|
Storm News
[Index][Aussie-Wx] |
Australian Weather Mailing List Archives: Wednesday, 18 August 1999 |
From Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
001 Anthony Cornelius [cyclone at flatrate.net.au] [Fwd: re snowfall 1984 queensland]
002 steve baynham [bayns at nor.com.au] photo development - saturdays storms
003 Lindsay [writer at lisp.com.au] Re: Snow at Orange
004 Lindsay [writer at lisp.com.au] Rain/snowline
005 Anthony Cornelius [cyclone at flatrate.net.au] photo development - saturdays storms
006 "len stewart" [lelj at primus.com.au] Photos of Saturdays storms.
007 Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU] Perth warm overnight for August
008 Ben Quinn [bodie at flatrate.net.au] photo development - saturdays storms
009 "Michael Thompson" [michaelt at ozemail.com.au] Photos of Saturdays storms.
010 Keith Barnett [weather at ozemail.com.au] photo development - saturdays storms
011 Jimmy Deguara [jdeguara at ihug.com.au] [Fwd: re snowfall 1984 queensland]
012 Ira Fehlberg [jra at upnaway.com] Photos of Saturdays storms.
013 "Michael Thompson" [michaelt at ozemail.com.au] photo development - saturdays storms
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
001
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 00:15:59 +1000
From: Anthony Cornelius [cyclone at flatrate.net.au]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: Australian Weather Mailing List [aussie-weather at world.std.com]
Subject: aus-wx: [Fwd: re snowfall 1984 queensland]
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Hi all,
I received this email, I don't recall a snowfall in July 1984 (maybe
because I was only 2 years old! :) ) Perhaps some one else can help
him?
Anthony Cornelius
-------- Original Message --------
Hi AnthonyI'm Sam and I live in the Gold Coast Hinterland. Do you or
any other member in Queensland remember the snowfall of July 1984? I
heard the snowfall at Springbrook was quite large. Do you have any
photos of snowfalls in Queensland? regardsSam
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
002
X-Sender: bayns at nornet.nor.com.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 00:38:24 +1000
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
From: steve baynham [bayns at nor.com.au]
Subject: aus-wx: photo development - saturdays storms
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
hey marty and all,
i too tell photo places that there are some star shots and stuff and to print all negatives, however cheap photo places like chemists and newsagencies i've found are really crap and i doubt they read the instructions (lazy pricks). but no one has not taken their time with each negative at all, unless i come back and say "i want this one darker and this one aswell and all these too!!" i spose once you've given them heaps of money from previous developments they might take care with your photos, but i think that is soo wrong! they should do it from the start. $14 is a lot of money. especially to some!!
i've lost count of the amount of times i've had to take them back or many not being dun at all, simply cos the machine doesn't pick them up and skips them just so they save paper!!! AAARRRGGG!!! it shits me soooo much!!!!!! and its this reason that my ambition now is to own my own friggen shop!!!! and have GOOD service!! puff puff puff
i'm Alan Jones
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
003
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 07:18:28 -0700
From: Lindsay [writer at lisp.com.au]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Re: Snow at Orange
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Thanks Ross,
IT's a nice place to camp, up there on the summit.
Lindsay P.
Ross Wilson wrote:
>
> Hi Lindsay and all
>
> Very little snow lying around on Mt Canobolas this morning (Monday).
> In fact, most of it had gone by mid to late Sunday.
> Some small areas of snow still visible right on the summit of Canobolas,
> and more on the southern side, near Mt Towac.
> Very cold conditions here overnight, but the snow should be just about
> all gone by tomorrow.
> No snow at all remaining below about 4000 ft.
> Weather today: Cold and sunny, light S breeze. Temp ~5C
>
> Ross Wilson
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
004
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 07:25:08 -0700
From: Lindsay [writer at lisp.com.au]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Rain/snowline
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
You are right Laurier,
The wind was light in the Shooters Hill area rather than still although
the fall I observed for approx. half an hour at the Jenolan/Kanangra
turn off fell in quite still conditions.
Lindsay
Laurier Williams wrote:
>
> I rode the bike down to Shooters Hill yesterday early afternoon to see
> what snow was left. Patchy covering about 1 to 3cm deep above 1200m
> was all that was left. Of interest was the complete absence of
> drifting of any kind, though the pine trees all still had a thin line
> of snow crystals right up the western side of their trunks, even deep
> in the forest; from which I deduce that the wind was very light but
> not calm while the snow was falling.
>
> The lack of snow depth compared to previous falls indicates the
> dryness of the outbreak.
>
> Laurier
>
> On Sun, 15 Aug 1999 21:21:24 -0700, Lindsay
> wrote:
>
> >I was just reflecting on the borderline snow conditions up our way last
> >Saturday.
> >
> >It was really interesting out Oberon way, watching this.
> >
> >As I left Oberon - roads wet but no precip. there at 2pm Saturday - and
> >made my way towards Shooters Hill things suddenly changed. Very slight
> >sleet along the road and then 5 or so k's out of Shooters wet snow just
> >"appeared" as I drove up higher and then got heavier and heavier. This
> >was the place where I got out of the car and stood in the snow for ten
> >minutes allowing myself to get covered in it. It was actually the very
> >same place on the road that prevented me from going further in that June
> >chase because of the snow on the road. I only had a t-shirt, light
> >jumper and a turtle-necked jumper and was not cold at all. It was great
> >amongst the pines - I took a self-timer shot of me crouching next to a
> >large wombat hole here amongst some slightly deeper drift snow.
> >
> >
> >I followed the snow showers as best I could back towards Edith, a small
> >place on the way out to Jenolan Caves around 1080 metres, where it was
> >lightly sleeting and I could see the white hillsides further ahead. As I
> >drove on in the mud and slush, the sleet gradually became more snowy and
> >then when I got to the turn off to Jenolan/Kanangra Walls(just before
> >that steep descent) it was drifting down beautifully, absolutely no
> >breeze and quite large flakes fell for quite some time. About half an
> >inch of snow settled on the car roof. I just sat in the car there, in
> >between getting out to view the hills, and listened to the snow on the
> >roof - and read the paper. The roads are on the ridge tops so you can
> >get a pretty good go at following the showers around here. Definately a
> >great spot to snow chase when the snow is marginal.
> >
> >Laurier, your Synop/AWS stuff helped me as well as Don's early
> >indication
> >of some possible developments on that day. Not to mention Mount Boyce
> >lookout and the low cloud that was cleary over Shooters with temps
> >around zero.
> >
> >
> >
> >Like I said, enjoyable, not unreal but very enjoyable :-)
> >
> >
> >Lindsay.
> >
> > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> > with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> > message.
> > -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
>
> --
> Laurier Williams
> Australian Weather Links and News
> http://www.ozemail.com.au/~wbc/
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
005
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 09:29:43 +1000
From: Anthony Cornelius [cyclone at flatrate.net.au]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Subject: Re: aus-wx: photo development - saturdays storms
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Hi all,
I've found it very difficult (in fact impossible) to "train" any of the
film proccessing & development places that I have gone too. My nearest
Kodak is the worst - I wanted to get my Nov 24 shelf cloud set
reprinted, I thought that they might make the pictures look overexposed
(the original place I took them to in Noosa were fine, they came out
PERFECTLY). So, in order to avoid the reprints looking overexposed, I
thought that I would include an original picture and I told them "this
is what it looked like, and this is how I want the photos to look like,
becareful you don't overexpose them as they're all cloud photos" - the
lady there said "yes, sure, no problem." So I went away and came back
for the next day expecting a great set of reprints...duh...silly me, how
thoughtless of me! The first photo I got showed looked exactly the same
as the original, so I thought 'great! They got it right!' But when I
took them home and opened them, only ONE photo was like the original,
the rest were all overexposed and looked RS - I couldn't believe it!
So I took them back and this time took my entire photo album and told
them that I wanted them ALL to look like it...they finally did get it
done, even then it's not as good as the original.
The comment I got back was "oh, you wanted them ALL to look like the
originals?" Hmm...you wonder where these people completed their
education at times...
I've now started taking them to Photo Continental (like a
semi-proffessional place), but I haven't given them a cloud roll yet.
However, I did get one enlargement done with them, and it was quite well
done.
I've had a plethora of cases where I've told them that they're all cloud
photos, and they still can't get it right. It really is quite
exasperating at times.
My whinge for the day...
Anthony Cornelius
steve baynham wrote:
>
> hey marty and all,
> i too tell photo places that there are some star shots and stuff and to print all negatives, however cheap photo places like chemists and newsagencies i've found are really crap and i doubt they read the instructions (lazy pricks). but no one has not taken their time with each negative at all, unless i come back and say "i want this one darker and this one aswell and all these too!!" i spose once you've given them heaps of money from previous developments they might take care with your photos, but i think that is soo wrong! they should do it from the start. $14 is a lot of money. especially to some!!
> i've lost count of the amount of times i've had to take them back or many not being dun at all, simply cos the machine doesn't pick them up and skips them just so they save paper!!! AAARRRGGG!!! it shits me soooo much!!!!!! and its this reason that my ambition now is to own my own friggen shop!!!! and have GOOD service!! puff puff puff
>
> i'm Alan Jones
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
006
From: "len stewart" [lelj at primus.com.au]
To: [disarm at braenet.com.au]
Cc:
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Photos of Saturdays storms.
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 09:40:38 +0800
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Re your over/under exposed pics;
1. Your camera is using centre weighted metering, obvious from pics with
very bright areas particularly near centre of image.If your camera has
exposure compensation control (+/- control) set it to +1 when you have this
type of situation. It is almost the same as photographing snow, which needs
a +1 or +2 compensation to obtain "white" snow. The BIG problem with using
this control is that you WILL at some stage forget to reset comp control
afterwards (we all do). An alternative is as someone else mentioned is to
use exposure lock, or better still, manual exposure.
2. Using the slowest ISO film possible will reduce the contrast and help
the situation. For really important pics take the negs to a good lab and
have custom print made, the image is on the neg and with custom printing it
can be printed out.
3. If you camera does not have manual exposure capability an old manual
type SLR (Nikkormat for example, available for around $100) will give you
manual exposure, and guarantee to overcome the problem. Using any form of
auto exposure with a subject with a huge range of contrasts is beyond the
ability of all many SLR metering systems.
Len Stewart
--- Original Message -----
> Hi Everyone.
>
> I have scanned some of the better photos and put them on my web page of
the
> small storms in Sydney on Saturday the 14th of August.
>
> http://www.braenet.com.au/~disarm click on "1999", then "August 14" for
the
> photos and a small report.
>
> Most of the photos were either overexposed or underexposed, (a close
> towering cumulus at midday turned out black/grey in the photo:(, I have no
> idea why, it could either be the film,the camera,me,or the developer. I
had
> it on manual focus with auto for all other settings. My camera is a Pentax
> MZ-50, and if anyone can help id appreciate it.
> Enjoy
> Matt Smith
> ASWA Committee Member
>
> PS-> Michael Thompson , I emailed that TV station in SLC yesterday about
> getting a copy of the video, im waiting for a reply.
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
007
From: Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Perth warm overnight for August
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 14:19:21 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
>
>
> Interesting to note Perth's overnight minimum temperatures, the city
> temperature only got down to 16.1C at 6:19am this morning, the August
> record for the city site, even though its not directly comparable to the
> new site is 16.6C.
>
> The Perth Airport 24 hour min temp in rounded numbers was 16C, the August
> record for the Perth Airport site is 16.8C. So both records getting pretty
> close.
>
> Other warm 24 hour minimums came from Lancelin and Jurien Bay, both with 17C.
>
> Jacob
Interesting, in the light of some discussion we had a couple of months
back, that Mt. Elizabeth in the Kimberley has had the lowest minimum
(3) in the state both today and yesterday.
I'd guess it's a 'frost hollow' site, but I can't get hold of any site
photos so I don't know for sure. The means from the (rather short) 5
years of record here are:
June max 28.4, min 9.1
July 28.5/7.9
August 30.0/9.8
I suspect the 20.6 degree mean diurnal range in July is the largest
for any Australian station (although it's fairly tame compared to
what can happen in some locations in the high plains and deserts of
the western US - I have seen a station record a minimum of -11 C and
maximum of 31 C in Nevada).
Lowest minimum on record there is -1.3 (in June 1998).
Blair Trewin
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
008
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 16:14:34 +1000
From: Ben Quinn [bodie at flatrate.net.au]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Subject: Re: aus-wx: photo development - saturdays storms
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Hey Ben from Brisbane here...
I take all my film to a professional photographic shop as well.. the
first few rolls of weather pictures i had developed at a Kodak came out
shocking.. but every roll i have had developed at the professional place
since then have come out fine.. it does cost me $12.95 for a roll of
24.. but hey, if you want good pics then you have to pay that little bit
extra i guess.. if i take 4-5 rolls in i can get them developed for
around $10-11 each anyway..
Just out of curiosity.. what speed film do others on the list use? (for
weather photography of course) We had a small debate about film speed in
IRC last night.. some say 400 is a good allrounder.. others say 100
speed film is the best to use.. any thoughts?
Anthony Cornelius wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've found it very difficult (in fact impossible) to "train" any of the
> film proccessing & development places that I have gone too. My nearest
> Kodak is the worst - I wanted to get my Nov 24 shelf cloud set
> reprinted, I thought that they might make the pictures look overexposed
> (the original place I took them to in Noosa were fine, they came out
> PERFECTLY). So, in order to avoid the reprints looking overexposed, I
> thought that I would include an original picture and I told them "this
> is what it looked like, and this is how I want the photos to look like,
> becareful you don't overexpose them as they're all cloud photos" - the
> lady there said "yes, sure, no problem." So I went away and came back
> for the next day expecting a great set of reprints...duh...silly me, how
> thoughtless of me! The first photo I got showed looked exactly the same
> as the original, so I thought 'great! They got it right!' But when I
> took them home and opened them, only ONE photo was like the original,
> the rest were all overexposed and looked RS - I couldn't believe it!
>
> So I took them back and this time took my entire photo album and told
> them that I wanted them ALL to look like it...they finally did get it
> done, even then it's not as good as the original.
>
> The comment I got back was "oh, you wanted them ALL to look like the
> originals?" Hmm...you wonder where these people completed their
> education at times...
>
> I've now started taking them to Photo Continental (like a
> semi-proffessional place), but I haven't given them a cloud roll yet.
> However, I did get one enlargement done with them, and it was quite well
> done.
>
> I've had a plethora of cases where I've told them that they're all cloud
> photos, and they still can't get it right. It really is quite
> exasperating at times.
>
> My whinge for the day...
>
> Anthony Cornelius
>
> steve baynham wrote:
> >
> > hey marty and all,
> > i too tell photo places that there are some star shots and stuff and to print all negatives, however cheap photo places like chemists and newsagencies i've found are really crap and i doubt they read the instructions (lazy pricks). but no one has not taken their time with each negative at all, unless i come back and say "i want this one darker and this one aswell and all these too!!" i spose once you've given them heaps of money from previous developments they might take care with your photos, but i think that is soo wrong! they should do it from the start. $14 is a lot of money. especially to some!!
> > i've lost count of the amount of times i've had to take them back or many not being dun at all, simply cos the machine doesn't pick them up and skips them just so they save paper!!! AAARRRGGG!!! it shits me soooo much!!!!!! and its this reason that my ambition now is to own my own friggen shop!!!! and have GOOD service!! puff puff puff
> >
> > i'm Alan Jones
> >
> > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> > with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> > message.
> > -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
009
From: "Michael Thompson" [michaelt at ozemail.com.au]
To: [aussie-weather at world.std.com]
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Photos of Saturdays storms.
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 17:51:10 +1000
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
I am with Ira on this one. I think that the results Ira would get would be
better regardless. Other problems I get with mini labs are dust and other
UFO's on the negatives. I am happy that you can have a lab who listens to
you, unfortunately mine don't.
Bear in mind that most model SLR cameras can produce results that far
outweigh mini lab quality capacity, just take a roll of transparencies and
check the colours compared to your best mini lab results. Some of the
problem is even the film brand as Ira states, negative film has different
emulsions dependant on brand, and each brand has different developing
requirements. If you don't believe me buy a negative scanner and try to scan
each negative regardless of brand at the same colour balance and see what
you get. The mini labs do a good job at catering for different brands, but
not up to the professional labs.
Michael
>
> So, Ira, I see no need for you to take your films to a more expensive lab,
> unless you want some serious quality work.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Marty.
> Brisbane, Australia
> martyp at dynamite.com.au
> Images of Canberra: http://www2.dynamite.com.au/martyp
> Lightning Photos: http://www2.dynamite.com.au/martyp/lightning
> ICQ: 11790565
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ira Fehlberg
> To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
> Date: Tuesday, 17 August 1999 19:45
> Subject: Re: aus-wx: Photos of Saturdays storms.
>
>
> > I agree with Michael totally, after many getting many films back with
> >dissapointing exposures i spoke to a lab technician who said exactley
what
> >Michael T said, they do an average exposure. So I started taking my films
> >to special lab (Gerry Gibbs Camera House) that expose each neg on its
own.
> >The only downside is a few more bucks and you have to wait longer for em.
I
> >dont do it all the time but i do when it counts and you will notice the
> >difference. My only other tip is, (some will disagree) but buy Fuji film,
> >ive done my own tests and in my opinion it stands up way better than
other
> >brands. If you take care of all the little pieces your will find an
overall
> >improvement for sure.
> >
> > Ira Fehlberg
> >
> >PS: BTW the pics look great anyway!!!!
> >
> >At 17:57 17/08/99 +1000, you wrote:
> >>Pretty spectacular pics regardless, the hail shafts are quite evident in
> >>your Sydney shots, the clouds were down here in the Illawarra did not
have
> >>well developed features.
> >>
> >>The MZ-50 is a camera that I have considered purchasing and I hold it
high
> >>regard. I have learnt two things about cloud photos 1) get as much of
the
> >>foreground out the picture as possible. With a pic spilt with the bottom
> >>half dark foreground vs light sky the light meter tends to
overcompensate
> >>for the foreground and over expose the picture in regard to clouds. Not
sure
> >>on the MZ50 metering system, if its centre weighted the answer is to
simply
> >>make sure that the viewfinder middle is your primary target. If some
other
> >>fancy metering ( as is often the case these days ) see if there is a
> >>exposure lock and lock it on a cloud filled pic. 2) number two is a
possible
> >>cause or often adds to number one, and that is mini lab processing is
crap.
> >>They cannot handle very well pics with light / dark extremes. Somebody
> >>correct me if I am talking rubbish, but I think the mini lab scan your
whole
> >>roll of film first, then apply an average exposure, this is a great
recipe
> >>for stuffing your nightime lightning pics, especially if you have sunny
> >>scenic days at the beach pics on the same roll.
> >>
> >>Regards
> >>Michael
> >
> >
> > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail
to:majordomo at world.std.com
> > with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> > message.
> > -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
> >
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
>
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
010
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 19:38:23 +1000
From: Keith Barnett [weather at ozemail.com.au]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Subject: Re: aus-wx: photo development - saturdays storms
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
I have been thinking of getting into cloud photography myself but with
all the bad luck you guys have had it seems the only safe option is to
have one's own darkroom etc and do it oneself..would that be a fair
thing to say?
Anthony Cornelius wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've found it very difficult (in fact impossible) to "train" any of the
> film proccessing & development places that I have gone too. My nearest
> Kodak is the worst - I wanted to get my Nov 24 shelf cloud set
> reprinted, I thought that they might make the pictures look overexposed
> (the original place I took them to in Noosa were fine, they came out
> PERFECTLY). So, in order to avoid the reprints looking overexposed, I
> thought that I would include an original picture and I told them "this
> is what it looked like, and this is how I want the photos to look like,
> becareful you don't overexpose them as they're all cloud photos" - the
> lady there said "yes, sure, no problem." So I went away and came back
> for the next day expecting a great set of reprints...duh...silly me, how
> thoughtless of me! The first photo I got showed looked exactly the same
> as the original, so I thought 'great! They got it right!' But when I
> took them home and opened them, only ONE photo was like the original,
> the rest were all overexposed and looked RS - I couldn't believe it!
>
> So I took them back and this time took my entire photo album and told
> them that I wanted them ALL to look like it...they finally did get it
> done, even then it's not as good as the original.
>
> The comment I got back was "oh, you wanted them ALL to look like the
> originals?" Hmm...you wonder where these people completed their
> education at times...
>
> I've now started taking them to Photo Continental (like a
> semi-proffessional place), but I haven't given them a cloud roll yet.
> However, I did get one enlargement done with them, and it was quite well
> done.
>
> I've had a plethora of cases where I've told them that they're all cloud
> photos, and they still can't get it right. It really is quite
> exasperating at times.
>
> My whinge for the day...
>
> Anthony Cornelius
>
> steve baynham wrote:
> >
> > hey marty and all,
> > i too tell photo places that there are some star shots and stuff and to print all negatives, however cheap photo places like chemists and newsagencies i've found are really crap and i doubt they read the instructions (lazy pricks). but no one has not taken their time with each negative at all, unless i come back and say "i want this one darker and this one aswell and all these too!!" i spose once you've given them heaps of money from previous developments they might take care with your photos, but i think that is soo wrong! they should do it from the start. $14 is a lot of money. especially to some!!
> > i've lost count of the amount of times i've had to take them back or many not being dun at all, simply cos the machine doesn't pick them up and skips them just so they save paper!!! AAARRRGGG!!! it shits me soooo much!!!!!! and its this reason that my ambition now is to own my own friggen shop!!!! and have GOOD service!! puff puff puff
> >
> > i'm Alan Jones
> >
> > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> > with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> > message.
> > -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
011
X-Sender: jdeguara at pop.ihug.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 20:03:01 +1000
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
From: Jimmy Deguara [jdeguara at ihug.com.au]
Subject: Re: aus-wx: [Fwd: re snowfall 1984 queensland]
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
I have been in contact with well I thought Annette.
I will contact them (him).
Jimmy
At 00:15 18/08/99 +1000, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I received this email, I don't recall a snowfall in July 1984 (maybe
>because I was only 2 years old! :) ) Perhaps some one else can help
>him?
>
>Anthony Cornelius
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: re snowfall 1984 queensland
> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 14:06:33 +1000
> From: "annette macdonald"
> To:
>
> Hi AnthonyI'm Sam and I live in the Gold Coast Hinterland. Do you or
>any other member in Queensland remember the snowfall of July 1984? I
>heard the snowfall at Springbrook was quite large. Do you have any
>photos of snowfalls in Queensland? regardsSam
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
012
X-Sender: jra at upnaway.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 18:31:56 +0800
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
From: Ira Fehlberg [jra at upnaway.com]
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Photos of Saturdays storms.
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Hey dont worry i asked them many times to tkae care as the pics are meant
to be of the clouds, the reason i started going else where was because i
would ask but they would always forget. If they did it it would be good, i
just dont like the cheap and nasty attitude some labs have, if you could
find a good lab then sure. When i said a few more bucks its only about
$2-$3 more.
Ira
At 23:32 17/08/99 +1000, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Whenever I take a roll of film, which I know to contain some night/lightning
>shots (or extremes of exposure between frames), into a one-hour mini-lab, I
>simply tell them this at the start, and they're happy to take extra care and
>develop each shot seperately without charging extra, just to keep my
business.
>
>I am a regular customer, so I guess my business is particularly valuable,
but as
>far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter where I get my photos developed how
>quickly the job is done, I expect each frame to be developed correctly.
The fact
>that they can 'average' the exposure on most people's films is not an
excuse to
>supply me with an inferior product. Every store I've requested extra care
from
>have done so happily.
>
>So, Ira, I see no need for you to take your films to a more expensive lab,
>unless you want some serious quality work.
>
>Cheers!
>
>Marty.
>Brisbane, Australia
>martyp at dynamite.com.au
>Images of Canberra: http://www2.dynamite.com.au/martyp
>Lightning Photos: http://www2.dynamite.com.au/martyp/lightning
>ICQ: 11790565
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ira Fehlberg
>To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
>Date: Tuesday, 17 August 1999 19:45
>Subject: Re: aus-wx: Photos of Saturdays storms.
>
>
>> I agree with Michael totally, after many getting many films back with
>>dissapointing exposures i spoke to a lab technician who said exactley what
>>Michael T said, they do an average exposure. So I started taking my films
>>to special lab (Gerry Gibbs Camera House) that expose each neg on its own.
>>The only downside is a few more bucks and you have to wait longer for em. I
>>dont do it all the time but i do when it counts and you will notice the
>>difference. My only other tip is, (some will disagree) but buy Fuji film,
>>ive done my own tests and in my opinion it stands up way better than other
>>brands. If you take care of all the little pieces your will find an overall
>>improvement for sure.
>>
>> Ira Fehlberg
>>
>>PS: BTW the pics look great anyway!!!!
>>
>>At 17:57 17/08/99 +1000, you wrote:
>>>Pretty spectacular pics regardless, the hail shafts are quite evident in
>>>your Sydney shots, the clouds were down here in the Illawarra did not have
>>>well developed features.
>>>
>>>The MZ-50 is a camera that I have considered purchasing and I hold it high
>>>regard. I have learnt two things about cloud photos 1) get as much of the
>>>foreground out the picture as possible. With a pic spilt with the bottom
>>>half dark foreground vs light sky the light meter tends to overcompensate
>>>for the foreground and over expose the picture in regard to clouds. Not
sure
>>>on the MZ50 metering system, if its centre weighted the answer is to simply
>>>make sure that the viewfinder middle is your primary target. If some other
>>>fancy metering ( as is often the case these days ) see if there is a
>>>exposure lock and lock it on a cloud filled pic. 2) number two is a
possible
>>>cause or often adds to number one, and that is mini lab processing is crap.
>>>They cannot handle very well pics with light / dark extremes. Somebody
>>>correct me if I am talking rubbish, but I think the mini lab scan your
whole
>>>roll of film first, then apply an average exposure, this is a great recipe
>>>for stuffing your nightime lightning pics, especially if you have sunny
>>>scenic days at the beach pics on the same roll.
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Michael
>>
>>
>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
>> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
>> message.
>> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
>>
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
>
>
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
013
From: "Michael Thompson" [michaelt at ozemail.com.au]
To: [aussie-weather at world.std.com]
Subject: Re: aus-wx: photo development - saturdays storms
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 22:39:45 +1000
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
That would be the ultimate answer, but we are now talking a whole new hobby
that is time intensive. Not to mention expensive for colour.
Michael
> I have been thinking of getting into cloud photography myself but with
> all the bad luck you guys have had it seems the only safe option is to
> have one's own darkroom etc and do it oneself..would that be a fair
> thing to say?
>
> Anthony Cornelius wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've found it very difficult (in fact impossible) to "train" any of the
> > film proccessing & development places that I have gone too. My nearest
> > Kodak is the worst - I wanted to get my Nov 24 shelf cloud set
> > reprinted, I thought that they might make the pictures look overexposed
> > (the original place I took them to in Noosa were fine, they came out
> > PERFECTLY). So, in order to avoid the reprints looking overexposed, I
> > thought that I would include an original picture and I told them "this
> > is what it looked like, and this is how I want the photos to look like,
> > becareful you don't overexpose them as they're all cloud photos" - the
> > lady there said "yes, sure, no problem." So I went away and came back
> > for the next day expecting a great set of reprints...duh...silly me, how
> > thoughtless of me! The first photo I got showed looked exactly the same
> > as the original, so I thought 'great! They got it right!' But when I
> > took them home and opened them, only ONE photo was like the original,
> > the rest were all overexposed and looked RS - I couldn't believe it!
> >
> > So I took them back and this time took my entire photo album and told
> > them that I wanted them ALL to look like it...they finally did get it
> > done, even then it's not as good as the original.
> >
> > The comment I got back was "oh, you wanted them ALL to look like the
> > originals?" Hmm...you wonder where these people completed their
> > education at times...
> >
> > I've now started taking them to Photo Continental (like a
> > semi-proffessional place), but I haven't given them a cloud roll yet.
> > However, I did get one enlargement done with them, and it was quite well
> > done.
> >
> > I've had a plethora of cases where I've told them that they're all cloud
> > photos, and they still can't get it right. It really is quite
> > exasperating at times.
> >
> > My whinge for the day...
> >
> > Anthony Cornelius
> >
> > steve baynham wrote:
> > >
> > > hey marty and all,
> > > i too tell photo places that there are some star shots and stuff and
to print all negatives, however cheap photo places like chemists and
newsagencies i've found are really crap and i doubt they read the
instructions (lazy pricks). but no one has not taken their time with each
negative at all, unless i come back and say "i want this one darker and this
one aswell and all these too!!" i spose once you've given them heaps of
money from previous developments they might take care with your photos, but
i think that is soo wrong! they should do it from the start. $14 is a lot of
money. especially to some!!
> > > i've lost count of the amount of times i've had to take them back or
many not being dun at all, simply cos the machine doesn't pick them up and
skips them just so they save paper!!! AAARRRGGG!!! it shits me soooo
much!!!!!! and its this reason that my ambition now is to own my own friggen
shop!!!! and have GOOD service!! puff puff puff
> > >
> > > i'm Alan Jones
> > >
> > >
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > > To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail
to:majordomo at world.std.com
> > > with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of
your
> > > message.
> >
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
> > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail
to:majordomo at world.std.com
> > with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of
your
> > message.
> > -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
> with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
> message.
> -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
>
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
message.
-----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
| Document: 990818.htm
Updated: 09 September 1999 |
[Australian Severe Weather index] [Copyright Notice] [Email Contacts] |