Woodcock and Silver Wire - Submerged

[DUBBN]

What a great thread William.

Somewhere, many years ago, while traveling down the Soft Hackle path I must have taken a wrong fork in the trail. Maybe I should say different path. I have always wanted the hackle on my patterns to collapse. In my mind, that was the triggering device. In clear enough water I noticed that some of my patterns the hackle did not collapse easily, but once water logged and with minimal current, the hackle would eventually collapse. It never occured to me that others would want just the opposite out of their Soft Hackles.

I may have mentioned that the Peacock and Partridge has treated me very well the past year. The way I tie them, or the materials I am using, causes the hackles to collapse almost immediately once wet. It is very confusing to me why this pattern works so well. When I look at the fly in the water, and it is sparsley hackled, I have a hard time seeing the barbules. I am not a fish so I do not know exactly what the fish see's, but the hackle is triggering strikes. Once all the Partridge has been torn away from the fly, I rarely have another fish on it.

This thread has made me realize different tyers want their patterns to do different things. I will be pondering, and thinking, and experimenting with patterns that the hackle does not collapse as easily. Not to prove anyone wrong, or to prove anyone right. Just to possibly add another arrow to my quiver.

Keep up the experiments sir. I am finding them fascinating.

[daringduffer]

A key point that I hadn't seen until Lance pointed it out, and today with the distilled water, I demonstrated to myself again, something that I wouldn't have picked up on. We tend to see what we expect to see I guess. But with the flies submerged, and every fiber spread, absorbing and reflecting light, the dubbing and the hackles are not darkened as they are when you take them out of the water. In and out, like a little kid, I watched closely and found the darker waterhen fibers lighten, as did the dubbed bodies. With the Woodcock as well, it does darken when it's out of the water, but put it back in and it lightens to the color of a dry hackle. Dark hackles? who cares right, but when you're entertaining the idea of imitating a March Brown, so subtlety comes into play. I really don't know what to make of this yet, it's a new thought for me, and if I'm making a fool of myself based on such a small sample size...I'll eat every word. No problem. I'm just sharing what I see. As I said in the intial post...let the speculation and suspicions regarding it's relevance begin. That will certainly prove to be an interesting conversation. I think we're safe in have disagreement for the point of learning. I hope to be the one to gain the most from this little exercise.

On the appearance of the flies submerged versus wet in-hand, water diffuses light very well, and may account for the brighter appearance shown in the photographs. Another contributing factor may be that you are getting equal illumination from all sides in the tank that a wet fly in air is unable to receive? It might be illuminating to see how a Partridge & Whatever silk-bodied fly changes with your setup. Those are the flies we most often comment on as changing color.

I found this topic very interesting and am quoting crazy4oldwilliam here. Has anybody given this light/dark issue any more thought? Too interesting not to dig deeper, don't you think?

(Very beautiful flies have beern hatching on this forum).

dd

[Old Hat]

I agree the color change is very interesting.

DUBBN, I've always had both. I have some patterns where I want the hackles to stay out and free flowing suggesting that emerging, struggling and alive insect. I have other patterns which I tie specifically for swinging. In the case of these, I tie the fly for the appearance it gives when the hackles are collapsed. I think both ways are effective if used purposefully.

[Otter]

I have always enjoyed seeing patterns submerged. I also like seeing them when they are photographed wet (out of water). I am not trying to be negative, but what is it that we learn from these pictures? If there is no current pushing the hackle back over the fly, or sweeping the dubbing material towards its tail, are we really seeing the true appearance of the pattern?

In calm water, patterns like the Peacock and Partridge, or my Muskrat look rather plain when just sitting in water (submerged). They really don't look all that different than when dry, except for a few bubbles coming from them. Add movement (current) and the two patterns take on a whole different appearance. The hackles sweep back and envelope the body in a fascinating shroud. The patterns look completely different than just submerged or out of the water and wet.

From my understanding (which is confused at the best of times), our fly is carried within a cushion of water and the fibres will not move much if at all until an external force is applied to the fly. This is where our leader comes into play and where so called drag causes a force to be applied and hence movement by the materials. This is where it can get real interesting, the elastic modulus of the materials define how well they can spring back to their original position. Apparently many game feathers , the ones we hold in high regards have a high elastic modulus - so not alone do they perform in the appearance department they also have a controlled movement back to their original position once the external forces are removed. Some materials such as CDC behave badly in this regard and will behave in a completely different manner than the normal game feathers.

From that, how the fly is tied could well determine its suitability as dead drift or as swung. The behaviour of the materials when a force is applied and released I believe to possibily paramount to any illusion of life or indeed death that we think we are trying to achieve.

[letumgo]

(reactivating an old thread)

[gingerdun]

(reactivating an old thread)

good idea, especially for that first shot of the fly with fox dubbing spun in silver wire.

L

[hankaye]

Ray, Howdy;

Thanks for bringing this back to the front ... excellent discussion and
an great brain teaser...

hank