# Critique Please



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

Abby is 2. Be brutally honest, not looking for compliments.


----------



## FORRUGER (Jan 3, 2006)

I'm sure you'll get lots of responses from folks on this board but the AKC also has a good learning video for critiquing the GSD conformation on their website...and for the 'Import' vs the 'ASL' controversy, the standards they recommend appear to be very suitable for either type.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

She looks like she is good size and condition. I would like better color (not just red vs. tan, but the feet are too light for me).


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

She's an American showline, right?


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

Jax08 said:


> She's an American showline, right?


Probably 75%


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

Liesje said:


> She looks like she is good size and condition. I would like better color (not just red vs. tan, but the feet are too light for me).


The sunlight and camera flash make her look much lighter than she is, her tan is darker than it appears, but I hear ya. Thank you.


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

FORRUGER said:


> I'm sure you'll get lots of responses from folks on this board but the AKC also has a good learning video for critiquing the GSD conformation on their website...and for the 'Import' vs the 'ASL' controversy, the standards they recommend appear to be very suitable for either type.


Thank you for the info but I am looking for critique from members. I find them honest and informative.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Her feet aren't as "tight" as I've seen on other dogs. That's about the best I can do.
She has a nice, straight back


----------



## DanielleOttoMom (May 11, 2010)

I'm not a pro at the whole "critique" thing. I will say I love her head very feminine. I think Abby is fantastic!


----------



## 4TheDawgies (Apr 2, 2011)

Her withers look a little flat, she appears to be east/west. She needs more angulation overall but with her own angulations she is balanced for herself. 
She has a somewhat wide earset I personally perfer closer. She has somewhat flat feet but not so much so. 

She is at a good weight but I prefer a little more conditioning for a tighter tuck up and overall tighter look. She could use more pigment and darker colors. She has good pasterns. She could use a slightly larger head but thats just my preference. 

Overall shes a cutie


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Flat withers with a slight dip behind the withers. Good placement of a croup that needs to be longer. Good/very good angulation front and rear. Good depth of body. She looks to toe out a bit on the left front. Yes, her feet should be much tighter. Feminine head with a very pronounced stop (forehead). Her color maybe could be a bit richer, but I do not find her unpleasant to look at.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

On a female, where you say "good depth of body" and then "feminine head", what I notice is she's very full-bodied with a smaller head.
Is that because she's a girl, and is that how its preferred, or, as Maris said, "more balanced", is that what I'm noticing with the larger body/smaller head?


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

4TheDawgies said:


> Her withers look a little flat, she appears to be east/west. She needs more angulation overall but with her own angulations she is balanced for herself.
> She has a somewhat wide earset I personally perfer closer. She has somewhat flat feet but not so much so.
> 
> *She is at a good weight but I prefer a little more conditioning for a tighter tuck up and overall tighter look*. She could use more pigment and darker colors. She has good pasterns. She could use a slightly larger head but thats just my preference.
> ...


She is in excellent condition, gets a lot of running in and is a light eater. Not sure why not a tighter tuck unless it's the depth of the body ... or it could be the result of her 'repair' surgery after her spay went south. Actually, that is the 'webbing' between her rib cage and her hindquarters, her stomach is much higher. Thank you ... these are all good, good to see her through objective eyes.


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

msvette2u said:


> On a female, where you say "good depth of body" and then "feminine head", what I notice is she's very full-bodied with a smaller head.
> Is that because she's a girl, and is that how its preferred, or, as Maris said, "more balanced", is that what I'm noticing with the larger body/smaller head?


She is deep-chested, which affects the tuck ... she's not a greyhound. She has a feminine head, she's a female. I admit that I prefer doggy bitches (too?). Her feet are east-west and could be tighter. Her angulation is as GSDs were back in the '20s and '30s. It really shows when she moves but seems to disappear when she stands. Her withers are higher than her back give her a slight slope to a straight but not level back. The pictures were not good so I am grateful for your critiques under the circumstances.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

We had Mariah, the purebred GSD foster, who was shaped like this but not as large as your girl appears, well, Mariah was 9mos. of age or thereabouts.
She was like your girl, very refined, feminine head, and full body/deep chest.
I think what happens is they just appear unbalanced due to the smaller, feminine head.
Our first GSD together was a male, smaller boy at 70lb. but very blocky head and I really liked that look. 
I'd always get a male, I think, due to that. I'm so shallow!!


----------



## 4TheDawgies (Apr 2, 2011)

When I talk about balance I am talking about the angulation in the shoulders and in the rear. when you have matching good front and rear angulations you get a balanced dog. A dog with a lot of rear angulation and no front angulation the dog looks unbalanced in both a stack and in movement.

She does have a smaller head but this was not included in my comment of balance. 

And her head size looks smaller than reality in that standing looking back at us photo. In the other three photos her head looks on the smaller end but not overly so. She has a very feminine head.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Just looking at the pictures you can see how much a photo can distort the look of a dog depending on the angle. In the last picture it looks like she has a tiny head and really long legs. First picture is a much better shot.  My unofficial critique, pretty girl!


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

Whiteshepherds said:


> Just looking at the pictures you can see how much a photo can distort the look of a dog depending on the angle. In the last picture it looks like she has a tiny head and really long legs. First picture is a much better shot.  My unofficial critique, pretty girl!


Exactly, the last shot is unfortunate. Cameras distort based on angle. The side shots are more accurate for things like head size because all parts are at the same distance from the lens. 
Ya, she has a bitchy head.
She is 25.5 inches and 70 pounds.
Here she is sans ears showing off her easty-westy.
MSVETTE2U - I like the bigger head too.


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

Relative head size doesn't look so bad here.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

PaddyD said:


> Relative head size doesn't look so bad here.
> View attachment 13495


Yes much better angle


----------



## Ramage (Oct 10, 2009)

I agree with 4thedawgs

Pretty girl


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

Ramage said:


> I agree with 4thedawgs
> 
> Pretty girl


Thank you. ;-)
EVERYBODY thinks she's a male puppy (she is 2.5) and says how handsome 'he' is and wait until he fills out, etc. She has weighed 68 for a year and a half... hopefully will for 10+ more years.


----------

