[Starman77]

I've been tying up some baitfish patterns using Hareline Dubbin's Ice Dub UV dubbing material. I got to thinking, "How do I know that this dubbing material really reflects UV light and how much?" Since we humans can't see UV light, for the most part, we can't just look at the dubbing material to tell. Also, is the dubbing material 100% UV reflective or are only 10% or less of the fibers UV reflective? I then remembered that we have a foot long UV light that we used to use for detecting where our previous cats used to pee on the walls. It is a pretty powerful UV light, using 3 D-cell batteries. So, I shined this UV light on the UV dubbing material, and to my surprise the dubbing material didn't light up or glow at all, not a bit. I know the UV light works because white paper glows, and some clothes in my closet glow, and on the carpet I can see spots where my current cat has thrown up. I did a bit of research online and found out that when I shine my UV light on something, when we see something light up or glow (like cat pee or clothes in my closet), we are seeing UV fluorescence, not UV reflectiveness. The UV light is absorbed and then some of the absorbed light is emitted (or fluoresces) in a visible wavelength that we humans can see. We cannot see reflected UV light. So, my question is if there is an easy method to determine if my UV dubbing is really UV reflective and by how much? I read online that it can be done with fancy photographic equipment and lenses, but I don't want to spend the money to do that.

Rex

 

[Graham McFadyen Hill]

Interesting question...there have been answers posted here previously. Google " UV reactive vs UV reflective" and a thread on WFF from 2013 pops up. It contains some highly technical information. There is math and there are graphs. I watched a recent video on youtube presented by Daniel Holm, a Danish angler who has an online shop...the English language version is flytying.eu. In the vid Daniel makes the claim that the UV craze is basically a hoax. What he does believe in is the fluorescence effect of UV materials.

 

[Starman77]

Interesting question...there have been answers posted here previously. Google " UV reactive vs UV reflective" and a thread on WFF from 2013 pops up. It contains some highly technical information. There is math and there are graphs. I watched a recent video on youtube presented by Daniel Holm, a Danish angler who has an online shop...the English language version is flytying.eu. In the vid Daniel makes the claim that the UV craze is basically a hoax. What he does believe in is the fluorescence effect of UV materials.

Good stuff! As you wrote, that 2013 thread is highly technical, more so than I'm interested in. I just worry that I might be getting duped into buying UV dubbing that might not be any different than non-UV dubbing, as there doesn't seem to be any easy method to tell the difference. I was quite surprised that the UV dubbing didn't show any fluorescence at all under my UV light and that was what got me to post the question. I don't want this thread to devolve into a debate over whether the UV craze is a hoax or not; I just want an easy way to tell that the UV dubbing I'm buying is the real stuff, other than just believing the label on the package.

Rex

 

[Squamishpoacher]

I think UV dubbing...for that matter UV anything is just another way to separate us from our cash. Cast any fly UV or not to a willing participant and it will bite. And I do not believe those tales you hear about where some dude was fishing the same fly as your buddy only it was tied with UV or utilizing some other minor variance to outfish buddy. That's just the way it goes. Like the real Dude says "somedays you eat the bear and other days . . . . "

 

[Graham McFadyen Hill]

Good stuff! As you wrote, that 2013 thread is highly technical, more so than I'm interested in. I just worry that I might be getting duped into buying UV dubbing that might not be any different than non-UV dubbing, as there doesn't seem to be any easy method to tell the difference. I was quite surprised that the UV dubbing didn't show any fluorescence at all under my UV light and that was what got me to post the question. I don't want this thread to devolve into a debate over whether the UV craze is a hoax or not; I just want an easy way to tell that the UV dubbing I'm buying is the real stuff, other than just believing the label on the package.

Rex

I started checking all of my dyed materials quite a few years ago after attending a workshop given By Todd Oishi. He suggested that every pattern should have a UV component. I use my UV curing light when I am shopping, and I found that in many ranges of materials there both were UV-reactive (fluorescing) and non-UV reactive items, for example, Hareline UV Ice Dub. So rather than putting my faith in self-proclaimed UV materials, I settled for UV-reactive, as suggested by Daniel Holm. So all of my steelhead and salmon flies have a fluorescing component, sometimes several. I do not rely solely upon the UV claim. Many darker UV materials aren't UV-reactive, so rather than "hope for the best", I add some "hot stuff" to the pattern.

 

[troutpocket]

Rex- I understand your interest in the technical aspects of UV tying materials. But from a practical standpoint, I don’t think you need any further advantages on the water. Please leave some for the rest of us!

 

[Adam Saarinen]

 

[Eyejuggler]

.

 

[Starman77]

Adam, that's a very educational video, so thanks for posting it. Regardless of whether one believes his opinion or not, it is worth viewing. Unfortunately, the video doesn't answer my original question about an easy way to determine if UV materials are really UV reflective or not. If one believes the opinion presented in the video, then it wouldn't matter if fly tying materials are UV reflective or not, only if they are UV fluorescent. If one is just looking for UV fluorescent materials, then it is easy because you just take a UV light into the fly shop and shine it on all the materials and only choose the materials that light up the best. Personally, I'm still trying to be open-minded on the UV reflective theory, but feel I can only make a good judgement if I know I'm really using UV reflective materials. Hence, my original question...

Rex

 

[Ron McNeal]

Hummmm..... So much for UV. From here on, I'm going with bacon grease.

But, intuitively, that UV light, shining on a fly tied with UV materials sure does "POP" & gives me one of those "Ah Ha!" moments, thus firing the imagination of the ever-hopeful, easily duped fisherman in me......

 

[Nick Clayton]

Paging @Bagman

 

[Stonefish]

A minimum of two strands of UV Krystal Flash go into nearly every saltwater pattern I tie.
Reflective, Reactive????? I really don't care.
If you have confidence it it, use it. If not, don't use it.
SF

 

[Nick Clayton]

Agreed with SF. Two strands of UV pearl KF is SOP for nearly all of my Puget sound flies.

I won't comment on confidence though... That seems to be a touchy topic lately

 

[tkww]

Adam, that's a very educational video, so thanks for posting it. Regardless of whether one believes his opinion or not, it is worth viewing. Unfortunately, the video doesn't answer my original question about an easy way to determine if UV materials are really UV reflective or not. If one believes the opinion presented in the video, then it wouldn't matter if fly tying materials are UV reflective or not, only if they are UV fluorescent.

I don't think you can tell, at least not with your eyes, since your eyes can't see UV. You could in theory photography it with filtration that blocked IR/Visible to see what UV reflection was going on. However we then have the next issue which is what portion(s) of the UV spectrum do fish see, how prominently does it factor into their vision, and so on. So even if the material did have some magical UV reflectiveness (that we couldn't see), how do we even know the fish even can?

I have noticed that different UV resins fluoresce very differently under a UV curing flashlight. But they don't seem to do that under daylight, so how much UV in the real world are they picking up and fluorescing back to the fish? Whenever I ask 'mid guys about the impact of UV resin coating--and some clearly pop under a UV light--I've never yet heard anyone say "it makes a big difference." Heck I can't find someone who will say it makes any difference.

I do plan on experimenting more with different cures and coatings this year, but considering that kajillion fish that were caught prior to the UV craze (and still are caught without using specific UV materials) and the lack of feedback from one of the most obsessed groups out there ('mid fishermen), I so far haven't bought into as significant, game-changing, etc.

 

[Buzzy]

A minimum of two strands of UV Krystal Flash go into nearly every saltwater pattern I tie. SF

Two strands of UV pearl KF is SOP for nearly all of my Puget

I started fly fishing the salt in the "South Sound" area about 1980. I had just joined Puget Sound Fly Fishers and was thankful to meet so many master tiers and anglers. One of the club members had a very simple saltwater fly: silver tinsel body, front 1/3 chartreuse chenille, white calf tail wing which was Ferguson's Green and Silver. I couldn't leave Bruce's fly alone and I modified it - added a couple strands of pearl flashabou along each side (way before UV materials were marketed as UV). For me, this modification made a huge difference. To the fish: well, I don't know, not sure I ever presented another Ferguson's Green and Silver without flashabou.

Sorry @Starman77 to hijack your thread. I too am curious about your question.............

 

[Graham McFadyen Hill]

Adam, that's a very educational video, so thanks for posting it. Regardless of whether one believes his opinion or not, it is worth viewing. Unfortunately, the video doesn't answer my original question about an easy way to determine if UV materials are really UV reflective or not. If one believes the opinion presented in the video, then it wouldn't matter if fly tying materials are UV reflective or not, only if they are UV fluorescent. If one is just looking for UV fluorescent materials, then it is easy because you just take a UV light into the fly shop and shine it on all the materials and only choose the materials that light up the best. Personally, I'm still trying to be open-minded on the UV reflective theory, but feel I can only make a good judgement if I know I'm really using UV reflective materials. Hence, my original question...

Rex

I have been following the thread closely, but I think I missed a link to a vid? Was it the Daniel Holm/UV material video?

 

[Adam Saarinen]

I like Mother of Pearl Krystal Flash!

 

[Adam Saarinen]

I have been following the thread closely, but I think I missed a link to a vid? Was it the Daniel Holm/UV material video?

Yes!

 

[Graham McFadyen Hill]

Well okay then!

 

[Bagman]

Two or three years back I did a great deal of research on what fish see what, and how to test the materials to make sure they reflect UV light. I also wanted to know How to test for this cheaply, I made contact with a few people that I had worked with over the years Test engineers, and professional photographers, and came away with "not without spending a whole lot of money". That being said Starman, if you look up Spirit River UV2 coated material they will tell you that some of their UV coated materials do not reflect under a black light, and on mostly their dubbing materials you will not see the glow. So you just have to take their word.