http://www.westpointtb.com/view_enlarge ... page=horse
I am having a hard time deciding if it's just the way he is standing.
Back at the knee?
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
While this colt may be back at the knee, I think it's more likely that he is a victim of poor photography. Not only is he standing on an upgrade, his legs are underneath him--both conditions which place undue stress on the front legs. If he were standing on a flat surface and correctly posed his legs would look much different.
A good example of why it's never a good idea to put too much stock in one photograph. A bad photographer can make a good horse look bad, and a skilled photographer can hide a myriad of conformational sins.
A good example of why it's never a good idea to put too much stock in one photograph. A bad photographer can make a good horse look bad, and a skilled photographer can hide a myriad of conformational sins.
-
wilf
- Breeder's Cup Contender
- Posts: 1882
- Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: Ocala, Florida.
What bothers me is not his legs but the fact that this is a 2yr old by Holy Bull. Man this guy was really honed for the sales!!!! At first glance I thought it was one of the 3yr olds that had been dragged through the triple crown trail backwards, he does not have a spare ounce on him. If he is managed conservatively from now on and let down a little he will probably be a runner. I will enter his name FLASHY BULL in my stable mail to follow his progress. Thanks for the Westpoint access Cree. Regards.
Last edited by wilf on Fri Mar 25, 2005 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Managed conservatively?"
Not too many horsemen practice this anymore. Too many quick bucks to make, either at the 2yo sales, or in the 2 furlong races, or in private sales of quarter horse-like Thoroughbreds.
For a little dose of reality, check out the following link. How many of the horses with the fastest workouts ever developed into sound racehorses:
http://barretts.com/preview/preview.htm
Not too many horsemen practice this anymore. Too many quick bucks to make, either at the 2yo sales, or in the 2 furlong races, or in private sales of quarter horse-like Thoroughbreds.
For a little dose of reality, check out the following link. How many of the horses with the fastest workouts ever developed into sound racehorses:
http://barretts.com/preview/preview.htm
hi Michael
You wrote "While this colt may be back at the knee, I think it's more likely that he is a victim of poor photography." You go on to write "If he were standing on a flat surface and correctly posed his legs would look much different."
Although the colt's legs may not be positioned as you (or I) might have preferred...I believe it's fair to say that the photographer Joe D'Orio is (arguably) quite competent and accomplished (at what he does)...and I expect, tried (to the best of his ability) to diminish whatever flaws the colt has (including the questionable front end that we are focused on). I suggest that D'Orio understood the challenge before him...and placed himself at an angle (I am confident the horse was on flat ground) which would allow himself to capture a photo that would minimize (as much as possible) the appearance of any defects.
I suggest that this is not a case of "poor photography" (as you wrote). I suggest that this is a case of a back-at-the-knee colt that the photographer is trying to present in the best possible way.
As you know...hiding (or minimizing) apparent flaws and /or defects in a conformation photograph (in this case a photo intended for public consumption) can be extremely difficult (if not impossible).
And unless a skilled...experienced...accomplished equine photographer (as Di'Orio arguably is) can position himself (after standing the horse as best-as-possible) to get the angle which might minimize the impression of the flaw(s)/defect(s)...the chances of getting a photo which best represents the horse is nearly impossible.
I believe it's fair to say that some photographers and graphics professionals have enhanced (to varying degrees) what the public may otherwise accept and/or perceive as an unretouched photo. I am confident also that we've seen photos (particularly conformation) of horses (in advertisements) that were retouched by photographers and/or graphics professionals...with the intention of leaving a better (although possibly misleading) perception than an unretouched photo might have.
I suggest that West Point Thoroughbreds' Terry Finley is a bright guy...his right-hand-man (Buzz Chace) has a pretty good eye for a horse...and D'Orio is arguably a very accomplished equine photographer. I expect that the photo is honest...unretouched...and represents the colt in what they believe is the best-light (All Things Considered).
I suggest that Team West Point Thoroughbreds (and photographer D'Orio) would have kept trying until they got it...if they felt a better conformation shot of this particular colt was possible (All Things Considered).
Best to you.
Respectfully
You wrote "While this colt may be back at the knee, I think it's more likely that he is a victim of poor photography." You go on to write "If he were standing on a flat surface and correctly posed his legs would look much different."
Although the colt's legs may not be positioned as you (or I) might have preferred...I believe it's fair to say that the photographer Joe D'Orio is (arguably) quite competent and accomplished (at what he does)...and I expect, tried (to the best of his ability) to diminish whatever flaws the colt has (including the questionable front end that we are focused on). I suggest that D'Orio understood the challenge before him...and placed himself at an angle (I am confident the horse was on flat ground) which would allow himself to capture a photo that would minimize (as much as possible) the appearance of any defects.
I suggest that this is not a case of "poor photography" (as you wrote). I suggest that this is a case of a back-at-the-knee colt that the photographer is trying to present in the best possible way.
As you know...hiding (or minimizing) apparent flaws and /or defects in a conformation photograph (in this case a photo intended for public consumption) can be extremely difficult (if not impossible).
And unless a skilled...experienced...accomplished equine photographer (as Di'Orio arguably is) can position himself (after standing the horse as best-as-possible) to get the angle which might minimize the impression of the flaw(s)/defect(s)...the chances of getting a photo which best represents the horse is nearly impossible.
I believe it's fair to say that some photographers and graphics professionals have enhanced (to varying degrees) what the public may otherwise accept and/or perceive as an unretouched photo. I am confident also that we've seen photos (particularly conformation) of horses (in advertisements) that were retouched by photographers and/or graphics professionals...with the intention of leaving a better (although possibly misleading) perception than an unretouched photo might have.
I suggest that West Point Thoroughbreds' Terry Finley is a bright guy...his right-hand-man (Buzz Chace) has a pretty good eye for a horse...and D'Orio is arguably a very accomplished equine photographer. I expect that the photo is honest...unretouched...and represents the colt in what they believe is the best-light (All Things Considered).
I suggest that Team West Point Thoroughbreds (and photographer D'Orio) would have kept trying until they got it...if they felt a better conformation shot of this particular colt was possible (All Things Considered).
Best to you.
Respectfully
You may be right, but I stand by my observation. I do not believe the colt is standing on level ground, and I don't believe the photographer spend much time posing the colt in the correct stance. He is clearly standing in the camped under position, which accentuates the angulation of the knee. Perhaps the photographer was taking a rushed shot, which would account for his lapse in standing the colt correctly.
I don't know what this colt sold for, and I suppose Chace and Finley might have overlooked a case of back at the knees, but I don't think that is very likely.
In any event, our different interpretations of this photo is a great example of why a lot of credence shouldn't be given to a single shot of any horse. One tweak of a muscle can create an entirely different looking horse.
I don't know what this colt sold for, and I suppose Chace and Finley might have overlooked a case of back at the knees, but I don't think that is very likely.
In any event, our different interpretations of this photo is a great example of why a lot of credence shouldn't be given to a single shot of any horse. One tweak of a muscle can create an entirely different looking horse.
Colt does appear to be standing slightly uphill. Additionally, the photo is taken slightly to the rear of the horse (with the rear closer to the photog), further distorting the length of body and angle of shoulder.
I totally agree with Michael that you cannot take much from one photo, possibly even several photos. I have seen "picture perfect" horses move horribly and less than perfect horses literally float. I imagine this particular photo is less flattering to the horse than it could have been.
While I agree with Michael, I also must admit that this photo does raise questions and concerns I would want to thoroughly investigate, in person, before I would invest one dime. Of course, whether it be investing in the purchase of 1% of a potential racehorse, or deciding which stallion to breed to your mare, you need to do a visual inspection. This is simply another case which supports this premise.
I totally agree with Michael that you cannot take much from one photo, possibly even several photos. I have seen "picture perfect" horses move horribly and less than perfect horses literally float. I imagine this particular photo is less flattering to the horse than it could have been.
While I agree with Michael, I also must admit that this photo does raise questions and concerns I would want to thoroughly investigate, in person, before I would invest one dime. Of course, whether it be investing in the purchase of 1% of a potential racehorse, or deciding which stallion to breed to your mare, you need to do a visual inspection. This is simply another case which supports this premise.
-
brooke
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 480
- Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 5:53 pm
- Location: Tennessee/Alabama boarder
- Contact:
this probably wouldnt make a difference but after looking at the pic and the angle i dont think the back ground is really where the horse is, notice the feet and almost floating on the pavement and very sharp looking in contrast to the pavement. anyone think this?
There will be discouraging times. But a life without horses;
Now that's discouraging.
Now that's discouraging.
hi KAL...hi Michael
Respectfully...I sense that you have rarely (if ever) been involved at conformation photo-shoots.
Having attended the proceedings (up close and personal) on many many many occasions (possibly an abacus could help)...I can assure you that I have never seen an accomplished equine photographer (including Joe D'Orio) look for anything but level ground to stand their subject on for a conformation photo. Arguably photographers (at least the accomplished ones) are aware of exactly what the client is attempting to accomplish...and I suggest that D'Orio understood clearly the challenge before him.
If you will refer to the 2005 TBred Times Stallion Directory you can glance at many conformation photos...by many photographers. I'll reference a couple.
Joy Gilbert (for example) seems to take a high percentage of photos from a spot that is perpendicular (or straight-in) to the center of the horse...and in Gilbert's photos, there is often less contrast than some may prefer (with little or no color correction to help distinguish a white pastern and/or foot from a very light background)...but the photos are certainly adequate and professional (examples: Medaglia D'Oro and Doneraile Court). In other Gilbert photos you'll see horses standing in the grass versus on a hard surface (examples: Aldebaran and Proud Citizen) but still perpendicular shots...very little or no angles. Simply straight-in.
And in the photo of Almostashar, Gilbert cannot minimize the very straight (or as some may describe it...back-at-the-knee) look of Almostashar's front-left leg that a perpendicular...straight-in shot produced. Arguably a shot from more of an angle (as I will further describe below that some photographers often use) might have benefitted the perception of the subject stallion.
Renowned (and published) photographer Barbara Livingston seemed to have Thunderello standing quite well for a straight-in shot, but an angle shot where the stallion could have cocked his head a bit more (ala photographers Louise Reinagel and Joe D'Orio) might have produced a more attractive result. And obviously photographer Livingston was not able to capture Say Florida Sandy in a fashion which might enhance his look. As Michael pointed out...setting a horse's legs can be extremely important when attempting to get a quality photograph...but sometimes the horse will not cooperate...and sometimes the person standing the horse simply cannot make-it-happen etc etc etc. There are a myriad of potential obstacles to deal with and/or overcome when attempting to capture a quality representative conformation photograph of a horse.
The very accomplished photographer Louise Reinagel usually takes a conformation photo from an angle (versus the Joy Gilbert straight-in perpendicular-to-the-horse photo). Reinagel's style is usually more the 3/4 angle shot slightly from the rear of the subject. And if you notice...many of her photos appear to be at an angle similar to the one that D'Orio took (of the West Point Thoroughbreds horse). Reinagel looks for level ground...but often her subjects appear to be standing "slightly uphill" (as KAL describes) because the angle that she often captures her subjects at can create that perception. A look at a few Reinagel photos (she uses her name and/or the letter "R" in photocredits) may clarify my premise.
Take a look...the "angle" that I reference and the "slightly uphill" look (as KAL calls it) should be quite clear in the majority of Reinagel photos...notice...rear feet appear to be set lower than the front ones and you may agree that a "slightly uphill" perception is present although the stallions are on level ground (examples: Montbrook...who by the way is back-at-the-knee but negligible at this photo angle), Seacliff (check-out his front left knee)...Classic Cat (over-at-the-knee)...Lost Soldier (a touch over at the knee) etc etc etc. Reinagel's style is often to use what some refer to as the 3/4 shot, and hopefully minimize front-end flaws (that a straight-in shot seems to draw more attention to or magnify)...while at the same time creating a perception of a deeper set of quarters. She can do a straight-in more perpendicular shot also (as photographer Joy Gilbert usually does). I sense that often Reinagel uses a more "straight-in" perpendicular shot when a horse is very good conformationally and has (arguably) nothing to hide (example: Full Mandate).
Then there's the maestro of the conformation-shot as we know it today...the legendary Tony Leonard. Tony can take a perpendicular straight-in shot (ala Gilbert)...or take the shot at more of an angle (ala Reinagel) depending on the circumstances (examples: he took Housebuster in 1993 at a bit of an angle [with that "slightly uphill" look...notice where the hind feet are set as compared to the front feet] and chose to stand him in the grass possibly to minimize attention to the angles of his pasterns)...he took Best of Luck on the asphalt drive (from an angle also...ala Reinagel and D'Orio) and probably snapped the shot from a very low and toward the rear location...obviously creating that "slightly uphill" perception (once again...as KAL mentioned). Tony can do a straight-in shot also (examples: Forestry...Crafty Friend...Skip Away).
There are hundreds if not thousands of examples...you can flip through the pages of various publications and stallion registers and view for yourselves the different conformation photographs, and often recognize the unique work of some photographers...based on angles...contrasts...styles etc etc etc without benefit of a photo-credit.
One thing that's for sure though...horses rarely cooperate in the process. I've seen horses that will not stand still for more than a split second...yet the skilled photographer (whether Leonard...Reinagel...Gilbert...D'Orio etc etc etc) often get it.
I've seen horses cooperate perfectly when suddenly a gust of wind picks up the mane and blows the tail wildly...and the patient (or even not-so-patient) photographer must re-prepare the horse...and be ready for the "perfect" (and often split-second opportunity) to get the shot. I've seen horses break into a sweat causing photo-shoots to be rescheduled for another day when it's cooler. I've seen mane's taped down (or even weighted down with various office supplies taped to the mane) in hopes of keeping them under control during the photo shoots. I've seen owner's...office staff...farm personnel etc crawling on the ground toward the stallion...or jumping up and down...or waving their hands...or making sucking sounds...or playing whinnying sounds on recorders...in hopes that the horse will prick his ears up. I've seen the photographers draw-in a fuller tail on the photograph...I've seen cracks and splits (and other anatomical flaws) corrected graphically...etc etc etc.
I guess that the point I'm trying to make is that getting a photograph that best represents the subject horse...is often a difficult task (and that may be an understatement)...time consuming...frustrating...etc etc etc. Conversely...I've seen the "perfect" photo captured within the first minute or so...of a stallion that is usually cantankerous and uncooperative.
I suggest...once again...that All Things Considered...if a better shot could have been taken of the West Point Thoroughbred colt...it would have been.
KAL wrote "I totally agree with Michael that you cannot take much from one photo, possibly even several photos.
I disagree...I believe you can take plenty from a photo (or photos)...especially if you know and understand the skills...style...and possible strategies used by various photographers...and the farms they produce finished products for.
KAL also wrote "I have seen "picture perfect" horses move horribly and less than perfect horses literally float."
I couldn't agree more.
KAL also wrote "I imagine this particular photo is less flattering to the horse than it could have been."
Knowing how particular D'Orio is...I have my doubts that a better photo was possible that day...All Things Considered.
Best to you...always.
Respectfully
Respectfully...I sense that you have rarely (if ever) been involved at conformation photo-shoots.
Having attended the proceedings (up close and personal) on many many many occasions (possibly an abacus could help)...I can assure you that I have never seen an accomplished equine photographer (including Joe D'Orio) look for anything but level ground to stand their subject on for a conformation photo. Arguably photographers (at least the accomplished ones) are aware of exactly what the client is attempting to accomplish...and I suggest that D'Orio understood clearly the challenge before him.
If you will refer to the 2005 TBred Times Stallion Directory you can glance at many conformation photos...by many photographers. I'll reference a couple.
Joy Gilbert (for example) seems to take a high percentage of photos from a spot that is perpendicular (or straight-in) to the center of the horse...and in Gilbert's photos, there is often less contrast than some may prefer (with little or no color correction to help distinguish a white pastern and/or foot from a very light background)...but the photos are certainly adequate and professional (examples: Medaglia D'Oro and Doneraile Court). In other Gilbert photos you'll see horses standing in the grass versus on a hard surface (examples: Aldebaran and Proud Citizen) but still perpendicular shots...very little or no angles. Simply straight-in.
And in the photo of Almostashar, Gilbert cannot minimize the very straight (or as some may describe it...back-at-the-knee) look of Almostashar's front-left leg that a perpendicular...straight-in shot produced. Arguably a shot from more of an angle (as I will further describe below that some photographers often use) might have benefitted the perception of the subject stallion.
Renowned (and published) photographer Barbara Livingston seemed to have Thunderello standing quite well for a straight-in shot, but an angle shot where the stallion could have cocked his head a bit more (ala photographers Louise Reinagel and Joe D'Orio) might have produced a more attractive result. And obviously photographer Livingston was not able to capture Say Florida Sandy in a fashion which might enhance his look. As Michael pointed out...setting a horse's legs can be extremely important when attempting to get a quality photograph...but sometimes the horse will not cooperate...and sometimes the person standing the horse simply cannot make-it-happen etc etc etc. There are a myriad of potential obstacles to deal with and/or overcome when attempting to capture a quality representative conformation photograph of a horse.
The very accomplished photographer Louise Reinagel usually takes a conformation photo from an angle (versus the Joy Gilbert straight-in perpendicular-to-the-horse photo). Reinagel's style is usually more the 3/4 angle shot slightly from the rear of the subject. And if you notice...many of her photos appear to be at an angle similar to the one that D'Orio took (of the West Point Thoroughbreds horse). Reinagel looks for level ground...but often her subjects appear to be standing "slightly uphill" (as KAL describes) because the angle that she often captures her subjects at can create that perception. A look at a few Reinagel photos (she uses her name and/or the letter "R" in photocredits) may clarify my premise.
Take a look...the "angle" that I reference and the "slightly uphill" look (as KAL calls it) should be quite clear in the majority of Reinagel photos...notice...rear feet appear to be set lower than the front ones and you may agree that a "slightly uphill" perception is present although the stallions are on level ground (examples: Montbrook...who by the way is back-at-the-knee but negligible at this photo angle), Seacliff (check-out his front left knee)...Classic Cat (over-at-the-knee)...Lost Soldier (a touch over at the knee) etc etc etc. Reinagel's style is often to use what some refer to as the 3/4 shot, and hopefully minimize front-end flaws (that a straight-in shot seems to draw more attention to or magnify)...while at the same time creating a perception of a deeper set of quarters. She can do a straight-in more perpendicular shot also (as photographer Joy Gilbert usually does). I sense that often Reinagel uses a more "straight-in" perpendicular shot when a horse is very good conformationally and has (arguably) nothing to hide (example: Full Mandate).
Then there's the maestro of the conformation-shot as we know it today...the legendary Tony Leonard. Tony can take a perpendicular straight-in shot (ala Gilbert)...or take the shot at more of an angle (ala Reinagel) depending on the circumstances (examples: he took Housebuster in 1993 at a bit of an angle [with that "slightly uphill" look...notice where the hind feet are set as compared to the front feet] and chose to stand him in the grass possibly to minimize attention to the angles of his pasterns)...he took Best of Luck on the asphalt drive (from an angle also...ala Reinagel and D'Orio) and probably snapped the shot from a very low and toward the rear location...obviously creating that "slightly uphill" perception (once again...as KAL mentioned). Tony can do a straight-in shot also (examples: Forestry...Crafty Friend...Skip Away).
There are hundreds if not thousands of examples...you can flip through the pages of various publications and stallion registers and view for yourselves the different conformation photographs, and often recognize the unique work of some photographers...based on angles...contrasts...styles etc etc etc without benefit of a photo-credit.
One thing that's for sure though...horses rarely cooperate in the process. I've seen horses that will not stand still for more than a split second...yet the skilled photographer (whether Leonard...Reinagel...Gilbert...D'Orio etc etc etc) often get it.
I've seen horses cooperate perfectly when suddenly a gust of wind picks up the mane and blows the tail wildly...and the patient (or even not-so-patient) photographer must re-prepare the horse...and be ready for the "perfect" (and often split-second opportunity) to get the shot. I've seen horses break into a sweat causing photo-shoots to be rescheduled for another day when it's cooler. I've seen mane's taped down (or even weighted down with various office supplies taped to the mane) in hopes of keeping them under control during the photo shoots. I've seen owner's...office staff...farm personnel etc crawling on the ground toward the stallion...or jumping up and down...or waving their hands...or making sucking sounds...or playing whinnying sounds on recorders...in hopes that the horse will prick his ears up. I've seen the photographers draw-in a fuller tail on the photograph...I've seen cracks and splits (and other anatomical flaws) corrected graphically...etc etc etc.
I guess that the point I'm trying to make is that getting a photograph that best represents the subject horse...is often a difficult task (and that may be an understatement)...time consuming...frustrating...etc etc etc. Conversely...I've seen the "perfect" photo captured within the first minute or so...of a stallion that is usually cantankerous and uncooperative.
I suggest...once again...that All Things Considered...if a better shot could have been taken of the West Point Thoroughbred colt...it would have been.
KAL wrote "I totally agree with Michael that you cannot take much from one photo, possibly even several photos.
I disagree...I believe you can take plenty from a photo (or photos)...especially if you know and understand the skills...style...and possible strategies used by various photographers...and the farms they produce finished products for.
KAL also wrote "I have seen "picture perfect" horses move horribly and less than perfect horses literally float."
I couldn't agree more.
KAL also wrote "I imagine this particular photo is less flattering to the horse than it could have been."
Knowing how particular D'Orio is...I have my doubts that a better photo was possible that day...All Things Considered.
Best to you...always.
Respectfully
-
wilf
- Breeder's Cup Contender
- Posts: 1882
- Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: Ocala, Florida.
Jeez FOS thats a lot of language to get through.....you should write a book. I had to step out for a cold one halfway through that last post. Instead of pontificating on the vagaries and intricacies of shooting film < I mean how hard can it be?> I really figured that the easiest way to find out if the horse was back at the knee was to look up the sales results . I can hardly imagine these sharp buyers shelling out big bucks for anything less than a 10 out of 10. It seems that in the past decade that conformation has superceded pedigree in the breezing sales. I liked Crees original post for its simplicity and that it linked up to the various parts of the Westpoint site.Respectfully.
The colt "FLASHY BULL" sold for $205,000 at the February Ocala Calder 2yo sale to Buzz Chace after breezing 1/8 mile in :10.2. He is now being syndicated by West Point for $380,000--$38,000 for a 10% 'unit.'
If this colt is back in the knee more than one person has WAY overpaid for the right to own him when he breaks down.
If this colt is back in the knee more than one person has WAY overpaid for the right to own him when he breaks down.
hi wilf ... hi Michael
Wilf...no pontificating...just the way it is (usually)...when trying to get a good conformation shot. As you might imagine now...the blow-by-blow re: many conformation photo-shoots requires a "cold one" sometimes...so thanks for your patience. How about an ice cold Corona?
Michael wrote "If this colt is back in the knee more than one person has WAY overpaid for the right to own him when he breaks down." Maybe so Michael...but you surprise me...I've seen many very good race horses that are back at the knee (to varying degrees)...haven't you ?
And as KAL wrote..."I have seen "picture perfect" horses move horribly and less than perfect horses literally float." I sense that Wilf has also.
Best to you...always.
Respectfully
Wilf...no pontificating...just the way it is (usually)...when trying to get a good conformation shot. As you might imagine now...the blow-by-blow re: many conformation photo-shoots requires a "cold one" sometimes...so thanks for your patience. How about an ice cold Corona?
Michael wrote "If this colt is back in the knee more than one person has WAY overpaid for the right to own him when he breaks down." Maybe so Michael...but you surprise me...I've seen many very good race horses that are back at the knee (to varying degrees)...haven't you ?
And as KAL wrote..."I have seen "picture perfect" horses move horribly and less than perfect horses literally float." I sense that Wilf has also.
Best to you...always.
Respectfully