(the inner, right hand "white line" on the tail is actually the edge of the bird's right foot: nothing to do with the tail I fear. What colour that might or might not have is lost in deepest shadow. The left hand "white line" could be almost anything. It's incomplete making an artifact more likely)
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Epping Forest, Sep.19th 2012 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter KenM
- Start date
Rotherbirder
Well-known member
Every time I look at this image I see Spotted Flycatcher. The bill size/shape, head shape and the relative position of the large, dark eye are pretty characteristic of this species and are shown well here IMHO. The other 'features' or - lack of them - are probably just peculiarites of the digital medium. You seem quick to pooh-pooh the comments of others Ken, but I don't remember you saying what you think it is if not a Spotted or Pied Fly, though your posts tend to be so verbose and rambling that I quite often lose track of what you've said so, if you have, I apologise.
RB
RB
Alexander Stöhr
Well-known member
Hello,
thanks again for crrection Kuzeycem!When looking at the picture at the first Time, I saw a real blackish tail contrasting against white undertail coverts and the two white edges seemed at the right position, therefore excluding a Spotted Flycatcher.
But you and all others are right: when ignoring this as artefacts, a Spotted Flycatcher seems a much better fit.
And sorry Ken: After Reading my post again, I realized that the word "failed " was unappropiate and harsh.
Important edit first sentense should read: thanks for correction Kuzeycem and all others, especially to RB for his helpful and detailed comment, why this bird has a Spotted Flycatcher head.
thanks again for crrection Kuzeycem!When looking at the picture at the first Time, I saw a real blackish tail contrasting against white undertail coverts and the two white edges seemed at the right position, therefore excluding a Spotted Flycatcher.
But you and all others are right: when ignoring this as artefacts, a Spotted Flycatcher seems a much better fit.
And sorry Ken: After Reading my post again, I realized that the word "failed " was unappropiate and harsh.
Important edit first sentense should read: thanks for correction Kuzeycem and all others, especially to RB for his helpful and detailed comment, why this bird has a Spotted Flycatcher head.
Last edited:
KenM
Well-known member
……………………………
Attachments
It's clearly not a male pied in breeding plumage. Of the other options I guess I'm closer to spotted. The bill shape and head profile fit better, perhaps the throat demarcation. There's some evidence of flank streaking.
What's with the blue head? Dunno: reflected light? I think worth adjusting curves until that colour becomes more normally spotted fly and see what this does to the rest of the pic
What's with the blue head? Dunno: reflected light? I think worth adjusting curves until that colour becomes more normally spotted fly and see what this does to the rest of the pic
Rotherbirder
Well-known member
Yes ... and ..? I will restate my question Ken: what do you think the bird is - or are you postulating a hitherto undescribed flycatcher species?
RB
Rotherbirder
Well-known member
Yeah, I can see where you're coming from, but the lack of a contrasting dark 'cheek' & lores, the ridiculously short legs and small feet suggest otherwise.
RB
dantheman
Bah humbug
It was a bit tongue in cheek. But yes, given the photo it seems as reasonable ... ;-) (The cheek/lores contrast can 'disappear', and didn't notice the feet)
There have been discussions before on 'spotless' Spotted Flycatchers. Not only when photos are 'blown'. Unidentified for me, and in the grand scheme of things happy with that.
KenM
Well-known member
I don’t have a clue?….hence the original post!
Hopefully not too verbose for you,
I acknowledge your attention span is deteriorating…I suppose it comes to all of us eventually. 😮
Well, 30 posts in and much more heat than light---so hardly surprising. At least it's a real ID question this time...
DMW
Well-known member
It's a clearly a Spotted Flycatcher, but as per, you post terrible 200 pixel images with blown out highlights and create a drama out of it.
Richard Prior
Halfway up an Alp
Good, I love a happy ending 
Tiraya
San Diego CA
I'm pretty sure (at a cursory glance, it's getting late here) that the white is blown out here and the chest streaking is therefore not seen. I'm embarrassed to admit I have never seen pied flycatcher in 10ish years of being in the UK, but this is not "quite right" for what I'd expect on one.
