# Heh. Another one for Diddly.



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

Yes. I know. Its my third time posting in this area about diddly's confirmation. But the first time was kind of in a rush and the second time was when I wanted to know about his gaskins. Now I've got pictures o him without tack, and he's fattened up a little bit. He still needs to be fatter, but he's getting there. Sorry that he's not standing completely square 










One of his front legs:









Another front one:



























Full, critique if possible please!


----------



## Tryst (Feb 8, 2012)

Unfortunately none of these photos allow for a good critique. He needs his head up, as grazing and standing with his legs like that changes all of his angles.


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

OK, I'll rush outside and try and get one now


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

Could you get someone to hold his head, and do proper, squared up photos, on hard ground , no grass?


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

OK got two!!


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

I resized the first one, but unfortunately it went fuzzy  Maybe you'll be able to make something out though.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

Still not square on . You have to photo from perfectly perpendicular to the middle of the horse and with camera angle perfectly horizontal , not angled downward. You may have to crouch a littl to do this,

The horse appear Cow hocked to me.


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

That's sadly as still as i can get him. He will insist on moving about all over the place.


----------



## barrelbeginner (Jan 31, 2012)

Is his back left hoof clubbed?


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

No, I don't think it is. All his feet look the same, and I had the farrier out 2 weeks ago and he did his feet. He said he had a lovely round shape to his feet! But its definitely not clubbed. I think its the way he's standing or the camera angle


----------



## Tryst (Feb 8, 2012)

Sadly the new photos really aren't very good either  So my assessment from these photos is cute face, pretty color. If you want a real conformation critique you need to get real photos, straight on profile, not at an angle, horse standing balanced and square.

I don't see cow hocked.


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

OK thank you! Diddly is very fidgety, and just as you have him square, and you are able to snap a photo he'll either walk forwards, backwards, or turn his head to the camera! *sigh*. 
I'll try for a few more, but it's pouring with rain today


----------



## rhosroyalvelvet (Sep 5, 2013)

Nonsense! Im no expert but you can see conformation well enough to critique from these pics if you have any sort of an eye. You dont need a horse square to get a rough idea of the conformation In fact out showing judges often out showing judges prefer them not square they ask for the 2 legs nearest them to be closer together than the 2 further away legs so that they can see all four legs. I feel that even though the conformation turitol (sorry for spelling :/ ) even though its perfectly good and all that is just not the way conformation was meant to be judged. How did they tell if a horse had good conformation or not before computors were invented? They studied the structor of a horses body they found out what parts did what and what shape they should be to be used to there full potential. They combined that knowledge with what shapes were pleasing to the eye and thats how they judged conformation. They used there knowledge and thats how they judged conformation. Now im no expert i know and corect me on any mistakes but this is what i see in this horse...
rite my critique... His back is very straight, flat and high think he has a slight roach back (but not sure), he could have more bone, his whole hind end is very weak ( to mee), his shoulder looks strong but could have a better angle (for movement ), hes got a good lenght of reign (neck lenght) and know i love face but not especially from d side (but im very picky and love pony heads but he is a horse so i need to tune in to their type of head) like his colour and his markings but u should get some copper for his feed and he will richen so much ( i tink)  i also wonder if once his back is done it may help him improve his back and hind end but dont count on it. 
now all of that may be wrong as im just a learner but thats what i can see looking at those pics even though he may not be square and i did it all just by using my limited knowledge of whats right and whats wrong.


----------



## rhosroyalvelvet (Sep 5, 2013)

Here this link give informationon how to judge conformation with out using paint on your computor...
Redirecting

Read through this and you should be able to give a rough critique on a horse even if its not perfectly square


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

Could you possibly at least tell me if you think his backs alright? 
Any roach-iness or what not:


----------



## Tryst (Feb 8, 2012)

rhosroyalvelvet said:


> How did they tell if a horse had good conformation or not before computors were invented? They studied the structor of a horses body they found out what parts did what and what shape they should be to be used to there full potential. They combined that knowledge with what shapes were pleasing to the eye and thats how they judged conformation. They used there knowledge and thats how they judged conformation.


 The way that they used to judge horses (before computers and the internet) was in the flesh! They saw them in real life, saw them move, how they used themselves, how the angles came together to create the whole. They didn't have a few still photos to assess a horse from, and certainly in the flash is still a better way to judge conformation. Always better to see the real thing! Those of us that have looked at a lot of horses have seen horses that move better than their structure looks like it should allow and the opposite, horses that standing still look very good, but don't move or use themselves as expected. Yes, there are things that can be told from these photos, however camera angle may be distorting them. A shoulder can look too upright when the horse is pointed toward the camera, but actually be decently laid back when a photo is taken at the correct angle, for example. A horse can stand cow hocked in one photo, but that not be its normal stance. A yes, a critique CAN be made from poor quality photos, and some of it might even be accurate, but just as much may be inaccurate because of angle, camera distortion or the way that a horse is standing at that particular moment. I guarantee no magazine would use a photo like one of these for its conformation critique section because too many things are vague or difficult to gauge due to the angle of the photo and leaves the critiquer only the ability to guess about them. So in the case that we don't have the real horse, in the flesh, a "good" conformation photo, where the horse is set parallel to the camera and fairly square leaves us with the least amount of guessing.


----------



## Tryst (Feb 8, 2012)

CandyCanes said:


> Could you possibly at least tell me if you think his backs alright?
> Any roach-iness or what not:


His back looks slightly roached, but not severe, and other than saddle fitting, which may be difficult, it should not hinder him for most uses.

Edit - In the photo where he doesn't have his head turned it does not look roached... So I am not sure if he just had his muscles tight when he turned his head or if the roach is 'real'.


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

We are getting the back man out very soon, but I just wanted an opinion on whether you thought it was roached. 
Thank you Tryst, and again, super sorry for the appalling pictures. Maybe some day we'll win a photo shoot!


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

Btw: I heard light boned hovering around in this thread, can't remember whoo said it, but may I ask a question?
Well Diddly has 8 eight inch bone (20.32 cm) and he is 16.1hh at the wither (high wither though) He is 3/4 TB, 1/4 Irish Draught. He is 15.3hh in the middle of his back. 
Would he be considered light boned then?


----------



## rhosroyalvelvet (Sep 5, 2013)

Well as you can see there are more than one picture in this thread. So looking at all the pictures and comparing you can give an educated guess. For example if he looks cow hocked in all or most of the pictures than hes probably cow hocked. As for your point on how a horse can move better than it looks and vice versa if a rider works the horse in a way that gets them really together in their hand and springy off their leg then a horse would move better than it looks. If a horse moves worse than its structure would suggest then its probably out in somewhere and you would need the back man out, it can also be just plain lazy or have a bad rider. No magazine would use photos like these as they would want a pony produced up and stood in a way that any one would be able to see the mistakes pointed out not just people who know what good and bad conformation is. The camera can not change what the horse looks like from its angle. YES a horses stance can make things look waorse or better that they are but again there IS more than one picture in this thread so you CAN make an educated guess. If the camera is at an agle and its bothering you that much you can do something as simple as tilt your head a little to even it out though not the best way it is possible to do and again educated guess from all the other photos. Not one single photo can get the pony/horse looking the same as in flesh I agree but once again with more than one photo you can make an educated guess and that is what you have to do in a conformation critque section is make a guess because you dont know what it will look like in the flesh. So to make a critique with and educated mind look at all the photos and make an educated guess nothing has to be perfect because nothing is perfect and nothing ever will be.


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

Ok...... 
No comment. 
Anyone bar rhosroyalvelvet? 

Just posting this again:
I heard light boned hovering around in this thread, can't remember who said it, but may I ask a question?
Well Diddly has 8 eight inch bone (20.32 cm) and he is 16.1hh at the wither (high wither though) He is 3/4 TB, 1/4 Irish Draught. He is 15.3hh in the middle of his back. 
Would he be considered light boned then?


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

Bump. 
Anyone? ONce my question is answered I'll let the thread sink away.


----------



## Tryst (Feb 8, 2012)

Bone diameter to height is part of it, but also to me is bone diameter to the build. A slim built 16.2 hand grey-hound like TB can look more in proportion than a 14.3 hand super stocky and built like a tank QH with the same bone diameter. I would prefer for him to have more bone, but I don't consider him light boned, personally. Also in the long run, bone density is more important than diameter, however that can't be told by just looking at him.


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

Okey Dokey! Thank you!


----------



## CandyCanes (Jul 1, 2013)

Maybe this picture. All the good ones seem to be tiny for no apparent reason! 
Had to re size a little. 


















Front leg.


----------

