Skip to main content

Due to decreasing use over the years, I have decided to disable the forum functionality of the site.

Forums will still be available to view but new posts are no longer allowed.

sooty on bay

The other discussions have gotten so long that I think I'll start a new thread for this. If I still had this mare I'd go take photos that show the sooty more closely but this, to me, is clearly sooty. She had black hairs mixed in with her bay coat -- visually black, anyway. You could still see the clear red bay coat underneath. That's my understanding of the definition of sooty. Sorry the photos don't show it more clearly but it was very obvious in person. Winter coat with sooty: [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/jmpnghorse/Lindsey/Lindseytrot03…] [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/jmpnghorse/Lindsey/Lindseystand2…] clear, summer coat: [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/jmpnghorse/Lindsey/LindseyTrot30…] [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/jmpnghorse/Lindsey/LindseySarahP…]

accphotography Tue, 03/31/2009 - 15:28

Hmmmm. Interesting. I'm on the fence on both. The first mare fits what I consider a red bay, and the darkness being seasonal does implicate sooty. Hmmm. The other one I think *might* be a light brown.

Sara Tue, 03/31/2009 - 15:43

well when there is a definitive test I will send in samples for the second mare and
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/…]
(I consider this dark bay but she is pretty much the same color as the second mare above)

and
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/…]
(I'm on the fence about whether this guy would be considered dark bay or seal)

The only horse I've owned who I would call definitely seal is:
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/…]

accphotography Tue, 03/31/2009 - 15:46

I'm on the fence with the 1st one. 2nd and 3rd definitely fit my mental image for it.

I think at this point it's just sooooo subjective. While there is no doubt the 3rd one is seal, I don't think they have to look like that to BE seal. Kinda like palominos don't have to be gold with a white mane and tail. :lol:

CMhorses Wed, 04/01/2009 - 15:14

Not trying to hijack your post, but would this be an example of one that you could say was sooty?
He is in his winter coat but even in his summer coat he has the darkness on his face and the top of his back is really black compared to the rest of him, I just don't have any pictures of his face without his forelock on it in a summer coat. (yay windy day)
Also he has good examples of distal and ermine spots that we were talkin about in a different post.

duncentralstation Tue, 04/07/2009 - 06:14

CMHorses,
I would say that is a brown, especially since you say the dark cape and masking is there even in summer coat.

duncentralstation Tue, 04/07/2009 - 06:18

I've included a collage of "At" tested horses, including two "At" confirmed buckskins. I know those especially won't go over too well with some.

Note that the "At" tested buckskin on the left was sired by a smoky black, so the only agouti she could have gotten was from her "nearly black" looking seal brown dam. Also note that I messed up the caption for her ... she is a light brown *buckskin*, not just a brown. OOPS!!

rabbitsfizz Tue, 04/07/2009 - 10:47

Tested by whom, and with what test???
Is this the one where it can't be published in case someone steals it in spite of the fact that every single other DNA test has been published???

accphotography Tue, 04/07/2009 - 13:12

Probably because 98%+ of the people on this forum would call that a sooty buckskin, not a smokey brown.

duncentralstation Tue, 04/07/2009 - 17:15

[quote="rabbitsfizz"]Tested by whom, and with what test???
Is this the one where it can't be published in case someone steals it in spite of the fact that every single other DNA test has been published???[/quote]

Those are rhetorical questions, right? ;)

duncentralstation Tue, 04/07/2009 - 17:23

[quote="accphotography"]Probably because 98%+ of the people on this forum would call that a sooty buckskin, not a smokey brown.[/quote]

Yup, because there are a lot of people who won't trust anything not from one of the major labs, which I can actually understand, because I had my doubts at first, too. But I had already done some of my own research, and I was not afraid to pose questions directly to the researcher himself.

I even know people who won't accept info from a published study, just because it isn't what they wanted it to be. They claimed that results they got from a newly offered test were faulty, again because they were not the results they wanted. :BH