Of course they are Yellow Buntings. I was expecting subspecies level descriptions and similarities/differences with the mentioned bird. If someone claims a bird is a vagrant/rare bird, I believe should know and compare depending on the bird topography. But these (Turkey specific) information are not present in 20 USD guidebooks or on Mr. Google. I am addressing the sources and when claimants look at there will see where they fail. On the other hand instead of looking at the pictures I shared and comparing similarities with the claimed bird pictures, only identifying the pictures I shared and considering weather it is vagrant or not, is an interesting approach. For doing this, I mean seeing the yellowish cast clearly, someone should boost up or saturate the color value. But I suggested "equalizing colorimetric values" and comparing the birds.
Mr MacNara suggested increasing the contrast and draw our attention to the patterns of the bird. Mr. Roland suggested to look at the size of the bird. And MS Jane Turner pointed out the color as an ID critter, is hidden in two photos.
I follow a basic approach when I see the first photo. Since I know the behaviour of the cmos chip and canikon software, I just boost the colors on my IPad (I didn't even open my mac and Photoshop). And immediately noticed the yellow cast on the birds rear flanks. Then I prepared color corrected/increased picture together with the illustration/explanation. But holy EBird approved the claimed bird as a "pine bunting". I don't know any, any scientific information that a pine bunting has yellowish cast on the flanks, regardless of the age/sex. Perhaps I have to learn something more about pine bunting from "St. EBird approvers".
There are more complex analyzing methods: use a forensic software. But before that, the data readout capacity of the chip should be known. This information never writes on the camera manufacturer sites or cameras user manuals. Agreements on camera manufacturer and CMOS manufacturer should be read from appropriate forums or patent institutes. Then cameras internal electronics should be known very well (data bus speed etc.). A professional astronomy software can help to regulate atmospheric effects (ask someone from cloudynights, they may be helpful, otherwise it is an extremely expensive software ). After all bring the picture back to the forensic software to calculate and correlate the pixels with the critical areas, in this case the rump and the rear flanks of the bird. The pixel sizes of the used camera sensor should also be correlated. Then adjust the light conditions, concerning the photo exif information and/or USGS published values at that time. At that stage the realistic pixel colors and patterns can be reached. There are more "semi-steps" but no need to mention. Pardon? Is it too complex?, then never mind whatever bunting you want this to be, it will be that
In the last two photos (attached below) I am sharing one bird, shot almost simultaneously with two different camera systems (by two of my bird photographer friends). One of them was taken with Canon 100-400mm v2 lens with 7DM2 camera. And the other is Nikon D4s with Nikkor 500mm f4 lens. Please notice how the camera software algorithm effects the bird's ID. The lesser coverts recorded differently on two cameras. Again poor "St. ID approvers" decided differently.
Years ago, before digital age, in Turkey somebody was using the filter tricks to change the color of certain parts of a bird. Nowadays same thing is happening intentionally or (I believe) unintentionally (caused by camera algorithm). Today most of those people became academicians and prepares some bird survey reports BTW. Many international credit banks are using worlds best experts to evaluate the bird survey reports that are part of the the energy investment reports. Birds are one of the important parts of these reports. Anyone who is interested in, can find on the internet, how many birding reports were refused by the banks . Although I am not an academician, I can proudly say that none of my reports have been so far refused.
I believe many of the ID problems in birds are caused by being a bird photographer, before being a bird observer. The beginners compare their photos with guidebooks, other photos etc., not with the images they memorize. Some bird photographers uses cheap Chinese binoculars, in addition to CMOS chipped SLRs. In my opinion these people never memorize the real color, contrast and tinges of the bird feathers which can be recognized and memorized only by using top German optics and recorded by Bayer CCD based cameras (with minimal algorithm effect). World infamous (Leica master) Ara Güler and I am getting help from same mechanic master (Okan Bayülgen and Serdar Bilgili and many good photographers also get their equipment fixed by this same person..) according to that master, when Ara Güler would take a series of pictures, he first goes to the place without any memory card (in the past, film) and works to find the best view angle for hours. Then next day he goes to the scene and makes his work in half an hour. Also I worked with many British, German and Dutch master birders. Bird photography is the least interest for most of them. I recommend to young birders before being a photographer, to become a good birder. Classifying the bird photos or commenting on them with limited information is not the right way.
Murat F. Özçelik
https://vimeo.com/channels/murat