76 replies to this topic

[alwayscatching]

Lol I'm dieing at all this in depth review of the length, I myself weighed the fish and my brother used the same measure board I use in tournaments to measure both. I really don't care about all the science behind it and I do not mean to be disrepctful at all lol but I had a blast and caught 3 hogs so far with my brother who was off his shift rotation for the week! Couldn't have asked for a better couple of days.

[alwayscatching]

26" would still be a mutant smallmouth.

Do your measurements take into account that the fish is being held out in front of the fisherman?

A picture can make a bass look longer than the CN tower due to positioning..

Just want to add 26 inches for a smallmouth is not a mutant lol! These fish get very long....

[cptpronin]

First off, nice fish regardless of actual size. Good couple hours of fishing.

 

Now I'm going to rip it apart...

 

 

Hence crackpot science as rybak stated. His method of estimation is only believable if and only if you compare two objects that are within the same plane in the photo. For example...measuring a segment of a finger that is held against the body of the fish.

 

But...it does prove a point the fish was over estimated.

 

Certain common objects can offer some estimate of the fish...regardless of how big or small the person in the picture may be. People often claim they are such and such height and weight and grossly overestimate fish size. I just had to look at the size of the ball cap visor and say BS because an unbent ball cap visor is usually 7"-7.5" wide. When bent, it ranges from 5.5"-6.5" wide...depending on the size of the "roof top".

 

Otherwise...to prove a point...I set this experiment up...

 

2 American pennies (Don't have Canadian pennies anymore ) set on a piano bench exactly (measured) 12" away from each other in "depth", and 1" slightly offset with each other laterally.

 

First picture was taken with the camera lens set exactly (measured) 22" above ground, and exactly (measured) 12" away from the closer penny (and exactly 24" from the further penny). This is a fairly unrealistic situation where the object (fish and angler) is so close to the lens...but use here to illustrate a point.

 

 

In this case, the closer penny is 191 pixels in diameter, while the further penny is 101 pixels in diameter. If we use the further penny as comparison for "actual size", then the penny that is closer is enlarged 89%...it almost doubles in size! I don't really need to tell you that. You can probably see that the penny that is further away is 1/2 the size.

 

OK...let's bring the camera back from the pennies.

 

Second picture was taken with the camera lens set at the same height (22"), and exactly 36" away from the closer penny (and exactly 48" from the further penny).

 

 

In this case, the closer penny is 68 pixels in diameter, while the further penny is 51 pixels in diameter. Again, using the further penny as comparison for "actual size", the penny that is closer is enlarged 33%! Again, I don't need to tell you that the penny that is further away is about 3/4 of the size.

 

So...as you can see, the enlargement factor is quite severe. I don't think I need to tell anyone that holding a fish closer to the lens makes the fish look bigger...but I don't know if people are aware just how much "bigger" the fish looks.

 

The further you set apart the pennies, the bigger the discrepency in size. I love how people always mention how big they are in the picture. If you claim you are taller and wider in built, it also implies your arms are longer and the fish is held out further...which means the actual size of the fish is actually smaller than it appears. It works against you...not for you.

 

But still, rybak's estimation has merits. If we take my measurements and enlargement ratios to what rybak has measuered, assuming that the photographer was 36" away from the fish and the fish was held out a reasonable 12" from the face (which I'm being generous...because with arms from a 6'1" body it is more than 12"...after all, a ball cap brim is about 5" long)...then you have an enlargement ratio of 33%...or flip it around we should shrink the fish to 75% of the apparent size...

 

That means the first fish is 19.8" (round up) and the second fish is 19.7"...Which is what I estimated without doing all that silly photography and calculation anyways.

 

Again, I'm being generous here assuming that the fish was ONLY held out 12" from the face.

 

All that to say...the smallies looks to be 4-5lb fish...and people should not overestimate an Ontario record breaking fish length without a tape measure...because that estimation certianly looks fishy. A 31" smallie it isn't unless you can show some pictures of the fish beside a tape.

 

BTW, if you really claimed the smallie is 31" long, then your forearm must be 24" long. You must be an orangutan..

 

 

You need to get laid.

[cptpronin]

Lol I'm dieing at all this in depth review of the length, I myself weighed the fish and my brother used the same measure board I use in tournaments to measure both. I really don't care about all the science behind it and I do not mean to be disrepctful at all lol but I had a blast and caught 3 hogs so far with my brother who was off his shift rotation for the week! Couldn't have asked for a better couple of days.

 

 

Don't worry about it.  Whether your measurements were a tad exaggerated or not, it is not like you were trying to intentionally BS us.  This is just a simple case of jealousy.  A two anglers who take themselves way too seriously and have to suck the joy out of good fish story.

[MuskieBait]

From you photo, measured on my monitor...

 

Length: 18.8cm

"Girth": 10.8cm (it was 5.4cm one sided, in 2D...in 3D this girth would be even higher)

 

Seriously, if this fish you claim to be 31" long, a simple ratio would give the fish a girth of 17.8".

 

Again, that would make your fish way bigger than the current Ontario record. You tell me that your "skinny" fish doesn't weight more than 9.84lbs with that conservative (generous) measurement?

 

 

It's not jealousy at all...

 

Hey look, I caught a 7lb bass too!

 

 

I give that fish 4lbs if I'm generous...

 

If I put a certain male body part closer to the camera, I can claim it is 12" long too. ...since we're all here measuring d**ks.

[MuskieBait]

You need to get laid.

 

I do experiments everyday for a job...that took me all of 5min to set up and 15min to type. Getting laid will take even longer than that.

[alwayscatching]

Give me the ratio of my chest size, 6'1 260 lbs. Go for it. Every person is different just as ever fish is. Again, sorry you feel the way you do about my fish  but thats on you. Ps That is a decent bucket mouth, should give you a couple lessons on how to take a better pic and make it look bigger.

[MuskieBait]

Give me the ratio of my chest size, 6'1 260 lbs. Go for it. Every person is different just as ever fish is. Again, sorry you feel the way you do about my fish  but thats on you. Ps That is a decent bucket mouth, should give you a couple lessons on how to take a better pic and make it look bigger.

 

Sure. Considering the brim of the ball cap, since you are a bigger person with a bigger head...I'll give you a generous 6.5" when the brim is bent.

 

You can fit 3 lengths of the brim with across your chest...which gives it 19.5" flat on the front side. Double that for back side...making it 39". Now consider volume...I'll give you an extra 6" considering you are 260lbs. So we have 45" chest size.

 

Here's the average chest size for someone your height...

 

http://www.powerhous...?idCategory=120

 

...not too far off...

 

BTW, I don't need to learn how to make a fish look bigger...you are lying to no one but yourself. My pics looks just as good with some actual big fish...thank you very much.

 

Here are a few actual 30" class fish for comparison. Smaller people don't have smaller headlamps or ball cap brim...and vice versa for bigger people...headlamps and ball caps are one size fits all...

 

29.5" Brown Trout

 

 

33" Northern Pike

 

 

34" Common Carp

 

[Aqua]

6'1' 260... Of course you are, we all are...

[Shawarma]

[Bow Man]

Hey Alwayscatching, very nice fish

[Shawarma]

So now not only do we want a picture of the smallie by a tape measurer, but we ALSO are questioning his height and weight! LMAO. 

 

Please nobody question him being a man as well. I do NOT want to see any of that proof!

[Shmogley]

idiots..

 

 

nice fish brother, regardless of people going full retard over it. lol

 

i think if i measured their jealousy it would be 42.219 inches

i have the maths on a napkin here to prove it!

[MuskieBait]

6'1' 260... Of course you are, we all are...

 

 

Not being an ass here...but really just curious about Aqua's statement...I was actually a little skeptical about his statement. I have a buddy who is 6'1" and 230lb, but he has a way bigger gut.

 

alwayscatchin looks pretty fit (yes, it is a compliment)...so let's compare a few NHL athletes...based on what's listed on TSN...

 

PK Subban - 6'0", 216lb

 

Phil Kessel - 6'0", 202lb

 

Drew Dougthy - 6'1", 213lb

 

Jerome Iginla - 6'1", 210lb

 

Joe Thornton - 6'4", 220lb

 

I don't know anything about NFL...but let's see some of the top players...because NFL guys are supposedly bigger than NHL guys...also listed on TSN.

 

Robert Mathias - 6'2", 246lb

 

Vontaze Burfict - 6'1", 248lb

 

Payton Manning - 6'5", 230lb

 

Josh Gordon - 6'3", 225lb

 

alwayscatchin, honestly, I do praise your fish...whether you believe it or not...but you don't show a huge gut to weight 260lb at 6'1". Again, that's a compliment. The closest to you is Vontaze Burfict...just 12lbs off...but darn...look at his built!

 

To everyone else...I study science...I believe in facts when I see it. Seems petty and picky...but show me some facts to back up the claim...especially a 31" long Smallmouth Bass that is record breaking...

[salmotrutta]

Just want to add 26 inches for a smallmouth is not a mutant lol! These fish get very long....

 

First of all, a 26" smallmouth in and of itself would be an absolutely remarkable fish, anywhere in the world, and could be considered a mutant simply due to its length.

 

Second of all, I was implying that a 26" (...or was it 29" and 31"...) smallmouth weighing only 6lbs would be a mutant, ie. a deviant from the norm, because at those lengths they should weigh much more.

 

Who ever said anyone was jealous? Why are some members trying to put others down over this?  Sheesh. 

 

Part of a forum is allowing more experienced anglers to educate, whether it be on techniques, locations, lures, or accurate lengths, weights, and weight to length ratios of fish.

 

We are lucky to have someone as experienced as Muskie Bait as a contributing member of this forum.

 

I missed the part where he said anything negative to anyone. Some of you need to re-read this thread from the beginning, realize that you are in fact the negative ones, and edit your posts. 

[Christopher K]

Just wanted to thank Salmo and MB here. Sorry man but those lengths are WAYYY off and you don't need to be a genius to realize it. Solid fish, 30" fish, not a chance.

[alwayscatching]

Like I said I'm not trying to justify the length! But I held the fish on my scale and it was solid! And yea I am 6'1 260 lol. Not a mutant am I? Lol

[alwayscatching]

Let's get back to fishing that's why we all come here!

[MuskieBait]

Like I said I'm not trying to justify the length! But I held the fish on my scale and it was solid! And yea I am 6'1 260 lol. Not a mutant am I? Lol

 

No, not a mutant, but you must have pretty big bones then...because fat and muscle density isn't that far off.

 

Bone = 1.7500 g/cm³

Fat = 0.9094 g/cm³

Muscle = 1.0599 g/cm³

 

Hey, you asked me for an estimate of your chest size...so...what is it?

 

If you challenge...be prepared to provide an answer.

[buckhorn-bassin]

Not being an ass here...but really just curious about Aqua's statement...I was actually a little skeptical about his statement. I have a buddy who is 6'1" and 230lb, but he has a way bigger gut.

alwayscatchin looks pretty fit (yes, it is a compliment)...so let's compare a few NHL athletes...based on what's listed on TSN...

PK Subban - 6'0", 216lb

Phil Kessel - 6'0", 202lb

Drew Dougthy - 6'1", 213lb

Jerome Iginla - 6'1", 210lb

Joe Thornton - 6'4", 220lb

I don't know anything about NFL...but let's see some of the top players...because NFL guys are supposedly bigger than NHL guys...also listed on TSN.

Robert Mathias - 6'2", 246lb

Vontaze Burfict - 6'1", 248lb

Payton Manning - 6'5", 230lb

Josh Gordon - 6'3", 225lb

alwayscatchin, honestly, I do praise your fish...whether you believe it or not...but you don't show a huge gut to weight 260lb at 6'1". Again, that's a compliment. The closest to you is Vontaze Burfict...just 12lbs off...but darn...look at his built!

To everyone else...I study science...I believe in facts when I see it. Seems petty and picky...but show me some facts to back up the claim...especially a 31" long Smallmouth Bass that is record breaking...

Yawn..

Nice fish AC!!