November

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Back to Public Comments ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Phil Pickering (208.46.229.179) on November 24, 2000 at 22:23:37:

I don't have much to add except that I think the proportionately small-headed look is also wrong for a peep/stint (looks like a stint who's body was inflated with a tire pump!) I agree with the previous comments on Pectoral vs. Sharp-tailed. The duskiness and streaking dipping on the central breast, lack of a defined eye-ring, supercilium narrowing instead of widening behind the eye, and the general pattern and extent of streaking on the face and head all seem right for Pec and wrong for ST. Also, my impression is that the white back lines forming the stint-like V mark seem, on average, to be more defined in juvenile Pec than ST.

The apparent darkness of the legs is undoubtedly due to the shading. In the photo on the right the back side of the visible leg is getting some light, and appears quite pale.

Cheers,

Phil

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: I don't have much to add except that I think the proportionately small-headed look is also wrong for a peep/stint (looks like a stint who's body was inflated with a tire pump!) I agree with the previous comments on Pectoral vs. Sharp-tailed. The duskiness and streaking dipping on the central breast, lack of a defined eye-ring, supercilium narrowing instead of widening behind the eye, and the general pattern and extent of streaking on the face and head all seem right for Pec and wrong for ST. Also, my impression is that the white back lines forming the stint-like V mark seem, on average, to be more defined in juvenile Pec than ST. : The apparent darkness of the legs is undoubtedly due to the shading. In the photo on the right the back side of the visible leg is getting some light, and appears quite pale. : Cheers, : Phil

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Public Comments ] [ FAQ ]