Sooty? How exactly does it work?

[AltNazarach]

Am I alone in thinking that the horse in question is not actually silver, but rather a very extremely sooty flaxen chestnut? And the sire is a sooty flaxen red dun? I mean, look at the newborn and yearling pictures - the horse is already dark all over, but the legs are not noticeably darker than the rest of the body. I also don't see any dun marks (but I do see them on the sire).

I think in the yearling Pic you can see a small crown of black, so it'd be a wild Bay; the cheeks and body seem to be slightly lighter, so it's a very gentle Dun expression - the socks covering so much of the legs certainly isn't helping here ^^' so I would still stay by Silver Sooty (wild) Bay Dun

[BlackOak2]

Am I alone in thinking that the horse in question is not actually silver, but rather a very extremely sooty flaxen chestnut? And the sire is a sooty flaxen red dun? I mean, look at the newborn and yearling pictures - the horse is already dark all over, but the legs are not noticeably darker than the rest of the body. I also don't see any dun marks (but I do see them on the sire).

He is a wild bay, his black points on his legs are quite short (more like anklets then anything else), but visible (yearling photos give it away). I also agree with the dun, there is a very faint, although noticeable mask, but no other dun markings. You can see it on his face best. His cheek is definitely a different color then the lower part of his face.

[Tjigra]

Okay, I am convinced That one dark leg looked slightly black-ish to me too, I suspected wild bay, but wasn't sure. And I didn't see anything dun in the foal picture (in my opinion, that's when cryptic dun is most easily spotted). The colour differences later might as well be due to sooty, but if you say dun, I believe you, because I am bad at spotting cryptic dun even in my own horses

[Uralym]

Am I alone in thinking that the horse in question is not actually silver, but rather a very extremely sooty flaxen chestnut? And the sire is a sooty flaxen red dun? I mean, look at the newborn and yearling pictures - the horse is already dark all over, but the legs are not noticeably darker than the rest of the body. I also don't see any dun marks (but I do see them on the sire).

I think in the yearling Pic you can see a small crown of black, so it'd be a wild Bay; the cheeks and body seem to be slightly lighter, so it's a very gentle Dun expression - the socks covering so much of the legs certainly isn't helping here ^^' so I would still stay by Silver Sooty (wild) Bay Dun

He is a wild bay, his black points on his legs are quite short (more like anklets then anything else), but visible (yearling photos give it away). I also agree with the dun, there is a very faint, although noticeable mask, but no other dun markings. You can see it on his face best. His cheek is definitely a different color then the lower part of his face.

Thank you, yeah, he's definitely dun, on the pictures where he's in younger age (1-3 years old) there also can be seen zebra stripes on the left foreleg and a faint triangle-shaped patch on his neck.

But could you please specify the difference between the wild bay and bay? Are they just shades of bay or is wild bay a different type of agouti?

[AltNazarach]

Thank you, yeah, he's definitely dun, on the pictures where he's in younger age (1-3 years old) there also can be seen zebra stripes on the left foreleg and a faint triangle-shaped patch on his neck.

But could you please specify the difference between the wild bay and bay? Are they just shades of bay or is wild bay a different type of agouti?

Wild Bay can be differenciated by the hight of the black legs, lower than the feetlocks is wild bay, anything higher is (normal) bay. the wild bay gene is dominant over bay or brown (totinas guide descibes this really well http://www.horseworldonline.net/forum/v ... =13&t=2158) :3