RED V RED! Confused? I am!

g1_ · Feb 7, 2013

Experts in both sea fishing and course fishing expound the virtue of using red line as it appears invisible to fish and gives an advantage when fishing crystal clear water.

I have no reason to dispute this as a fact but then I have difficulty in understanding why some anglers swear by using the "red maggot". Can the fish see the maggot but not the line? Does the red dye contain some magic fish attracting ingredient like Robin Red?

Some Carp guys I know get great success using baits dyed with Robin Red and fish in crystal clear lakes.

Is this one of lifes many puzzles or have I missed something obvious?

G

nicepix · Feb 7, 2013

Red line isn't invisible to fish. It is more likely to be seen as black.

chav professor · Feb 7, 2013

Agreed.... it is the most visible....

barbelboi · Feb 7, 2013

Colours absorb wavelengths of light to different degrees. The longest wavelengths, with the lowest energy, are absorbed first. Red is the first to be absorbed, followed by orange & yellow. The colours 'disappear' underwater in the same order as they appear in the colour spectrum. Even water at 5ft depth will have a noticeable loss of red. However, from my years scuba diving in the past red does not disappear, it becomes grey at approximately 15’ and at about 50’ becomes black.
Jerry
PS Flouro colours do not 'disappear' in the same way.

tiinker · Feb 7, 2013

Back in the 80s I spoke to some divers about this and they told me that below forty feet the coloured redgills we were using were black in colour . But this does not explain the following. Most of the time we were fishing in 300 foot or more on the wrecks in the western channel. At the start of every day we would tackle up with a pirk and three rubber eels one black one red and one flouresent red these being the most productive colours as a rule. After about three drifts over the wreck one of the three colours would be taking more fish than the other two so we would be using three the same as long as we carried on catching fish. All the colours were black at the depth being fished but the fish prefered one of the three on any given day.

Lord Paul of Sheffield · Feb 7, 2013

but do fish see colours the same as humans?

Frothey · Feb 7, 2013

^^No!

the different shades of red will still be different shades of "black" when in deep water.

if red did "disappear" below 40ft, then submarines would be that colour.....

nicepix · Feb 7, 2013

Lord Paul of Sheffield said:
but do fish see colours the same as humans?

No. Fish and many other animals have less sensitivity to red light. That is why rabbit and fox shooter use red lamps at night. The animals don't 'see' the red light as they would a white light and therefore are not spooked by it.

As other have said, red appears grey then black at increasing depths. As fish are less receptive to red light than we are they would 'see' the changes ate much less depths than humans. In reality you might as well use line that is coloured as near to the bottom of your swim as possible whether that be sand, mud or weed.

To be truly invisible the object would have to let all light through it as glass nearly does.

thx1138 · Feb 8, 2013

nicepix said:
... In reality you might as well use line that is coloured as near to the bottom of your swim as possible whether that be sand, mud or weed.

That assumes the fish are looking down. Ok for benthic feeding species if you are talking about a hooklength lying on the bottom. But, for most fishing situations, surely it would make more sense to have a line colour that matches the colour of the surface of the water as seen from below?. Hence most species of fish have a white underside.

To be truly invisible the object would have to let all light through it as glass nearly does.

That makes more sense to me. Flourocarbon is a good start. I mostly use 'clear' reel lines.

nicepix · Feb 8, 2013

james said:
That assumes the fish are looking down. Ok for benthic feeding species if you are talking about a hooklength lying on the bottom. But, for most fishing situations, surely it would make more sense to have a line colour that matches the colour of the surface of the water as seen from below?. Hence most species of fish have a white underside.

That makes more sense to me. Flourocarbon is a good start. I mostly use 'clear' reel lines.

Yes, good point. For fly fishing and lure fishing I do use flouro' hook lengths or neutral coloured lines. But when bait is nailed on the bottom it's usually either brown or green.

Titus · Feb 9, 2013

It is known now that some animals and insects see into the uv spectrum, and when viewed under uv light they appear florescent. It is also know that many ocean fish 'light up' when they are excited or agitated. It could be the same with the redgills which were mentioned earlier, the killer bait could be fluorescing in colours outside of the human visible light spectrum but highly visible to a fish.
Here's another one for you, why is one colour bait more effective at night than another? When night fishing for sea trout a change of fly colour can be all that is needed to get the fish moving.
The fact is we can experiment, dissect and theorise till kingdom come but we will never be certain what is happening under water.

RED V RED! Confused? I am!

g1_

Member

nicepix

Well-known member

chav professor

Well-known member

barbelboi

Well-known member

tiinker

Banned

Lord Paul of Sheffield

Well-known member

Frothey

Senior Member

nicepix

Well-known member

thx1138

Well-known member

nicepix

Well-known member

Titus

Banned