Same Dunlin, a Different View

[Bill Dix]

This is the same bird that Geoffrey posted a handsome image of the other day. I was too close to the bird and clipped his legs when he ran in front of me, not being quick enough to zoom out and recompose. I had remarked on Geoffrey's post that I thought it was a 1st winter bird, since Dunlins normally begin their molt before leaving the northern breeding grounds. I had expected that a juvenile would still exhibit some black on the belly, and more streaking on the breast as illustrated by Sibley, who says that juveniles are "rarely seen south of breeding grounds". Artie graciously corrected me and said it was "pretty much a worn juvenile", and when I did an online search sure enough I found a number of images labeled "juvenile" that did look a lot like this one. Maybe it's just semantics (or maybe he's a Curlew Sandpiper ), but if indeed he is rarely seen in this plumage in our area, I figured it was worth posting him again, with this somewhat unconventional crop to illustrate his plumage.

D500, Sigma 150-600 @ 450mm, ISO 1600, 1/2500s @ f/7.1 manual, HH.

[Geoffrey Montagu]

Grand closeup/portrait of our now well researched Dunlin. Good you kept your finger on the shutter release even as he approached as close as he did. Nice detail and like the curled up feathers from the flanks. Excellent BG.

Geoffrey




http://500px.com/geoffreymontagu

[Arthur Morris]

Another nice one Bill. My understanding is that some juvie Dunlins have extensive black smudging on the bellies and some don't. And then there is the matter of feather wear. The black on your bird might have been much more extensive two to three weeks ago. As for internet photos, don't believe everything that you read :)

Do you have a bit more behind the bird in the original frame?

with love, artie

[Arthur Morris]

ps: if you look closely on the upper back just behind the neck I think that the very few, very small, all-gray feathers are indeed first-winter molt.

with love, artie

[Bill Dix]

Artie, thanks for the additional information. I still have a lot to learn, especially when it comes to peeps. You're right about internet searches. When I do a search for a specific species, it's amazing how many random, mis-identified birds pop up.

Here's the whole Dunlin, sans legs.

[Bill Dix]

ps. Here's another Dunlin for comparison. Taken at 10:00 pm one evening in mid-July on Flatey Island, Iceland. Not as sharply detailed as the other, but maybe a useful comparison. I believe this may also be a juvie, but I'm certainly not sure.

[Stu Bowie]

Hi Bill, perfect eye level capture, and just love the colours on this fellow. The colour of the BG compliments the bird nicely.

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Bill, The bird in Pane 6 is an adult; note the worn but rusty medium coverts. Also, the bird in Pane #6 with its tiny bill is surely a male. The many races of Dunlin worldwide exhibit tremendous variation in coloration, size, and structure.

with love, arite

[Arthur Morris]

Artie, thanks for the additional information. I still have a lot to learn, especially when it comes to peeps. You're right about internet searches. When I do a search for a specific species, it's amazing how many random, mis-identified birds pop up.

Here's the whole Dunlin, sans legs.

Thanks for the full frame. The clipped rear leg in Pane #1 really bugged me. Such crops, however, including mine, often result in still awkward compositions in cases like this. On super important point is that the bird's face in the original post is quite dark, in part because you exposed properly for the WHITEs, and in part, because of the seemingly perfect head angle -- with the head square to the back of the camera -- the bird's head is actually turned a bit away from the (yes, soft) light. That is why I generally prefer the bird's head turned one or two degrees towards us ... I address the too-dark face problem in the repost.

with love, artie

ps: See more on the dark-face problems in my Diving Blue-footed Booby #1 blog post here.

pps: I extended each leg just a bit ...

[Bill Dix]

Thanks. I didn't mean to suggest that it was a juvie. I figured it was probably an adult, in his breeding territory. I noticed the large difference in bill size, but didn't realize it signified male.

[Arthur Morris]

Artie, thanks for the additional information. I still have a lot to learn, especially when it comes to peeps. You're right about internet searches. When I do a search for a specific species, it's amazing how many random, mis-identified birds pop up.

Here's the whole Dunlin, sans legs.

Thanks for the full frame. The clipped rear leg in Pane #1 really bugged me. Such crops, however, including mine, often result in still awkward compositions in cases like this. On super important point is that the bird's face in the original post is quite dark, in part because you exposed properly for the WHITEs, and in part, because of the seemingly perfect head angle -- with the head square to the back of the camera -- the bird's head is actually turned a bit away from the (yes, soft) light. That is why I generally prefer the bird's head turned one or two degrees towards us ... I address the too-dark face problem in the repost.

with love, artie

ps: See more on the dark-face problems in my Diving Blue-footed Booby #1 blog post here.

pps: I extended each leg just a bit ...

[Bill Dix]

A definite improvement. Thank you again.

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks. I didn't mean to suggest that it was a juvie. I figured it was probably an adult, in his breeding territory. I noticed the large difference in bill size, but didn't realize it signified male.

In general, male shorebirds have shorter bills than females. The bill lengths vary among individuals of the same sex. That is what makes it so much fun to see a female long-billed dow on the long end of the bill length scale ...