First of all let me say that this is Mark Sneed, I do not hide behind phony names so you will know who is writing this and I am not afraid to say my name. Second of all this might be the most enlightened group of evaluaters I have ever seen or heard, I have been in this business for 30 years and every time I come on one of these forums, I seem to learn a great deal about things that I have never heard. I am certainly not sure that I have the intelegence to join this group, but as my name and work seems to get thrown around here a great deal by people afraid to sign their name, I thought I should say something at this point.
First of all when you start comparing the two pictures, you need to use a little common sense. I was contacted to photo the bull after ABS had been involved in the purchase of him. They wanted to wait a couple of months to re picture him so that he would gain some maturity and weight, as any yearling bull should be expected to do. They felt that would be a much more accurate representation of him than the original picture. Second, I believe Chris Mitchell is one of the best photographers in the business, I love his work, but we take two different styles of photos. Chris gets lower and takes more of an upshot angle than I do and his look a little taller and growthier from that standpoint. I take a little more straight on angle as I believe that shows more volume and capacity, maybe not as much testicle developement as Chris's do though. Neither one is wrong, and neither one is right, just different styles. Chris's photos will also show them to be a little deeper necked from that angle. When Chris took his photo of this bull, he was in a bull sale along with probably 60 other bulls and he got no special treatment. When I photoed the bull he was at Hawkeye, I had hired JR Spears, one of the better clipper/fitters in the business to come in for two days to work on a few bulls to get them washed, clipped and presented properly for the pictures. He was also there to properly feed and hay this bull to get him as full as possible for the picture. Before the bull was photoed by me he was washed, blown out, and though he was not fitted as for a show, the bottoms of his legs were pulled back to accent the bone structure which was done from the back side so that it did not show up in the picture. As for this definition of what you are talking about his hock to pastern set and all, I guess I am not smart enough to understand all of that, all I can tell you is that that is how he was standing and that is what his back leg looked like, and that is about it. Chris did not have the advantage that I did of presentation, as they were working on a large group of bulls with time restraints I am sure. It took about 45 minutes for me to get this picture of this bull to get him angled in the light properly and to the right slope in the pen, Chris probably had ten minutes and I know where he would have been doing the photo work on the bull and it certainly is not as nice a pen to work in as what I had.
You can set and analyze these photos all you want, I don't really care. If you would ask, you are more than welcome to come watch me process these photos anytime you want, but then I guess you would have to lose your disguise and admit who you are and I doubt that is going to happen. It is easy to be brave and bold in your statements when you are hiding like a little girl, huh, maybe you are though, on here there is no way of telling. I really believe you just need to find something to do with your life that might be more worthwhile.
I am not sure there is much more that I can say about this, but if you have any other questions, i would be glad to answer them for you with the ability that I have.
Thanks and have a great day.
Mark