Anybody use Dr. Depth?

[Hoop Goobner]

I've been kicking the idea of purchasing Dr. Depth with the bottom hardness option for several months now.  Does anybody use this on here?  If so, any positives/negatives?  Is it easy to use for someone who's just average in computer skills?

Most of the lakes I fish do not have any kind of map available.  It's all in my head, but I would love to get a physical map of these lake bottoms.  It seems a little expensive to me, so I don't want this to be just another "dang, that sure was a waste of good money" purchases. 

[BassBUFF]

Looks interesting. I've never seen that program before.

[Bassinkorea]

When Coldfront sees this he will be able to give you a few ideas and pointers. I have just purchased the Dr. Depth basic (without the bottom hardness option) but I have not yet been able to try it out due to hard water.
Hopefully soon I'll be able to start making my own maps, as Korea has NOTHING that shows any kind of contours, structure or depths.

I have only heard great things about this program.

[Fishton]

DrDepth is a fantastic fishing tool:-

[MaineSkeeter]

I would be interested in hearing from someone that has used it in the US.  How acurate it the program and how long has it been around?

[coldfront]

Hoop:  the program has been around a while...and it's continually being upgraded by it's developer, Per Pelin.  Smart guy.  Waaaaayyy smarter than me...but then most folks are...

it is a pretty user friendly program for folks who take time to sit down and learn some of the basics...and have the gumption to refer to the small instruction manual which also has 'examples'...

Accuracy?  this thing is as accurate as your GPS coordinates allow it to be.  How well does it portray the bottom of the lake?  again, that will be dependent upon how you go about collecting the data...  more data points/area (saturation) the better it gets...

I routinely survey my local small lakes but limit my running speed to 4mph so as to get a 'ping' about every 10 feet or so...and then I make sure I cover the lake 'well'...

when you do those things, the software puts the three data points:
X:  Lattitude
Y:  Longitude
Z:  Depth

right where they're supposed to be...and then also 'interpolates' between them...

for some good insight into the program, Doc Sampson has some excellent stuff over at www.hightechfishing.com...Bruce (doc) has some excellent instructional videos covering use of sonar...and some excellent tips on DrDepth...

While I don't have a lot of desire to chase walleye...I will say this:  those walleye guys are about as good as it gets with sonar...and Doc is at the head of the class...


Bounce around over there for a bit...see if a lot of your questions dont' get answered...(sorry UB to direct someone over to a different site)...


Here's a map I put together on a local watershed lake (not completed as there were folks fishing in the 'blank' area)...this was done with DrDepth and overlaid on a google earth map/image...not perfect...and I'm still working on some concepts...



now, one thing to keep in mind about this lake:  it's older..and there are really no remaining creek channel cuts on this thing...it's pretty much a smooth bottom anymore...there are some key 'structures' on this (not to be confused with cover) lake however...and based on the 9 hours I spent surveying this lake...I found some stuff that is going to make a difference...   it shows up on this map a bit...but isn't overly 'obvious'...but then again, in a lake like this...it can well be the 6" rise/depth change that holds the fish...



I can't tell you if this will be worth it to you...I'd say that this approach probably means more to folks who intend to find offshore opportunities...if you are all about running the bank...not sure it'll be worth as much to you...

On the other hand...it can help really identify a lake's 'layout' and help clarify the logic behind why fish are in certain places...and what their 'migration' paths would tend to be...

Not a direct answer Maine...but I suspect it's like a guitar...we can all pick one up and play...but not all of us will be able to play it like Chet Akins, Randy Rhodes...Eddie Van Halen...

There are some things that I find limiting in the program:  it only has 10 depth changes in the programming as far as I can determine...so when I want to make a map of a lake with a 35 foot max depth...and might want to run 1-ft contours...like this one


then I have 'issues'...but I will say this:  the software allows a guy to download his sonar data, and convert/add waypoints to a custom map that can them be loaded/shown ON your very own sonar unit...

but rather than complain about it...I've found some creative ways around the situation that 'work' for me...

[mfo]

Coldfront I just noticed you r from omaha ,  me to, and burchard is our first tourney of the yr. I am not really crazy about the lake though.




mark

[Hoop Goobner]

"On the other hand...it can help really identify a lake's 'layout' and help clarify the logic behind why fish are in certain places...and what their 'migration' paths would tend to be..."

This is what I wanted to hear.  Every year my partner and I argue about how certain underwater islands lie, sunken road beds, etc.  We both have totally different ideas about the layout.  I consider myself a deep water guy 1st, banks 2nd.  It gives you a huge advantage if you can find and effectively fish water that appears to be in the middle of nowhere. 

One of the lakes I fish has a large amount of stumps, and sometimes we accidentally run into unexpected stump fields.  Say the stumps are all 1 to 2 foot high, and I have the software set to 1 foot contours.  Would it show these stumps (as bumps I assume).

I have an Lowrance HDS, but I don't have the structure scan so I know that will limit me somewhat.

Thanks for the input coldfront.  Aren't you the guy I bought the Shimano reel from?  If so, I'm looking for another one.  Unfortunately, the for sale threads have disappeared and I don't particularly like the new for sale section.

[coldfront]

Hoop,
it's a neat tool...and one that's great for some of the stuff you talked about.

the maps I put together on here were actually 'surveyed' with what Lowrance calls 'legacy' technology:  good old 16-level grayscale units (LCx-17 and LMS-480m) ... I also used a GPS 'puck' that I feel is critical to place as close to the transducer as possible (vertically speaking)...

what I find with many of the commercially available maps:  they're a long way from 'good' and once you enter into this world, you'll never look at them as 'that' valuable again...when you run your water, you'll see stuff that never makes the 'commercial maps'...and other stuff that's just plain wrong...  you'll do this routinely.

as for the reel you got from me...I'm assuming it met your expectations?  I felt like for a 10 year old reel, it was in excellent condition...

Drop me a PM on the reels...have 3 left...if you want to talk further about it...

[Hoop Goobner]

You bring up an interesting topic.  GPS pucks.  Like mentioned above, I consider myself a deep water specialist (8 to 20 ft deep), and on some lakes I have literally 100's of GPS waypoints for hidden structure/cover.  When a small stump in 15' of water on the end of a point is a guarantee if you can get your bait in it, a good GPS waypoint is critical.  Nothing worse than wandering around because you're GPS got you close, but not close enough (and you're battling wind, etc.). 

I've done a good bit of GPS research, but I'm still by no means an expert.  I have found that if you want pinpoint accuracy, then you gotta spend about 5 grand on one of those surveyors GPS.  Since I won't be doing that... I've found that one of the most important things is finding out how often the GPS "pings" satellites.  Refresh rate, I guess is what it would be called?  It's frustrating when you're close to your target, you slow down, and suddenly your GPS has no idea which direction to tell you to go.  Unfortunately, most GPS manufacturers don't publish this info.  They just say "high power GPS antennae".  Well so what does that mean? 

I guess my question is... does the GPS puck make a big difference as far as accuracy and power?  I get really frustrated when it comes to GPS technology.  I'm kind of a perfectionist, and I like having the best.  But... I'm "family poor", meaning it's hard to justify spending big money when I have 3 kids, and all the financial needs that come with that.  So if I'm going to spend a couple hundred bucks, I want to be sure about my purchase prior to buying.

Oh yeah, very satisfied with the reel.  I'll send a pm

[coldfront]

I guess my question is... does the GPS puck make a big difference as far as accuracy and power?  I get really frustrated when it comes to GPS technology.  I'm kind of a perfectionist, and I like having the best.  But... I'm "family poor", meaning it's hard to justify spending big money when I have 3 kids, and all the financial needs that come with that.  So if I'm going to spend a couple hundred bucks, I want to be sure about my purchase prior to buying.

for me, yes, the Puck makes a huge difference.  Keep in mind that I made sure to put the puck on the transom right 'over' where I have the transducer.  this way, when it show the bottom, the puck is right over the object/structure...DIRECTLY over it...not offset by 4-5 feet like it would be if it were on the console.

the 'new' set up I'm working with is HDS on the console...but even though there is an internal antennae IN the HDS, I have it set to read lat/long from the puck...which once again is right over the transducer (aluminum boat, transom mounted 'ducer)...  getting a new GPS for the bow this spring...it'll be another HDS but in this case, I'll use the internal 'ducer and network the units.

So, when the 'rear unit' says that a waypoint is at X:Y...when I use the front 'antenna/'ducer combo it'll still take me to the same X:Y and any potential 'offset' from the boat won't confound the issue and contribute to error.


I don't have the $$$ to spend on Trimble antennas...but have seen the new LGC-4000 with it's 5x/sec update/ping rate as a BIG improvement over the older LGC-2000 I used to run...and frankly am very happy with it.


Lots of stuff going on here...the key is that there are 'methods' to improve accuracy of GPS units...the most important of which I still believe is getting the 'antenna receiving point' as close to 'directly over/aligned' with the transducer as possible...

[Hoop Goobner]

I have an HDS5 in the bow, but both me and my partner find it easier to use a hand held GPS.  Guess we're both getting too old to bend over all the time to mess with the HDS, lol.  If I really believed the accuracy was that much better though, I'd use the HDS's GPS for sure. 

I get what you're saying about puck placement, and you told me what I've been wanting to hear about pucks - huge difference. 

Now it's decision time:  Buy the antenna and utilize the HDS on the bow, or find a very good hand held.  And finding a very good hand held doesn't look like an easy task. 

[Fishton]

There are some things that I find limiting in the program:  it only has 10 depth changes in the programming as far as I can determine...so when I want to make a map of a lake with a 35 foot max depth...and might want to run 1-ft contours...

You can set these contours as 'close' or 'far' apart as you want by changing the depth limit in the program, regardless of what the actual depth is.

For example:-
1. For a very 'coarse' map use full depth range.
2. For a 'medium' map use 0- 30ft (regardless of actual depth, even if 200 - 600ft)
3. For a 'fine' map use 0 - 18ft (this will give you a contour for every 1-2 ft in depth change)
4. And for very large shallow flats use 0 - 10ft, or even less.

[Bassinkorea]

All great information in this thread. I can't wait for soft water to start using my Dr Depth program.

[Hoop Goobner]

There's ice in Korea?  Man, I gotta get out of PA more often.  I thought Korea was tropical.  Wait, maybe I'm mixing Korea up with the Philippines.  I need a lesson in world geography. 

[Bassinkorea]

There's ice in Korea?  Man, I gotta get out of PA more often.  I thought Korea was tropical.  Wait, maybe I'm mixing Korea up with the Philippines.  I need a lesson in world geography.

There sure is ice over here. Up North near Seoul the ice is THICK, enough to walk on, but where I live on the Southern coast the ice is only a thin layer.

[coldfront]

Coldfront I just noticed you r from omaha ,  me to, and burchard is our first tourney of the yr. I am not really crazy about the lake though.




mark

mark, those fish can be about anywhere in that lake...where it's easiest to find them is not always where the bigger girls are hanging out...

we can talk more via pM on burchard if you wish...but I've never won a tx there either...come in second a couple times...

one of my best days fishing was on that lake in april...caught 6 fish...all between 19.5 and 21 inches in length...slow rolling a 3/8 oz white spinnerbait...well, one did come on a jig...

[Fishton]

Coldfront - Just got the news today:-

"Hi!

new stuff: When creating (depth) image maps there is now an option to
include 'Minor' contours.
These will appear as thinner lines than the old style, and will not have
a label. You set the number
of minor lines between the old ones, and you can choose if you want
these everywhere or just in
a particular range.
Example: You have 50 m(ft) deep lake. Set the normal depth range to 0-50
- this will give basic
contours at 5m(ft) spacing on a contour map. To get minor contours every
m(ft) check
minor contours (in the map generator) and select '4' - there will now be
4 minor contours
between the major ones. If you only want 1m(ft) contours down to
10m(ft), just set the minor range
to 0-10.

regards
Per"

[coldfront]

thanks Fishton!  Per is an extremely responsive developer and I greatly appreciate his efforts and the product...