I don't know about you all, but I get to stare at three 27" computer screens all day long in my office. If I'm going to have to have these eye sores in my office, they might as well display something that means a lot to me - in this case, that's a fish.

I had a professor (former WDFW Commissioner) back in my undergraduate days that said "If the photo is not truly the best it can be and is not 100% excellent, DO NOT use it." I've taken that to hear when I've had a camera in tow on my fish and hunting expeditions over the years. I'll take many photos in the slight hope that at least *one* photo comes out good by my standards. The lighting is good, the photo is crisp, the smiles are great, etc. Any serious flaw in the photo and it never sees the light of day. I have about 500 hundred "computer desktop/screen saver" worthy photos that I display on my three screens. Of these, a few photos pop up where you know the fish (or animal) was super special, the photo did it no justice whatsoever.

We've all seen the hero shots of big, beautiful fish, and I love looking at them all. We've also seen people post photos of a what looks like a 15 lb. steelhead with the person saying "Honestly, this fish was 25+ pounds....I'm 7'5"...or bad camera angle, etc".

While some of these photos are complete BS, much like the story behind them, some are not. Some are truly monster fish that just didn't photograph well, or the photographer may not want to give up his day job just yet.

This thread is about posting photos of truly exceptional fish/animal specimens that just didn't photograph well.

I have two fish photos that come to mind.

The first fish is a 40lb. albacore. It was so heavy that I had to rest it on my knee! Granted I do not know what constitutes a "wall hanger" class fish for an albacore, but I do know that 40 is a pretty good sized big tuna. The photo is OK, but this albacore just looks like any other albacore to me.



Here's a second shot showing the fish on the cleaning table. Just go ahead and sing along: "One of these things is not like the others...."
You can see the obvious difference in size between the 40 pounder and all the other tuna on the table.



The other fish was a chum caught by my son on an OP-ish river. It was his first float down this river and he was *thrilled* to fight any fish, let alone this fish. Thinking this fish was another big king when it slammed the rod, I was shocked when it came in to view and I saw that it was a chum. I was even more shocked when I tailed the beast and it was easily the largest, heaviest, and beefiest chum I've *ever* handled or seen. The photo really does this fish absolutely not justice on how thick this fish was. Much like coho that do not show their girth/size in a photo, chums do the same. This was an absolute monster of a chum and was easily over 25 pounds. It was released, so no actual weight was taken.



Let's see what you all have in terms of memorable, big, trophy, fish or animals that look like crap, or not their true size.

We've all seen the Glory Shots. Let's see the less then glory shots. The shots you *wished* would have been perfect.

I'm just not much of a picture taking kind of guy. The upside of that is that the visions in my mind of remarkable fish I caught continue to do the fish justice. The downside is that I caught a lot of fish that I don't even remember catching any longer. And I have this hunch that those memories will become even fewer as time goes on.

Have tons and would love to. Have never learned how? How do you post pics? Disclaimer....I struggle/suck at anything IT.

Bonafide 40# albacore confirmed on a scale? SERIALLY?

Firstly, nice pictures, and thx for sharing .

Secondly, that super nice Chum looks like maybe a good 17lbs, maybe 19 at most, unless you’re in Oregon, then it’s a nice 25 +

Here on the Green we call that size Chum a “Keta Creek Cookie-Cutter”!

This fish went 17.5 the next day

17.5" ?

Judging by the pictures, it might as well have

I was thinking the same thing. 17.5? Are you 6'8" and 280 lbs.? Looks closer to 7.5 lb than 17.5. Or maybe you are from Oregon.

6'3 230 but yes it was, 37×18.5 I have a few pics that show a better perspective on the size but this post is looking for photos that don't do justice

[img]http://[img]https://i.postimg.cc/6qt5KdwY/Screenshot-20211212-213446-Chrome.jpg[/img][/img]

I suck at this picture [Bleeeeep!], but here is another photo of that fish.

37 lbs

The fish or the angler?

Bucket and I sure had fun with TRBO a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away.....not sure TRBO appreciated our hungover shenanigans but this was a memorable 20+ from the Hoh that we had to team tag and chase both on foot and by boat....terrible cameraman on these pic's

What about all the times the real fish doesn't due justice to the photo ? (long arm and/or photoshop)

bobrr? c'mon share some pics

Nice hero shots from the moderator!