Ok i got a new dog book and i came across a page with pictures of a few breeds, on it was a shih tzu and a lhasa apso but i think they have labled them wrong, im sure ive seen those pictures used befor but the other way around. I aksed my friend who is in to lhasa apso's and she aggres that they are miss labled.

So i thought i would ask on here so see what you guys think. here is a link to the picture, its not great quality i uploaded to photobucked for this.

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa236/kentanstormcracker/Joannes%20Stuff/pets013.jpg

Yep,they're the wrong way round.Thats bad!

Just a reminder never to believe everything you see in a book!

I've got a book where an Australian Shepherd photo is labelled as an Australian Kelpie and a ruby Cavalier puppy is labelled as a Border Terrier.

Another book I saw in a shop with 100s of breeds in it, I looked up my own breed Tollers (I always look just to see the photos) and the book stated that they're about 22 inches tall and come in black, yellow and chocolate! (Copied straight from the Labrador page).

Oh dear, yep is the wrong way around!

I knew it! LOL thanks

stuff like that really bugs me - i once did a quiz somewhere naming the dog breeds from pics and i got all but one right - when i saw that what was wrong was where i had put a chesepeake bay retriever as such, i found they had it down as a curly coat retriever (as thats what the book that the pic came from said) i corrected them with the help of a shooting gundog friend and ha ha got 100%! lol!

It doesn't just happen in dogs!  I bred, showed and judged cavies for over 25 years, and naturally opened any book on the subject, before deciding to buy.

On the page with a new born litter I took a double take.  The young were bald and blind.  As cavies are often running around the pen with the afterbirth still attached, I was astonished.   They are born fully furred with eyes open, and the milk teeth already shed.  The litter was new born rats.  And they sold thousands of copies.

I think I have that book! It had a picture of newborn 'guineapigs' which were blind, hairless and with stumpy tails! I think they were baby hamsters.

> I think I have that book!

To be fair it doesn't have to be the author of the books mentioned that messed the photos up. When you write books on petcare, you often don't have any control over the photographs. I remember receiving one of mine just published and I was HORRIFIED at the results -the photos were awful. But I'd not been given any opportunity whatsoever to preview the photos or to chose which were used etc. Some publishers let the authors do this, others do not.