the challenge. You may call whatever you see here an original, a variant or a published pattern (we all have our own ideas about what those are. I'm not sure what a published pattern is except that mine are published here and in my blog) The only thing I ask is that if you saw it here (or in my blog) first, and you want to use it, please credit it to me.

 

The first fly on a float trip I noticed that the grayling were feeding heavily on a little white moth. I gathered up a few and googled it. Here are some excerpts from my blog about tying a spruce bud worm moth.

 

"In my research, I learned that the moth is likely a spruce bud worm moth. In many parts of their range they are bigger and darker, but up here in northern Alaska they are quite small and very pale. I thought I had an original idea, to tie a fly that emulates the moth, but as it turns out, it has been done before, lots of times, but I could find where anybody did it the way I did it.

I still liked the idea and copied some pictures of it (the real bug, not the imitation) off of the internet."

the+flies+004.jpg

the+flies+006.jpg

 

And here's my imitation.

the+flies+049.jpg

 

Many experienced fly tiers will say that this moth breaks all the rules, it doesn't have a hackle, it won't float. In fact it didn't float very well. It laid in the surface film just like the real moths do, and the grayling ate them up. They worked until they got waterlogged. I put floatant on them and they'd work some more for a while. Finally, I'd change the fly. I caught a hundred fish a day on these flies.

 

The next fly

Here's my example....

bees+041.jpg

 

I tied as realistic a bumble be as I could tie, but it took 45 minutes. There he is in the middle just under and a little to the right of the real one.

bees+062.jpg

Who's going to spend 45 minutes per fly? Answer, not me, not more than once, so I simplified it and tied all the others in just a few minutes each. Now, can you call all those bumble bees with the chenille and hackles originals? Nope.

 

Here's another look at the real bee and my fake bee.

nubees+034.jpg

 

And all my moths and bees.

nubees+043.jpg

 

Here's a grayling on one of my original spruce bud worm moths.

2012-06-28_13-28-24_649.jpg

 

And, one on one of my bumble bee variants. I'm quite sure I can't call this an original, although I didn't follow a recipe or look at other bumble bee flies.

1340922716966.jpg

 

Next I tied what I call an "egg butt scud" an "egg head scud" an "egg butt nymph" and an "egg head nymph"

egg+butt+scud+054.jpg

 

Can we call them originals? Probably not. I took two commonly tied flies and put them together. I never saw anyone else do it but am I the first one to do it? Probably not. Lets call them variants, or hybrids.

 

Do they catch fish? you bet.

halbow+017.jpg

While launching my boat in the lake that day, all the fishing reports were coming up with nothing. Mine was the only fish we heard about caught on the lake that day. It was pretty rewarding. This lake is one of the only places I fish that does get a lot of pressure, mostly from spin fisherman and trollers. I actually do OK on this lake with flies.

 

I often open the stomachs of fish I catch to see what they're eating (not a new concept, I know). These snails came out of a rainbow. I had never heard of a snail fly before so I'm working on one. (I have since heard of a snail fly but won't look at one till I've developed my own)

egg+butt+scud+301.jpg

 

Now, some salt water flies. We catch a lot of these spot shrimp, and so do the salt water fish we target.

sitka+011.jpg

 

So I tied these.

MO+Scales+068.jpg

Are they Originals? I don't know. Certainly, lots of shrimp have been tied. I tie these up to 7 inches long, I use flash chenille, hackle, pearlescent mylar and monofilament. All common materials, I bend my own hooks (6/0 and 8/0), I weight them with lead wire and fish them down to 120 feet with fly lines I make myself. I developed the pattern myself without any recipes or examples of other flies. You can decide for yourself if they're variants or originals. I would say probably not but have to say I've never seen any like them.

 

Here's a close up.

MO+Scales+033.jpg

 

Here's what I call a "Non-Pelagic Squid"

flies+of+Sitka+024.jpg

I've never seen anything like it, I developed it myself, and we catch a ton of fish on it, so much that I named my boat after it ( a private boat, I don't do charters, have nothing to sell). This one is articulated, probably over 6 inches long. There may be something like it but I haven't seen it. I would call this one an original. (now someone can show me something like it and shatter my fragile egosmile.png)

 

Here's a few more, A hot pink Non-Pelagic Squid,(on the top) a tiger rock fish imitation (middle right) It's articulated, over ten inches long and over five inches from top to bottom. It's weight-ballanced for the fly lines I make. At the time I couldn't get hair long enough to make them so I bought cosplay wigs on eBay for the hair. I still use a lot of costume wigs for fly material. They come in every color, even glow in the dark. On the bottom is a sea lance imitation. There may be some similar flies out there, I just haven't seen any them yet. Call it a variant. I also tie them with a beads the length of the body, that may be more original.

IMG_1554.jpg

 

I've never seen a Tiger Rockfish pattern before, I've never even seen a fly that big before. I make a China Rockfish pattern like it and we catch a lot of fish on them, mostly ling cod and halibut. I use fake fur, flashabou, Lady Amhurst cheeks, 3D eyes and 10/0 hooks. We cast them, though it ain't pretty, fish them between 60 and 120 feet down and tickle the top of the structure with them.

 

I suppose arguments can be made, on all the flies in this post, either way depending on where your line between an original and a variant is. I'm just doing it for the fun of it, not for all the riches and glory that can be had in developing original fly patternssmile.png rolleyes.gif laugh.png biggrin.png.

 

I understand that part of the art of tying flies is tying the essence of the bug, not necessarily the exact bug. I see the art in that too, it's just not always practical to tie lifelike replicas for fishing.

 

I hope you are all having as much fun as I am tying and fishing flies.

All my best.

 

Interested to know where you all think each of these lies in the scale between "Original" and "Variant" It might not be a "Black and White" thing.

I gotta go to bed now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning Mark,

First, let me say, you're flies are exceptional. The moth and the bee are great examples of mimicry and "match-the-hatch" tying.

 

Second, like you, I tied flies without prior knowledge of patterns. I tied flies to fish in specific conditions, not to match any particular bait.

I consider every one of those flies original. I've since learned that others tied flies similar to mine, either before or after I did. "Independent invention" does not make one item a copy of the other. There are only so many ways to tie a fly ... it is inevitable that different people with similar skills will develop similar patterns.

 

Finally ... your flies are originals. and some of them are truly innovative. Thank you for the pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Mike. Original. Independently created. Often flies are created at different places by different people.

 

Just because you use dumbell eyes, does the fly automatically become a clouser variant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very artistic and innovative originals. But,

 

we catch a lot of fish on them,

now that's the important thing, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a kid, I remember laying on the dock in Minnesota and catching rock bass, perch, and bluegills by holding the line in my hand and watching them take the worm. We soon ran out of bait, so I asked my grandma for some red yarn and I tied about a 1" piece to the hook with a double overhand knot. Twitching that yarn in front of the fish caught more rock bass than worms ever did. My first attempts at fly tying were just tying dog fur and whatever else I could find onto hooks to look like bugs or minnows. But later when I got more serious about tying, I started to actually gather standard tying materials and built my skills from what few library books I could find in Nebraska. Herters, Orvis, and Cabelas catalogs had pages of flies and I studied each one to determine the materials and tried all that I liked. But the more I studied about the history of fly tying, the more I felt it important to tie classic patterns the way they were "originally" called out. But I'm not a strict traditionalist. I will occasionally put together my own flies that use styles and materials I picked up along the way that I feel do a better job of matching a hatch or baitfish. I enjoy seeing flies that others create. So I'm all over the map. What matters is like tjm said, that they catch fish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that part of the art of tying flies is tying the essence of the bug, not necessarily the exact bug. I see the art in that too, it's just not always practical to tie lifelike replicas for fishing.

 

Hi Mark and with MUCH respect for those of you who practice the art of realistic tying- I have never forgotten what the guy who sold me my first fly rod said to me- "I know a guy who ties flies that look exactly like bugs. They're almost indistinguishable except for the hook. Yet when he fishes with us we always out fish him using traditionally tied flies". I tend to think flies with plucked dubbing or soft hackles/feather fibers catch fish because they do a really good job of imitating a dead bug that has been banged up in a stream or waterlogged.

 

Here's how I see the "Original" question-

There are certain flies known the world over, with distinguishing features, if your creation ends up resembling one you should probably use the word "variant" out of respect for tradition. If your winding peacock herl for an abdomen divided with red floss you kind of have to call it a Royal Coachman "variant".

 

Otherwise why not consider a fly you create based on looking at a natural, matching up materials and visualizing the tying technique an original? Someone somewhere may have (or not) come up with a similar concept but that doesn't diminish your insight. Who knows maybe in a few years "Mark's Tiger Rockfish" will be huge with the salt water guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been known to tie an original pattern or two - but that was long after copying every bug that worked (or that I thought might work...). Years later I was encouraged to send a few patterns forward to be considered by Umpqua Feather Merchants and was lucky enough to have some of them accepted... Every year they receive a bunch of "new patterns" and have the difficult job of selection just a tiny percentage to go into production. Can't say I'd want to be in their shoes. I can only imagine how many Copper John or Clouser style patterns they've had to weed through. The world of contract tying (or royalty patterns) is a tough one. If a new pattern doesn't sell well enough it gets dropped without ceremony (and I've had a few patterns that disappeared from Umpqua's catalogue over the years (and it will happen again if my current stuff no longer sells...).

 

In the meantime, if I'm doing someone else's pattern I always try to make a point of naming the tyer and the original pattern name, while noting that this is my version of their pattern...

 

Here's a good example... my version of Matthews Turneffe Crab...

4r6b8Tz.jpg

fpqlyQm.jpg

Although I call them Spider Crabs -they're still Matthews pattern but with outrigger style weedguards...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been known to tie an original pattern or two - but that was long after copying every bug that worked (or that I thought might work...). Years later I was encouraged to send a few patterns forward to be considered by Umpqua Feather Merchants and was lucky enough to have some of them accepted... Every year they receive a bunch of "new patterns" and have the difficult job of selection just a tiny percentage to go into production. Can't say I'd want to be in their shoes. I can only imagine how many Copper John or Clouser style patterns they've had to weed through. The world of contract tying (or royalty patterns) is a tough one. If a new pattern doesn't sell well enough it gets dropped without ceremony (and I've had a few patterns that disappeared from Umpqua's catalogue over the years (and it will happen again if my current stuff no longer sells...).

 

In the meantime, if I'm doing someone else's pattern I always try to make a point of naming the tyer and the original pattern name, while noting that this is my version of their pattern...

 

Here's a good example... my version of Matthews Turneffe Crab...

4r6b8Tz.jpg

fpqlyQm.jpg

Although I call them Spider Crabs -they're still Matthews pattern but with outrigger style weedguards...

That's some nice work Bob!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Local Knowledge", as Golfers say. It's not necessarily 'what works', but it's about 'what works in your Locale'.

 

Whether it's matching the hatch or opening the gut, it's about what the fish in your area typically feed on. Moths, bees, snails... if they're hungry, they'll eat anything, right?

 

There are as many "variants" of a particular fly as there are variants of the 'Indian' Taco.

 

That was a very entertaining story, Mark... and some awesome looking flies, too!

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DSC01063.JPG

 

Here is an original for me. It is tied in the same way many standard nymphs are tied, the pheasant tail nymph for example, but I used only golden pheasant tippet feathers for the tail, the body, the thorax and the wings. It is a stone fly impression I guess and I call it a golden stone fly nymph.

Joe

 

Oh well, my picture did not show up. I will keep trying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark as a fan and student of classic flies I bought the book "The History of Fly Fishing in Fifty Flies" by Ian Whitelaw. If you're not already familiar with it there's loads of information about how and why a lot of the well know standard patterns came to be. The book covers a lot of detail regarding how the classic innovators thought process worked. Anglers like yourself carefully watching when and what their local fish are feeding on and their efforts to replicate the food source and it's behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark as a fan and student of classic flies I bought the book "The History of Fly Fishing in Fifty Flies" by Ian Whitelaw. If you're not already familiar with it there's loads of information about how and why a lot of the well know standard patterns came to be. The book covers a lot of detail regarding how the classic innovators thought process worked. Anglers like yourself carefully watching when and what their local fish are feeding on and their efforts to replicate the food source and it's behavior.

 

That sounds very interesting, thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I can claim one possibly two original patterns. The first one was the result of a bad day of fishing the Griffith's Gnat for some rising trout. After the last cast of the day. I noticed something on the hook point. I looked at it and it appeared to be an very small insect. I dropped the hook in a small specimen jar took it home. Once I got home I put the hook on a white piece of paper and looked at it under large magnifying glass. Appeared to be some sort of midge or small biting fly. What I noticed was the body was black with a reddish brown tinge to it. This was back in, 1998/99. I had just been introduced to CDC and looking through my packets of CDC. I found I had a packet of black and one of red brown. The bug was about a size 20. Put a size 20 TMC 2457 in my vise. Tied in a black CDC feather and a red-brown one, twisted them together, and wrapped the body. Used some white CDC for the wing. Tied up a half dozen. Went back to the creek the next day and picked up four trout on it. It was exciting. I'd caught trout on a fly I came up with and tied myself. It's still one my top trout producers in my trout box today, just harder for me to tie. Why do I think it was original. CDC was just becoming known as fly tying material in the US. Mostly as bodies or wings. I'm not sure anyone had thought about making an all CDC fly at the time. I later submitted it to the FFF "Fly Pattern Encyclopedia. So I can also say I've had one of my flies published.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"What is an original Since there's no way for me to know weather or not someone has tied a pattern like mine before or not, I will say that my originals are original to me. That's to say that I tied them with no help from anybody else. I didn't look at recipes, or examples of fly patterns. I looked at the organism and tied what I saw."

 

A good discussion starts with a good description. The term "original" means different things to different people. Your definition of original is spot on. If your not tying from a pattern, video, picture or whatever then the fly is original to you not necessarily to the rest of the tying world. In other words, "original" is in the eye of the beholder.

 

Now if your tying an "original" to have a fly named after you then there are very very few, like next to none, original patterns. Materials and techniques may change but very very few, like next to nobody, is creating truely 1st of a kind fly patterns in the Internet age where patterns, materials and techniques are all out there. The one post on the effort to obtain the "original" distinction is very rigid, time consuming and often not obtained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something personal to note about "original patterns". I'd been tying commercially for a few years before I ever even considered submitting one of my patterns anywhere... I had also started writing the occasional article about fishing topics - but never fly related... A few more years went by - then I saw one of my signature patterns (every shop I ever tied for couldn't get enough of them...) that had been written up and published in a popular magazine - as the writer's own pattern (and he even had the stones to use the same name that I'd been tying that fly under for twenty years..).

 

The result was that after I got over being a bit angry (understatement...) I learned the hard way that it's "publish or perish" if you're wanting to be known for the stuff you produce... That's the reason today that I make a point of speaking up a bit on various fly fishing or fly tying forums. That's also the reason that whenever I copy someone else's pattern I always make a point of mentioning the original tyer....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...