Do we photograph our fish

R

Ron Clay

Guest
Some years ago I spent a day roach fishing on a midlands lake. Whilst there I witnessed a fairly well known angler land a 20 lb pike. He sacked it up and walked about 1/2 a mile to his car for the camera and then phoned his mate on his mobile. His mate arrived about 30 minutes later.

The pike was removed from the sack and the photo session started. Pics were taken from all sorts of angles as occasionally the fish slipped out of the proud captors hands. At the end of the roll of film the fish was returned to the sack and the camera reloaded. There than followed another lengthy session before the pike was finally released.

It is also common to see quite well known anglers holding fish in the most incredible angles, like John Wilson with two big roach balanced on the palms of each hand. If I tried that I am sure I would have fish jumping all over the place.

Perhaps some of these guys give the fish tranquilisers before a phot session.

Do we really have to have such technically perfect photos of fish with the possibility that they may be harmed. Quite frankly I am quite happy with a fish photographed with the rod alongside these days.
 
M

Matthew White

Guest
I am all for photographing what you catch but to cause the fish unnecessary stress by spending too much time trying to get the perfect photo/photos is out of order.

It takes only a few seconds (especially with modern point and click cameras) to photograph a fish and return it to the water.

I mostly fish with a mate and if he catches a fish which he wants a photo of I will quickly go and take it while he holds it,- and vise versa.
If I am on my own then I will place the fish onto my landing net on the ground and take the photo myself. If I wanted a picture of me with the fish then I would set my camera up before hand (on a tripod or bankstick) and use markers so that I know Im in the shot and then use the cameras self timer.

Any of these methods takes a matter of seconds and perfect results can be achieved.

AS anglers we must put the welfare of the fish we catch before our needs!
 
R

Richard Drayson

Guest
Like you Ron, I think the fishes welfare has to come first. Your story of the pike is sad. Just how many photo's do you need of the same fish?
Just a quick comment on John Wilson.
Are these actual photo's or stills from his TV show that you mention?
I'm sure JW is well practised in handling fish, some people seem to be able to handle fish better than others.
Maybe his cameraman wanted a certain type of shot for the programme.
As always, common sense should be excercised in handling fish, whether or not it be for that 'trophy shot'.
 
S

Steve Burke

Guest
A former fishing partner of mine used to complain that most of the photos he's got of me are of fish being returned. My answer was that I'd rather lose a photograph than a fish.

Now I fish on my own I seldom photograph anything except for a real specimen. Even then it's usually on the unhooking mat rather than a self portrait - much to the consternation of magazine editors! Only if there's someone else around does anyone get to see a picture of me holding a fish.

On a more practical note, catch one fish and the chances are high that there's a feeding spell starting and you'll catch another immediately afterwards. I therefore want my bait back in the water and full attention on the rods as soon as possible.
 
J

John McLaren

Guest
Good point on the feeding spell Steve, but when you've just caught a pb that isn't usually top of the agenda. That is now the only time I photograph fish (so it is fairly rare), usually I fish with a companion so he photographs me with my catches and vice versa, if alone I would photograph the fish alongside something measurable - the scales for instance, but I would never take more than two or three shots, the important thing is to get the fish back in the water asap.

On the subject of John Wilson, I am not being critical, but do you recall the occasion he tried to lift-land a very large tench with one hand and it flipped causing him to grab the fish, which then slipped from his grip several times, depositing mucus down his waistcoat. If it can happen to John, who is obviously is very experienced, it can happen to anyone - safety of the fish is paramount.
 
C

Craig Smith

Guest
Not owning a decent camera has cost me a fair few photo's but fish welfare is more important than a pic.
 
A

andrew jackson

Guest
Fish welfare, has never recived as much attention, as it does these days. The specialist anglers, who always appear to fall victim to these type of digs. Are the very same people who lead the way when it comes to fish welfare innovations. If you want a drum to beat, what about the practice of leaving multiple fish, in a keep net for upwards of 5 hours. The guy just nipping to his car for his camera doesnt even fall into the same league as far as I am concerned. Or what about the occasional Pike angler, who doesnt own a mat or sutiable unhooking eqipment or the knowledge to safely deal with a big predator?
How do you know that sacking up a pike for a while, isnt actualy benificial? It could be, lactic acid, an all that!!
 
R

Ron Clay

Guest
You have raised a point about keepnets Andrew that is worth debating.

I think I will start another thread.
 
J

John Pleasance

Guest
I still photograph fish using an automatic camera and self timer,now unless you are very lucky some of the photos are rubbish and some O.K., it's pot luck really most of the time,especially at night with a flash.

I only now take pics of PBs or 10lb+ barbel or sometimes a fish from a new water or something that makes it a little different along with the odd scenic shot,I can say that the last film I took from my camera was a 36 exp. and had been in there for three years!

One thing that concerns me with the advent of digital cameras is the ability to check out the photos that you have taken and do them again if they are not as you want them.

The temptation is there to keep the fish from the water just that bit longer than would otherwise be done.
 
R

Rodney Wrestt

Guest
John,
I think with digital cameras the function you describe is a bonus and should mean people can rattle off a round of shots then return the fish and after they set up again they can go through the shots and remove the ones they don't want. I don't have one and use a compact camera, One of my brothers or mates will take a couple of snaps then the fish is aloud to recover and released, I take no more than two or three on each occasion and like you a spool lasts me years as I tend not to use it all the time.
 
R

Ron Clay

Guest
Digital cameras? Oh I wish!!

I suppose it's OK for all you fat wallets!!
{:eek:{
 
J

John Pleasance

Guest
Rodney it's a bonus for the angler but is it for the fish? If the feature is used, the fish must be kept from the water longer as more shots are taken.

I'm not saying that I've seen it done just that the potential is there,and should be used with caution as far as the fish is concerned.
 
S

Steve Burke

Guest
I take your point about possible misuse, John. However, the other side of the coin is that you can see more or less immediately that the photos have come out OK. You therefore need less photos as you don't need to take extra ones just in case.
 
P

Phil Hackett

Guest
Photos, fish welfare, posing shots, etc., sounds like a master class is called for?

Time you earned you money Editor.

Your field I believe? :)
 
GrahamM

GrahamM

Managing Editor
Joined
Feb 23, 1999
Messages
9,773
Reaction score
1
You're right Phil. I'll try to fit in, in between editing the other articles, news and reviews, answering forum postings, etc, etc, on this site. And my vast team of editorial assistants are too busy.

But I'll see what I can do.

Any volunteers to write it though, and I'll do the rest?
 
R

Rodney Wrestt

Guest
John,
I see what you mean, I was thinking that the pictures could be taken in quick succession whithout the fish being out of water for any length of time and the best shots retained and the others discarded. I suppose that the angler would use the camera digital or otherwise in the same way....taking a couple of seconds per snap for focusing and angles etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top