PCA Illustrated Standard Debacle ~ Part 1

I have been posting some of this stuff on my facebook page, but it is a little hard to follow things there as timelines move fast and putting items further down in the comments makes it hard for people that come into the conversation later to find the info.  So I’ve decided to go ahead and just dust off my long neglected blog for a little while.  I’m sure the Board will be thrilled to learn this 😉

This first post, I’m just going to repost the items I put up on facebook, so everyone coming here can be on the same page, so to speak.   In following posts, I will be providing further comparisons.  I now have a copy of both the IS that was on the PCA webpage and the booklet put out by Nancy Pinke and Charlotte McGowan.

Let the games begin, as they say 😉

In 2009, I was sent a graphic (shown below) and asked what I thought.  Just eyeballing it, I could tell that it was pretty much the same drawing, but I went further than that and took the “new” drawing (the one on the right) and superimposed it over the original (the one on the left).   These images are the result of that little experiment.  I’ve had them sitting around since 2009 in case this issue ever raised it’s ugly head again.

Illustrated Standard Comparioson

Illustrated Standard Comparison 2009


The new drawing is not the exact same size as the original, so initially I took the images the sizes they are above and simply moved the “new” one around to various places on the original to see how they matched up.   The following images are the results of that test.  Clicking on any of the images will make them larger.


head comparison

Head Comparison


neck comparison

Neck Comparison


front legs comparison

Front Legs Comparison


back legs comparison

Back Legs Comparison


culottes comparison

Culottes Comparison


In the tail comparison, you can see that even though the “new” tail is larger, the divot in the tail lines up.

tail comparison

Tail Comparison


Once I had the above images done, I decided to try and resize the “new” image to see how close I could get them.   I suspect if I had the percentage that the “new” image was enlarged I could lay it over the original pretty much perfectly.   I didn’t do too bad a job just guessing, as you can see below.


new image resized

“New” Image Resized


One of the arguments for the drawings looking so similar is that there is only “so many ways you can draw a particular ear set or tail set etc.”  In other words, there is really only so many ways you can draw a Papillon.   Anyone that has ever done are or looked at Papillon art knows this might be the lamest excuse ever given.   I think a 5 year old could probably come up with something better.   For my facebook post, I grabbed some random images off a google search to show that excuse had no credence.  I’m not going to post all of them here, but I will post a couple that I used for another comparison.

First we have a drawing we have all seen I’m sure.  It’s the Papillon on the AKC page:

AKC Papillon

Papillon Illustration from AKC Page


Here we have a comparison I did with the original drawing from the standard to show that just because a dog is in the same type of post doesn’t mean it will line up exactly with another one drawn in the same pose (even though that should be common sense).   The head is not facing straight forward in the AKC Papillon illustration so the front is slightly different, but the rear gives you a very good idea.

AKC pap vs IS pap

AKC Papillon vs Illustrated Standard Papillon


In part 2 of this series, I will be showing comparisons of the skeleton drawing done by Deirdre Ashdown and the one from the IS.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 7th, 2014 at 4:38 pm and is filed under Papillons. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 Responses to “PCA Illustrated Standard Debacle ~ Part 1”

  1. […] you have missed the first installments of this series you can catch up by reading part 1 and part 2.  Today we are going to be looking at comparisons of 3 different […]

    [WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP ( doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP ( and so is spam.

  2. Meg Peifer says:

    Towal, this should be required reading for all members of PCA. THIS exemplifies all that these unethical board members have perpetrated on this club. Barbara Ankersmit, Kevin Ray, Jane Sirkoch and Angela Pickett reprinted this in secret, without advice from the other board members.

    Why would you want these thieves as your representatives. It’s not as if they don’t KNOW it’s illegal theft. Which is worse, knowingly stealing someone’s intellectual property (twice) or doing it in secret and pretending they have no memory of the original reason it was $18.000 spent in vain????

Leave a Reply