Fly-fishing on the River

[dave lackey]

Early morning fog at sunrise. A lone angler wades the stream with an intrepid photographer setting up for the money shot. It could be the shot of the false cast glistening in the early morning sun or it could be the shot with the angler fighting the hooked trout. Or any number of other scenarios.

How would you shoot it, given the choices below?

Gear: (This is a fixed item-no changes available except where noted)

Leica M3 with 50mm Summarit 1.5 lens
Leica R4 with 50mm Cron lens (Possibly a 35-70 F3.5 Vario Lens)
Nikon AF with 28-105mm lens

Film choices: (Film choice can be changed to match gear and conditions)

TriX
Ilford Delta 100
T-Max 3200
Kodak 400
Velvia 50
Velvia 100
Sensia 100
Fujicolor 200
Provia 400x
Provia 100F

Tripod? No tripod?

Change the film choices?

Other recommendations?

Also, I need some ideas on some close-up ideas of our custom bamboo fly-rods....


:)

[Brad Bireley]

You can find plenty of ideas for photographing cane rods in the back issues of Art of Angling Journal. You can find a few on ebay or amazon. They are worth the price.

[dave lackey]

Wow, Brad, thanks for that tip! That is really a cool publicaton!!!

[ChrisN]

I'd take the R4 with 50 Summicron, and a tripod. And a few rolls of HP5. And a pair of waders.

[250swb]

Stealth is of prime importance in fly fishing, and so you don't want a photographer looming large on the river bank showing himself against the skyline, it will scare the fish. So go with a Nikon and the longer lenses and keep low down and out of the way. If you aren't bothered about actually catching a fish it doesn't matter, get some waders and pose the photographs with your Leica.

You have another conundrum. If you are using such slow films it will need a very bright day to 'catch' the moment of a strike sharply with detail, and bright noon conditions are not great for fly fishing, better early or late in the day. A digital DSLR starts to sound like the ideal camera doesn't it?

Steve

[dave lackey]

Hmmm...not sure if this is helping yet or not, I am so dense sometimes.:rolleyes:

No digital. For personal reasons.

I think that I will take two cameras, the R4 (50mm lens F2) and the Nikon AF 28-105 zoom lens.

Time of day is only important as I love the lighting early in the morning.

That leaves the choice of film... what do you suggest for that time of day? Also, maybe one camera loaded with black and white and the other with color?

And, is a tripod even going to useable in a flowing stream with a rocky, gravel bottom?:confused:

[gekopaca]

I could give you advices for fly fishing, but not for photographing it, because in that situation I prefer to be the fisherman ;)

[dave lackey]

I could give you advices for fly fishing, but not for photographing it, because in that situation I prefer to be the fisherman ;)


Ha, ha! Ain't that the truth?

That is why I plan of fishing after photographing the guide on the river...;)

Wondering if the Ilford 3200 would be a good choice for the early morning angling? Or maybe just go with an 800 speed film?

[gekopaca]

Wondering if the Ilford 3200 would be a good choice for the early morning angling? Or maybe just go with an 800 speed film?

In the places where I'm fishing there's huge light differencies in few time (because the mountains e.g.)
You might use 3200 at the start of the fishing party, then maybe 100 asa 2 hours later…

[taskoni]

Hey Dave.
I would go with Ilford XP2. Tripod with ball head is essential IMO.
I would take a dedicated camera for the task since the best shots that comes to my mind are from the water - that's where the action is. I have seen tons of side shots and OTS shots of an anglers (I am one myself). Something wider than 50, 35mm sounds just good to my mind. Ah, and please wear sunglasses if you are close to the angler - the rule #1 in fly fishing.
Regards,
b.

[tlitody]

I would say to use colour and shoot in the evening unless you are wanting morning mist in the image.
The evening hatch of fly will look pretty awful in B+W if shot from low down. A closed landscape (no sky) with raking sun on the line should look good. i.e. line against dark background of trees/vegetation/opposite bank. You won't want to be too close and you will need to be up or downstream from fisherman and not behind (unless you want to be hooked).
I'm imagining an English chalk stream here. A mountain stream would be very different.

[dave lackey]

Hey Dave.
I would go with Ilford XP2. Tripod with ball head is essential IMO.
I would take a dedicated camera for the task since the best shots that comes to my mind are from the water - that's where the action is. I have seen tons of side shots and OTS shots of an anglers (I am one myself). Something wider than 50, 35mm sounds just good to my mind. Ah, and please wear sunglasses if you are close to the angler - the rule #1 in fly fishing.
Regards,
b.

Cool...Bobby, where in the world did you get that avatar? I like it!:)

[dave lackey]

Black and white film?

I dunno, might be a good idea like this::)

http://www.oysterbamboo.com/sitebuilder/images/family-508x349.jpg

[ChrisN]

...

And, is a tripod even going to useable in a flowing stream with a rocky, gravel bottom?:confused:

Well, it depends on the stream, but where I fish, certainly.

http://www.dslrexchange.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=773&d=1301259522

[taskoni]

Cool...Bobby, where in the world did you get that avatar? I like it!:)

A friend sent it to me - Leica is bulgarian (my native language) word for watering can :D

Regards,
b.

[tlitody]

Black and white film?

I dunno, might be a good idea like this::)

http://www.oysterbamboo.com/sitebuilder/images/family-508x349.jpg

Well if you have bear cub handy, a woman with a baby and child without waders then maybe but it has little to do with fly fishing.

[taskoni]

I guess Dave was referring to the look.
Regards,
b.

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/1677/wopq0371.jpg

[jan normandale]

Don't take the camera... unless you're getting paid. Remember "time spent angling is not subtracted from your life" ;D

[dave lackey]

Correctomundo!

The look is quite nice and especially the photoshop "old look". I know Bill well and I was surprized to find out that bear cub is named "Yogi" but it is actually a dog that was shaved in hot weather...resulting in a bear cub look!:D

I agree about the color for most of the shots but am undecided about which color film would work best. Any ideas?:)

[dave lackey]

Don't take the camera... unless you're getting paid. Remember "time spent angling is not subtracted from your life" ;D


Ha, ha...yes, getting paid but also is paying for my fishing trip!:)

Jan, with your background, what do you recommend on how to shoot this?

[tlitody]

I'd suggest a fuji low contrast negative film. For me a river bank is so full of colour it just won't look right in B+W. But again if its a mountain stream with a lot of rocks and earth then maybe B+W is OK but the rivers I fished on were all greens and browns with splashes of colour from reeds and flowers. In B+W that will look very medium grey and lifeless. In colour it'll look vibrant. Really depends on the rivers setting. Take both colour and B+W and see what you find.

I thought, is that a dog? Then thought no it can't be, it's bear cub with those ears.

[dave lackey]

I'd suggest a fuji low contrast negative film. For me a river bank is so full of colour it just won't look right in B+W. But again if its a mountain stream with a lot of rocks and earth then maybe B+W is OK but the rivers I fished on were all greens and browns with splashes of colour from reeds and flowers. In B+W that will look very medium grey and lifeless. In colour it'll look vibrant. Really depends on the rivers setting. Take both colour and B+W and see what you find.

I thought, is that a dog? Then thought no it can't be, it's bear cub with those ears.


Ha...here's another photo of Yogi:

http://www.oysterbamboo.com/images/yogi.jpg

[Ken Smith]

My problem is that the fishing is always more important at the time than photos. The photos come after the fishing, when waiting for a hatch, or after I put down a big fish and I'm waiting for him to resume rising. And I usually have the curse of camera on person - no fish. Left camera at home - the trout are fighting for my fly. Which can be a pain since the Missouri here in Montana is my home water - and it's famous for big rainbows/browns.

Anyway - back to the OQ. Depending on the size of the water. Here in Montana on a big river like the Missouri - a medium format like a Fuji 690 series to convey the vastness. Fuji Acros 100. The angler bent over and following the drift his #22 Trico or #18 PMD. To another flyfisherman - it's body position that conveys the concentration and anticipationt involved in fishing wee flies dry flies. To those of you that don't fly fish - you can fit 2 of these on the your pinky fingernail.

As the photographer you need to be on your knees if the water is shallow or at least offering a smaller profile to not spook the fish. If the angler is fishing down stream or across - you need to be upstream.

If it's a small stream - same set up. If it's really skinny stream (shallow), a polarizer to show the clearness of the water. perhaps behind and off to the side on the bank - out of his casting plane. A lot of times you don't need to see the angler's face to convey concentration - body position will tell all that.
If you want to slow shutter speed down and show the blended fluid movement of water over the rocks - a tripod.

Ken

[Ken Smith]

Just saw the camera selection - can't venture to guess. I live in Montana - a big vast state famous for big rivers and a big sky. It takes a big negative to soak it all in.

[TXForester]

I tell ya what I wouldn't do. The grip and grin with angler pointing the trout like a scatter gun at the photographer. :bang:

You might going to the Itinerant Angler website. They have a photography forum that could provide you with ideas.

http://www.itinerantangler.com/cgi-bin/board/YaBB.pl?board=Photography

[tlitody]

Ha...here's another photo of Yogi:

http://www.oysterbamboo.com/images/yogi.jpg

Check out Tim Flach's website for some very cool pet shots. Goto the Dogs Gods section. Image 10.

http://www.timflach.com/

[jan normandale]

I'd take 3 rolls… Delta 100 in case the light is strong, TMax 3200 for late evening shots and I'd bracket ones I really wanted to be sure of nailing.

For colour if you can get it the Sensia is an interesting film as is Provia at 100 ISO for mid day.

For shooting I'd not take the M3 just might be more thinking than photographing on the river. Watching your step, not falling in, making sure the light is taken into account prior to taking the shot. That leaves the R4 or the Nikon AF . I like Leica glass for colour rendition slightly more than the Nikon. But it's close and it's a personal choice. I would go for the R4 because it's got a top end of 1/1000th which will help in the strong light situations and it's got a good meter. I think the 50 mm will cover most of the shooting so you don't have to think about comp and framing / zooming. Just 'zoom with the feet'

The Nikon with the AF and zoom is a strong second if your style is to use a zoom to crop or move in. The choice between the two will be what suits your style that you will be using for this photoset. Also the comments that Ken made above are good ones but I'd put a larger fly on just so you will be able to follow the drift. Maybe a deer hair caddis or something readily visible for you as a photographer.

It sounds like you've given a fair amount of preparation and thought to this. I'd just show and shoot. Then put the camera away and fish. Good luck

BTW I'd be interested in the shots of the cane rods. I had a friend in PA who was quite an accomplished builder George Maurer. If you get a chance to cast one; his ideas about rod taper made for unique rods.