White Gull. North Yorkshire (1 Viewer)

[MICKYFISH]

South of Staithes harbour, this afternoon. Similar size to Herring gulls that it was associating with. ?leucistic. Thanks Michael

 

[THE_FERN]

Probably leucistic for me. Structure wrong for iceland, glaucous I think. But the colours are not balanced—you can see looks a bit like a 1970s over-saturated print in the back of camera shot

 

[MICKYFISH]

Will try to improve quality. Currently using the Cod and Lobster’s WiFi.

 

[MICKYFISH]

Does this one look any better? Shows red base to bill?

 

[Butty]

Now the primaries also look red(dish), which isn't reassuring. Strong colour cast. Posting the actual photo is hugely preferable.

 

[Alexander Stöhr]

Hello Micky,

yes I agree with you and The Fern its a leucistic bird.
And thanks for the new, better=much easier to ID picture. It makes assesement much easier= more confident imo:
I think its not one of the "white-winged gulls", but either a Herring or maybe better a Lesser Black backed Gull (smallish, rounded head and no massive bill, giving it a Common Gull impression).
Yes, its easy to read the question wrong and knowing that the observer who has seen the bird in the field can often give a better description than a picture (an a back of the camera shot like here), the original pictures might possibly change features.

The primaries seems quite uniformally patterned with dark pigments implicating a dark/even blackish wingtip (a 1cy=1st cycle bird?) And a dark bill with fleshy base would fit a 1 cy HG or LBBG quite good.

But I agree with The Fern and Butty: better wait for the original pictures. No offence you know.

 

[Mike Crawley]

I was edging towards leucistic Common Gull looking at the structure

 

[RichieTwitchy]

I just don't understand why people continue to upload images taken via the back of a camera???

Forgive me if I'm wrong..... but people ask for a definite ID yet upload a photo where the colours WILL be affected by the glare of the screen, the colour balance of not only the original image but then the displayed image and then the mobile phone image taking the photo of the camera screen too! Crazy!

These days it is so easy to Bluetooth the original image to a phone for upload (if the camera can't already do that itself) and cameras aslo have editing tools to reduce file sizes and render jpgs (from original RAW images) so file size is not an issue. Or even put the card in the phone - or vice versa using an adaptor. Or send it by carrier pigeon, or a taxi, or print it off then put it in an envelope and mail it - at least it'll be a better image!

Or - wait until you get home and upload it from your device!

Sorry about the rant - I'll go and have a sit down now.

 

[MICKYFISH]

Thanks guys. Now back in civilisation, well Lincolnshire anyway. Apologies to Ritchie Twitchy, I was trying to get this out in case it was something rare. Rather than get ranted at by folks tomorrow for not getting it out earlier.
Anyway, original shots attached.
Thanks again for your time and patience.
Michael

 

[RichieTwitchy]

I thought that may be the case - but you can't beat an original image

 

[Butty]

Presumably aberrant common gull. I guess head and chest were actually white? - in which case there's still a significant colour cast which you might try and remove in order to aid assessment...