Lucky Craft Real Skin
39 replies to this topic
Posted 27 September 2007 - 09:21 AM
Have you guys seen this yet? It's pretty cool. They actually wrap the plastic baits in real fish or squid skin and seal it before they paint it. Here are some pictures from the LC website that show the process and the finished product:
Why didn't any of us think of this?
Posted 27 September 2007 - 10:14 AM
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that it is not real skin underneath the clearcoat as this would totally mess up any clearcoat with the moisture trapped between the plastic body and the clearcoat. More than likely it is a picture of whatever type of baitfish/prey that has been
super-imposed onto the surface of the bait. Guys have been doing that here for quite some time. I think Husky or Fatfingers did a tutorial on how it can be accomplished with an inkjet printer and tissue paper. Tom Mann did this back in the 80's on his crankbaits and the pogoshad. Nothing new as far as I am concerned. Just some hype to jack up the price of a bait that is mass produced.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 10:38 AM
They do make clothing out of fish skins.(Iceland) It's cured, tanned and then treated.
I would think that as long as it is dry and free from oils it would work.
I also think that this is just a ploy to catch the fishermen. I'm sure the cost will be very high compared to the rest of their products; and they are high enough. I'm also sure that the fish don't give a darn that it has a squid skin wrapped around it.
To me this is nothing more than an pricey novelty.
Just my 2 cents.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 12:32 PM
I just thought it was kind of a cool idea. And blackjack, it is real squid skin. I don't know how they seal it. It looks from the pictures that maybe they stretch the skin across the lure and let it sit till it dries. I also read that they lightly dye the squid skin with coffee to bring out the natural patterns. I thought someone here might be interested enough to give it a try.
I'm not going to go out and buy any. It adds about $5 to the price of the lure, and I'm not paying $20 for a lure unless its the costs incurred in me making one. Anyways, just thought it was a novel idea.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 12:39 PM
It is real skin, but there is nothing new about that. I have a Frog Pappy over 50 years old which is a wood Darter-type lure that is covered in real frog skin...and it is in near perfect condition.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 01:27 PM
Real skin on lures isn't new at all. A company called Eger Bait Company made a lure covered in real frog skin back in the 1930's. They were issued a patent for the process in 1937. They also made frog skin covered lures for Shakespeare.
It's cool to see how many "new" ideas were done many years ago using the materials that were available at the time. For example: the Shakespeare "Evolution bait". It features a minnow shaped rubber body that looks similar to the soft plastics of today. It came out in 1902 !
I enjoy studying old lures and am amazed at how ingenious some of the designs were; and I have seen a few post on this board that everything has been done before, don't believe it! I have come up with several designs that I can find no evidence of having ever been done before. It just takes a goal, dilligence, the ability to accept your failures and learn from them, and most importantly, thinking "outside the box".
Keep pluggin' !
Posted 27 September 2007 - 01:42 PM
Sorry, you'll have to excuse a young whipper-snapper who isn't up to date on his tackle history. I was mainly posting this as an idea for lure builders here to try, not as a plug for Lucky Craft. Personally I think their stuff is way too expensive.
I just can't understand why you guys aren't chomping at the bit to get some squid skin to stretch around your lures and try this yourself? I'm sure it would smell wonderful while you were waiting for it to dry.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 03:09 PM
While it's a neat idea, I don't think many folks are wanting to do it because from the pictures you posted, I've seen hammer mechanics (first class one's, too) make lures that look just as good as these. Hell, there's a few guys here who can paint that well.
That and the skin doesn't really add anything to the lure, fish-catching wise.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 04:12 PM
i've got to agree with dampeoples, i don't see the point,covering it in resin and painting it would offer no advantage as far as i can see in terms of fish catching,angler catching that may be a different matter
Posted 27 September 2007 - 04:53 PM
I just find the responses to this interesting. I have a sneaking suspicion that if I or better yet one of the more recognizable luremakers here like Nathan Bettencourt had presented a lure wrapped in squid skin, or halfbeak skin in the case of the bluish lure on the bottom of the second picture, that the responses would be a lot different: "wow, that's cool", "that natural scale pattern is amazing", etc.
I disagree that it doesn't add anything to the lure. I think it adds a realism that just can't be imitated by paint because it is a natural material that is providing coloration, depth, and random patterning. I have tremendous respect for the incredibly talented artists here, but I don't think anyone can match that aspect of these lures purely with paint (you really have to see these lures in person; a camera doesn't do them justice).
Will the real skin make a huge difference in fish catching ability? No, probably not. But why do so many anglers want ultra-realisitic paint jobs on lures? I think it is because on those days when the fish are looking, but not biting, that extra bit of realism can be what finally makes the fish take your lure. In those cases I think the real skin could be that x-factor.
Okay, enough of my whining, ranting because people didn't think this was as cool as I thought.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 06:17 PM
I thought it was pretty interesting also. Lucky Craft lures are hot right now no matter what anybody says....the Stacey King and the Staysee 90 are two of the hottest lures going. There are some pretty bold statements here denouncing a company that has been kicking ass for a long time.... Yes, they are trying to sell lures, does this skin thing work....who knows, interesting none the less.... The fact that companies have tried this before even puts more merit in it as far as I am concerned...."It's called Marketing".....Hello.....Sure, there are a lot of good builders on this site, but I don't think any of them are doing as well as Lucky Craft....trust me.
Smokey you can't be afraid of making a statement here. There are many opinionated people on this site, but I couldn't sit here and agree with them on this.....
Posted 27 September 2007 - 07:30 PM
I thought the lures looked interesting, OK for one or two show lures. But producing large numbers could prove to be a problem. I would sooner see them little fishies swimming around and growing into big fishies or at least contributing to another fishies growth.
Count Draculure, great reply, so true. There is a ton of stuff out there, waiting to be discovered.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 07:45 PM
That's the other thing I thought was cool. At least according to an article on ESPN.com, Lucky Craft is getting the skin for their lures from sushi restaraunts! So they aren't even harvesting fish to do it, they are recycling scraps that would normally be thrown away.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 07:46 PM
I don't think I nor anyone else is denouncing LC baits. I have a whole box of them that I throw when that is what the fish are eating. I don't think there are any builders who frequent this site that are doing as well as LC or even try to compete with them. The whole issue is marketing hype remotely similar to Strike King's Sexy Shad. Joe Pro the professional says he killed the fish on X bait Joe Blow the average fisherman says I need that bait because it will help me catch fish like Joe Pro. Same thing goes for cost analysis, some special new process that noone is doing right now, well, mark up the price. As long as the major players in the business keep doing what they are doing there will be a place like this and builders like us carving out our own little niche
Posted 27 September 2007 - 07:57 PM
I agree with you blackjack, I was just trying to defend Smokey, because it seemed everybody jumped on him for just mentioning it.... New members should be able to start threads without getting chastised. Maybe I took it wrong.....
Posted 27 September 2007 - 08:11 PM
Just a gimick? Something to make them seem different from the growing competition in high quality finishes? The baits are obviously painted after the skin is applied with net scale on the back, shading, red gills, etc. Looks very nice but I'd bet LC could do just as nice a job with paint if they wanted. Wonder how the finish will last on such an expensive bait. LC's aren't noted for finish durability! But that hasn't stopped me from buying a bunch
Posted 27 September 2007 - 08:15 PM
I'm just really confused...I just really liked the way they looked, better than the standard LC finishes IMHO, and thought I'd share the technique here because I was under the impression people liked new and/or different ways to get good looking finishes on their lures. Best way to learn is to pay attention to what others are doing, and if what they are doing works, take it and try to improve on it. Anyways, I don't take anything personally on forums like this, and I hope I didn't offend anyone with what I said. Maybe in a couple months I'll have my own "real skin" lure to show you guys. I just hope it doesn't stink up my garage too bad while the skin is drying out.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 08:47 PM
I hope you didn't think that I was trying to discourage you by pointing out that the idea of a real skin lure isn't new. It just seemed to me that if such a finish made for a significantly better producing lure, other companies would have produced some in the 70 years since Eder tried it. Granted, the Eders are frog skinned and and not realistically shaped. I think the LC's are beautiful, but I'm not sure that it would out-perform a nicely painted lure.
That being said; I think if the idea intrigues you, you should by all means try it yourself. Who knows, you may discover a way to produce real skin lures faster and cheaper than using paint!
Best of luck to you
Posted 27 September 2007 - 09:57 PM
(I love quoting myself...) Count D-Lure, Nor was I trying to poop on his party when I mentioned the above about the Frog Pappy, (made by Eger Bait Company) over 50 years ago.
Posted 27 September 2007 - 10:05 PM
SmokeyJ, it was a great post, it got a good discussion going, pro's, con's etc. That is what this site is about, searching for new ideas, re-evaluating old ideas.
Yes, sometimes new users can get stepped on, I know I was. In fact you don't need to be a new user for that to happen. Nothing wrong with a healthy, heated discussion occasionally. There are a lot of good members to pull us back if it gets out of hand. It just appears like new users get it because they often bring something fresh to the table. This is a good thing, bring it on Smokey.