How Bass See Color 2024
Ozark_Basser reply :
This has probably been covered more than once, but I'm starting the topic again because I feel I might have specific questions for those in the know.
I have read that bass, like humans, have cones and rods in there eyes. However, bass don't have pupils to adjust to light, so in instances of bright or dim light, they adjust their vision by repositioning the rods behind the cones in bright light and the cones behind the rods in dim light. Cones are what a bass uses to see color, so in shallow clear water with high skies, bass can perceive color very well, but do they have as many cones as humans? In other words, do they see as many colors as we do? I have read they actually have more and better rods (used to see shades of grey) than humans. This would explain how they can see at night so well. Also this suggests that color is of no difference at night due to the repositioning of cones behind rods which means that black would be the best color followed by white. But, again, what about the number of cones?
I have a feeling if anyone actually knew if bass didn't have as many or as good of cones as humans, the tackle industry would like to keep that information as secret as possible 
Catch 22 reply :
I don`t know about smb & lmb, but a friend and I proved time and time again that stripers could be color selective at night . We used to throw the old Rebel fast tracks, primarily in blk silver,blue silver and purple silver. Many times they would take one and not any others at all. Next trip it could be totally different. It cost us a fortune to stay current with those critters.
C22
WRB reply :
Until someone figures out how the bass brain processes the light wave length it's eyes sends to it we will not know. Trying to compare the fish eye structure to any animal, including humans, that live above water to predator fish that evolved in water isn't valid.
We know from experience that minute changes in color can have a big impact enticing bass to strike lures, under bright and poor light conditions.
Tom.
aavery2 reply :
Many scientist believe that bass have excellent color vision, actually better than our own. Many believe they can see as high as deep red 720 nanometers down into the UV at 400 nanometers.
Catt reply :
How Bass See Color as Seen Through The Human Mind!
WRB reply :
+1, Catt you did again, summed it up in one sentence.On 12/2/2014 at 1:06 PM, Catt said:How Bass See Color as Seen Through The Human Mind!
Tom
HoosierHawgs reply :
This is A great topic. If anyone finds any new information, I'd love to know. I am as confused as you guys are!
BammerBass reply :
This is a very interesting topic,and it would be exciting if scientist could provide insight into how bass perceive color and divulge more into why they like a certain color lure more than the same lure of a different color. For instance, I know apparently they DO like dark grey colors thst resemble shad, as evidenced by some of my catches this year. But I also havr a pack of bright colored (obnoxiously bright to be honest) panfish assassins that im trying to find if there is any condition that they are suited for and will perhaps elicit strikes. Th color is called " electric chicken" and is pink on top, green on bottom, with gold and silver specks. Looks a lot like a watermelon and im wondering if they just thought "ooooo, lets try these obnoxiously bright color combos to see if we can get some poor saps to buy it!" 
almost seems they are colored that way to attract people more, lol.
Catt reply :
I don't disagree with the evidence, there is evidence that bass have cones & rods.
I disagree with the interpretation of that evidence!
Just because scientist "believe" something does not make it fact.
Observable
Testable
Repeatable
Falsifiable
That's science!
No where does it ask for opinions!
aavery2 reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 5:14 AM, BammerBass said:This is a very interesting topic,and it would be exciting if scientist could provide insight into how bass perceive color and divulge more into why they like a certain color lure more than the same lure of a different color. For instance, I know apparently they DO like dark grey colors thst resemble shad, as evidenced by some of my catches this year. But I also havr a pack of bright colored (obnoxiously bright to be honest) panfish assassins that im trying to find if there is any condition that they are suited for and will perhaps elicit strikes. Th color is called " electric chicken" and is pink on top, green on bottom, with gold and silver specks. Looks a lot like a watermelon and im wondering if they just thought "ooooo, lets try these obnoxiously bright color combos to see if we can get some poor saps to buy it!"
almost seems they are colored that way to attract people more, lol.
I like your electric chicken example. As humans we live in a environment where the light is white, white is the inclusion of all colors of the spectrum. Color as we see it is the reflection of light, some colors are absorbed and others are reflected. For an apple to appear red, it must be struck with and reflect red light, if red light were filtered then the red apple would appear as another color depending on the light that was reaching it and was being reflected.
When you cast a lure into the water and it begins to sink, the water then start to act like a filter. It blocks some of the light from reaching the electric chicken jig you just cast. The deeper is goes the less light that reaches it, the muddier the water the less light reaches it, the color of the water has an effect on what light will reach it. If the light that reflects as pink cannot reach your electric chicken jig, then the color it becomes underwater shifts, dependent on what light is able to reach and reflect off of the jig.
My point is that because it looks pink and green above the water while it is being struck with white light does not mean it will appear the same under water.
Catt reply :
Very well put aavery2 
Another prime example is color red, we are told the red disappears underwater. Yet I know from experience that on Toledo Bend watermelon red will out produce watermelon seed.
So what does the bass actually see?
Senko lover reply :
I'm not a fish scientist, but I have found one color of bait to be 10x more productive than other colors at certain times, so I'm a believer in colors.
Ozark_Basser reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 7:28 AM, Catt said:Very well put aavery2
Another prime example is color red, we are told the red disappears underwater. Yet I know from experience that on Toledo Bend watermelon red will out produce watermelon seed.
So what does the bass actually see?
Red is supposedly the first color that disappears once the bait gets so far down depending on water clarity. It would appear as black to us. This is supposed to happen at about the 17 foot range in perfectly clear water. So it seems to me there are way too many variables to come up with a definitive answer.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 7:28 AM, Catt said:Very well put aavery2
Another prime example is color red, we are told the red disappears underwater. Yet I know from experience that on Toledo Bend watermelon red will out produce watermelon seed.
So what does the bass actually see?
Thank you, the fish at Amistad also seem to prefer watermelon red, IMO.
WRB reply :
My most productive big bass lure is a hair jig with 3 colors of dyed bucktail; black back, purple mid area and rust brown belly. To this color combo I add 4 strands of red crystal flash when fishing low light conditions.
Average depth fished is between 15 to 30 feet.
Red crystal flash, a color bass can't see works very well. The color combo doesn't represent the red swamp crawdads planted in my lake to my eye, the bass think differently.
By low light I mean overcast and rain at dawn and dusk. I use the same color combo during blue bird bright days, less the crystal flash tends to be more productive, but not always. Our lakes usually have 10+ feet of good water clarity, the bass have no problems seeing this jig, day or night.
Tom
PS, fished this jig since '71 from coast to coast, Canada and Mexico...anywhere anytime!
Purple = red + blue, brown = red+ black (rust brown has more red).
BammerBass reply :
so then in such case, what seems like an absurd color choice, may not be absurd at all if certain factors are just right then, eh?On 12/3/2014 at 6:26 AM, aavery2 said:I like your electric chicken example. As humans we live in a environment where the light is white, white is the inclusion of all colors of the spectrum. Color as we see it is the reflection of light, some colors are absorbed and others are reflected. For an apple to appear red, it must be struck with and reflect red light, if red light were filtered then the red apple would appear as another color depending on the light that was reaching it and was being reflected.
When you cast a lure into the water and it begins to sink, the water then start to act like a filter. It blocks some of the light from reaching the electric chicken jig you just cast. The deeper is goes the less light that reaches it, the muddier the water the less light reaches it, the color of the water has an effect on what light will reach it. If the light that reflects as pink cannot reach your electric chicken jig, then the color it becomes underwater shifts, dependent on what light is able to reach and reflect off of the jig.
My point is that because it looks pink and green above the water while it is being struck with white light does not mean it will appear the same under water.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 11:19 AM, BammerBass said:so then in such case, what seems like an absurd color choice, may not be absurd at all if certain factors are just right then, eh?
Exactly, Many of the baits we buy are purchased based on how we see them in full light. These same baits will present themselves very differently once they are in filtered light as in under water. This was my first true realization of just how much colors catch fishermen not fish.
What we need to develop is a better way to determine what color patterns look like in different light conditions.
hawgenvy reply :
According to a passage in the wonderful book (which I highly recommend to scientific-minded folks among you bassers), KNOWING BASS, The Scientific Approach to Catching More Fish, by Keith A. Jones, PhD (Lyons Press, 2002):
Dr. Don McCoy of Univ. Kentucky "found that largemouths ... quickly learned to distinguish between colors falling in the red and green sectors of the spectrum but struggled to differenciate shades of blue. This suggests that bass color vision is relatively good from red to green but weak in the blues and violets. According to McCoy's findings, bass have their highest color discrimination capabilities around two areas: yellow-green (wavelengths measuring 540 nm) and yellow-orange (610nm). In these areas they could distinguish between colors differing as little as 5 nm".
Now, this does not tell us what baits to use when, but there are other passages in the book that address lure selection based on science. Clearly water depth, water color, water clarity, and time of day all play a role in color vision. Contrast between bait and surroundings are important, and of course odor, low frequency sounds, and lure vibration and water movement detectable by the lateral line system are all factors that combine to determine if and how a bass bites a bait. And then there are factors that are internal in the bass, like how hungry the guy is. I am glad there are good scientists out there learning more about bass biology and behavior.
I have noticed lately a seeming increase in the subtle turqoise blue coloration on the underside of the jaws of LMB that I have cought over the past two weeks, wondering if it has something to do with mating behavior. I guess it is odd since they supposedly don't see blue well. (Where I live in S Florida, spawning season starts soon.) If anyone has noticed this blue color and understands what it might be, please let me know!
Happy catching!
Paul Roberts reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 1:24 PM, hawgenvy said:...I have noticed lately a seeming increase in the subtle turqoise blue coloration on the underside of the jaws of LMB that I have cought over the past two weeks, wondering if it has something to do with mating behavior. I guess it is odd since they supposedly don't see blue well. (Where I live in S Florida, spawning season starts soon.) If anyone has noticed this blue color and understands what it might be, please let me know!
...
hawgenvy, are you able to post an image of that?
Catt reply :
There is a lot of "scientific" information out there that is nothing more than interesting information.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 1:24 PM, hawgenvy said:According to a passage in the wonderful book (which I highly recommend to scientific-minded folks among you bassers), KNOWING BASS, The Scientific Approach to Catching More Fish, by Keith A. Jones, PhD (Lyons Press, 2002):
Dr. Don McCoy of Univ. Kentucky "found that largemouths ... quickly learned to distinguish between colors falling in the red and green sectors of the spectrum but struggled to differenciate shades of blue. This suggests that bass color vision is relatively good from red to green but weak in the blues and violets. According to McCoy's findings, bass have their highest color discrimination capabilities around two areas: yellow-green (wavelengths measuring 540 nm) and yellow-orange (610nm). In these areas they could distinguish between colors differing as little as 5 nm".
Now, this does not tell us what baits to use when, but there are other passages in the book that address lure selection based on science. Clearly water depth, water color, water clarity, and time of day all play a role in color vision. Contrast between bait and surroundings are important, and of course odor, low frequency sounds, and lure vibration and water movement detectable by the lateral line system are all factors that combine to determine if and how a bass bites a bait. And then there are factors that are internal in the bass, like how hungry the guy is. I am glad there are good scientists out there learning more about bass biology and behavior.
I have noticed lately a seeming increase in the subtle turqoise blue coloration on the underside of the jaws of LMB that I have cought over the past two weeks, wondering if it has something to do with mating behavior. I guess it is odd since they supposedly don't see blue well. (Where I live in S Florida, spawning season starts soon.) If anyone has noticed this blue color and understands what it might be, please let me know!
Happy catching!
Great post. I have read several articles that suggest the same, bass have fewer blue sensitive cone cells and a much greater number of red and green. Dr. Colin Kageyama suggest that it has to do with where the bass primarily lives and feeds. " Freshwater fish tend to have rods which are sensitive to longer wavelengths of light, although not quite so long as the light which actually reaches them. The cones (used to distinguish color) in the eyes of fish tend to be more closely related the color of light which reaches them underwater. The pigments in the cones of freshwater fish are often highly adapted to the light conditions in which they feed".
I think his theory supports what you posted. Bass tend to live and feed in medium to shallow water, spending most of their time above the thermocline on deep lakes. In the shallow to medium depth water the wavelength of light that is predominant is between red and green, with blue being associated with deeper water. This would explain why bass tend to have better color vision between red and green wavelengths and less definition at blue.
As Catt suggested it all has to be taken with a grain of salt. I for one am happy that there are scientist and doctors that are doing the research and are willing to share their results. We need this information so that we can further prove or disprove their work.
Again great post.
Catt reply :
Lot of unasked questions about that research!
At what depths was this research done?
Single depth or multiple depths?
Water clarity?
Multiple clarities?
What colors as in Opaque or Translucent?
Team9nine reply :
I guess I'm just wanting to know, based on all the discussion above, should I go ahead and buy those UV enhanced baits or not???
-T9
Alonerankin2 reply :
I'm putting a Flir system on my boat this winter..
Seriously, I am
I believe fish see in IR and I don't worry about the science part.. Wood baits seem to work a bit better for me in spring, maybe a heat signiture? Idk.. But it's my theory and that's the fun of it for me!
WRB reply :
Bass and all other fresh water fish are cold blooded, body temps same as the water they are in.
There is something to a critter being alive and dead, bass rare eat anything that was living and is dead at the time they see it. I fished with live bait back in the 60's to early 70's for bass with crawdads, water dogs, big night crawlers, mud suckers, shiners, shad, etc. Bass would not eat a fresh dead crawdad that died as a result of nose hooking it, it had to be alive and I couldn't see any difference in color. Bass hit a jig falling through the water column, not a dead crawdad or any other dead bait
Tom
aavery2 reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 11:58 PM, Team9nine said:I guess I'm just wanting to know, based on all the discussion above, should I go ahead and buy those UV enhanced baits or not???
-T9
Depends some on the design of the bait, it would be interesting to know if the baits are using chemicals that are florescent or phosphorescent.
hawgenvy reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 2:37 PM, Paul Roberts said:hawgenvy, are you able to post an image of that?
Paul, I've been meaning to get a good photo of the bluish chin, and may try to snap one with my phone this afternoon that I can post, if I catch an exemplary specimen. However, if you look at the rotating photographs on the current home page of Bass Resource, the photo for the article "My Fish Won't Grow" shows some of the pale turquoise that I'm referring to, under the lower jaw of that fat bass the guy is holding. See it? It is subtle in that photo, but in some other fish it is more pronounced.
Dwight Hottle reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 6:46 PM, Catt said:There is a lot of "scientific" information out there that is nothing more than interesting information.
Until someone learns how to communicate with a bass we will never know the answer. Heck I can't even get my dog to talk to me.
hawgenvy reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 8:25 PM, aavery2 said:Great post. I have read several articles that suggest the same, bass have fewer blue sensitive cone cells and a much greater number of red and green. Dr. Colin Kageyama suggest that it has to do with where the bass primarily lives and feeds. " Freshwater fish tend to have rods which are sensitive to longer wavelengths of light, although not quite so long as the light which actually reaches them. The cones (used to distinguish color) in the eyes of fish tend to be more closely related the color of light which reaches them underwater. The pigments in the cones of freshwater fish are often highly adapted to the light conditions in which they feed".
I think his theory supports what you posted. Bass tend to live and feed in medium to shallow water, spending most of their time above the thermocline on deep lakes. In the shallow to medium depth water the wavelength of light that is predominant is between red and green, with blue being associated with deeper water. This would explain why bass tend to have better color vision between red and green wavelengths and less definition at blue.
As Catt suggested it all has to be taken with a grain of salt. I for one am happy that there are scientist and doctors that are doing the research and are willing to share their results. We need this information so that we can further prove or disprove their work.
Again great post.
Thanks, aavery2. I think bass science will be more and more important to anglers, conservationists, fisheries management, and lure and tackle manufacterers. How about producing a braided line color (blue?) that is more invisible to fish, for example?
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 2:51 AM, hawgenvy said:Thanks, aavery2. I think bass science will be more and more important to anglers, conservationists, fisheries management, and lure and tackle manufacterers. How about producing a braided line color (blue?) that is more invisible to fish, for example?
I like the idea of less visible lines, but I think there is a distinction that needs to be made. I don't believe that colors like red and blue in this case are invisible to fish. I would think that instead of seeing them as blue or red they would see them as a greyscale.
hawgenvy reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 3:41 AM, aavery2 said:I like the idea of less visible lines, but I think there is a distinction that needs to be made. I don't believe that colors like red and blue in this case are invisible to fish. I would think that instead of seeing them as blue or red they would see them as a greyscale.
Agree, but that still could be better.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 4:06 AM, hawgenvy said:Agree, but that still could be better.
Would it be better than just making a grey line?
WRB reply :
Blue is a good poor light color for bass lures, the thought bass can't see it well doesn't stand up to experience.
Fish have the ability to change coloration and light up with brilliant colors when exited or mating. Nature doesn't do things randomly, there is a purpose to colors.
Ultraviolet color spectrum is visible to some animals and near ultraviolet is visible to some humans. We have no idea how broad or narrow the color spectrum is for bass under poor or no light. We know what we can't distinguish colors in very low light, therefor assume animals like bass have the same limitation. Humans are not naturally nocturnal predators, bass are and have developed senses and eye sight to aid them. We know bass feed at night in shallow and deep water. From experience we know color can be a important factor at night and during the daytime, but not always. It's the exceptions that tend to confuse the color vision issue for some anglers. Me, I accept the fact bass see colors in a broader spectrum them humans because they must survive underwater in poor light.
Tom
Catt reply :
The difficulty I have with this type of "science" is that everyone's intepretation is that the bass's eyes are as good as the human eye.
The US Navy has proven that the human eye can see the color blue at greater depths & distances.
If bass see red as shades of grey why watermelon red (grey) donamite or watermelon seed (black)?
I think we don't know how bass see color
Dwight Hottle reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 7:14 AM, Catt said:The difficulty I have with this type of "science" is that everyone's intepretation is that the bass's eyes are as good as the human eye.
The US Navy has proven that the human eye can see the color blue at greater depths & distances.
If bass see red as shades of grey why watermelon red (grey) donamite or watermelon seed (black)?
I think we don't know how bass see color
My point exactly. It's all conjecture.
Texas Hawg Hunter reply :
As a PhD researcher in behavioral science, I would recommend sticking to what bass actually do in response to different color lures...that's what you really want to know anyway. Getting caught up in all this other stuff will just take you in never-ending debates.
tatertester reply :
Good point Hawg Hunter,I've read so many different theories over the years that it does seem pointless as to exactly what their vision is, but, how bass respond indeed is whats important.
Alonerankin2 reply :
Ok, I'm not going to put a Flir on my boat.
I know without question what colors I can depend on in my area, & in Florida... I still like to read and/ or hear different data/ theory's on " How Bass see Color "
hawgenvy reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 4:15 AM, aavery2 said:Would it be better than just making a grey line?
Beats me. One would have to figure out how to test it convincingly with live bass, design such a test, have facilities, time, energy, and funding to carry it out, and then actually carry out such testing, reach a conclusion that has statistical significance, reproducibiity, and, ultimately, practical usefullness, and then publish the results. That's why bass science is so scarce.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 7:14 AM, Catt said:The difficulty I have with this type of "science" is that everyone's intepretation is that the bass's eyes are as good as the human eye.
The US Navy has proven that the human eye can see the color blue at greater depths & distances.
If bass see red as shades of grey why watermelon red (grey) donamite or watermelon seed (black)?
I think we don't know how bass see color
Bass can and do see red very clearly when light permits, as mentioned, to be seen as red an object must be struck with red and reflect red light. Red light is the first color to lose it's ability to penetrate through the water column. The clearer the water the deeper the penetration. It's not that bass cannot see red, its that red cannot always penetrate to the depth the bass are holding, when this happens it color shifts and can appear as grey or black.
aavery2 reply :
This is a portion of a article in a very good book on what bass see.
Numerous experiments have been done on bass concerning their vision and ability to identify different colors and thicknesses of fishing line. In one research project, bass were trained to strike targets connected to different colored fishing line. There were a series of targets connected to different colored fishing line, bass were trained to strike certain colored fishing line in order to receive a reward of food. Once the bass learned which colored fishing line resulted in a reward, the experiment was repeated with fishing line of smaller diameter.
Bass were able to quickly select the fishing line of the desired color down to four pound test line. This experiment was repeated with different colored fishing line. Bass were also able to discriminate between different colors of the fishing line with a high degree of accuracy. This experiment proved several things. Bass have highly developed color vision and were able to determine the difference between clear, purple, green, blue, yellow and pink fishing lines.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 9:15 AM, hawgenvy said:Beats me. One would have to figure out how to test it convincingly with live bass, design such a test, have facilities, time, energy, and funding to carry it out, and then actually carry out such testing, reach a conclusion that has statistical significance, reproducibiity, and, ultimately, practical usefullness, and then publish the results. That's why bass science is so scarce.
There have been some very good tests similar to this with published results. The information can be hard to find but if you are persistent and wade through the information , there are some very good studies and research projects going on.
Catt reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 8:41 AM, Texas Hawg Hunter said:As a PhD researcher in behavioral science, I would recommend sticking to what bass actually do in response to different color lures...that's what you really want to know anyway. Getting caught up in all this other stuff will just take you in never-ending debates.
As a student close to a degree in the Philosophy of Science that's what you need to know.
Everything being reported as science aint science!
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 8:41 AM, Texas Hawg Hunter said:As a PhD researcher in behavioral science, I would recommend sticking to what bass actually do in response to different color lures...that's what you really want to know anyway.
At what depth, what color water, clear, blue, green or tanic? Is is a cloudy day or sunny, is the sun overhead or just rising. Chop on the water or smooth like glass? I respect your education, but it is not as simple as saying bass X responds to stimuli Y in this manner. If that were the case it would be easy enough to figure out.
Paul Roberts reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 6:46 PM, Catt said:There is a lot of "scientific" information out there that is nothing more than interesting information.
"Interesting" is what motivates me to fish in the first place! Time in "the library" is part of my fishing time.
On 12/4/2014 at 2:42 AM, hawgenvy said:Paul, I've been meaning to get a good photo of the bluish chin, and may try to snap one with my phone this afternoon that I can post, if I catch an exemplary specimen. However, if you look at the rotating photographs on the current home page of Bass Resource, the photo for the article "My Fish Won't Grow" shows some of the pale turquoise that I'm referring to, under the lower jaw of that fat bass the guy is holding. See it? It is subtle in that photo, but in some other fish it is more pronounced.
I'm aware of what you are talking about, and have seen it too. However, images -run through all the iterations from ccd to printing- can be deceiving. That one image is of low resolution and highly pixilated. Many shadow areas are "blue" in such images. You are catching floridanus, right?
On 12/4/2014 at 2:51 AM, hawgenvy said:Thanks, aavery2. I think bass science will be more and more important to anglers, conservationists, fisheries management, and lure and tackle manufacterers. How about producing a braided line color (blue?) that is more invisible to fish, for example?
I agree. There is an awful lot of science (best attempts in a complex and imperfect world) that underlies what we presently know about bass, and there's more to come. Doubt anyone would give all that up -have it erased from memory- and have a go with a blank slate, stick and string.
Unfortunately, it appears that line color, even visibility, probably plays a generally small role in affecting bites.
Catt reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 10:11 AM, aavery2 said:At what depth, what color water, clear, blue, green or tanic? Is is a cloudy day or sunny, is the sun overhead or just rising. Chop on the water or smooth like glass? I respect your education, but it is not as simple as saying bass X responds to stimuli Y in this manner. If that were the case it would be easy enough to figure out.
Exactly why the afore mentioned research is not science!
Most of that research was done in an aquarium which removes all of natural conditions listed above.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 10:33 AM, Catt said:Exactly why the afore mentioned research is not science!
Most of that research was done in an aquarium which removes all of natural conditions listed above.
I fail to understand your logic
Texas Hawg Hunter reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 10:11 AM, aavery2 said:At what depth, what color water, clear, blue, green or tanic? Is is a cloudy day or sunny, is the sun overhead or just rising. Chop on the water or smooth like glass? I respect your education, but it is not as simple as saying bass X responds to stimuli Y in this manner. If that were the case it would be easy enough to figure out.
You can take all those factors into account if you like taking good data. Then, you can calculate probabilities of bites based on the interaction of factors. Pretty typical data analysis stuff.
greentrout reply :
I am not a scientist. I have fished for 40 years plus. I have used Trilene of all stripes , Stren of all stripes, Bass Pro Excel, Cablea's Pro LIne, Silver Thread, Ande fishing lines and others and all mono. I get more strikes and have caught more bass using Cajun Red fishing line. I have bought in. Ain't going back.
Old school basser...
Alonerankin2 reply :
Does red fishing line attract Bass?
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 10:50 AM, Texas Hawg Hunter said:You can take all those factors into account if you like taking good data. Then, you can calculate probabilities of bites based on the interaction of factors. Pretty typical data analysis stuff.
I think you would factor yourself into oblivion trying to calculate the probability that a bass would bite.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 11:01 AM, Alonerankin2 said:Does red fishing line attract Bass?
It does sometimes when it has a crankbait tied to it.
Paul Roberts reply :
"Seeing Red" ...a poem...Ahem...
Red is an apple ripe on the vine.
Red is of Kool-Aide, grapes, and wine.
Red is of tumescence, lipstick, lingerie, and high, high heels.
Red's pretty important to people.
Tackle manufacturer's see Green when they offer Red!
Makes me see Red.
Alonerankin2 reply :
hehe, must the crankbait also be red? It's my understanding these items must match...
Weld's Largemouth reply :
This is a very interesting and useful journal read: http://digital.library.okstate.edu/oas/oas_pdf/v59/p34_40.pdf
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 11:18 AM, Alonerankin2 said:hehe, must the crankbait also be red? It's my understanding these items must match...
May I refer you to the thread about if the jig and trailer need to match. I think we determined that it was only a factor when it was.
Alonerankin2 reply :
Yes, lol ... Someone said something about their socks not matching, musta been JF..that was a interesting thread as well..
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 11:18 AM, Weld said:This is a very interesting and useful journal read: http://digital.library.okstate.edu/oas/oas_pdf/v59/p34_40.pdf
Interesting, to me I find it cool that they were wrestling with the same thoughts and questions in 1979, 35 years ago.
Catt reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 9:34 AM, aavery2 said:This is a portion of a article in a very good book on what bass see.
Numerous experiments have been done on bass concerning their vision and ability to identify different colors and thicknesses of fishing line. In one research project, bass were trained to strike targets connected to different colored fishing line. There were a series of targets connected to different colored fishing line, bass were trained to strike certain colored fishing line in order to receive a reward of food. Once the bass learned which colored fishing line resulted in a reward, the experiment was repeated with fishing line of smaller diameter.
Bass were able to quickly select the fishing line of the desired color down to four pound test line. This experiment was repeated with different colored fishing line. Bass were also able to discriminate between different colors of the fishing line with a high degree of accuracy. This experiment proved several things. Bass have highly developed color vision and were able to determine the difference between clear, purple, green, blue, yellow and pink fishing lines.
In what body of water was this research done?
papajoe222 reply :
Although it is debateable whether or not bass see colors as we do, I think we can agree that they do see colors and can tell the difference between many of them at depths of 30ft. or more and at night under a moonless sky. Many can testify to this and the fact that they, at times, do show a preference for a certain color. The difficulty we face as fishermen is knowing when their color preference outweighs, or becomes more important to them, than shape, size, action, scent, etc.
There are way too many variables in a bass' enviornment that affect both their behavior and how they may or may not percieve colors. I doubt that science will come up with any definitive answers in my lifetime, so I stick to my way of finding out the answer as I'm sure most of you do. Trial and error is the best way I can describe how I answer the 'right color' question. If I'm confident there are fish in the area and that they are likely to prefer a certain style bait presented in a certain way, but I'm not getting any action on it, I'll switch colors. If I begin catching those fish, in my mind I believe they have a color preference. If I switch to a different style and color of lure and begin catching, I don't sit and wonder if it was the color change or the change of lure type. I just keep on chucking that puppy until it stops producing.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 12:31 PM, Catt said:In what body of water was this research done?
Unknown, I would assume it was done in a controlled environment to eliminate as many variables as possible.
Ozark_Basser reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 11:18 AM, Weld said:This is a very interesting and useful journal read: http://digital.library.okstate.edu/oas/oas_pdf/v59/p34_40.pdf
Good read. However, it seems like the experiment would have been better if they would have presented the fish with all of the colors instead of just two. Then once the fish reached criterion with the braided strand, they should have randomly mixed all of the lines leaving the same line as the reward line for the single strand. THEN they should have seen how well the fish could discern between the lines. This would leave the fish to only use color discernment to find the reward line instead of going back to the same spot to pull on the line or merely guessing between the two. Although not perfect, I think this would add more control to the experiment and eliminate some of the randomness.
It's weird how the fluorescent white line seemed to be the worst to reach criterion, but the clear line was one of the best 
Look out Berkley Nanofil! Haha who knows though. I don't think the bass would blatantly shy away from it because of its vivid appearance because fluorescent yellow was one of the most successful and probably the most visible. However, like I mentioned in the original post, bass in well lit environments are believed to hide their rods behind their cones. This could explain their difficulty to associate the fluorescent white line with food, but still they did well with the clear line. So it must be something else.
What I would like to see is the same experiment done in low light and darkness to see how the fluorescent white matched up.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 1:32 PM, Auggie14 said:Good read. However, it seems like the test would have been better if they would have presented the fish with all of the colors instead of just two. Then once the fish reached criterion with the braided strand, they should have randomly mixed all of the lines leaving the same line as the reward line for the single strand. THEN they should have seen how well the fish could discern between the lines. This would leave the fish to only use color discernment to find the reward line instead of going back to the same spot to pull on the line or merely guessing between the two. Although not perfect, I think this would add more control to the experiment and eliminate some of the randomness.
It's weird how the fluorescent white line seemed to be the worst to reach criterion, but the clear line was one of the best
I would like to use your mention of fluorescent yellow to make a point or ask a question. So we can assume from the test that a bass can indeed see what we call fluorescent yellow, a color that appears as a very bright yellow to humans, our optic nerve passes a signal to the visual cortex or our brain and fluorescent yellow is seen as a bright yellow color to us. So what about a bass, as mentioned we can assume that the bass can see fluorescent yellow, but what we don't know is how a fishes optic nerve processes that information and sends it to the the visual cortex of their brain. They may interpret fluorescent yellow as a checkerboard, or something that we cannot even comprehend.
So when someone says a bass can see green, it only means that a bass can see what we interpret as green, it may be something entirely different to them, or not.
Ozark_Basser reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 1:46 PM, aavery2 said:I would like to use your mention of fluorescent yellow to make a point or ask a question. So we can assume from the test that a bass can indeed see what we call fluorescent yellow, a color that appears as a very bright yellow to humans, our optic nerve passes a signal to the visual cortex or our brain and fluorescent yellow is seen as a bright yellow color to us. So what about a bass, as mentioned we can assume that the bass can see fluorescent yellow, but what we don't know is how a fishes optic nerve processes that information and sends it to the the visual cortex of their brain. They may interpret fluorescent yellow as a checkerboard, or something that we cannot even comprehend.
So when someone says a bass can see green, it only means that a bass can see what we interpret as green, it may be something entirely different to them, or not.
I totally agree with you aavery, but i'm not buying the bass a dress, I'm just trying to get her to bite lol. So I guess it doesn't really matter. Jokes aside, you make an interesting conjecture. If we knew exactly how the bass sees ....well anything... we could probably find a way or two to manipulate that in our favor.
Paul Roberts reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 1:46 PM, aavery2 said:I would like to use your mention of fluorescent yellow to make a point or ask a question. So we can assume from the test that a bass can indeed see what we call fluorescent yellow, a color that appears as a very bright yellow to humans, our optic nerve passes a signal to the visual cortex or our brain and fluorescent yellow is seen as a bright yellow color to us. So what about a bass, as mentioned we can assume that the bass can see fluorescent yellow, but what we don't know is how a fishes optic nerve processes that information and sends it to the the visual cortex of their brain. They may interpret fluorescent yellow as a checkerboard, or something that we cannot even comprehend.
So when someone says a bass can see green, it only means that a bass can see what we interpret as green, it may be something entirely different to them, or not.
Fish don't even have a "visual cortex"; that's a mammalian add-on. Apparently, fish process visual info right in the mesencephalon (known in fish as the "optic lobes") without sending it on for processing in the neocortex like mammals do.
Ozark_Basser reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 1:46 PM, aavery2 said:I would like to use your mention of fluorescent yellow to make a point or ask a question. So we can assume from the test that a bass can indeed see what we call fluorescent yellow, a color that appears as a very bright yellow to humans, our optic nerve passes a signal to the visual cortex or our brain and fluorescent yellow is seen as a bright yellow color to us. So what about a bass, as mentioned we can assume that the bass can see fluorescent yellow, but what we don't know is how a fishes optic nerve processes that information and sends it to the the visual cortex of their brain. They may interpret fluorescent yellow as a checkerboard, or something that we cannot even comprehend.
So when someone says a bass can see green, it only means that a bass can see what we interpret as green, it may be something entirely different to them, or not.
But what about the contrast to the fish's surroundings in the lines that worked compared to the ones that didn't? That has to count for something. You'd think that a fluorescent white line out in the lake would show up before anything else even to fish solely due to how it contrasts with everything else. I guess I shouldn't have even mentioned the fact that the fluorescent yellow is the most visible. It is to us. I guess I'm really just trying to prove to myself that bass can in fact see a lot like we do, but evidence from this test cleary states different.
Paul Roberts reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 1:46 PM, aavery2 said:...
So when someone says a bass can see green, it only means that a bass can see what we interpret as green, it may be something entirely different to them, or not.
I'm trying to stay outta this, for several reasons: discussing color in fishing is like discussing religion, and I haven't put together what I want to say about it to my satisfaction yet. But...
There is one assumption (and yes its an assumption but one that's got some heavy backing) we can make about "green" to bass and humans. It's the same "green", regardless of the potential variations in brightness, saturation, hue, and... neuronal, emotional, interpretations elicited. Bass not only see red to green wavelengths of visible light but have two peak spectral sensitivities at yellow-green and red-orange. The proper question is, "What function might this serve?" The answer is that the green is adapted to bass original environment -an adaptation to vegetated environments -both rooted and planktonic that reflect greens and absorb shorter and longer wavelengths. This is not only suggested by looking at bass, but holds for a number of fish from various taxonomic groups having vision adapted to their environments. Why the red? It's considered a derived, later evolved, add-on to provide contrast to separate camouflaged prey from that green background.
Can we use this info? Possibly, yes, at times. But... the real question is, when does "color" trump other factors in the real world -a very very big complex place. Thus there's a heck of lot more to the story on any given fishing day. And in fishing, not all of that is even about "what the bass can see".
Kevin Van Dam relates a story in one of his books" (paraphrased):
Four pros were sharing a large main lake point, and catching bass on worms. Each found a particular color that drew the most strikes. "The only one that worked", they each said when it was over. Interesting thing was, all four ended up "divining" 4 entirely different colors! Obviously, there's more to these angler's stories than "what the bass can see".
Catt reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 1:09 PM, aavery2 said:Unknown, I would assume it was done in a controlled environment to eliminate as many variables as possible.
Controlled envitoment?
Ya mean aquarium?
Where's your various depths which lessen light penetration?
Where's your water clairity, clear, blue, green, tannic?
How about some good old fashion rain runoff?
How about variations in sky color?
How about angles of the sun due to season?
What about winds?
What about algae?
All found in nature but removed in the name of "science"!
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 2:28 PM, Paul Roberts said:Fish don't even have a "visual cortex"; that's a mammalian add-on. Apparently, fish process visual info right in the mesencephalon (known in fish as the "optic lobes") without sending it on for processing in the neocortex like mammals do.
Thanks for sharing, I was not aware of that, my intention was to only stimulate a discussion based on the difference in what we see and process and the possible difference in bass.
aavery2 reply :
Catt, we may be crossing two different lines of thought. The original post,
Texas Hawg Hunter, on 03 Dec 2014 - 6:41 PM, said:
On 12/4/2014 at 8:41 AM, Texas Hawg Hunter said:As a PhD researcher in behavioral science, I would recommend sticking to what bass actually do in response to different color lures...that's what you really want to know anyway.
In my thoughts he was suggesting that it is a simple as putting a lure in front of bass and observing its response, my questions about light and water color had more to do with how the lure will present itself in the water. This is a function of light and the filtering effects of different water colors, so the same lure may look very different depending on conditions.
In the research they were only trying to determine if a bass can see color and to what degree. The test was not to prove that a bass can discern the color green in every environmental condition, heck we can't even do that and I like to think our brains are a least a little more evolved than a fish.
I don't know how good of a job I have done at explaining what I feel the difference is, but hopefully you can see where I make the destinction at least.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 3:10 PM, Paul Roberts said:I'm trying to stay outta this, for several reasons: discussing color in fishing is like discussing religion, and I haven't put together what I want to say about it to my satisfaction yet. But...
There is one assumption (and yes its an assumption but one that's got some heavy backing) we can make about "green" to bass and humans. It's the same "green", regardless of the potential variations in brightness, saturation, hue, and... neuronal, emotional, interpretations elicited. Bass not only see red to green wavelengths of visible light but have two peak spectral sensitivities at yellow-green and red-orange. The proper question is, "What function might this serve?" The answer is that the green is adapted to bass original environment -an adaptation to vegetated environments -both rooted and planktonic that reflect greens and absorb shorter and longer wavelengths. This is not only suggested by looking at bass, but holds for a number of fish from various taxonomic groups having vision adapted to their environments. Why the red? It's considered a derived, later evolved, add-on to provide contrast to separate camouflaged prey from that green background.
Can we use this info? Possibly, yes, at times. But... the real question is, when does "color" trump other factors in the real world -a very very big complex place. Thus there's a heck of lot more to the story on any given fishing day. And in fishing, not all of that is even about "what the bass can see".
Kevin Van Dam relates a story in one of his books" (paraphrased):
Four pros were sharing a large main lake point, and catching bass on worms. Each found a particular color that drew the most strikes. "The only one that worked", they each said when it was over. Interesting thing was, all four ended up "divining" 4 entirely different colors! Obviously, there's more to these angler's stories than "what the bass can see".
Paul, thank you for your post. I have read an article that is much the same as what you stated in your first paragraph. The article if I recall correctly was about trout or salmon, and it went on to make the point that they were born with more green receptive cones in their eyes as juveniles to help them locate plankton on which they would primarily feed. Later their eyes would develop to have more red receptive cones to help them isolate prey in cover as you also suggested.
I believe all of this only helps to prove that bass and other fish have highly evolved color vision. If they see green as we see green and red as we see red, is a much more difficult thing to prove but based on the articles I have read about the chemicals found in the nerve cells of their eyes, it would seem that many scientists would make that argument.
Please don't stay out of this conversation, it is important to have your input.
Sam reply :
After I give Auggie time to order his copy of Dr. Jones' book I will post the info Dr. Jones sent to me so other guys and gals can order the remaining books while they last.
Great investment and fantastic information.
I strongly suggest you obtain a copy at a cost of $25 and read/study the information to learn all you can about your adversary.
Dr. Jones uses scientific methods to determine how bass see colors and many other aspects of the animal's body.
Will post the information over the weekend so be on the lookout for it.
Sam
RMcDuffee726 reply :
Impossible to tell. Everything is assumption. No scientific studies have been completed or published in peer reviewed papers to determine a actual scientific fact how bass see color.
Mike L reply :
Whew
I thought I was a pretty smart guy (just ask my grandkids)
Until Threads like this are started.
A smart man once said....
"The things I know about, I know a lot about them
but the things I don't know about, I don't know $*#*"
Thanks Fellas,
I learned something today
Mike
hawgenvy reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 10:32 AM, Paul Roberts said:"Interesting" is what motivates me to fish in the first place! Time in "the library" is part of my fishing time.
I'm aware of what you are talking about, and have seen it too. However, images -run through all the iterations from ccd to printing- can be deceiving. That one image is of low resolution and highly pixilated. Many shadow areas are "blue" in such images. You are catching floridanus, right?
I agree. There is an awful lot of science (best attempts in a complex and imperfect world) that underlies what we presently know about bass, and there's more to come. Doubt anyone would give all that up -have it erased from memory- and have a go with a blank slate, stick and string.
Unfortunately, it appears that line color, even visibility, probably plays a generally small role in affecting bites.
Floridanus, for sure. Yes, it is not so obvious in that photo but it does look just like that "in person," a pale almost irridescent turqoise blue under the lower jaw and on the operculum. Will eventually have a photo of my own that shows it well. And aavery2, do you have the reference for your quote in post #41?
aavery2 reply :
On 12/5/2014 at 8:01 AM, hawgenvy said:Floridanus, for sure. Yes, it is not so obvious in that photo but it does look just like that "in person," a pale almost irridescent turqoise blue under the lower jaw and on the operculum. Will eventually have a photo of my own that shows it well. And aavery2, do you have the reference for your quote in post #41?
What Fish See: Understanding optics and color shifts for designing lures and flies. Colin J. Kageyama, O.D. F.C.O.V.D.
hawgenvy reply :
On 12/5/2014 at 8:53 AM, aavery2 said:What Fish See: Understanding optics and color shifts for designing lures and flies. Colin J. Kageyama, O.D. F.C.O.V.D.
Thanks!
Ozark_Basser reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 7:39 PM, Sam said:After I give Auggie time to order his copy of Dr. Jones' book I will post the info Dr. Jones sent to me so other guys and gals can order the remaining books while they last.
Great investment and fantastic information.
I strongly suggest you obtain a copy at a cost of $25 and read/study the information to learn all you can about your adversary.
Dr. Jones uses scientific methods to determine how bass see colors and many other aspects of the animal's body.
Will post the information over the weekend so be on the lookout for it.
Sam
You can go ahead and post the link, Sam. If you've seen any posts I've made in the tackle making forum, you'll see that I've been dropping loads of money into making my own jigs. Seems ironic right? lol. I've been buying everything by large amounts though. I hope I don't miss out on getting one of those books though!
Lund Explorer reply :
I'm rather interested in seeing the results of these studies.
Once we know how bass see colors, we'll have all of 1% of what we need to know about catching them.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/5/2014 at 6:16 PM, Lund Explorer said:I'm rather interested in seeing the results of these studies.
Once we know how bass see colors, we'll have all of 1% of what we need to know about catching them.
1% is a 100% more than 0
Catt reply :
Contrived Settings
That's what these types of observational studies are called by the Scientific Community.
A contrived setting is one where the specific situation being studied is "created" by the observer. It maybe "questionable" as to whether or not the data collected does truly reflect a "real life" situation. Philosophy of Science text book!
Interesting word choice, "contrived"
aavery2 reply :
On 12/5/2014 at 5:32 AM, RMcDuffee726 said:Impossible to tell. Everything is assumption. No scientific studies have been completed or published in peer reviewed papers to determine a actual scientific fact how bass see color.
Impossible to tell, this is what you believe?
Lund Explorer reply :
On 12/5/2014 at 6:43 PM, aavery2 said:1% is a 100% more than 0
Only for the totally clueless, and only if the science isn't flawed. Only if these studies tie color to every other of the thousands of variables.
It's just my opinion, but I would think that anyone would be a whole lot better off spending their time trying to understand where fish located themselves on the bodies of water they fish, and then relying on the lures/colors that have already been proven to catch fish. Of course it is winter, so maybe I can understand that the original poster is worried that some bait company is going to discover the secret magic color that all bass will climb over each other to get at, and then hide it. I think I'll waste my time trying to figure out what makes my wife's mind work!
aavery2 reply :
On 12/5/2014 at 8:48 PM, Lund Explorer said:Only for the totally clueless, and only if the science isn't flawed. Only if these studies tie color to every other of the thousands of variables.
It's just my opinion, but I would think that anyone would be a whole lot better off spending their time trying to understand where fish located themselves on the bodies of water they fish, and then relying on the lures/colors that have already been proven to catch fish. Of course it is winter, so maybe I can understand that the original poster is worried that some bait company is going to discover the secret magic color that all bass will climb over each other to get at, and then hide it. I think I'll waste my time trying to figure out what makes my wife's mind work!
See this is funny, because somehow a few others and yourself have made this discussion about what colors of lures are going to catch more fish. When the conversation is about how fish see color. I can understand your haste, wanting to pick your wife's brain and all.
People fear what they don't understand and hate what they can't conquer.
Lund Explorer reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 12:15 AM, aavery2 said:
See this is funny, because somehow a few others and yourself have made this discussion about what colors of lures are going to catch more fish. When the conversation is about how fish see color. I can understand your haste, wanting to pick your wife's brain and all.
People fear what they don't understand and hate what they can't conquer.
Andrew Smith
I didn't think I was confused when the OP mentioned bait manufacturers, and can't imagine why else he would have asked.
And some people learn what battles are worth fighting, and which windmills are not worth tilting at.
Sam reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 6:38 PM, Catt said:Controlled envitoment?
Ya mean aquarium?
Where's your various depths which lessen light penetration?
Where's your water clairity, clear, blue, green, tannic?
How about some good old fashion rain runoff?
How about variations in sky color?
How about angles of the sun due to season?
What about winds?
What about algae?
All found in nature but removed in the name of "science"!
Catt makes a strong case against the scientific studies about bass behavior.
What we must understand is the "research bubble" that one must enter to appreciate the study's results.
With all variables the same the scientist conducts his studies based on one or two variables.
If the scientist can expand the variables then he will do so and record the results.
In the "scientific research bubble" the scientific establishment will embrace the study and award tenure, Ph.D.'s and promotions based on a study.
A scientific study cannot include all variables as there are too many combinations to test.
So when one mentions Dr. Jones or other scientists one must understand that their studies are limited but they are all we have.
Dr. Jones' studies form the base for Pure Fishing/Berkley products. The products are then modified to produce better results based on the feedback from the professional bass guys.
To have a basic understanding of bass behavior takes time reading and watching DVDs; listening to the pros and friends; and then going on the water and experimenting in your area to find the correct color pattern of the day because tomorrow everything changes.
Just remember, when you enter another person's "bubble" you are in foreign terroritory but the person you are speaking with has a good grasp of what is included in their "bubble" be it NASCAR, NFL, NBA, college football, quilting, sewing, auto mechanics, plumbing, construction, law, medicine, computers, etc.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 3:16 AM, Lund Explorer said:I didn't think I was confused when the OP mentioned bait manufacturers, and can't imagine why else he would have asked.
And some people learn what battles are worth fighting, and which windmills are not worth tilting at.
Your right, I mean why even waste out time on things like sending unmanned space craft to the surface of Mars to wirelessly transmit data and picture back that we can interpret. Bet that might have sounded like quite a stretch to your Grandparents. Why study the eyes of fish and try to determine what they can see, I mean what are the chances that someone discovers a chemical in a fish eye that is a cure for glaucoma or another vision disease, develops a new lens that helps us have better vision underwater, I mean what could possibly be learned.
If we used your logic people like DE Vinci, Einstein, Newton, and the Wright Brothers would have settled for status quo. Is it really that big of a stretch to think that we have or may develop the ability to determine how bass see?
Team9nine reply :
Quote
Is it really that big of a stretch to think that we have or may develop the ability to determine how bass see?
No, but I do think it's a pretty big stretch to assume the many posting members here will somehow definitively answer the question before this forum discussion ends
-T9
aavery2 reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 4:31 AM, Team9nine said:No, but I do think it's a pretty big stretch to assume the many posting members here will somehow definitively answer the question before this forum discussion ends
-T9
It's a discussion like any other, different points of view, passionate on both sides.
FunkJishing reply :
Ever see a color and say thats blue but have another person call it purple? or how about the same cenario with red and orange? what I'm saying is maybe the way color is percieved can differ between two bass just like it can between two humans. some reds may look a little more orangish to one person and some purples may look a little more blue to another. not everyones eyes see things the same, why should the eyes of a bass? I doubt bass can't see color, but i don't doubt that they see it diffrently from one to another.
Ozark_Basser reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 5:17 AM, FunkJishing said:Ever see a color and say thats blue but have another person call it purple? or how about the same cenario with red and orange? what I'm saying is maybe the way color is percieved can differ between two bass just like it can between two humans. some reds may look a little more orangish to one person and some purples may look a little more blue to another. not everyones eyes see things the same, why should the eyes of a bass? I doubt bass can't see color, but i don't doubt that they see it diffrently from one to another.
I agree. I think it doesn't seem fair to judge one bass the same as another. Anyone who has ever fished beds during the spawn knows that one lure or color may get a bass to pick it up, but the next bed you fish might be totally different. It's almost like bass have their own personalities. So regardless of what color the bass actually sees, it almost seems that bass randomly go after on lure over another, but I do think there would be an advantage in knowing how the bass perceives color. At least it would level out the playing field a bit more.
Catt reply :
Love how y'all talk science but refuse to listen to what science is telling y'all!
Controlled Observation (Contrived Settings)
Controlled observation is a type of observational study where conditions are "contrived" by the researcher. This type if observation may be carried out in a laboratory (aquarium) type situation and because variables are "manipulated" it is said to be in high control.
The weakness of the method is that it will be low in ecological validity compared to naturalistic observation.
Every thing in science tells us this type of research is quetionable, low in validity, highly subjective, & does not truely reflect " real life" situations!
Y'all can believe what y'all want but science says it aint so!
aavery2 reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 1:04 PM, Catt said:Love how y'all talk science but refuse to listen to what science is telling y'all!
Controlled Observation (Contrived Settings)
Controlled observation is a type of observational study where conditions are "contrived" by the researcher. This type if observation may be carried out in a laboratory (aquarium) type situation and because variables are "manipulated" it is said to be in high control.
The weakness of the method is that it will be low in ecological validity compared to naturalistic observation.
Every thing in science tells us this type of research is quetionable, low in validity, highly subjective, & does not truely reflect " real life" situations!
Y'all can believe what y'all want but science says it aint so!
What ain't so ?
Lund Explorer reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 3:45 AM, aavery2 said:Your right, I mean why even waste out time on things like sending unmanned space craft to the surface of Mars to wirelessly transmit data and picture back that we can interpret. Bet that might have sounded like quite a stretch to your Grandparents. Why study the eyes of fish and try to determine what they can see, I mean what are the chances that someone discovers a chemical in a fish eye that is a cure for glaucoma or another vision disease, develops a new lens that helps us have better vision underwater, I mean what could possibly be learned.
If we used your logic people like DE Vinci, Einstein, Newton, and the Wright Brothers would have settled for status quo. Is it really that big of a stretch to think that we have or may develop the ability to determine how bass see?
LMAO!
Somehow I've stumbled into the "Science & Technology" section of Bass Resource when all along I thought this was a fishing forum!
By all means though, please continue with your research to find a cure for all of those medical marijuana cards!
Catt reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 2:17 PM, aavery2 said:What ain't so ?
Comprehension level aint so high
Mattlures reply :
I don't pretend to know how bass see colors but they obviously do. I just don't buy into the color red disappearing at a certain depth unless it is very deep or low light. I have scuba dived at 40 ft and I could still see red and orange fish at that depth. They were dulled down some but they definitely weren't grey.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 5:08 PM, Lund Explorer said:LMAO!
Somehow I've stumbled into the "Science & Technology" section of Bass Resource when all along I thought this was a fishing forum!
By all means though, please continue with your research to find a cure for all of those medical marijuana cards!
So there is no Science or Technology associated with bass fishing, news to me. I find it sad that you have to resort to these types of post.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 6:32 PM, Catt said:Comprehension level aint so high
I assure you Catt that my comprehension is fine. What I have not been able to understand is your argument, and the truth is I am not sure you do either. So make me look bad and spell it out for me.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/6/2014 at 8:32 PM, Mattlures said:I don't pretend to know how bass see colors but they obviously do. I just don't buy into the color red disappearing at a certain depth unless it is very deep or low light. I have scuba dived at 40 ft and I could still see red and orange fish at that depth. They were dulled down some but they definitely weren't grey.
Clear water and a sunny day, no reason you would not be able to see reds and orange at that depth. It's all about the light penetration.
WRB reply :
When reading articles written about how bass see colors my baseline is my own experience, not science.
What I have learned from papers written rarely support what my personal experience has been. My first run into color study was by Dr Loren Hill, who was also a good pro bass angler, when he came out with hid Color- C -Lector, based on his studies of bass vision. Gave it a good try, some of the color combos were very different from anything I had used prior to this. Smoke translucent gray with hot lime green or hot orange proved to be excellent combos. However other proven color combos like cinnamon with blue were not on the chart and those are still good today.
The colors the bass reacted to in Hill's study are very similar to nearly every study since; reds disappear quickly and blues stay blue deeper than any other color.
I agree with the blue, disagree about reds, based on over 60 years experience catching lots of bass from depths between 0 to over 60'. You wonder why salt water rock fish like red snapper and cow cod are bright red/orange living in 300' to 600' deep? The color jigs you use to catch those rock fish can be important at those 300' to 600' deep! Fish don't see colors the way we do.
Tom
aavery2 reply :
On 12/7/2014 at 7:27 AM, WRB said:I agree with the blue, disagree about reds, based on over 60 years experience catching lots of bass from depths between 0 to over 60'. You wonder why salt water rock fish like red snapper and cow cod are bright red/orange living in 300' to 600' deep? The color jigs you use to catch those rock fish can be important at those 300' to 600' deep! Fish don't see colors the way we do.
Tom
Tom, I am trying to understand some of the points you are making. Can you elaborate on why you feel that catching fish as deep as 60 feet means that red is visible at that depth. The other thing I am not clear on is your point of fish living at 300-600 ft deep being red/orange, are you relating the color of the fish somehow to what colors are visible at that depth.
WRB reply :
The color combination clear soft plastic with red flakes is a good deep water 30' to 60' during the winter. Another good combination is smoke soft plastic with micro gold flake and neon blue blood line. Clear soft plastic with salt & pepper (silver & black ) flake doesn't work well deeper than 30' during winter.
With everything being the same, size, line, speed and same angler you would think salt & pepper would be more visible and the clear red flake invisible to the bass based on color studies that indicate red isn't good in low light.
The point with the rock fish, most are red color, the fish must be able to see their own color to stay together as a school and the predator fish that feed on them.
The "science" of how bass see color doesn't support reality. The reason I add red crystal flash is to help the bass see my hair jigs in poor light and it works very well based on success. I don't know of any other angler who has caught more giant bass using jigs than I have.
Tom
Catt reply :
On 12/7/2014 at 6:59 AM, aavery2 said:I assure you Catt that my comprehension is fine. What I have not been able to understand is your argument, and the truth is I am not sure you do either. So make me look bad and spell it out for me.
Spell it out for you!
Ok, all the science you & others have qouted has been deemed by scientific law as
Low in ecological validity
Questionable as to whether or not data collected does truly reflect a "real life" situation.
In a controlled environment the following has been removed.
Variable depths, which lessen light penetration
Variable water clairites
Variations in sky color
Variations of the sun's angle
Winds
Algae
All of the above effect has colors are seen & perceived!
Ya can't throw those conditions out & say I understand how bass see color.
Dwight Hottle reply :
I said it once before in jest. But until you can talk to a bass it is all conjecture.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/7/2014 at 10:32 AM, Dwight Hottle said:I said it once before in jest. But until you can talk to a bass it is all conjecture.
I respect your opinion.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/7/2014 at 10:27 AM, Catt said:Spell it out for you!
Ok, all the science you & others have qouted has been deemed by scientific law as
Low in ecological validity.
Do you have a reference to this claim, so far I have only seen it presented as your opinion. Just a link or a quote will work.
Questionable as to whether or not data collected does truly reflect a "real life" situation.
In a controlled environment the following has been removed.
Variable depths, which lessen light penetration
Variable water clairites
Variations in sky color
Variations of the sun's anglee
Winds
Algae
All of the above effect has colors are seen & perceived!
I still have no idea what you are in reference to. But I will say this, your right testing in a lab is not real life, it does not account for all of the variables that you mentioned. But that is not always what the research is trying to prove. You can prove a bass can see red without accounting for all of the variables that you mention. Maybe they can only see the color red under ideal circumstances created in a lab environment, but how does that take away from the fact that they can see red. You add these variables back into the research one at a time and your start to understand how they play a part in when, where why and how. As mentioned before , I don't understand your logic.
Ya can't throw those conditions out & say I understand how bass see color. Have you heard anyone make that claim, that they understand how bass see. All that has been posted is bits and pieces of research and studies that have been conducted along with personal experience. It is a discussion not a declaration.
Catt, I will finish by saying that I am disappointed that with all of your experience and time on the water that you have chose to be so negative about this whole conversation, I am disappointed because it leaves me wondering what we all might have learned if we would have chose to share rather than to spending time picking others apart.
I'll give you the last words, as this will be my last post on the topic.
Catt reply :
aavery2, you claim to understand science but obviously you do not!
Everything I have listed are the laws of science & had you understood science you would have recognized this.
I'm studying to get a degree in the Philosophy of Science which is a branch of philosophy concerned with the foundations, methods, & implications of science. The central questions concern what counts as science, the reliability of scientific theories, & the purpose of science.
aavery2 reply :
Catt, I wish you good luck with that degree, it is an accomplishment that can't ever be taken from you. As it pertains to Philosophical Science, I tend to follow the thinking of Paul Feyeraband.
RSM789 reply :
I have the type of personality that often dissects a subject to the point of annoyance to others. However, when it comes to color when choosing lures, all I try to do is get close to matching what the bass are currently eating. If bright red crawdads are the specialty on todays menu, I believe it is more important to match that color (and action) than to figure out how the bass sees the color red or at what depth red is not visible.
IMO, knowing how bass see color may be important, but far less important than knowing what the bass are currently keying on.
Lund Explorer reply :
On 12/7/2014 at 6:58 AM, aavery2 said:So there is no Science or Technology associated with bass fishing, news to me. I find it sad that you have to resort to these types of post.
I didn't think it was about the fish with you. I only find it sad that I am stupid enough to try to inject a little common sense into these kinds of discussions.
When a subject such as "How do bass see color" comes up, a logical person would assume that it dealt with how to improve a person's chances at catching fish. Sadly, there are too many people who will take whatever science (proven or otherwise) and think they have found the one key to the big bad secret of how to catch a fish.
As I posted earlier, nothing could be further from the truth. Color vision is an extremely minor factor when you consider all of the variables. If you were a real student of this crazy game of fishing, you would look even more skeptically at this so called science. Charlatans have already brought us a number of "science driven" miracles guaranteed to improve your odds of catching bass. And many gullible fisherman have bought into their schemes, giving others the incentive to come up with their own theories that they can market.
This junk science is not limited to vision, and every aspect has its adherents. I'm sure that it is only a matter of time before we see another thread titled "How Do Bass Smell"! Perhaps the subject of "How Do Bass Chew" is the missing key!
So I apologize profusely that my comment that color vision isn't as important as you have deemed it to be upset you so greatly. I should have known better, that other people's opinions shouldn't be allowed to cloud your vision.
Lund Explorer reply :
On 12/7/2014 at 7:27 AM, WRB said:When reading articles written about how bass see colors my baseline is my own experience, not science.
What I have learned from papers written rarely support what my personal experience has been. My first run into color study was by Dr Loren Hill, who was also a good pro bass angler, when he came out with hid Color- C -Lector, based on his studies of bass vision. Gave it a good try, some of the color combos were very different from anything I had used prior to this. Smoke translucent gray with hot lime green or hot orange proved to be excellent combos. However other proven color combos like cinnamon with blue were not on the chart and those are still good today.
The colors the bass reacted to in Hill's study are very similar to nearly every study since; reds disappear quickly and blues stay blue deeper than any other color.
I agree with the blue, disagree about reds, based on over 60 years experience catching lots of bass from depths between 0 to over 60'. You wonder why salt water rock fish like red snapper and cow cod are bright red/orange living in 300' to 600' deep? The color jigs you use to catch those rock fish can be important at those 300' to 600' deep! Fish don't see colors the way we do.
Tom
Don't forget to include the fact that a number of lure manufacturers paid Dr. Hill for the marketing rights to produce entire lines of lures tied directly to this science. Fishermen were encouraged to make sure that they never left the boat ramp without lures covering every possible color combination this amazing device guided you to.
I can remember several of our bass club members buying into the whole scheme. Right down to the point that when they failed to catch winning limits at a tournament, they knew that it was their poor use of science. They would ask what others caught fish on, and comment that it didn't make any sense because the miracle machine hadn't been anywhere close to those colors.
I can only assume that the reason that every fisherman doesn't own one of these things today, is because we are all to stupid to use it correctly.
It surely couldn't be that the science was wrong!
greentrout reply :
Old school basser...
hawgenvy reply :
I find it amazing that people who depend on science for so much take it for granted. Without science fishing is wading in the water with a hand woven net, or handlining from a dugout canoe with a home made rope and a bone hook. Of course experience is important in fishing, and so is learning from others, but the technology of fishing tackle, boats, and electronics, as well as fisheries management, ecology, and conservation efforts all stem from some serious science. If you want to know how bass see, as all of you who are reading the post seem to have an interest in, you need logical analysis, and that's science. Even trying out different lures in different situations is an experiment of sorts. If you kept a log of what works when, under what conditions, and analyzed it, you'd have a bit of science that might help you catch fish the next time you go out.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/4/2014 at 11:18 AM, Paul Roberts said:"Seeing Red" ...a poem...Ahem...
Red is an apple ripe on the vine.
Red is of Kool-Aide, grapes, and wine.
Red is of tumescence, lipstick, lingerie, and high, high heels.
Red's pretty important to people.
Tackle manufacturer's see Green when they offer Red!
Makes me see Red.
Paul, this is ridiculous, everyone knows apples don't grown on a vine.
aavery2 reply :
On 12/7/2014 at 5:22 PM, Lund Explorer said:I didn't think it was about the fish with you. I only find it sad that I am stupid enough to try to inject a little common sense into these kinds of discussions.
Your wrong, it is exactly that, about the fish, not catching the fish. The funny thing about common sense is that it is not very common.
When a subject such as "How do bass see color" comes up, a logical person would assume that it dealt with how to improve a person's chances at catching fish. Sadly, there are too many people who will take whatever science (proven or otherwise) and think they have found the one key to the big bad secret of how to catch a fish.
When you say logical person I assume you mean yourself. I choose to discuss the topic and let everyone else use the information that comes from it for whatever purpose they choose, not shoehorn them into my way of thinking.
As I posted earlier, nothing could be further from the truth. Color vision is an extremely minor factor when you consider all of the variables. If you were a real student of this crazy game of fishing, you would look even more skeptically at this so called science. Charlatans have already brought us a number of "science driven" miracles guaranteed to improve your odds of catching bass. And many gullible fisherman have bought into their schemes, giving others the incentive to come up with their own theories that they can market.
Would not a strong understanding of how fish see color make these type of devices much easier to see for what they really are. I mean if you had knowledge and understanding why would you spend hard earned money and time with a device like this. You can only be taken advantage of when you let someone. People tend to prey on the uneducated and the fearful.
This junk science is not limited to vision, and every aspect has its adherents. I'm sure that it is only a matter of time before we see another thread titled "How Do Bass Smell"! Perhaps the subject of "How Do Bass Chew" is the missing key!
I think this only further shows that your mindset is about catching fish, not understanding fish. Let's suppose someone did want to discuss how fish smell, what is it about that conversation that would bother you?
So I apologize profusely that my comment that color vision isn't as important as you have deemed it to be upset you so greatly. I should have known better, that other people's opinions shouldn't be allowed to cloud your vision.
I think if you go back through these posts you will find a common theme. That is your intolerance and rudeness. I am far from upset, I find your posts funny but sad.
People fear what they cant understand and hate what they can't conquer.
Andrew Smith
hawgenvy reply :
Heloman reply :
Tom,
What line size and color do you use? What jighead design and weights?
WRB reply :
Winter Sunline Super Sniper FC 10#, green. Fish deeper in the winter.On 12/8/2014 at 3:55 AM, Heloman said:Tom,
What line size and color do you use? What jighead design and weights?
Pre Spawn through Fall 14#, green. Fish between 1' to 35' or around the thermocline when it's there.
I can see green line better when jig fishing than clear, otherwise clear is good.
I make my jigs, 7/16 oz and 5/8 oz with 5/0 #114 Gamakatsu.
PM me your email and will send a few jig photos if interested.
Tom
Paul Roberts reply :
On 12/8/2014 at 2:54 AM, aavery2 said:Paul, this is ridiculous, everyone knows apples don't grown on a vine.
Poetic license. 
BasshunterJGH reply :
How do you make your jigs? I'd like to see pictures as well. ThanksOn 12/8/2014 at 7:33 AM, WRB said:Winter Sunline Super Sniper FC 10#, green. Fish deeper in the winter.
Pre Spawn through Fall 14#, green. Fish between 1' to 35' or around the thermocline when it's there.
I can see green line better when jig fishing than clear, otherwise clear is good.
I make my jigs, 7/16 oz and 5/8 oz with 5/0 #114 Gamakatsu.
PM me your email and will send a few jig photos if interested.
Tom
flipin4bass reply :
On 12/3/2014 at 1:24 PM, hawgenvy said:According to a passage in the wonderful book (which I highly recommend to scientific-minded folks among you bassers), KNOWING BASS, The Scientific Approach to Catching More Fish, by Keith A. Jones, PhD (Lyons Press, 2002):
Dr. Don McCoy of Univ. Kentucky "found that largemouths ... quickly learned to distinguish between colors falling in the red and green sectors of the spectrum but struggled to differenciate shades of blue. This suggests that bass color vision is relatively good from red to green but weak in the blues and violets. According to McCoy's findings, bass have their highest color discrimination capabilities around two areas: yellow-green (wavelengths measuring 540 nm) and yellow-orange (610nm). In these areas they could distinguish between colors differing as little as 5 nm".
Now, this does not tell us what baits to use when, but there are other passages in the book that address lure selection based on science. Clearly water depth, water color, water clarity, and time of day all play a role in color vision. Contrast between bait and surroundings are important, and of course odor, low frequency sounds, and lure vibration and water movement detectable by the lateral line system are all factors that combine to determine if and how a bass bites a bait. And then there are factors that are internal in the bass, like how hungry the guy is. I am glad there are good scientists out there learning more about bass biology and behavior.
I have noticed lately a seeming increase in the subtle turqoise blue coloration on the underside of the jaws of LMB that I have cought over the past two weeks, wondering if it has something to do with mating behavior. I guess it is odd since they supposedly don't see blue well. (Where I live in S Florida, spawning season starts soon.) If anyone has noticed this blue color and understands what it might be, please let me know!
Happy catching!
This is one of the best books on bass biology and it's a shame it's no longer in print. When I acquired my first copy of the book a few years ago, it brought back memories of a fish biologist back in Illinois who took me under his wing and gave me up close lessons on the internal structure of bass. This is a great book and would be well worth the price if you can find a copy.
Lund Explorer reply :
Only because my opinion seems to upset the simple minded, I'd like to make the following statement.
Just to be perfectly clear, I don’t have any problem with real scientific research and theory when it has a purpose, and even more so when the knowledge gained has an effect on my life.
I do have a problem with junk science, research done for no other purpose than to turn a profit, or theories that have not gone through proper peer review. I also have no interest in any science that to me has absolutely no purpose.
Because I am a somewhat skeptical person by nature, I tend to look at many of these discoveries a little more critically than some others. Over the years this has saved me untold thousands of dollars, not to mention the stress inherent with fear.
If I wasn’t this way, I would have given away my soon to be worthless home back in the 1970’s before the predicted ice age buried it under a few hundred feet of glacier. I’d be moving back today because it would only be a matter of time before global warming put all of Florida under 10’ of water. In the realm of fishing, I would have been the guy with hundreds of lures across every spot of the spectrum of colors some machine told me to use. I would have driven back and forth across the lake looking for the perfect spot based on it’s “ph” level. I’d be the guys throwing my baits at the turtles that my amazing “side-finder” pointed out to me as being bass. And quite seriously, I really don’t care about the mating habits of spider monkeys, dung beetles, or the lop-eared Madagascar fruit bat. Those things only upset me when I have to help pay for it.
Mitchell205 reply :
Not to get to complicated haha.... Having friends and family that are color blind has made me come up with a theory.... When you see something that's a specific color lets say red ... If your not color blind anyone would answer if asked that it's red .... Now why did they say it's red? Because when they were younger someone told them that color was called red .... With that said that doesn't mean we all see that color the same or for that matter that we even see the same color at all...we give colors name that have been passed down ... I don't think we all see colors the same way and I don't think bass do either.... Science is not perfect or exact even though it strives to be and until we know all there is to know about the brain and how it works I will be sticking to my theory hahaha....
roadwarrior reply :
Colors are defined by wavelengths: http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/EDDOCS/Wavelengths_for_Colors.html
The visible red light has a wavelength of about 650 nm.
WRB reply :
NUV, near ultraviolet is visible to insects, birds, fish and some children, 300-400 nm.
Thought I add that to the discussion.
Tom
aavery2 reply :
On 12/9/2014 at 6:09 AM, WRB said:NUV, near ultraviolet is visible to insects, birds, fish and some children, 300-400 nm.
Thought I add that to the discussion.
Tom
Humans that have the disease/anamoly Aphakia are also known to be able to see into the UV spectrum. They also have smaller pupils and there eyes dilate less.
WRB reply :
Everyone should keep their options open when discussing science when nature is in play.
The demise of the Spotted owl is a good example. Over harvesting the northwest forest was blamed for the crash of the spotted owl population. Tree cutting was stopped, the lumber industry suffered billions of dollars in loss and 10 of thousands jobs lost as the industry shut it's doors. The science was faulty, the Barred owl , a larger cousin, was killing and displacing the Spotted owl, evolution at work, not the lumber industry.
We don't know how bass see color, we know they do.
Tom
Glenn reply :
We also know spotted owl is great barbequed! It tastes just like Eagle!
Alonerankin2 reply :
Hehe, wonder if Flyfisher will see this...
tatertester reply :
I have been reading this entire thread, and, I've come to this conclusion, after much thought , bass see whatever it is that they see relating to color , and, I catch as many as I can no matter what it is they see or how it is percieved to them........SOOOO.......I'm going fishin with the same old, match the hatch ,colors I've been using all the time, and you guys can argue about how and what colors bass can see........ 
roadwarrior reply :
On 12/9/2014 at 10:11 AM, tatertester said:I have been reading this entire thread, and, I've come to this conclusion, after much thought , bass see whatever it is that they see relating to color , and, I catch as many as I can no matter what it is they see or how it is percieved to them........SOOOO.......I'm going fishin with the same old, match the hatch ,colors I've been using all the time, and you guys can argue about how and what colors bass can see........
That seems like a fitting end to this thread.
Good night Irene.
related General Bass Fishing Forum topic
previous topic
most viewed General Bass Fishing Forum topic
© 2024 - fishing.qciss.net. All Rights Reserved.