Why Fish Don't See Your Lures: How Fish Vision... By Greg Vinall

[Turkey sandwich]

I noticed a bunch of threads on here over the past month or two about color choices and lure selection in different water clarities and figured I'd post about this. The book Why Fish Don't See Your Lures: How Fish Vision Affects Intelligent Fishing Tackle Color Selection. Lake Fishing, River Fishing, Sea Fishing. By Greg Vinall covers everything from color visibility at depth, color visibility at distance, how well fish can focus in varying water clarifies, different light conditions, and lots of other super helpful information for lure selection.

The book has been really helpful for me. I've known some of the basics for a while, but the book really helped me understand the "why" beind a lot of the things that I do. Similarly, the book has also helped me spot some bad habits I've developed over the years.

Anyone else read it? Thoughts? Also, what are some other books/instructionals that have been helpful for you guys?

[OkobojiEagle]

Technical question: in what download format available by this publisher would the ebook be most readable from my computer without any additional reading software.  Most online articles I want to save are copied into a word document and saved in that format.

 

 

oe

[WRB]

Never read anything Greg Vinall has written so I watch a few of his on-line video's

Australian, most of his work is in salt water fisheries and nothing new in regards to how "fish" in general see colors at various depths.

I am always a sceptic when it comes down to any lure manufacture promoting science.

Greg Vinall has not studied fresh water bass as far as I can determine, all fish are not the same. You can't compare walleyes with smallmouth bass for example, their eyes are very different. You can compare largemouth with smallmouth bass, their eyes are very similar, however both bass have different preferences in lure coloration, size or profile and location.

Greg Vinall books are inexpensive and worth reading, apply what fits your experiences.

Keep in mind that the average bass angler never fishes deeper than 20' and the average bass lake depth of light is less than 20'. For the minority of bass anglers who fish deeper in clear lakes, color selection becomes more important.

Tom

[Turkey sandwich]

Technical question: in what download format available by this publisher would the ebook be most readable from my computer without any additional reading software.  Most online articles I want to save are copied into a word document and saved in that format.

 

 

oe

It's available as a Kindle version via Amazon.

[Turkey sandwich]

Never read anything Greg Vinall has written so I watch a few of his on-line video's

Australian, most of his work is in salt water fisheries and nothing new in regards to how "fish" in general see colors at various depths.

I am always a sceptic when it comes down to any lure manufacture promoting science.

Greg Vinall has not studied fresh water bass as far as I can determine, all fish are not the same. You can't compare walleyes with smallmouth bass for example, their eyes are very different. You can compare largemouth with smallmouth bass, their eyes are very similar, however both bass have different preferences in lure coloration, size or profile and location.

Greg Vinall books are inexpensive and worth reading, apply what fits your experiences.

Keep in mind that the average bass angler never fishes deeper than 20' and the average bass lake depth of light is less than 20'. For the minority of bass anglers who fish deeper in clear lakes, color selection becomes more important.

Tom

There's a lot covered, as the intentional the book seems to provide a lot of broad information. That said, it does give some attention to specific species and the information is useful. The information regarding how things are seen at depth over distance is helpful, as well as some of the information about how/why fluorescents are as visible as they are. Seriously, give it a read.

[makelures]

Thanks for the plug Turkey! It's a bit of an old thread, but thought I'd chime in with my two bobs worth ;-)

First, this is my book. I wrote it because there are lots of misunderstandings when it comes to lure color selection. Tom, just so you're aware, I teach lure making, I'm not a manufacturer. So I have nothing to gain from steering people towards one color or another. This book was merely an attempt to inject some science and objective thinking into an area of fishing where it is usually lacking.

Before I was a full time lure making teacher, I was an aquatic scientist. Actually, I have a degree with double majors in Aquatic Biology and Aquatic Chemistry, Honors in Aquatic Science and a PhD awarded for my research thesis in the fields of Aquatic biology and water chemistry. I spent 20 years working as a professional scientist on areas of fish management (among other things) and ran my own niche aquatic ecology consultancy employing a number of other scientists in the fisheries field. I have personally made numerous measurements of light and color in saltwater - and even more in freshwater - using some pretty sophisticated equipment. I've also been an expert witness in my professional capacity as a scientist. And before I wrote this book I did an extensive review of scientific (not popular fishing) literature on the subject. I reckon I'm probably qualified to give a scientific perspective  ;-)

Yes, I'm Australian. I've worked and fished around the world though, including in the US. And had you read my book, you would have seen that there are links to references to other scientific work from around the world too. Actually, in scientific terms, what I present in my eBook is very old hat, scientists have known and published this stuff around the world for years. Fishermen have just never caught up.

You are quite right that different species often have the capacity to see different colors, or at least different shades than other species. But you have completely missed the point that environmental conditions often preclude fish from seeing a particular hue, or any color at all. These environmental conditions are physical, not biological, so they are the same irrespective of your geographical location. 

In terms of the capacity for fish to see color: Most freshwater fish species are hundreds of times better at seeing shapes and shadows than humans are. And many (but not all) are many times worse than humans at detecting color. We know this from the anatomical structure of their eyes. Walleye, to pull your example, have a retina is packed with rod cells. These are the photochemical receptors that are super sensitive to light. They're present and have the same function in every living vertebrate on the planet - they allow us to see shapes and outlines in low light. Human eyes have relatively low numbers of rod cells, which is why we struggle to see much when the light fades - fish can often see silhouettes sharply when human eyes fail.

The other photochemical receptors in eyes are the cone cells, which detect different wavelengths (colors) but need much higher intensity of light to do their job. Thats why we can often see silhouettes but not colors at dawn and dusk or on a moonlit night. The ratio of rod and cone cells tells us a lot. As already stated, walleye have loads of rod cells. But they have a low proportion of cone cells. This reflects the environment they live in, as well as their nocturnal hunting habits. They don't see color as well as other species but they can make out shapes in low light when other species can't. Bass have a higher proportion of cone cells because they tend to live and operate where there is better light. Color can play more of a part here. But compared to humans, they still have a high proportion of rod cells, so they still see better than us in low light and worse (less color distinction) in bright light.

And yes, before you say it, some fish can see colors that humans can't, such as UV.

As for the penetration of light and the visibility of color at depth, I've worked on tannin lakes where the blue and green wavelengths are absorbed in the first 6 inches and only red colors are visible. I've worked on algae lakes where the red/orange wavelengths disappear within 12 inches and only greens and yellows are visible. So light penetration and color visibility can vary tremendously in a lake as deep as 20ft. 

Hope this sheds some light (pun intended)

Greg 

 

 

[scaleface]

55 minutes ago, makelures said:

 

 

 

 

 

I"m interested in how light waves get absorbed in water and how colors may simulate a basses nerve center into striking . I have watched your videos and found them informative . 

[Turkey sandwich]

@makelures Had no idea you had an account here.  Thanks for the follow up.  The information about seeing lures at distance, different water colors, and the use of fluorescents is really interesting. 

[Tim Kelly]

Presumably, when the colour is no longer visible the fish can still see the silhouette and the lure appears grey (to our eyes) to them? Does making the lure black or white make the silhouette stronger? 

[Turkey sandwich]

1 hour ago, Tim Kelly said:

Presumably, when the colour is no longer visible the fish can still see the silhouette and the lure appears grey (to our eyes) to them? Does making the lure black or white make the silhouette stronger? 

Water clarity and light do impact this.  The book is really worth a read.

[makelures]

Thanks Scaleface, Tim and Turkey, glad you found it interesting. It's a complex area and littered with misinformation, which is why I wrote the book in the first place. 

Tim, black and white are definitely the most contrasty colors. Black throws a particularly strong silhouette and is often one of the easiest colors for fish to see - and yet there are few jet black lures on the market. 

There are a couple of analogies I use when I'm teaching lure making classes:

1. Next time you're watching TV, have a play with the remote. Try turning the color brightness down a little and the contrast well up. It's a little simplistic, but it's kind of how fish see things under "normal" conditions. To simulate low light or dirty water (or getting deeper in the water), turn the color down even more.

2. Get yourself some pale blue cellophane and hold it in front of your eyes. In clean water that's how color appears to fish, even just a few feet down. To simulate greater depth, add more layers of cellophane. You'll see reds and oranges disappear first, yellows become more green, greens become more blue. Keep going and you'll eventually only see things in shades of blue. Of course, inland waters are rarely perfectly clear, so try the same thing with red or green cellophane to simulate tannin or algae.

But I suppose the take home message is that color is usually far less important than most people think and fish rarely see it the way we think they might. Most people could catch more fish if they concentrated on other factors first and color second. But most lure fishermen seem to be fixated on color as the key top success.

Regards

Greg

 

[Tim Kelly]

Colour is always pretty low down on my priority list. Bright or dark is about as much as I consider it, but like everyone else I pick up different baits because the colour appeals to me! It's complex in a fisherman's head. LOL

[primetime]

mI would agree that solid black is a color that never get's enough press. If I were to pick one Jig Color it would be Black since I can add a trailer for contrast or add a strand of blue or white etc....I rarely see soft baits in solid black any more....A black ribbon tail worm is a good color choice any day and dipping the end in chartreuse sometimes helps....

[soflabasser]

On 6/11/2016 at 9:57 AM, makelures said:

Thanks for the plug Turkey! It's a bit of an old thread, but thought I'd chime in with my two bobs worth ;-)

First, this is my book. I wrote it because there are lots of misunderstandings when it comes to lure color selection. Tom, just so you're aware, I teach lure making, I'm not a manufacturer. So I have nothing to gain from steering people towards one color or another. This book was merely an attempt to inject some science and objective thinking into an area of fishing where it is usually lacking.

Before I was a full time lure making teacher, I was an aquatic scientist. Actually, I have a degree with double majors in Aquatic Biology and Aquatic Chemistry, Honors in Aquatic Science and a PhD awarded for my research thesis in the fields of Aquatic biology and water chemistry. I spent 20 years working as a professional scientist on areas of fish management (among other things) and ran my own niche aquatic ecology consultancy employing a number of other scientists in the fisheries field. I have personally made numerous measurements of light and color in saltwater - and even more in freshwater - using some pretty sophisticated equipment. I've also been an expert witness in my professional capacity as a scientist. And before I wrote this book I did an extensive review of scientific (not popular fishing) literature on the subject. I reckon I'm probably qualified to give a scientific perspective  ;-)

Yes, I'm Australian. I've worked and fished around the world though, including in the US. And had you read my book, you would have seen that there are links to references to other scientific work from around the world too. Actually, in scientific terms, what I present in my eBook is very old hat, scientists have known and published this stuff around the world for years. Fishermen have just never caught up.

You are quite right that different species often have the capacity to see different colors, or at least different shades than other species. But you have completely missed the point that environmental conditions often preclude fish from seeing a particular hue, or any color at all. These environmental conditions are physical, not biological, so they are the same irrespective of your geographical location. 

In terms of the capacity for fish to see color: Most freshwater fish species are hundreds of times better at seeing shapes and shadows than humans are. And many (but not all) are many times worse than humans at detecting color. We know this from the anatomical structure of their eyes. Walleye, to pull your example, have a retina is packed with rod cells. These are the photochemical receptors that are super sensitive to light. They're present and have the same function in every living vertebrate on the planet - they allow us to see shapes and outlines in low light. Human eyes have relatively low numbers of rod cells, which is why we struggle to see much when the light fades - fish can often see silhouettes sharply when human eyes fail.

The other photochemical receptors in eyes are the cone cells, which detect different wavelengths (colors) but need much higher intensity of light to do their job. Thats why we can often see silhouettes but not colors at dawn and dusk or on a moonlit night. The ratio of rod and cone cells tells us a lot. As already stated, walleye have loads of rod cells. But they have a low proportion of cone cells. This reflects the environment they live in, as well as their nocturnal hunting habits. They don't see color as well as other species but they can make out shapes in low light when other species can't. Bass have a higher proportion of cone cells because they tend to live and operate where there is better light. Color can play more of a part here. But compared to humans, they still have a high proportion of rod cells, so they still see better than us in low light and worse (less color distinction) in bright light.

And yes, before you say it, some fish can see colors that humans can't, such as UV.

As for the penetration of light and the visibility of color at depth, I've worked on tannin lakes where the blue and green wavelengths are absorbed in the first 6 inches and only red colors are visible. I've worked on algae lakes where the red/orange wavelengths disappear within 12 inches and only greens and yellows are visible. So light penetration and color visibility can vary tremendously in a lake as deep as 20ft. 

Hope this sheds some light (pun intended)

Greg 

 

 

Thank you for posting this.

[riverbasser]

Great topic and good insight. These topics are why I'm glad to be apart of this forum. This stuff doesn't come into normal conversation. 

P.s I will definitely be trying the TV and cellophane trick just for fun

[WRB]

What I have learned from experience often contradicts what I read in sceintific papers and research data on how fish see colors. My experience spans over 60 years of fishing for both fresh and salt water game fish. The one thing in common with all game fish is their preference for color contrast verses single color lures, including all black.

The study of the physical eye construction certainly gives clues to low light vs bright light vision ability. What the eye construction can't do is determine how the fish interprets the waves lengths the eye transmits to it's brain. Observing how fish react to various colors, shapes and lure movement takes a lot of time on the water under a wide variety of lighting conditions. As mentioned 60 years of fresh water fishing for trout and bass, plus about 30 years fishing for musky, pike and walleyes. About 35 years salt water off shore fishing for tuna, Marlin, swordfish and coastal fishing for calico and sand bass, halibut, White Sea bass etc., You learn all fish have different color preferences depending on light conditions, including night, overcast days, bright noon sun.

Color preferences in soft plastic lures for bass can make or break your day or night.

Nothing I have ever read explains how bass have specific color preference at night in deep clear structured lakes that I fish. Understand the importance of contrast and silhouette outline, but often a clear smoke worm with different color flakes out fishes solid black with various color flakes at depths of 20 top 40 feet at night. The science tells us the bass eye can't see the worm, but they do!

Tom

[Catt]

So how many bass did you interview to draw these conclusions?

[fissure_man]

15 hours ago, WRB said:

You learn all fish have different color preferences depending on light conditions, including night, overcast days, bright noon sun.

Can you elaborate?  How do you go about picking lure colors based on those factors?   

2 hours ago, Catt said:

So how many bass did you interview to draw these conclusions?

Good point, but environmental conditions and bass physiology can be studied without any input from the bass.  It's not the whole picture, but it lays a foundation for understanding bass behavior.  If experience shows bass have a color preference in particular conditions, the science can help to understand why, and lead to a hypothesis on color choice in other conditions as well.

I'm in the camp that says lure color usually isn't a big deal, but occasionally it's critical.  Some of the discussion above has focused on determining which colors are most visible to the fish, but "most visible" often does not mean "most likely to get bit."

[makelures]

I think you're 100% spot-on Fissure-man ;-)

Nothing is ever definitive in fishing - and just because a fish can see a particular color doesn't necessarily mean it will take the lure (I think that's what WRB is getting at with the way fish interpret). I think the comment about color contrast is especially valid, too. For example, we know that many billfish don't see reds or oranges too well, but they can distinguish between minute differences in shades of blues and purples. This is an adaptation to help them distinguish blue baitfish against a blue background. And my experience with solid, single color lures has mirrored those of WRB, except for black fished at night or in muddy water.

But In my view if our focus is purely on color then we tend to overlook so many other factors, such as vibration/sound, smell/taste (yes, taste) size, shape, action, dive depth and so on. 

Greg

 

[Catt]

9 minutes ago, makelures said:

But In my view if our focus is purely on color then we tend to overlook so many other factors, such as vibration/sound, smell/taste (yes, taste) size, shape, action, dive depth and so on. 

Greg

 

How Fish Vision Affects Intelligent Fishing Tackle Color Selection. 

In other words ya book aint said nothing!

[makelures]

lol, yep Catt. You got me!

[WRB]

For decades we were told the physiology of Marlin and swordfish eyes couldn't determine color, they were color blind.

That was disproven the billfish have acute color vision in blue green tones and that supports experienced anglers who for decades settled on combinations of blue-green lures. I have read dozens I'd white papers on this topic and most contradict each other...who do you believe? I believe in my experiences far more than contradictory studies. Australia has produced some excellent studies on billfish, so I am not pooh poohing Gregs work, just not all in.

I had to move from lake Casitas to lake Castaic a few weeks ago due to poor launching facility at Casitas. Hadn't fished Castaic in years, the lake is on the rise, it was down over 150' and is coming up about 30' a month the past 6 weeks. The water coming in is warm about 75 degrees, there is a algae bloom. From experience I knew Castiac bass don't move up when this lake is rising, most of the fish in newly flooded areas will be catfish and carp instead of bass like most other lakes. So what color to use in water with visibility about 6' and greenish? My choice to start was baby bass colors thinking baby bass or Shad would the prey bass would be targeting and that didn't work out. Tried oxblood red flake ( night crawler) and MMIII ( purple) both standby's at Castiac with no luck. Aaron's Magic proved to be the color at 18' deep on secondary points. Color selection is a trail and error process until you find the right combination. Never got a jig bite going, no top water bite, no crank bait bite, just the worm bite. The next trip to Castiac everything could change, that's why bass fishing is both challenging and rewarding, these green fish can't read and do thier thing.

Tom

 

[makelures]

WRB, they definitely don't play by the rules. And I believe that experience and science go hand in hand, BTW. They contradict sometimes, sure, but you get a more complete picture if you're open to both. Much of the billfish work done over here has been carried out by Dr Julian Pepperell, another keen fisho and a well respected scientist.

I've been pondering your smoke worm fished deep at night and have a theory.......  

Could it be that it's the fact that the lure is NOT visible that makes it effective? There are plenty of instances when a transparent lure gets a reaction strike because it gets close to a fish undetected and takes it by surprise. Maybe black ones are more easily seen and don;t have the surprise factor. Just a thought!  

Thanks for the great points!

G

[Catt]

33 minutes ago, makelures said:

lol, yep Catt. You got me!

Not picking on you but with my years of working with marine biologist, years of experience, & a degree in the philosophy of science I tend to read things a little different.

[WRB]

1 hour ago, makelures said:

WRB, they definitely don't play by the rules. And I believe that experience and science go hand in hand, BTW. They contradict sometimes, sure, but you get a more complete picture if you're open to both. Much of the billfish work done over here has been carried out by Dr Julian Pepperell, another keen fisho and a well respected scientist.

I've been pondering your smoke worm fished deep at night and have a theory.......  

Could it be that it's the fact that the lure is NOT visible that makes it effective? There are plenty of instances when a transparent lure gets a reaction strike because it gets close to a fish undetected and takes it by surprise. Maybe black ones are more easily seen and don;t have the surprise factor. Just a thought!  

Thanks for the great points!

G

It's nearly impossible for a lure to get close to active bass without it knowing it's approaching because of their highly developed lateral line and close low frequency hearing senses.

The question is why do they choose to strike a specific color in very low light with everything else being equal? I don't know!! It's always trail and error and problem solving on the water.  I am not degreed in anything to do with fishing, just a old retired aerospace engineer.

Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge.

Tom