• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

ID Central France (1 Viewer)

What a nice pitfall picture, I must admit, when the black and white pattern of a Skylark wasnt there, the bird had given a Skylark-jizz to me:
  • capped appearance could be bolder, but thankfully long supercilium with white rear-end reaching to the nape is just visible
  • dark framing to ear-coverts could be clearer, but its there (puuh!)
  • pinkish-flesh bill is a result of strong backlight (how bad!)
  • tail looks long, but I think this is exagerrated by the position of the wing
I must admit I double checked the black and white wing/alula pattern but it looks correct (position, extent and colours) to me, so it has to be a Woodlark.
 
Just noticed, that first sentence of my previous post should read: What a nice pitfall picture, I must admit, when the black and white pattern of a Woodlark wasnt there, the bird had given a Skylark-jizz to me:

now, it makes sense.
 
What a nice pitfall picture, I must admit, when the black and white pattern of a Skylark wasnt there, the bird had given a Skylark-jizz to me:
  • capped appearance could be bolder, but thankfully long supercilium with white rear-end reaching to the nape is just visible
  • dark framing to ear-coverts could be clearer, but its there (puuh!)
  • pinkish-flesh bill is a result of strong backlight (how bad!)
  • tail looks long, but I think this is exagerrated by the position of the wing
I must admit I double checked the black and white wing/alula pattern but it looks correct (position, extent and colours) to me, so it has to be a Woodlark.
I apologise for failing to reply earlier my mistake. Thanks for the ID. Mike.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 3 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top