Question about the APA Standard of Perfection

[NYREDS]

One of the most common criticisms of the Standard is just that, no clear example of what "medium" [or other vague terms] looks like. There is definately a subjective element to interpreting the Standard which is why two different judges will often place the same birds differently.
The illustrations in the colour Standard leave a lot to be desired. The illustrations in the black & white version are actually much better in terms of seeing proper type. The next colour version of the Standard wil be illustrated by a different artist & I'm hopeful for better illustrations.
The best way to learn to interpret the Standard is to take it with you to shows & compare the descriptions to winning birds. That can help somewhat to clear up some of the confusion.

 

[Baybrio]

Thanks again everyone who has replied. I am going to order a black and white version.

NYREDS wrote: The best way to learn to interpret the Standard is to take it with you to shows & compare the descriptions to winning birds Thank you that is great advise I never would have thought of it on my own.

I also never thought of contacting breeders. That is a great idea.

 

[Katy]

Quote:
I like my B&W version.....I knew the colored version was just colored line drawings so I didn't spend the extra for it. The B&W is also drawings, no photos. I do look at the drawings, but go more by what is written. It would be nice to have one with actual photos of the different breeds and colorings.

 

[becky3086]

Interesting. I was thinking about getting the color version as well, glad to hear that I don't need to. When does the next version come out?

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

The Bantam Standard has drawings of a number of faults.

For some breeds the specifications are very specific, for others vague terms such as medium or moderate or small are used. I would like to see these vague descriptions replaced by something that at least 9 out of 10 people would interpret the same way.

 

[poltroon]

I was struck by how little the paintings looked like actual birds. My daughter has buff brahmas, and the image of the buff columbian color is of a buff rooster the same color as the hen (with the appropriate black accents). But, I've never seen a buff columbian rooster that color - instead, the saddle and hackle feathers are more of a glossy light mahogany shade (and quite lovely). So this has always confused me - is the light matte buff, if you could produce it, more desirable? Or is this just a silly artist's rendering that no one pays much attention to? Why didn't the artist paint the rooster in a more realistic fashion?

 

[lildinkem]

I don't mind drawings. I like Black birds, so the color issue isn't going to tell me much. One more source you " MIGHT " consider is on EBAY. I found this person selling a print from 1890 of these 2 Black Orps. I just look and compare what I have and what I like my birds to be. Just another source to think about.

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

My understanding of why paintings rather than photos are used is that you can paint a perfect bird; however the reality is that there are never any real perfect birds.

 

[poltroon]

Quote:
Which makes sense, but my example of the color has left me shaken with how to interpret the paintings. So is there a hunt to create the elusive matte buff columbian rooster? Did no breeders of the buff columbian pattern have the opportunity to say, "No, we need to change the feather color here and here?" If something as obvious as color was never noticed or corrected, it makes me uncertain in trusting the painting in any aspect.

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

I believe the standard came frst, then the paintings were made to depict the description.