Blue Chip ad - horses don't match!!!

J

jumpergirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 July 2009
Messages
64
Visit site
I've just sat down to read this week's edition of h&h. Like a lot of people I start at the back and I was just looking at the big Blue Chip balancer advert on the back page. I was just looking in horror at the appalling condition that some of the horses look to be in in the pictures, when I noticed that the bay at the bottom left is not the same horse in the before and after pictures!! The one in the "before" picture has 2 white socks behind and the off fore also has a sock. The one in the "after" pic has 2 socks behind and the NEAR fore has a sock!!

How stupid do they think we are??!!!
 
No ... I'm not that stupid!!! Horse is facing same direction and it looks like the "after" pic is of a horse several years older anyway!!
 
it is possible to flip photos so they appear to be facing the same way, so for example if the sock was on the front leg closest to the camera when you swap it it will still stay on the leg closes to the camera but would then been on the opposite leg to if the horse was facing the other way. hang on i will see if i can find some photos to show you what i mean
 
right this is my mare she has white near hind and off fore. this is the original photo

DSC01168.jpg


and this is flipped (see how it looks like her off hind and near fore are white now)
DSC01168-1.jpg
 
Yes v clever ... BUT ... the picture in question is facing the same direction. It doesnt look like the same horse in any way. Have a look at the magazine!
 
yes but if it was taken facing the other direction they would have flipped it around so you can do a better comparison. it wouldn't be worth there while false advertising it cost to much and there would be nothing to gain from it. having looked at the photos in question i am positive that they have just flipped it so they are both show from the same angle
 
ok so this is my mare when she came to me
n746808682_867750_6427.jpg


and this is her when she left
P1000135.jpg


like that it is more arkward to get a good comparison but if i showed you like this
n746808682_867750_6427.jpg

P1000135-1.jpg
 
I think it is the same horse but mirror inmage but I can totally see the point.
If you look at the horses blaze it is different but really looking at it I'd say the same horse.

I do think sometimes they advertise these horse using blue chip, but in all honesty these horses are in such bad condition just being fed would make them look 300% better, so could you say the turn around is down to blue chip, or just being cared for!!!!
Alot of the pic's are taken in the winter with wooly coats and then the comparison in the summer, would they not look better with out a coat anyway.

Not saying Blue Chip doesn't work but there are other ways, like just looking after them.
 
oh i think i should add, i have never used blue chip on any of my horses and my mare was feed on hifi original, maintenance cubes and pink powder with ad lib haylage.
 
Sammii819 said:
I think it is the same horse but mirror inmage but I can totally see the point.
If you look at the horses blaze it is different but really looking at it I'd say the same horse.

I do think sometimes they advertise these horse using blue chip, but in all honesty these horses are in such bad condition just being fed would make them look 300% better, so could you say the turn around is down to blue chip, or just being cared for!!!!
Alot of the pic's are taken in the winter with wooly coats and then the comparison in the summer, would they not look better with out a coat anyway.

Not saying Blue Chip doesn't work but there are other ways, like just looking after them.
Click to expand...


I agree ... I dont think the horse's blaze matches. I also agree that the horse probably just needed some decent feed, shelter, grooming etc and it would probably look heaps better.

I just feel that if Blue Chip really worked as well as they seem to want to show it does then why do they need to alter pictures and show the horse in a totally different way to the original picture. For example, the bay in question is shown scruffy and mane everywhere, lots of feather etc in the before pic. After pic then shows a horse with no feather, mane pulled/plaited, bridle on, pic rotated/mirrored/flipped. It just seems wrong.

Going on the argument that they've done whatever they've done to it so it's facing the same direction, why have they left the chestnut in top right of the ad facing the opposite direction in pics???!!!
 
the only explanation i can think for that is maybe the owner flipped the photos for the bay before sending them in, but i honestly couldn't say 100% on that
 
I think that the socks on the hind legs of the chesnut bottom middle row aren't the same height before and after! But I do remember an advertorial on the chesnut pony top right a few years ago with more photos in the article, it improved beautifully over the time period.
 
The blaze, and the height of the back socks, and the front socks dont look the same because you are seeing the OTHER SIDE of the horse. I know its been said but others have commented afterwards, its the other side of the horse, flipped like a mirror image so the blaze and socks wont look the same!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top