Zach Matthews
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Mike –
To be perfectly honest with you, in my subjective opinion, I think there’s about a 10% difference in overall quality and enjoyment between the worst Chinese made import and the most expensive domestic fly rod. That didn’t used to be true; I had a POS I got at Wal-Mart which actually had the ferrules upside down (you put the top end *inside* the bottom end to assemble it). Nowadays, though, it’s simply been too long since anyone was able to come up with an electrifying new technology and keep it all to themselves. Every year we get closer to absolute parity.
That also leads to some tricky situations, like 7 weights being marketed as 5 weights to increase anglers’ perceptions of their distance casting abilities. The industry is in a slow burn right now; rods get marginally lighter, marginally stronger, and marginally more flexible for a given graphite recovery speed every year. But every year the amount of increase in those categories is in the single digits, percentage wise. Meanwhile, price increases have (as I demonstrated) largely outstripped performance gains.
At some point, someone will come up with some new material or technology to radically propel us forward again, but right now we’re in a holding pattern.
Zach
Edit:
Hey Bryan –
First of all, I agree with Eric that you have no need to apologize. Secondly, I agree with everyone that a certain amount of wet glare is necessary; it’s like the inverse (shadows)–you need it to show the depth and texture of the surface.
Generally, blown fish shots come from holding the fish broadside to the camera while using fill flash. Bonefish are wicked at this. You aren’t really having this problem at all, but there are some ways to prevent glare generally.
(1) Meter off the brightest part of the fish and let the rest of the shot underexpose. You can fix the underexposed areas in Photoshop in post processing while retaining the non-blown highlights. Zach’s #1 rule of shooting shiny stuff: Once you’re clipped, you’re hosed! 🙂 Have a look at the single-image HDR post at the top of this board for how I split out lowlights and highlights and bring them closer together. I do that all the time, as below, and you can’t see any photoshopped-ness at all.
(2) You can physically affect the situation by putting the fish in the shade, as others have suggested. I find the cavity under the prow of a flats boat to throw an excellent shadow and the angler can hold the fish from above.
(3) I like polarizers and use them all the time. Shelling out for an expensive polarizer will bring optical clarity back to the image but won’t really change the overall effect much. The biggest advantage of a polarizer in outdoor bright daylight is that it cuts light two stops; it’s a set of sunglasses for the camera.
(4) I would change how you are post processing some. But it depends on the application. We’ve discussed this before. Your images as printed above would be highly appropriate for The Drake or This is Fly. Neither Fly Fisherman or American Angler would be likely to run them, however. It’s just a different take on photography. However, when you jack up the contrast as you have done above, one of the things that happens is the blacks get blacker and the whites get whiter. You can achieve the same effect without clipping out the whites, again by following my single image HDR technique. Essentially you will grab the highlights and float them on a higher layer, then lower the rest of the contrast as you see fit; the whites will stay more grayish and will not clip.
Best,
ZachHey guys –
Phil and I have brainstormed up a great idea. As you all should know, Phil was the editor of American Angler for many years. He’s currently freelancing for some bigger outlets (look for him in Outdoor Life, among others), but he hasn’t lost his editorial knack. He offered to perform a service for us through the podcast, but it’s going to take some balls on your part. In the words of Andrew Wright: I’m not going to lie to you; I’m about to ask a lot.
Here’s the deal. Phil has offered to provide constructive editorial critique of reader-submitted photographs. He’s willing to give you a personal editor’s eye on your images, discussing what works and what doesn’t, whether they would be published, and why they would or would not be appropriate for a particular article.
But we need submissions. I realize that I am asking you to be cannon fodder, but I think everyone would agree that this has the potential to be hugely instructive. So, if you’re willing, please post no more than three of the best images you have come up with. The idea here is to put up stuff that you might like to actually see published (there’s a chance Phil would find a place for stuff he likes in one of his various outlets, too).
We’ll discuss the images on the show in the next couple weeks.
David –
You can get into the Snake in the most southerly sections of Yellowstone, right by the South Gate. It’s a gorgeous stretch of water but when Lauren and I fished it, it was hot and not all that productive. Also, it had hordes of angry ants. That’s the only place I have ever had to jump feet-first into the river from the bank to wash off an onslaught of pissed off ants. Twice. In August, that section may be a bit warm again.
That said, if you’re smart, you’ll float the section down in Grand Teton–Moose to something. Paul Puckett talked about it in his podcast.
Those are both true Snake River Fine Spotted Cutthroats.
Zach
This post makes me so glad that most of the “hatches” on my water are [s:1woiv705]corn and power bait[/s:1woiv705] scuds and sowbugs.
Hey Chad –
$150 is hard. My advice would be to look at Dan Bailey waders here:
You might tie their cheapest wader with these:
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=4875649
That’s actually a very good, long-lasting combo for $175 (I can’t get to $150 with decent quality breathables either). I’ve heard very good things about the Bailey’s and the Hodgman brand felt boots last a long time; lots of my friends have worn those (even though they are sold at Wally World).
Also, Orvis has an option for you. If you’re lucky you might be able to fit in one of their remaining sizes here:
None of these are going to do it for you right now, but this is a good place to look generally:
http://www.sierratradingpost.com/e/2248_Waders.htmlFinally, these are really going to suck in every possible way, but they do get you in under the price limit:
I personally would not buy single layer waders for any reason whatsoever. I would simply save longer. I’ve been down that road. It isn’t worth it.
Zach
A merkin (first use, according to the OED, 1617) is a pubic wig, originally worn by prostitutes after shaving their genitalia to eliminate lice or disguise the marks of syphilis. 😮
I guess, in certain instances, this could be related to crabs.
Hilarious.
Hey Bob –
They are also releasing shorts and standard pants; these are just the only promo photos I got.
Agree on the metal fittings though.
Zach
The Crystal Creeks are the more expensive at $365, and they are made of Gore Tex. The Hellroarings are about $260 now, I think. They are made of 5-layer in a “proprietary” fabric. (Whenever you see the term “proprietary fabric” anywhere in fly fishing, it typically means the fabric is made by a large Japanese company called Toray, which has a competing microporous membrane to Gore-Tex. The only other breathable membrane available on the market is a DuPont product and only William Joseph uses it currently).
The Toray fabrics are not as breathable as Gore Tex. However, durability is not related to the breathing rate of the microporous membrane inside the fabric “sandwich.” Rather, the exterior face fabric typically defines how strong a pair of waders will be. I don’t know why Cloudveil went with 5 layer on the Hellroaring, but I like it. What you can take away from this is that the Hellroarings will be more durable but less breathable than the Crystal Creeks. It’s all about what you need. 3-layer Gore-Tex is typically plenty for almost any application; I have 3-layer Gore-Tex in the seat and bib of my first pair of Simms Guides, which are now 7 years old, and they’re still fine.
I personally like the cosmetic look of the Cloudveils *way* more than the Simms. My main objection to the Simms’ waisthighs is the double-buckle belt, which to me looks awkward. However, Simms traditionally has far better sizing than anyone else in the industry. I wear a medium in just about everyone’s waders and I can’t use Medium Hellroarings: the legs are too short and I get a lot of tension in the crotch when I raise my knee above halfway. I haven’t tried on a pair of Medium Longs; that might fix my problem. I haven’t heard any sizing complaints about the Simms waisthighs.
Now, conversely, Lauren wears the Hellroarings because they fit her perfectly, and she really, really loves them. I think ladies are especially suited for waist-high waders since you avoid a lot of the technical complications that just come with being a lady on the upper bib. Lauren has waded deep in her Hellroarings and as I recall the zipper did percolate a bit, but not enough to worry about. If you are regularly wading deeper than your crotch to fish, (a) stop, because you’re standing where you need to be fishing, and (b) you need to be using bib waders for safety reasons anyway.
Zach