Boatless Fishing Forum, Reports, Info

So I was reading through the front page of FS.com this morning. This was posted on the front page... Anyone see anything wrong here?

Yeah. The guy in the middle could use some longer shorts. The lady to his left has longer shorts. Oh, and her snapper... Could use a few inches. Unless her hands are huge and she makes it look small. But I highly doubt it. It probably just barely made slot. But I could be wrong..

lol i was under the impression that snapper needed to be more than 6" jk jk that thing is tiny...

You can never judge the true size of a fish bi a picture unless its next to a tournament measuring devise with a lip stopper. You never know if the people on the pics are giants.

migs24 wrote:Yeah. The guy in the middle could use some longer shorts. The lady to his left has longer shorts. Oh, and her snapper... Could use a few inches. Unless her hands are huge and she makes it look small. But I highly doubt it. It probably just barely made slot. But I could be wrong..

hahahahaha i didnt notice the thing about the shorts before

SaltyDog wrote:

cudaman wrote:You can never judge the true size of a fish bi a picture unless its next to a tournament measuring devise with a lip stopper. You never know if the people on the pics are giants.

Unless those people are all decendents of Paul Bunyon none of those fish are legal except the crevalle.

Just tell Cubanexpress to do an analysis on the pic and post it here. We have been judges on quiete a few tournaments and know what to look for. From a pic you can only use points of reference to be able to more less tell the actual size of a fish. It all has to do with depth and perception. Only items that can be used to to tell the size of a fish are the ones touching it directly. For example the human pointing finger the middle phalanx is usually 1 inch, he can take the one from the woman and try to measure the snapper which is about 10 inches and since the fish has its tail towards her that could take half to a full inch away (unpinched tail). He can do the same for the snook and the trout.

Again, but with out my smart 4$$ remark:

cudaman wrote:You can never judge the true size of a fish by a picture unless its next to a tournament measuring devise with a lip stopper.

There are many people that can take a pic and make a fish look like 30 pounds when the fish might be half that size. Look at magazines, they do that most of the time. And the same goes if you take a pic from too far then you end up making the fish look tiny.

cudaman wrote:[There are many people that can take a pic and make a fish look like 30 pounds when the fish might be half that size. Look at magazines, they do that most of the time. And the same goes if you take a pic from too far then you end up making the fish look tiny.

Very true. This permit was a little one, about 12 lbs. You were the one who taught me the pose to make them look huge, Herbert

PhishingPhanatic wrote:

cudaman wrote:[There are many people that can take a pic and make a fish look like 30 pounds when the fish might be half that size. Look at magazines, they do that most of the time. And the same goes if you take a pic from too far then you end up making the fish look tiny.

Very true. This permit was a little one, about 12 lbs. You were the one who taught me the pose to make them look huge, Herbert

I just wish people would take pics like that of my fish

PhishingPhanatic wrote:

cudaman wrote:[There are many people that can take a pic and make a fish look like 30 pounds when the fish might be half that size. Look at magazines, they do that most of the time. And the same goes if you take a pic from too far then you end up making the fish look tiny.

Very true. This permit was a little one, about 12 lbs. You were the one who taught me the pose to make them look huge, Herbert

on a side note......

nice keens