Amur or Japanese Paradise flycatcher - lighting issue (1 Viewer)

[earlytorise]

I took these two photos in Hong Kong yesterday. It seems to me that the wings are rufous enough to ID the bird as Amur Paradise Flycatcher and not Japanese.

However, would it be possible for 'overexposure' on a photo to make the wings on a female Japanese look 'more rufous'? (The photos are NOT edited.)

This question concerns photography more than anything else, but I suppose people with experience dealing with difficult IDs will know a bit about it.

Thanks and cheers!

 

[Butty]

Could you give the location, please? Thanks.
Colours as perceived in photos are subject to a whole bag of unknowable influences. There is actually no such thing as an 'unedited' digital photo given that photos are all manipulated in-camera by the camera's own software at point of digitisation.

 

[Vyomkesh]

Would be good to know location as Asian is spilt into - Indian, Blyth's and Amur Paradise Flycatchers.


As far as lighting is concerned, overexposure can change ratio (eg - a slightly dark superclilium may look more darker as the lighter colors become more exposed). Try exposing yourself, should help.

 

[Butty]

Try exposing yourself, should help.

I think we'd mostly prefer not to.
🚓

 

[KenM]

Location is given!…Hong Kong.

Cheers

 

[Butty]

The original post was edited immediately after my comment, to add the location as a result of my request, and to change 'Asian' to 'Amur'.

 

[James Eaton]

I took these two photos in Hong Kong yesterday. It seems to me that the wings are rufous enough to ID the bird as Amur Paradise Flycatcher and not Japanese.

However, would it be possible for 'overexposure' on a photo to make the wings on a female Japanese look 'more rufous'? (The photos are NOT edited.)

This question concerns photography more than anything else, but I suppose people with experience dealing with difficult IDs will know a bit about it.

Thanks and cheers!

One thing I have learnt more than anything when judging photos of this species complex is the need for more than a single photo from a single angle - for suboptimal photos, really need 2-3 different angles to be sure, as you mention, largely due to lighting effects.
As such, no critical detail can be picked out from these photos for a firm identification.

James

 

[Vyomkesh]

I think we'd mostly prefer not to.
🚓

Ya, but that was just to check. Keep original image.