Skill levels?

[Hillbilly 0]

Ok here is my opinion. I tye flies, nothing more nothing less. its like I've been doing machine work for ten yrs. Some people classify me as a machinst. I don't consider myself to be that. So I think its in the eye of the tier.

[Hywel 0]

Afterthought(s)

 

I recall having a spirited discussion on this very matter (skill levels) with a gentleman who many consider a 'tyer's tyer'. He's of the mind that there "...is no pecking order when it comes to tying or tyers."

 

He also thought that tenure itself had little to do with crafting a well-dressed fly. It was your (paraphrased) "passion at the vise" and the 'quality of time' tying that ultimately determines your prowess at dressing a fly.

 

I agree to an extent. I've seen the work of people (some quite famous) who've been tying for thirty years and their work IMO can be best described as 'pedestrian'...even sloppy. By the same token, I've seen flies tied by new-comers that have been absolutely brilliant in every respect.

 

Perhaps one of the best descriptions to rank oneself comes from a friend of mine who just happens to be one of the most talented (and modest) flytyers I know. When asked how he rated himself as a tyer, he responded with, "I'm comfortable with my tying skills".

 

Hywel

 

 

[Kingfisher 0]

I think I would say I'm competent. I spend a fair amount of time looking through pattern books and field guides, thinking of how to tie flies and then doing a few as I go. Generally, I work on something until I'm happy (or at least satisfied) with the result. When someone shows me how to tie a pattern, I pick up on the steps and technique fairly quickly. All of these things, as well as more time spent on the vise, have led me to be a much better tyer than I was a few years ago, so I definitely don't think I would consider myself as a beginner. Frankly, if I was spending as much time as I do tying flies and they were no better than the ones I came up with "in the beginning" I'd be ashamed and take up some other hobby.

[JasonN 0]

I just started a year ago, but I've put a tremendous amount of time into it, and I think that by the definitions you gave I'd be somewhere between professional and master, but I don't consider myself to be those things by any means. I would place a much higher value on artful innovation in those top tiers, and I haven't yet developed the greatest sense for that, because it requires both knowledge of tying techniques and detailed experience with how different materials and methods of tying affect the fly's action underwater...

 

I just think there's a lot more to being a "master" than being able to quickly and accurately replicate what you see. That's not particularly hard for me in most cases, but I still have so much left to learn about the art...

[getholdofjoru 0]

Competent. I can tie a bunch of flies but they never look exactly like the other ones, which I don't care because they catch fish.

[Tyrone 0]

I've been tying for 16 years. My wife calls it a hobby but I call it a sickness. I say that I'm somewhere between a Competent and Professional but I'm hard on myself. I tye for a local fly shop to supply my addiction.

[mmarkey 0]

Well I think I definitly fit on Steelheader's list.

 

I tend to let others judge my capability. I think it's more fun that way. After all don't we all try to impress our friends.

 

Personally I'd say "I get along!"