Hard to believe the two photos are of the same animal, just shows that photos will seldom give a true reflection of the animal. How much is the age difference in the two photos?
If I only saw this photo
I would have said that the first thing I noticed is his oustanding haircoat (for my conditions), the darker colouration of his neck which is a good indication of virility.
He looks to have a adequate hindquarter with good outer thigh developement for his age considering he is working and not a stall fed show animal. His topline could be more level, but it isn't bad. His shoulders looks smoothly laid in with an adequate fore-arm.
the next photo tells me a lot more and was taken at a better angle, although not quite square on as what the ideal would be
In this photo his topline looks much better, there is still a slight bump about a third back from between the shoulders and the hooks, but that don't really bother me.
He is long spined, long hipped, well muscled and well proportioned.
His legs and feet and the amount of bone is just about ideal.
He has a good symmetrical scrotum with well developed testes.
I agree with Ryan that he is a very well balanced animal with good capacity and a deep chest.
Every animal has his faults though, the bull's head is not masculine enough for me. At 14 months I want to see stronger male character and more of a crest in a bull. I want the crest to begin directly behind the head with a bulging neck especially if a bull is in this good condition. I know shorthorns do have a finer head than say herefords and are cleaner fronted, and although I must admit I haven't seen many shorthorn bulls develope in my life, I still stand by my point that his neck and head could have been stronger and more masculine at 14 months.
Still one of the better shorthorn bulls I've seen posted here.
