Dear All

Noticed some dramatic skies with mid-level instability and virga about
tonight (in Wimbledon) and took this shot of a developing cloud (using my
friend's excellent Canon digital camera).

Can anybody help me identify it? It looks like a mid-level cumulonimbus of
shallow extent, with what seems to be mammatus on its underside.

Any thoughts?

Cheers
Richard

Of course the link would help!

http://freespace.virgin.net/richard....loud_21jul.gif

Richard

"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
.4...
Of course the link would help!

http://freespace.virgin.net/richard....loud_21jul.gif

Richard

Decayed remains of a cu-nim.

Jack

"Jack Harrison" wrote in news:NNLSa.6014
:


"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
.4...
Of course the link would help!

http://freespace.virgin.net/richard....loud_21jul.gif

Richard

Decayed remains of a cu-nim.

Jack

Jack

It developed as we were in the garden, so could it be something else?

Richard

Tor Richard and all,

I do not think your nice cloud picture is s****atus. What has happened is
some cumuliform medium level cloud has formed in a humid layer of air-I
watched them late afternoon and they then glaciated, being very cold at this
height. around 6000 metres or so. The ice crystals fall into drier air
below evaporating and cooling this layer causing a sinking motion that forms
the mamma.

Hope this helps

Ian Currie-Coulsdon
www.Frostedearth.com





"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
.4...
Dear All

Noticed some dramatic skies with mid-level instability and virga about
tonight (in Wimbledon) and took this shot of a developing cloud (using my
friend's excellent Canon digital camera).

Can anybody help me identify it? It looks like a mid-level cumulonimbus of
shallow extent, with what seems to be mammatus on its underside.

Any thoughts?

Cheers
Richard

"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
.4...
Of course the link would help!

http://freespace.virgin.net/richard....loud_21jul.gif

Richard

Just a pointer - the way to go with photo type images is with a jpg, not a
gif. Gif's are limited to 256 colours and are fairly inefficient for
compressing photo type images. a JPG allows full 16.7m colours and is more
appropriate for photos. Gif's are typically suited to more diagramatic
stuff.

Doug

"Doug Ellison" wrote in
:

Just a pointer - the way to go with photo type images is with a jpg,
not a gif. Gif's are limited to 256 colours and are fairly inefficient
for compressing photo type images. a JPG allows full 16.7m colours and
is more appropriate for photos. Gif's are typically suited to more
diagramatic stuff.

Thanks for that - the original was a 5.1 megapixel jpeg but I thought I'd
trim it down a bit so that most people could view it more easily (at 400k).

Re-saving as a .jpg at the same size this time around actually differs very
little in filesize to the .gif but, as you say, has more colours. I'll
remember that for next time!

Cheers
Richard

"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
. 1.4...
"Doug Ellison" wrote in
:

Just a pointer - the way to go with photo type images is with a jpg,
not a gif. Gif's are limited to 256 colours and are fairly inefficient
for compressing photo type images. a JPG allows full 16.7m colours and
is more appropriate for photos. Gif's are typically suited to more
diagramatic stuff.

Thanks for that - the original was a 5.1 megapixel jpeg but I thought I'd
trim it down a bit so that most people could view it more easily (at
400k).

Re-saving as a .jpg at the same size this time around actually differs
very
little in filesize to the .gif but, as you say, has more colours. I'll
remember that for next time!

If you use photoshop - the 'save for web' feature's very usefull

Doug

"Jack Harrison" wrote in message
...
|
| "Richard Dixon" wrote in message
| .4...
| Of course the link would help!
|
| http://freespace.virgin.net/richard....loud_21jul.gif
|
| Richard
|
| Decayed remains of a cu-nim.
|
| Jack

There were no CB in the SE yesterday Jack so I think that's highly unlikely.

Joe

"Joe Hunt"

There were no CB in the SE yesterday Jack so I think that's highly
unlikely.

That is of course true. But the date on the image was 21 July which is
today!

So I was confused as to which day the photo was actually taken. I thought
it must have been on Sunday when I certainly saw decayed cunims over
southern of East Anglia as I drove southwest along the A11 at around 2030
BST

Jack