# Do Pictures Really Make a Difference....



## k2muskie (Oct 6, 2007)

I have to ask this question...do 'actual' fish pictures really provide credible evidence to 'YOU' (be honest) of an anglers fish'n trip story? :| :|


----------



## wyoguy (Mar 4, 2010)

Not necessary for evidince, however I do enjoy looking at them.


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

No. I dont personally need pictures as proof of someones fishing story. There are doubters and there are believers. I tend to want to believe people.

Do some tend to lie or exaggerate when telling thier story? absolutely. It's funny how a 2 lb fish can turn into a 4 lb fish.. or a how a 22" wide buck can turn into a 25" buck. :lol: Just my experience though. I'm sure nobody else has experienced this.  

I like most, enjoy pictures for what they are. Visual stimuli..


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

I don't take pictures any more.
I did it for years and now they just all start to look alike to me.
Besides with my old computer and lack of computer knowledge, it takes way to much of my time to add pictures.
I do enjoy when others post their pictures though.
Thanks to those of you that do post pictures.


----------



## blueboy22 (Sep 30, 2007)

Sure they do provide credible evidence even though I have no reason not to believe anyone. And the pic's are nice to look at.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I always take pics, but they seem to always show the fish much smaller than what I remembered in my head; maybe I just need to work on that hands in front of the body pose.


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

Pictures are not necessary, but they are very welcome. I thank anyone who is willing to share a fishing trip. As far as the “proof” part, my Grandpa said “never let the truth get in the way of a good story”.


----------



## tye dye twins (Mar 8, 2011)

All I need to know is "Where they went, what they were using, and what/how many they caught.... the rest is not all that important to me. I get some great pics out there but this site is way to complicated to get them on here! Besides pics are not proof. It is way too easy to fake a catch with an old pic. Whenever the pic posting process changes I will post them up. Maybe we ought to have a pic of the week/month/year to encourage more pics. I know not a whole lot of people will vote but it could be fun anyway.

When it comes to lying I personally choose to believe only about half the crap that come out of a fishermens mouth. Just comes with the sport but it sure beats no reports at all. My favorite liers are the local "pond pounders" at the community ponds. They'll claim they caught 20+ fish and then you watch their fish get off the hook 5 to 10 to 20 feet off shore and they will count it saying it was easier to release it that way, in fact they preffer it. To me if you didn't have the choice to eat it, it doesn't count. I tend to blindly trust this site and so far it hasn't done me any wrong. 

"If you don't watch the news your uninformed, if you watch the news your misinformed." 
-Mark Twian


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

I voted yes before I read the first post because I just went off the title of the thread. 

Yes, photos make a difference...in a trip report. But as far as needing them for credible evidence, that depends on who's talking. There are a few folks out there that could make almost any claim and I'd blindly believe them, just knowing that they say it straight.

There are plenty that I'd hesitate to believe though, if they laid claim to something really noteworthy without pics and a note from their mothers. :lol:

Personally, I go out of my way to make sure I accurately report my catches. It's the right thing to do! I take pride in not lying about fishing. If I don't have a tape, I've got markings on my rods to go off of.

Now that I finally bought a scale (a pretty good one), I've been reporting weight too. It's been very surprising to see what some fish have weighed.

So yes, fish pics do make a difference in evidential circumstances, but anything's possible with some of the lakes we've got and I won't necessarily rule out someone for not having pics either.



sawsman said:


> I like most, enjoy pictures for what they are. Visual stimuli.


Absolutely. Fish are really cool looking animals and fun to catch, so I love staring at fish pics and the places they live. It's inspiring.


----------



## scott_rn (Sep 11, 2007)

Grandpa D said:


> I did it for years and now they just all start to look alike to me.


I love it. My wife asks me if we really need more pictures of fish, we already have a lot.

Pictures of 10" finless pellet heads don't do much for me. Quality pictures of wild fish make a difference, enough that I like to check some guys blogs from time to time (utahcuthroat, utahflypatterns, flytowater, etc.). :O||: fish porn


----------



## duneman101 (Nov 6, 2009)

I like pictures, because i get the skunk so often and don't get to actually see a fish, i start thinking, it's not me all of the fish were swallowed by birds, and i have put all the necassary time and effort into it. Then i look on here and see that all of you actually caught fish where i did not, then i realize i need to get back out there and find the slimy little suckers!


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

I put that I didn't care either way.... because there are some guys whose posts I'll read just because of the name on the post. They do a good writeup and without pics, its still fun to read. Guys like LOAH or even some of the fly fishermen that used to post artsy pics of reels, fish and other things are icing on the cake.... those I almost wish I could save, print in color and re-read on days like today when nobody is out fishing. Pictures of a gorgeous fish or gorgeous country inspire me to go out and wet a line when I can.


----------



## Bhilly81 (Oct 18, 2009)

wyoguy said:


> Not necessary for evidince, however I do enjoy looking at them.


funny thats exactly what i was thinking

my opinions with pictures is that most of the places we go we just normally catch planter fish and everyone has seen those on many occasions i normally only take pictures if some of the kids catch it or its a good colored brown or a high mountain brook but the all time favorite is the tiger trout so here are a couple of my favorite pictures if i remember right the bigger one is 23 inches and 3 pounds


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

I voted that I didn't care and I don't although I sure enjoy seeing the pictures. The only exception may be if someone is boasting about catching an outsized fish, then a pic does increase credibility.

You guys are forgetting an incontrovertible rule of fishing and photography, something I have proven to myself time and again. You will *always* catch the biggest fish on the days that you forgetfully leave the camera at home or after the camera battery runs out. O|*


----------



## trout bum (Oct 5, 2010)

Depends on who is telling the story.


----------



## Chaser (Sep 28, 2007)

Necessary? No. Preferred? Absolutely. 

A picture is worth a thousand words, right? Some posts of 4000 words can't convey what a picture or two can. I'm not much of a reader though. It takes a pretty well-written piece to keep my attention much past a paragraph or two. So for the folks out there who ain't no "Bill Shakespeare", pictures are a good supplement to their reports.


----------



## PACKFAN (Sep 18, 2007)

One of the best contributors to any of these sites is TubeDude, he usually includes pictures of his trips to include fish taken as well as his companions and a great blow by blow description of the outing. I find them extremely interesting and informative and anyone that has met Pat will agree he is a wealth of knowledge when it come to fishing and the outdoors. I tend to agree with a former member on another site who said that without pictures it is just another story. You wanted honesty on how we felt on this subject and there it is, and thank God for cell phones cause I usually forget the camera. I'm hoping the eyes turn on for me at Willard so I can post some pictures other than brine flies. LOL sorry Kim. 8)


----------



## americanforkdude (Sep 13, 2007)

I use the site for fishing reports so pictures aren't necissary but are an added bonus. I've been hesitant to post a report because I've wanted to put pictures up but I'de rather have an up to date report then have to wait for someone to upload pictures to prove it. I can take a persons word for it.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

I would happly read a report without pictures over no report at all.
Pictures are nice and I love pictures of kids and fish.
Please post your fishing trips with or without pictures.


----------

