|
|
Post by HokieThea on Jun 17, 2013 15:25:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Jun 17, 2013 16:39:51 GMT -5
I like the second one!
|
|
|
|
Post by jbrooks on Jun 17, 2013 20:36:44 GMT -5
Same here #2 was nicer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Goalie on Jun 18, 2013 7:35:40 GMT -5
I vote for the 2nd one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Smay on Jun 18, 2013 9:43:50 GMT -5
Well, he looks more like a hunter in the second one and the background is better, but I like the first one for his more dressage-like frame! But that's just me!
|
|
|
|
Post by ZenRider on Jun 18, 2013 22:43:43 GMT -5
Um, er, all three!  |
|
|
|
Post by adcooper on Jun 19, 2013 11:36:31 GMT -5
I do like the first shot. He looks very professional! #3 is cool, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Unbound on Jun 19, 2013 11:50:51 GMT -5
#1 & #3. Ask the photographer if they can clone out the horse in the background on #1. They may charge, but it shouldn't take too long for them to do it IF they offer that option.
|
|
|
|
Post by HokieThea on Jun 20, 2013 8:16:09 GMT -5
I ended up ordering the first picture, because I did like the dressage-y look of it. I paid for the ears-forward option, and the photographer deleted the background horse and rider for free!  |
|
|
|
Post by Smay on Jun 20, 2013 9:47:16 GMT -5
Wow great photographer!
|
|
|
|
Post by niaru on Jun 20, 2013 17:46:33 GMT -5
That is a very nice pic! But....
"ear forward option"?!
Next it will be, let's see...."thinner rider option"? "correct leg option" (to correct rider form over fences)? "knees up option" (for horses that hang legs over fences)?
Any other you can think of?
lol
|
|
|
|
Post by HokieThea on Jun 20, 2013 18:02:19 GMT -5
Well, his ears weren't pinned, he just has big old floppers, and since this may the only time I get a fancy-shmancy picture of my boy, I said go for it! And BTW, if they offered a thinner rider option, I would pay many many dollars for a pic of ME and Wilson!
|
|
|
|
Post by niaru on Jun 20, 2013 19:13:41 GMT -5
Well, his ears weren't pinned, he just has big old floppers, and since this may the only time I get a fancy-shmancy picture of my boy, I said go for it! And BTW, if they offered a thinner rider option, I would pay many many dollars for a pic of ME and Wilson! LOL! I think photographers will soon realize there's definitely a much wider market there than the "ears forward option"...  |
|
|
|
Post by Unbound on Jun 23, 2013 12:15:18 GMT -5
Well, his ears weren't pinned, he just has big old floppers, and since this may the only time I get a fancy-shmancy picture of my boy, I said go for it! And BTW, if they offered a thinner rider option, I would pay many many dollars for a pic of ME and Wilson! LOL! I think photographers will soon realize there's definitely a much wider market there than the "ears forward option"... They already do. ;-) You can do so much with Photoshop. I don't particularly agree with all of the changes that CAN be done, but something like ears forward doesn't bother me too much. There are folks that will take a pic of a horse and completely change the conformation (popular in the Arabian world to do this from what I hear through the photographer's grapevine). I don't agree with that at all, but some people do...and that differing opinion is what makes the world go 'round, I suppose! Your photographer did a FANTASTIC job, HokieThea! Great pic!! |
|
|
|
Post by ZenRider on Jun 24, 2013 22:06:09 GMT -5
I kinda liked the original photo. With the ears back in a normal manner he looks like he's really concentrating on his rider. Too bad the photographer at the show I took Zen to didn't have change almost stumble out of the arena into a piaffe.  |
|
