makewoodenlures.com/lure-colo... Lure color selection explained. Find out how waves affect the visibility of lure colors and use this information to make the best lure color selection on a given day.
Thanks, Greg...very informative series. It's interesting to note that for many years, I'd always known and been told to use brighter colours for dirty water - think yellows and fluoros. But in hindsight, I'd venture to say that it was the action/vibrations of those same lures that was triggering strikes, rather than the colour. Looking forwards to more from you! Consider me subbed.
Great series - thank you! Can you please inform me how the color white is perceived. Since it holds all of the light waves, can it be seen as deep as the short wave purple?
Thanks Loron! Cloud cover has a similar effect as water depth. It reduces the amount of light (all wavelengths) that hit the water, which in turn reduces the light further again. So on cloudy days all colors look more dull and the shallow penetrating colors like red and orange penetrate even less into the water. Hope this helps! Greg
G'day Greg, like many others, I thank you for your efforts in posting the series. I to would not discard reds, yellows, etc at depth as I also agree they would produce different shades of grey or black. Spinning muddy dams for redfin as a kid, color played a big difference, but the choice of lure was always either red, orange, or yellow. I am also curious about your thoughts with purple. I used to troll a down rigger, sailing in choppy conditions, in depths from 8 meter to 21 meters, using 6" (Storm Herring) soft plastic paddle tails. Colors were in Purple with silver speckle, Brown with dark stripe on back/orange belly & (natural) bluey/silver (light belly dark back). Interesting at night (snapper also Thresher shark), purple was outstanding, brown 0, & bluey/silver had a few hits. In daylight, the bluey/silver caught fish down to roughly 12 meters & the brown down to 21 meters, the real surprise, purple caught nothing. Trolling 30ft Xraps both on their own or assisted down to depth with downrigger, my best lure was a Redhead (all white body with red head), light greens were best shallow & bluey/silver was second to the redhead at depth. Casting the 6" Storms of the surf, brown was the best performer, followed by the bluey/silver.
Excellent videos , waiting for the rest of the parts ..... Thank you so much Please, tell us about silver Would like more videos explaining the sizes and weights Also what about Phosphorescence colors, the one that glows in the dark Thanks for the effort
Thank you for making these videos. Makes sense why blue craws work better now. I doubt any of the scud and crawfish in my local fisheries are actually blue or purple. Would the color of the murk make any difference? Like say green murk as opposed to brown?
Awesome video, totally forget what we have study during our school time. Just wondering, what about those lure which is painted in chrome/silver color?
I regularly fish in salt water Northern Calif sometimes its sorta clear sometime its murky at best so how does white work in this and also pink. Pink is not red just a percentage of it so does it go further down than red? Thanks
Kind feedback, thanks - and great questions. RU-vid limits my post, so I can't answer them all here. At 10-12 ft in a turbid, algae rich lake few colors are visible except at close range to a topwater lure. Brightness hue and saturation factor in big - It's why fluorescent paints can be so effective. Reflectance (flash) is WAY bigger than color IMHO. Post these questions on my blog (there's a link on my homepage) and I'd be happy to go into a lot more depth so everybody can get an appreciation!
Excellent videos Dr Vinall. A white lure can be considered a color changing lure depending upon the available light at any particular depth. I am going to switch to white lures! :)
I did enjoy you presentation but what happens when you use a white lure. What effect does the depths have after absorbing only the correct colours that are available. Is there some point that the colour moves from the bridge to darker colours.
i just finished watching your series and i now understand how much the business can manipulate the community. You my friend deserve alot more views and subs. I'm going to buy some blue lures now. but i'm kind of wondering how white color changes in the water. cheers :D
so what about holographic lures /mirrored /chrome/ hi-vis and glittered wouldn't the light still reflect off them a lot more just just matt or flat colours
!Awesome tutorial Videos!, Dr. Greg I'm new in the hobby, my father used to take to fish when I was a kid, and I love fishing, but I had so much trouble while fishing because I didn't know about this! I Used to think vivid colors would do the best, but that was in my eyes, not on the fish eyes, thank you Again Dr. Greg!
Thanks for the question. I'd love to, but unfortunately it's not an easy comparison as it depends on the nature of the material in the water and the degree of ripple on the surface. But I can tell you this much: dirty water blocks light much more effectively than surface ripple. Even just a little bit of suspended material in the water can have a major effect on color visibility.
I watched the whole series, subscribed. I found these videos extremely helpful, however- you made no mention of black or chrome "colored" lures. Also based on your vids I made the conclusion that white colored lures will be all around best in any of the conditions you studied. In fact I don't know why I would use anything other than white, blue and black with the only variable being the thump or vibration of lures that go down deeper. Am I far off in my lines of thinking? Great vids, well done, well explained, very helpful. Seems like the Aussie accent and cheerful manners could make a talk about ANY subject more interesting! lol so with that I say Cheers & thank you!!!
An interesting discussion and well produced. Coming from California, most of my fishing is at depth. I have often pondered how fish see at depth. It would be interesting to extend the discussion to include fish eye physiology and how color is perceived from a species perspective. It appears, depending on the species, fish have the ability to "see" wavelengths of light that man cannot (such as ultraviolet). Some fish use ultraviolet reflection patterns as warnings to potential predators that they are poisonous and others use ultraviolet for identification. (Damsel fish) Some studies indicate that there is still 10% of the surface UV-A (360nm) at depth of 50-70 meters, depending on latitude, indicating that UV might be a large factor in vision at depth. Given that most white pigments are Titanium Dioxide based, which absorbs UV light, your suppositions would have an additive effect both in the visible and UV range as depth increases. Knowing TiO2s' UV-A absorption properties might be used to effectively change the pattern on the lure at depth. Glitter or any mirror like substances on the lure body would have the effect of reflecting or scattering UV at any depth. Other fish have established visual compensation mechanisms to address low light, such as a reflective layer which bounces light that passes through the retina back through it again to better discern objects or potential prey (much like a cat's or deer's eye). It also appears that some/many fish may also have polarized vision. Polarized light is most abundant at dawn or dusk (fishing seems to better then too). Many fish in ultra clear water reef environments have double cones, allowing for greater color (colour) discrimination. For deeper fish, many have upward pointing eyes, indicating that the contrast between the surface and the silhouette of the lure would be a strong attractive force. The countershading of epipelagic fish like tuna, etc., with their dark top and silvery bottom seems to be directly designed to help eliminate this contrast. It would seem that a lure with exactly the opposite countershading (lighter on top, darker on bottom) while keeping the appropriate silhouette would expose the lure to both top and bottom predators, creating the dodo bird of naturally selected lures! :-) Some have said that sharks are basically color blind, indicating that other mechanisms such as scent, contrast or pressure changes have initial precedence. Still other fish seem to use counter-illumination to change their average brightness to match the background. (squid) Thanks again. Sorry for being so long winded but I'm fascinated by the subject. If you're ever in California, let's go fishing!
Hello and thank you for the fine videos. May I ask a question ?. If I measured a Secchi depth to 60cm with my Secchidisk in a river. Is it the point where the blue color disappears or is it where the red disappears.
Hi Christian good question..... and it only took me 8 months to get back to you (sorry). A secchi is used to estimate the depth to which white light is reduced to about 1% of what it was at the surface, otherwise known as the "euphotic depth". It's a very rough measure for rapid field assessment of the depth to which photosynthesis can occur and it's kind of an average of all wavelengths. But it is very crude. and the nature of the particles that cause that light extinction affect which wavelengths are removed..... algae, suspended sediments and tannin all affect secchi depth and they all affect different wavelengths to different extents. Hope this helps
Hello again thanks for fine answer, I have made some test this summer with a home made 20cm secchi disk, with 4 colour on a red,yellow,green,and blue. at a depth of 2 feet, the green and blue are faded out... now I know what to use. thanks for time and videos..
Hey, thanks! I don't mean to be too critical of lure manufacturers. I'm sure some deliberately manipulate buyers, but most of them aren't scientists so they probably don't understand this stuff themselves. Even if they did, they would be silly not to cater to the crazy whims of their customers! To answer your question about white lures.......initially they just look less bright, but the deeper they go, the bluer they will look. Contrast is what makes white lures so successful, rather than color
If you put a white lure and a blue one side by side at a depth where only blue wavelengths can penetrate, they'll look the same shade of blue, or very close to it. It's a great question, I'll have to do a little vid to demonstrate what happens! When I can find the time ;-)
Greg. Can you address the visibility of white during low light and high light penetration? Also what happens at night in darkness? Does white become the more "visible" than any other color but black will still have the greatest contrast at night? What about UV paint on lures. How do they change things? Lastly What about anything with a metallic shine?.....Chrome baits, metallic bucktails etc... Thank you!
Hi Jared, lots of great questions there, thanks for that! Might be worth flitting over to my website where I have more detailed info, but in a nutshell: white looks progressively more blue as a lure goes deeper into the water. In complete darkness no color is visible, but since fish can find food quite happily without vision it's not a real problem for them. Sound and vibration are more than enough for fish to find a lure in pitch dark. I love black lures at night as they cast a strong silhouette if there is even a little moonlight. UV is visible only as deep as UV wavelengths penetrate into the water. This can be reasonably deep in clear water, but it is rapidly removed if there are plankton of particulate materials suspended in the water. Chrome finishes create a flash that is visible from a long way away. They're effectively intensifying and directing white light, so the same absorption principles apply, but they're certainly more visible than standard colors, especially if the water is clear and the day is bright
@Juicyjoose1990plus5 To say that reds/oranges are obsolete is probably a bit strong, but they are certainly the least visible colors under most circunstances. In clear, shallow water they are as visible as any other color. Blue is the most visible at depth, so in a sense I suppose it is the most versatile color. But as always, it depends on circumstances. Blue is not a common color for freshwater bait fish, so it could look unnatural in the sweetwater, which may make it attractive - or not!
I recently posted on this subject on my facebook page.search Facebook for "WoodenLureMaking" and you'll find it, then see post on April 28 for more detail. In a nutshell though, white looks more and more blue the deeper you go, until the color disappears completely at around the same depth as blue disappears. White is a great color for lots of lures. One of my favorites, in fact!
There are plenty of local rules that people go by, if it works for you that's great. I prefer dark colors on dull days, black at night - a strong sihouette is what I'm after (most fish hit lures from below). On sunny days the color I choose depends on a lot of things. If the water is really clear, I prefer natural colors. Most of the time I'm more concerned with getting the right size and shape of lure, right action and putting it in front of the fish. Color is a usually minor thing IMHO
Whites take on the color of the water it is in and can typically be seen at the depth of the deepest color but can only be seen at short distances horizontally because it will take on the color of the water so it will blend in with the water at distance.
In clear water, white lures just look a darker and darker shade of blue the deeper you go. In algae infested water they get darker and darker green and in tanin stained water they get darker and darker red/brown. Like all colors, once they're real deep, white lures just become a shadow in the darkness!
Greg Vinall so basically solid white lure will turn into a visible dark silhouette in a low light condition such as murky water or during night time just like dark color lure? I love white lures but 'love' alone wont help me to catch lot of fish if im to be hardheaded sticking with my personal preferences, but i dont plan to buy and to have every color avails. And watching your videos from part 1 so far i concluded that dark color and blue are the best colors for every conditions..am i wrong for making such assumption?
@rhino688 Black works at all depths. In my opinion it's the best color of all because 90% of fish attack a lure from below, so they don't see much color, just a silhouette. Black gives a stronger silhouette than lighter colors, so it is very visible. Especially at night!
Fish see color very differently! You did not mention how it may change from sunrise to midday to sunset, and cloudy weather, cloudy water and how that all affects fish, and air and water temperature, oh, and the wind speed that moves the water surface! Sorry! you missed the whole fishing color theory for me!
+Greg Weberg Thanks for your comments. This is part 4 of the series, I do discuss some of those other factors in parts 1-3, so you may have come in at the tail end of the series. With the exception of water clarity most of these factors change the penetration depth of ALL wavelengths, though not necessarily proportionally. Cloudiness in the water also affects specific wavelengths, depending on what's causing the cloudiness. Algae, for instance, allows green light to penetrate but reduces the penetration of reds and oranges. Surface ripple (even a tiny bit of surface ripple) reduces all wavelengths, water temp not so much, except there can be algal blooms etc at specific temps, so there can be an indirect effect. The lower the sun on the horizon, the less visible all colors become, but since fish use contrast more than color these can be peak times to fish. Hops this answers some questions, but definitely take a look at the other vids in this series for more complete answers.
Hi John, I'm afraid you've missed the point completely. It's not about what humans can see at all. It's not even about what fish can see. It's about the optical properties of light in water that have been known to oceanographers and aquatic scientists for decades and published extensively. If you are catching fish on Red/Orange flies in deep, dirty water it's not because of their color or what the fishes eyes are capable of seeing. It's because of the size, shape, action and the way you fish your flies. Stick a camera down there and film your flies to see what color they appear - you'll be surprised. BTW - if the camera can't see them in dirty water the fish probably still can - but fish see contrast, silhouettes and shadows extremely well under those conditions, not color.
I think you've overlooked what happens in dirty water, Greg. In higher turbidity water (say 25 NTU), the light penetration sequence REVERSES with the higher frequency colours ( blue, green, violet) fading first and the lower freq colours (red, orange, yellow) fading progressively slower. and THAT is the key that's led to all the confusion about colours underwater. If fishing in shallow dirty water use red, orange or yellow lures (or combinations). Red and green is a good all-round combination (1 low freq - red and 1 higher freq - green) basically giving a bit of both worlds across a wider range of NTU readings. Guns and Roses colour (green and red) is good allround (especially if fluro) lure and why (I reckon) G&R colours in both Classic and Warlock styles are so effective. Look up the research carried on colours underwater by the US Navy Submarine depot at Long Island in Conn. a long time ago. I found the same reversal in simple tests I've done here in Aus. Research is Aus has been using the clear water findings and simply extending them to dirty water assuming a simple reduction in depth. Not so. The attenuation reverses. Try it yourself. I did it with coloured washers and a turbidity tube and got an unexpected opposite effect as turbidity increased. Go back to low turbidity and the results were as expected.
I watched the videos on color and I found your theory on fish color sight to be extremely stupid, you are basing the whole color selection as if fish see like humans, but they do not. and Everyone know that light goes away underwater. But the fish eyes have adapted for that, which you do not mention of take into consideration.
Thanks. I love hearing opposing views, especially when they're well researched, well informed, well articulated and backed up by some kind of evidence. But your comment has none of that. It's just a cheap insult from someone with no grasp of the very basics of fish vision. Please, do some simple research, read all the comments on this video series or check out my published work, my website or the many independent scientific publications in reviewed journals. I've personally written a TON about how fish eyes are evolved and adapted to life underwater. But that's not what this video series is about - So you watched 4 videos and completely missed the point of every single one. Fish, avian, mammalian, reptilian, amphibian eyes all have one thing in common. They all receive light of a particular wavelength and convert it into nerve impulses that the brain can interpret as color. If that wavelength isn't there, they can't see that color. Full stop. That's what this video series is all about. Contrary to what you're saying, all of the scientific evidence and anatomical studies of fish eyes show that most species are not highly adapted to see color at all. They can't pick up tiny traces of light that human eyes couldn't detect because their eyes have far fewer color receptors than human eyes. In fact, fish eyes are highly adapted to see contrast in a world where color often doesn't exist. So please, do us all a favor. Don't make another insulting comment that just wastes our time and makes you look like a fool. Come back with something intelligent that shows you've done some research and have some idea of what you're talking about. Who knows? Maybe you'll convince me (or a few thousand other fisheries scientists) to change my views.
