Did anyone else see the post that Danyelle Campbell made about photoshopping stallions? As someone who does not live in a place where I get to see a bunch of the top stallions, I wish someone would have actually named names if they had evidence of that happening. How are people who don't get to see them in person supposed to know? 

It was very nice to see many stallion owners post different shots of their stallions doing different things outside of their poster pictures though. 

I saw a share of the post. I wonder if she meant filters.

I appreciate Danyelle bringing this to light. 
There are photos of several popular studs that have the same style of "manipulation" whether it be by filter and/ or photoshop. These are nice studs that have had features "enhanced" , along with lighting filters and different angles. Not sure why someone thinks this way that making a horse look like he's been blown up with air is desirable. The technique is so consistent that this person's pictures pretty much look like the same horse, just body color and background have changed. Granted, some horses are legit, much stouter than others but these pictures are over the top, blatantly enhanced.....nobody wins on this deal.

I missed the post.. Would someone mind sharing?

I'm sure I know which photographer you are talking about, though I didn't see the post.  The other part is you dont see feet in photos.  I know of a few "top" stallions that are on significant wedges. But you would never know, unless you happen upon them at a show or something. 

If you are going to breed to something... please go see the horse in person. 

This is what the post said;

"Here’s a popular opinion that is still certain to ruffle some feathers. I guess I drew the short straw and got nominated to make the post? I cannot begin to fathom why my friends would think I should be the messenger ??

Stallion owners: When getting professional pictures done of your stallion, remember you are selling an image along with bloodlines and possibly performance. But do not forget you are selling an IMAGE! One that should show your horse not only in his best light, but also a realistic one. Some stallions are older and proven to the point nobody cares what they look like. But most are not. I want to see how this horse is balanced, how his shoulder ties in, where is his tail set, how strong is his gaskin along with many other things. All of these are MAJOR factors for me when choosing a stallion and i cannot see any of them when he has been photoshopped. They also play a key role in the athletic ability your future foal will have.

There is an industry standard for a stance a horse should have for a profile picture. There’s a reason for this. It shows the horse’s truest conformation for your consideration. If you are unaware of this, do your homework so you know what to expect of your photographer. If you cannot afford a professional photographer, study up so you can can take them properly yourself.

I have zero desire to breed to a stallion that doesn’t show these things. In addition, i will NOT Breed to a stallion that has been misrepresented and photoshopped.

Show us what your stallion really is. Odds are, we will like the real version better anyways. Save the catfishing for Tinder or whatever these kids are partaking in these days."

Photo (Dash Ta Fame) is for reference only of what a stallion photo should look like. And for the record, that’s how he looked in person.

No Filter or Photoshop Needed

Messed up what I typed---It says, NO FILTER OR PHOTOSHOP NEEDED. LOL

Thanks for sharing! I agree, wish there were some names in there so I could go look as well. 

She is just how she looks in the pasture. Not photoshopped 

How is she bred?  She super nice looking.

Pretty Miss Crystal  is her papered name. 

She is 16 hands and 1,480 lbs on the Elevator scales. 

We use her for cattle work. 

She is bred to Fast and Famous Jeans for a end of June baby. Our first one in 20 years. 

Photographers don't have to use Photoshop to change a horses appearance

Their distance from the horse, the lens used and the angle of the lens can really enlarge certain

areas of the body, make other areas look smaller, make a horse appear to have longer legs, etc

Light can bring the what they want enhanced , shadows an help hide faults

True. This photographer went way beyond what you mention, it's blatantly obvious. I think the  first couple of pictures that went out were somewhat believable but when every, single picture came out looking the same, especially when some people knew what the horse looks like in person something needed to be said.

Here I am watching from the sidelines wanting so badly to see which examples are being discussed here. LOL

Agreed. I'm seeing blatant advertising of how great ones horses are but no information on what the original thread is referring to lol. Shameful lol.

One of the stallions that the photographer posted, is actually as good looking in person.  He is nicely built and great to be around at barrel races IMO.  True, that some of the pictures were "too" slick for me, but you are right.  Go and see them in person.  

I watched that debate unfold.  WOW it was interesting.  I got out the popcorn.  I know exactly what studs she was talking about too.  They looked like halter horses not barrel horses.  One even looked like his color changed.  

I wish I knew who y'all were talking about

one thing a photographer should consider is there reputation.  If a client wants you to misrepresent their horse it will eventually hurt you.  People will realize what you are doing and avoid stallions that you photograph when they can not see the horse in person , and like dominoes the stallion owners will not want you as their stud will now be suspect 

it amazes me; the lack of foresight 

This post has been viewed 2165 times.  It looks like we're not the only ones that would like to know.