( This is a back up post - originally posted by Iain Cameron )
Hi Mike,
Apologies. Ironically, after saying that the book needed editing, I posted here without proof reading my own scribbling!
Also, being a lazy sod, I was recalling from memory rather than referring to the book. My poor excuse is that I’d finished my coffee, and had to go… you know.
I misrepresented the authors. My bad.
I’d said, “ … trout can see your flies body when in/under the surface film, and can see the wings, but the detail around thorax was less vital…”
I was mixing up a few bits of the book, so only fair to try to fix that
Re reading it slightly more carefully, I understood-
Things in a trout’s window (plain sight zone in this book) are visible, including colours & thoraces.
The footprint of flees drifting downstream won’t be sufficiently recognisable by the indentations on the meniscus, until the fly is within the window.
When a fly is outside the window, the thorax and footprint don’t seem to come into play; rather it’s the bits sticking below the surface, like the hook/body, or bits above the surface like a wing, that are visible.
Anything subsurface is relatively visible, depending on water clarity, from a longer distance, and that’s where the colours come in.
From p102:
Marinaro did not think that the body of the dun is ever visible to the trout, Goddard and Clarke say it is a dark silhouette, and we disagree completely, as did Datus Proper, with both: in the window the trout can see it, well lit, and inspect it. The body colour of natural duns when held above the surface, can be seen directly through the window and the air, and when resting on the surface, directly through the water…
I probably again jumbled up things; worth picking up the book and having a read, there are lots of good things there,
Cheers, iain
