Not sure if this has been posted yet but thought it may be true…..
IDO » Forums » Fishing Forums » General Discussion Forum » 54 inch 44lb Northern?
54 inch 44lb Northern?
-
July 7, 2006 at 8:27 pm #458898
I was told LOTW in the email I got, but no one can confirm that I’m aware of. Initially I’m skeptical.
July 7, 2006 at 8:29 pm #458901supposedly it was Rainy Lake on 8# test fishing walleyes. Regardless it’s a gator….I usually don’t let slimers in my boat but for that one I would make an exception
July 7, 2006 at 8:43 pm #458908Is that a belly or is he holding a garbage bag
Holy crap that is a nice one
Todd_NEPosts: 701July 7, 2006 at 8:52 pm #458911I’m not the FBI, but boy does that look doctored. Look at the fish and his bottom hand even.
July 7, 2006 at 9:14 pm #458917We all like to be skeptics first but anyway you look at it, it is a PIG! WOW
July 7, 2006 at 9:16 pm #458918Doesn’t look DR. to me. You can even see the seam that is being made by his fingers.
July 7, 2006 at 9:17 pm #458920July 12,1999,I caught a 53″ Northern in SK on Walston Lake. It was CPR SK record for one year. I must agree with the idea that this is a doctored photo. Head and tail do not appear to match color or body size. Now you know where the name site name ‘skpike’ comes from. Almost two years to the day I got a 51″ on the same Lake. The good lord blessed me twice. All I need now is a 30+” ‘eye’. Maybe this fall on Mille.
I’ll try and post a picture of my 53″ if I can figure it out.
SKPIKE – Roger Budny
July 7, 2006 at 9:18 pm #458921Pike, Northern 45-12 n/a Basswood Lake Lake 05/16/1929
Dam that would be close to a record.Doctored or not looks like his suit is all slimed up.
July 7, 2006 at 10:18 pm #458940DANG that is huge. I thought my 43″ a while ago was huge! but that is Unbelievable. I honestly don’t think its doctored. It looks legit to me. Why would they put musky fins on it? that wouldn’t change the size of the actual fish..
VikeFanPosts: 525July 7, 2006 at 10:49 pm #458949Good eye on the fins…the anal fin of the fish in the photo looks like it has dark spots on a light background, i.e. musky colors, while the body obviously has the light oblong spots on a dark background that says Northern. The other fins seem to show muskie color as well. That makes me think this photo was doctored, with a photo of a Northern’s body pasted on to the photo of a guy in a boat holding a muskie. Like someone else said, the hand holding the fish’s belly does not seem the right size in proportion to the guy in the photo–the hand looks far too small. I suspect the hand holding the fish was taken from the donor photo of the Northern, rather than the guy holding the muskie.
July 8, 2006 at 12:55 am #458968I just recieved this email as well yesterday and I heard Rainy Lake as well, and I would belive the rest Mrjigger said as well…….in the photo is what appears to be a walleye rod with a shad rap laying there also. That darn thing looks like a cross between a Platapuss and a Northern!! Look at how wide it’s head is!!! Now I know where they get the term Gator from…the first guy who say one of these monsters coming at him for the first time. I was going to guess it to be bigger than that, but it might just be an optical illusion by the way he’s holding it. I believe it’s real. Lets start a vote
1 Real
0 FakeJuly 8, 2006 at 1:36 am #458970I vote real. It would take a heck of a lot of time to fake a photo like that(believe me, Lil Ripper knows… ). What purpose would it serve to fake a photo like that. To get the hand placement, folds on the fish to fit the hand placement, so on & so forth. If it has been faked/altered, it was a very good job.
Now, let’s look closely at the photo. The rod doesn’t appear to be a spinning rod. The eyes in the rod aren’t all that big to indicate for sure that it’s a spinning rod. If I look closely, I can see the line run through his rod. It’d have to be heavier than standard Walleye poundage mono.
Also, on the right side of the photo is a large lure that looks a little too big for Walleye. Below it is a Lakewood type of bait box to hold larger types of lures for bigger pike. I believe they based on the stuff in the photo, they were targeting those fish and caught one of those trophy once-in-a-lifetime fish.
I still vote real photo.
July 8, 2006 at 1:50 am #458973you guy are awesome…an online debate over somebody else’s fish and whether or not it’s doctored or not. why would someone go through the trouble of photoshopping something like anyway? it would take hours to make it look even close to plausible. ok no but seriously, i go with blue on this one, muskie guys chasing big fish and happened upon a huge fricken northern.
REAL.July 8, 2006 at 1:53 am #458974I have more than a little experience with PS… that pic is real or its an incredible forgery done by an exceptional talent.
If I was to guess I would go with that fish having been caught some place in Europe with the location listed as “some place in MN” as the only part of the story that’s been altered.
July 8, 2006 at 2:13 am #458981well, if you look closely at the dorsal and anal fins, they look like they’re in very good shape, that tail however…
July 8, 2006 at 2:21 am #458984FYI
World record IFGA 46#+(as I recall) Scandaga Res…New York
53# Pike caught in Ireland some years ago.
I don’t think its doctored…and am inclined to vote for James opinion.
jhalfenPosts: 4179July 8, 2006 at 2:30 am #458985Yawn….you guys are watching a little too much CSI. Go sharpen your hooks or something.
July 8, 2006 at 2:40 am #458993Voting for REAL
Possibly European – stories of 100lb+ pound pike have stirred around the UK for decades, not sure how common fish in the ~50 class are. For some time, there were rumors of a monster hooked & lost in the St Lawrence River that could have broke the 100lb mark. Whether true mutants like that live here in the midwest is the stuff dreams are made of.
July 8, 2006 at 2:49 am #458995I say it’s real. If it’s fake, someone spent ALOT of time doing it. I work with computers and photo programs everyday and it’s really hard to enlarge something and keep the other small details looking exactly the same. Usually in a “fake” photo, you can pick out something right next to the outline of the “body” somewhere that is stretched, tightened or something similar. I don’t see anything like this in this photo, but I can’t zoom in very close to get a good look either.
I’m not saying it can’t be done, just that it’s not likely.
July 8, 2006 at 4:07 am #458999HMMMM…..I don’t believe it was caught on LOTW or Rainey Lk so to me it is a FAKE…..Editing this is not as hard as you think……..
I call Bullsnot on the story……
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.