Thread: More pictures taken on the 5th

Rickie,I can,get rid of those interference lines by turning on filters.also those scans at 20+,can go up to 50mph. (Lake was to ruff.lots of boats out playing,just like me)once my boat gets up to,or close to 50,the DI seams to do a better job of reading the bottom than 2d.not sure why tho?

Kosmo, post up a pic of how you have your TD mounted, interested how far under the water it is at the 20 mph.

Originally Posted by Redge

Kosmo, post up a pic of how you have your TD mounted, interested how far under the water it is at the 20 mph.

I don't no redge,I might get hurt trying to get that shot

Sorry montess,I read your post wrong,about the interference lines.I thought u were posting about the 2d intreference u were posting about the si.not sure if I could get much better of a picture,while running at those speeds

Man 20mph!!!! Im washing ut at 8! I lowered it deeper into the water and get an even highe rooster tail from it and it washes out at an even slower speed. Please post pik of your transducer!

Here three more pictures that I took on the fifth.The objects all show on si and di.Do u think my boat went directly over them. (My 2d was set to 83/200[URL=http://s826.photobucket.com/user/kosmo012/media/Mobile%20Uploads/S01629_zpspbxf45oi.png.html][/URL[URL=http://s826.photobucket.com/user/kosmo012/media/Mobile%20Uploads/S01625_zpsaf9vf9mz.png.html][/URL

They were all to the left side of the boat.

I am glad that you are posting these. I am trying to learn how to interpret SI and DI currently so having images that the content is know is a great help. So while I am most likely incorrect in my interpretation of your images I will try for my own education.
I do not think that your boat went directly over the objects. It appears that all of them are slightly to the left of the boat in the water column at the time of image capture. If you went directly over them, they should appear in the water column on both sides of the SI track path. On the right side of the image I do not see any structure or shadows to indicate that the right beam struck and caused a return or had the beam absorbed by anything resembling the returns from the left side of the image.
I could be completely wrong, I am probably completely wrong, but nothing ventured nothing gained.
Dennis