Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 46 of 46

Thread: Drop Shot Plastics = a fly in the making?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    edgemead
    Posts
    1,873

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Cox View Post
    Bout time you kids go to bed...
    back to the sheets then for me...........
    stephen is wishing he was fishing location x right now.......



    Stephen Smith

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Jowies
    Posts
    723

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swsmith View Post
    hi kevin...nice to see you out of the sheets again....
    Ya now I know what you and kevin are up to under the sheets
    NOTICE :

    If you notice this notice you will notice that this notice
    is not worth noticing thank you for
    NOTICING

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Western Cape
    Posts
    7,613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FIGJAM View Post
    Andre! Please give credit when its dew... I gave you credit for the Leerie, it was actually 164cm you forgot the 1
    Ooops!!!!

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    1,367

    Default

    This is an interesting debate, but I don't believe that there is much room for establishing or agreeing on a set definition of what actually constitutes fly fishing and what not (or for that matter flies). Each individual is entitled to form his own opinion and the general idea is to simply enjoy what you are doing. My further comments should be seen in this light.

    On the czech nymphing cast I am inclined to agree with Kevin, that it does not really constitute a cast in the traditional sense where the flies are carried by the line and not vice versa. The other side to this coin is that such a definition would exclude all forms of short range presentation where only the leader is outside of the rod tip. Think of our WC stream fishing where leader taper assists us in presenting a fly and flyline often does not play any role. Surely we are fly fishing? The same thing often happens in saltwater where a fish chases a fly right up to the boat and then eats it on a gentle lob in front of its nose.

    Feeding the line downstream in a river is a far more difficult debate. We all do this from time to time and yes, sometimes it is the best presentation or even the only presentation that will achieve the desired effect. If, on the other hand, this is all that you do, then you are bluffing yourself if you believe that you are flyfishing. Again, it is a personal decision, but if you actually want to really enjoy or maximise your fly fishing, then you will have to learn to cast at some stage.

    The fly issue?

    Very much the same as the downstream line-feeding debate. Artificial imitations are so good nowadays and with the growing popularity of dropshot, there are hundreds of fly-castable imitations available. The short answer to this one is that you will know what constitutes a fly and what not. If you take the shortcut by using a factory made artlure, then you will catch fish and you will possibly be fishing a more effective imitation, but it can never constitute a fly by the addition of one bell or whistle. This is a very gray area and when we consider things like the Petitjean Magic Head, things really gets confusing. It is easy to find a middle of the road solution (fly) that contains just enough hand made elements to be called a fly and yes, I have also fished some interesting concoctions where these personally imposed boundaries were pushed to the extreme. At the end of the day, that is all that they are - personal opinions that each of us establish and adjust as we go along.

    This is now getting too long.
    Chat later.
    MC

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    4,268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Shelton View Post
    And what about publishers who collect previously unpublished material from private individuals who have obtained bits and pieces from their friends or acquaintances? Should the publisher not go out of his way to seek permission from the original photographer to use the photograph in their publication in the first place? Secondly, if they don't find the original photographer for whatever reason, but know who he is, should they not at least acknowledge him? What are the implications of them getting it wrong, and crediting the photograph to someone else? What recourse does the original photographer have in this regard?
    Chris I see you and I are on the same page. Wiets, it's not what you think bru. You are arguing our case for us, not against us...
    "So hereís my point. Donít go and get your ego all out of proportion because you can tie a fly and catch a fish thatís dumb enough to eat a car key.." - Louis Cahill - Gink and Gasoline

  6. #46
    Wiets Banned User

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkieser View Post
    Chris I see you and I are on the same page. Wiets, it's not what you think bru. You are arguing our case for us, not against us...
    Let the cards fall where it may. I am aware that I am indeed arguing your case for you and not against you - I am therefor not in disagreement with some comments. But I do stand firm of the issue of copyright whoever the original owners may be. I also responded to your PM.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •