This is my view regarding het markers and the "het look". I personally think there are good and bad examples of 'hets' (specifically when regarding pied and clown) like any other wildtype or morph.
I posted a picture of normal het clowns previously. You can definitely see the clown gene influencing the normal phenotype.
A few are more obvious than others. I consider this equivalent to the example of Yellowbelly or Fire. Some people cannot distinguish a horrible example of a YB or Fire from a normal. But good examples stand out and pop.
These 2 morphs can be subtle alone, but do big things when combined with morphs. Same thing with these "hets". It's not that the markers or whatever traits aren't there. They are there. Just more downplayed and subtle compared to the better examples of it....
I'm not sure if the 'het look' can be controlled to produce more animals with the same unique look. It could be totally random. I don't think there is enough evidence to conclude if breeding the more visual hets together can produce more wacky looking hets. However, Brandon Osborne consistently produces funky looking pewter het pieds. I'm not sure if it's just his line of animals or if most pewter het pieds do that in general.
Reply With Quote