# Pictures for the AMHA & AMHR registration - an example, Would you want to post your 4 pics?



## Christina_M (Jan 2, 2010)

This was a previous topic, however, most of the pictures have been deleted from that post. Would you care to add some current examples for AMHA & AMHR Registration pics along with any advice?

I have a question about the picture of the head for AMHA. Should I crop out the feet so the picture is more square than rectangle? Does it matter if the picture is vertical or horizontal?


----------



## ohmt (Jan 2, 2010)

The registries aren't as picky about pictures as people think. I do vertical for front and leg shots. For AMHA I just make sure you can see their sides and that their heads are turned towards me. Beyond that, I quit pretty darn fast-it gets a bit tiresome doing 10 babies and a bunch more younguns every year. They're naughty!

For AMHR I just make sure all 4 legs are showing and the head is forward.

Alot of times I send in extras-just in case.

I don't have examples at the moment, but hopefully someone will!


----------



## Maple Hollow Farm (Jan 2, 2010)

Here is an example of one of my babies I registered this year. I just do all of my foals loose, it makes it less stressful on both of us LOL!

AMHR:






















AMHA:

same side shots as above and:






I try to get a side pic of them looking at me if I can but they arent always willing to do that, the registries are pretty forgiving as long as you get a good face marking shot for the front picture. Also get all legs to show on both pictures if you can (I find walking pics work best for this) but as long as one side at least has them all they will accept one without. Squared up legs in front and back for those shots helps to see the markings better without getting the tail in the way or shadowed portions. Hope this helps!


----------



## Leeana (Jan 2, 2010)

I actually just shot these pictures today of this mare and got them developed and sent the paperwork out. These are for an AMHR transfer of one of my broodmares...

I've never had any trouble with AMHR. I develop my pictures at Drug Mart, takes under 5 minutes if i'm only doing one or two horses reg pictures at once.

When I do reg pictures, if i don't have anyone to help, I just tie them up and snap L-R-B-F pictures, takes just a few minutes. I can crop in on them a bit at Drug Mart...

*Left*






*Right*






*Back*






*Front * _(this came out more offset to the side rather then direct right on front, but she is a fidgety mare so was the best I could get by myself)._


----------



## Marsha Cassada (Jan 3, 2010)

I save the photos on the computer, open Microsoft Photo Editor, arrange the photos, and print on glossy photo paper. Then use a paper cutter to cut them out. Vertical for head and rear, horizontal for side view.

These are the photos for AMHA. I was fun reviewing these photos of him today as I think this boy looks so much better now.


----------



## ruffian (Jan 4, 2010)

"I save the photos on the computer, open Microsoft Photo Editor, arrange the photos, and print on glossy photo paper. Then use a paper cutter to cut them out. Vertical for head and rear, horizontal for side view.

These are the photos for AMHA. I was fun reviewing these photos of him today as I think this boy looks so much better now."

I don't cut them apart when I send them. I let the registries do that that way they don't get mixed up.


----------



## Becky (Jan 5, 2010)

Regarding the head shots for AMHA, they only require the full flat of the face in the pictures. Legs aren't necessary, but they will accept those. I normally take one picture of the face, print it twice, usually vertical.


----------



## Little Wolf Ranch (Jan 8, 2010)

I am having to do pictures of my mares and one of them is a very light palomino pinto but she practically looks completely white with her winter coat. . .

Is it okay for her to have this winter coat? Oh and she is neck and head clipped is that okay too?

Thanks,

Katie


----------



## Dona (Jan 8, 2010)

Leeana said:


> I actually just shot these pictures today of this mare and got them developed and sent the paperwork out. These are for an AMHR transfer of one of my broodmares...I've never had any trouble with AMHR. I develop my pictures at Drug Mart, takes under 5 minutes if i'm only doing one or two horses reg pictures at once.
> 
> When I do reg pictures, if i don't have anyone to help, I just tie them up and snap L-R-B-F pictures, takes just a few minutes. I can crop in on them a bit at Drug Mart...
> 
> ...


I'm surprised that they would take these head shots as the forelock is hanging down on the face, instead of being pulled back so they can see the "entire" front of the face, and ALL markings that may be there.

I've had problems with AMHA accepting photos like that in the past....so I always make sure the forelock is pulled to the side in those shots. Maybe AMHR isn't as "picky"?


----------



## Minimor (Jan 14, 2010)

I would say that AMHR isn't picky at all! They have their list of photo requirements, but they don't stick to those requirements. No action photos...yet if you go through the photos of AMHR and ASPC on horsestudbook you will see a number of horses shown trotting and even cantering. When I sent in registration photos for our weanling colt this past fall, I was concerned they wouldn't accept the photos because his legs were muddy. I'd wiped them off some & you could see his leg color in spite of the mud, but still... Turns out I needn't have worried. They accepted the photos, and I have seen worse since then!

If you browse through the Shetlands on horsestudbook--go to the Shetland site & click on 'horses' then go through a few pages (not sure how many now) & you will see at least one colt with VERY muddy legs. You definitely don't see any leg color through the mud on that one--granted he is white legged, but even so I would have though they'd require that you can SEE the color of the legs.


----------



## MiLo Minis (Jan 15, 2010)

One thing that I have noticed is that a lot of people's photos are distorted on the papers - usually squashed flat making the horse look short legged and long bodied. The photos must be either 3 x 5" or 4 x 6" with the horse taking up most of the frame. If you send in any other size they become distorted when they are formatted onto the papers so you can't just square crop out the horse on computer at any old size. I set up a document with 4 photos up on an 8 1/2 x 11 size sheet with guidelines for 4 pictures at 3 x 5", drop the photos in individually, rotate and crop them to fit the guidelines. That way I know the photos will come out reasonably nice on the papers themselves.


----------



## Dona (Jan 17, 2010)

MiLo Minis said:


> One thing that I have noticed is that a lot of people's photos are distorted on the papers - usually squashed flat making the horse look short legged and long bodied. The photos must be either 3 x 5" or 4 x 6" with the horse taking up most of the frame. If you send in any other size they become distorted when they are formatted onto the papers so you can't just square crop out the horse on computer at any old size. I set up a document with 4 photos up on an 8 1/2 x 11 size sheet with guidelines for 4 pictures at 3 x 5", drop the photos in individually, rotate and crop them to fit the guidelines. That way I know the photos will come out reasonably nice on the papers themselves.


Well.....I always send in 4 x 6 photos, and even THEY come back distorted!


----------



## Dona (Jan 17, 2010)

Minimor said:


> I would say that AMHR isn't picky at all! They have their list of photo requirements, but they don't stick to those requirements. No action photos...yet if you go through the photos of AMHR and ASPC on horsestudbook you will see a number of horses shown trotting and even cantering. When I sent in registration photos for our weanling colt this past fall, I was concerned they wouldn't accept the photos because his legs were muddy. I'd wiped them off some & you could see his leg color in spite of the mud, but still... Turns out I needn't have worried. They accepted the photos, and I have seen worse since then!
> If you browse through the Shetlands on horsestudbook--go to the Shetland site & click on 'horses' then go through a few pages (not sure how many now) & you will see at least one colt with VERY muddy legs. You definitely don't see any leg color through the mud on that one--granted he is white legged, but even so I would have though they'd require that you can SEE the color of the legs.


Kind of defeats thw whole purpose have having photos then....doesn't it!


----------

