Hey man.... no worries.... you don't have to apologize to me.... Without other photos of the taxidermists work, I cannot say this mount is par or off par, for his work... and by you saying he does "excellent" work normally, I would have to be under the assumption that your opinion for excellent is indeed, accurate.... now before you fly off the handle again and call me stupid, I'm not saying you don't know what your talking about... but your idea of excellent, might be different than the next guys..... My point is perfectly proven, by the array of comments from different members on here... some say ya while some say nay, in regards to the mount in question. Sorry to have pushed your buttons earlier, I simply won't make subtle jokes anymore..... before giving an honest opinion on a post that was asking for just that, opinions.... Hope you fellas are able to get his mount straightened out... On a side note, depending on what curing method was used, there really isn't a lot you can do to "repair" the mount concerning the deer hide itself, that has already been set... it's not like you can take it off the form and remount it using the same hide... Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
I was already aggravated with something else....I shouldn't have jumped on ya My concern is the same as yours about the "repair"... Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
I have to say this ugly deer ugly mount, not saying the deer or the mount is ugly but some deer just look better than others.
from the one side view I noticed a dip in the bridge of the buck's nose. either he used a mount too small or it might be possible he switched form manufacturers from what he used to use. a buck that size should have a crown in the bridge of his nose or at least be straight. the eyes look a little doom and gloom like just black holes but it might be the picture angle? the jaw does look short. the skull plate does look crooked but with picture angles hard to tell?but like I said I bet it is a cheap form. he might have switched due to rising costs from previous manufacturer? just a thought. like someone else said it isn't the worst mount we have seen. does this taxi have hired help? my previous taxi hired help and I got nervous that the owner wasn't the one going to be doing my mount so I took my business elsewhere.
The thing that is the most obvious to me is how the hide was prepped. I can tell just by looking at it that the hide wasn't fleshed thin enough.... that is obvious by the bulky look of the hide around the antlers, eyes, mouth and overall face. A deer shot that time of year will not have hair going over his pedicles..... rrason being is because they have been rubbing and the hair gets wore off.... not sure how he got the pedicles recessed in the deers head.... and yes, the skull plate appears to be on crooked Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
I've looked at the photo several times and I'm no expert on taxidermy but to me it kinda looks like a doe mount with antlers Sent from my SCH-S968C using Tapatalk
hmmmm. didn't think of that one. possible. looked at my mounts and all of them have a straight bridge on their nose, not dipped.
looks like to me he cut the nose to shorten it up and may have not built it back enough you can see the line....when the eye to nose isn't right some taxidermist cut a little above the nose and shave off some of the form to get the exact eye to nose correct. Just looks like above the nose needed to be built up a little to me. IMO
He is coming into town next. Weekend and is going to the taxidermist. Stay tuned Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
The biggest thing I see is the dip in the nose. If you compare the harvest photo to the mount pic at a similar angle it looks like the top of the form was to thin or something. Not sure about the other stuff though. I prefer the ears a bit more tucked back but so be it. It doesn't look terrible. IMO But I know I pour over my mounts when I get them back. I've only had one guy do them. And he hasn't failed me yet. You spend that much money on one you do expect a nice mount. Great buck BTW.
First thing I see is there is no detail in the neck, Either a low cost form or the didn't prepare the form for deeper lines in the neck. Second I see the ears look as if they were never positioned ,if they would atleast been positioned half back I think it would of gave the mount a whole different look.Not the best but I've seen way worse ..time to find a different Taxidermist. Maybe ur current Taxidermist took to many animals in and its compromising the quality that he previously put out.
Was that buck shot with a Rage broadhead?? If so... Theres your answer! It does look a bit goofy but I wouldn't be complaining. Although pictures generally don't do anything justice. I'm sure if we all got to examine in person it might be a different story.
I would accept it into my house without complaint. The rack is narrow making the ears look bigger and wider then normal. The deer may not have been that old so a smaller form may have been needed. Quite honestly some people will never be happy but I think it looks fine.
I have never NOT been happy with mounts done for me and my family....fish, birds and deer ...so that's not the case here...
Agree with this. Overall I just see no details in this mount...the neck and ears for sure. I feel like you want the neck as big as possible but this just looks kind of bland. Also one interesting note, I feel like in the trophy pics the hair around the antlers is a much darker brown. Maybe it's just me and I know pictures don't always do it justice, but the mount looks kind of washed out. Personally I would be disappointed in this mount and would see if there is anything he could do. I've definitely seen worse though.
