Recently there have been a couple of interesting discussions around declaring color when photo showing models. In one case a judge claimed that a shower couldn’t declare a color on an OF plastic model other than what Breyer had declared; in another the judge insisted that a Fjord color designation had to use the Fjord registry specific terms (and curiously, the English translation of those terms, not the original Norwegian).

So here are my questions for discussion:

  1. Should we require color next to breed and gender at all? And if so, how specific should that color be? (IE: “chestnut” or “flaxen chestnut sabino rabicano”?)

  2. Does it matter to you if a shower chooses a different label for a model’s color than the manufacturer or original artist did?

  3. Does it matter to you if the color matches the label that the registry would apply/require? (Chestnut vs sorrel, grulla vs grey dun or grå)

  • Pixelperfectstables
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Personally I don’t think it’s that important unless it’s an unusual color for a breed, or the color (including many “Breyer colors”) can look ambiguous due to the execution of the paint job or how it shows up in a photo. (Not everyone has the skill or resources to properly balance a photo in angle, lighting, color, etc. without using a lot of editing, and most shows these days do not want any more than minimal edits. So, a color description could be helpful to properly present a model for someone who is still skill building for example.)

    Might adding a color tag or description be helpful as a matter of accessibility for folks who may have challenges with vision? To my awareness there are some conditions that could impact how well someone can visually distinguish some things and not others, for example. Unless a show site has a sophisticated tool for image captions there may be some things that need to be done as part of the text description in order to make viewing the images more friendly.