Hello, Supportstorm, and welcome to Wikipedia! I am MBisanz and I would like to thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), which are produced by clicking on the button; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Also, I think that you might want to join the the adopt-a-user project, where advanced editors can guide you in your first experiences here; so check it out if you want. Again, welcome!
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
Hey, I was wondering, with whichever program you use, whether you could find an image if Typhoon Pamela in 1976? It peaked on May 19 near Guam. That would be an amazing help if you could! :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:52, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm using a index from NCDC to find the images, but the problem is that it only goes back to 1978. It's kind of hard to find quality images else where, but I'll try :)Supportstorm (talk) 01:29, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh neat, so that's the archive! What folder do you use in there to get the pretty color images? I'm looking through and can only find black and white (or the funky color SSMI). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I process the images, adding a natural colored world map to it. I try to make images as natural as possible. I'm sure the NOAA CLASS website has the true natural colored images that are full resolution, but I don't have the programs that can geo-correct and process the information. Supportstorm (talk) 22:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the available images and couldn't find any that were good. I could make a colored and geo-corrected image that is about the same resolution as the current one. Would that be alright? Supportstorm (talk) 00:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hurricane Irene imgaes
Just an FYI: continuing to add old and decidedly irrellevant photos to the Hurricane Irene (2011) article infobox is not helpful and, in reality, has the appearance of edit warring. Further, when adding a more recent photo, please make sure it is cropped correctly. The last one you added to the Irene page had a huge section in a lower left that was missing. Thanks. Lhb1239 (talk) 22:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well the image I had uploaded at the time was newer then the one previously, and is in no way edit warring which is not my intent at all, my intent is to provide MODIS images when they are available, and lastly my cropping is correct, the satellite had not collected data for that section and I could not have shown the storm without that part. I appreciate your effort to keep images up to date, but I have done this for two years following the project standards. Supportstorm (talk) 05:42, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Project standards"? Where are you finding "project standards" for hurricane satellite photos included in articles about hurricanes? As far as edit warring -- no, you weren't edit warring in the traditional fashion. But, if you look above at what I actually said, I stated what you were doing had the "appearance" of edit warring. And, in a sense (remember, edit warring is a bright-line rule), you were edit warring. Especially when putting in a days old photo in favor of a newer, more relevant photo. Doing this for two year is certainly commendable, however, talking about what you were doing and why would have gone a lot further for gaining points with me (and others, I imagine) in the area of editing collegially and cooperatively. Lhb1239 (talk) 15:14, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not too long ago the project had agreed that 250-m MODIS images, that were 5x5, were to be used. I usually post an image once, but other user may have tried to re-add images over your's. All my images of tropical cyclones are relevant, I really have no idea why they wouldn't be, the images obviously show a cyclone when it was active. I'm trying to remain cooperative with you, but this will just continue in a disagreement. No one had told me I was wrong till you came on here, so I just didn't feel the need to talk about it. Sorry for the misconception that my edits may have had, hope we can reach an agreement soon. Supportstorm (talk) 17:47, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Because Hurricane Irene is a continually developing storm (until it's no longer a storm at all), it makes sense that updated and current images would be relevant, whereas old images not representing the storm in its current state would not be. At this time, as with the storm itself, the article continues to change. Once the storm has passed, I can see where the best, most interesting photo would be the choice to represent the article. Glad to know you are "trying to remain cooperative", as this, of course, is imperative for collegial editing in Wikipedia. Anything else is seen as disruptive and not welcomed. In response to your reference to the "standard" being MODIS images -- you linked to a discussion, but I see nothing in that discussion that states MODIS is the standard or even Wikipedia policy. Until it's policy, it's just a discussion. Lhb1239 (talk) 18:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the updating images and the most interesting photo being added after the storm has dissipated, but the polices only contains within the bounds of the project, and most of theses are only discussed and do tend to lead to arguments and confusion elsewhere on Wikipedia, so I guess it's not as valid. The "project standard thing" was started to make images fit the info boxes better, and MODIS is most commonly used as it is a near true colored image and is the highest resolution in satellite imagery that we have easy access to, but it's not as reliable. Other images can be used, I never said they couldn't be. Well I believe the problem is solved, real-time images can be used to represent a storm while it is still active, but after it has dissipated MODIS can be used to represent the storm as a whole like it has been. Supportstorm (talk) 19:02, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Images retrieved from the MODIS Rapid Response System
Haha, actually, I see your confusion. The unnamed storm was in the wrong position (after Gilbert), even though it formed before Florence. How goes the TC-photo project? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:58, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's going well. I plan to, at some point, upload most of the colored AVHRR images of the cyclones in the HURSAT database, and if they release the full resolution GOES images soon I'll be working on that too. Supportstorm (talk) 23:15, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I’m currently in Maputo, where Irina has attempted to land on two different occasions (Sat 3 March more or less all afternoon and night of Sun 4 March) . We have been trying to find a website that would give us a good idea of where it is going, as it is a matter of some concern for some of the people here staying in the same house. Just a while ago I realized that Wikipedia also might have info on tracking the storm, and I was right, I suppose thanks to your efforts. Could you suggest some website that we could follow? Would be most grateful if you could help us out. Apanuggpak (talk) 22:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the barn star! You also have done a great job on helping out the West Pacific and Southern Hemisphere articles, and you've also done a good job in uploading cyclone image quickly. Keep it up :) Supportstorm (talk) 12:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, but I use only Photoshop, and I've spent a few year trying to perfect how to do it and is quite a lengthy process. The most complete explanation is found here, but I've since improved this process. Lune, the person who asked, was using Gimp with OK results. Few hints: instead of screen use color in the 45ish range and use color select and completely desaturate the clouds afterwards. Supportstorm (talk) 09:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
wow wow wow! that's amazing! I knew that you deserved the Barnstar below! I mean, it is a miracle you added the other unseen side of the storm, and making the image so high definition and big! ✯Earth100✯ ^‿^TalkContribs01:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, looking back I made an error on the date it is June 2, but the pressure is correct. Here are the source: [2] and I thought there was a IBTrAC data for it, but if the source above is not valid please tell me. Supportstorm (talk) 17:11, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going through the IBTrACS and the RSMC has the wind speeds like that, and I'm not sure if I should round up or down on some of them. I think it's the BOM region that's the problem. More or less I'm trying to correct the dates of the cyclones, but would you like me to stop the editing? Supportstorm (talk) 03:41, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be wiser if you switched from using IBTrACS to the data contained either in the spreadsheet or the reports here. As for rounding youve gotta play it by ear, the general rule though is if its above 3 you go up, below you go down. Regards.Jason Rees (talk) 14:20, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you color up this image of Nalgae at peak intensity? After that, just put a link to the the image below, and i think of what to do with the image.
And also do the same trick on this one, saying File:Nalgae over Philippians and date. :D
-- ✯Earth100✯ ^‿^TalkContribs12:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I hope you know that those images are twice as small in resolution as the 1km versions. Here is the September 30 image, and here is the October 1. You can tell me if you want something else or if the images need more editing. Supportstorm (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I create them as requested or needed. Though if you are looking for actual true-colored images from the NRL they've recently started collecting data from NASA's NPP VIIRS satellite as example with Hurricane Daniel. If you have some requests I'll except them. Supportstorm (talk) 15:43, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Supportstorm! I was wondering if you could make track maps for all storms in the individual periods of pre-1900 (← 1851 to 1899, in that case), 1900-1943, and 1944-1979 that have affected Texas, similar to the image on the right. The storms to be included are on those pages. Thanks! --TheAustinMan(Talk|Works)15:29, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That could take awhile to complete. I have to individually create the tracks because the the Wikipedia method is not PC friendly. I'll see what I can do though. :) Supportstorm (talk) 16:51, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Completed! Tell me if you want a different crop area, or if you want me to remove the Texas boundary. I also mapped out the entire track of all these storms so we can have an image of where they had formed and dissipated. I'm moving on to the 1900-1943 hurricanes soon. Supportstorm (talk) 01:03, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
umm... can you do color up a Infrared image which is high resolution, and shows the storm with a perfect eye? If you can't find any, just upload the exact image i requested(in color).-- ✯Earth100✯ ^‿^TalkContribs05:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I found the source for the image you requested and it was only 400X400 and thought I could find a better image using a polar orbiting satellite image at near the same time. The two images are only 20 minutes apart, but yeah I guess the eye fills in during that time. Anyway I was finally able to track down an up scaled version this morning and this is what I got: [3]. Hope it's better Supportstorm (talk) 11:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That should do it. Thanks a Billion! ^O^
And, can you find, color, up, a image which shows the Vicente at right at landfall, with an un-distorted eye?(that means one part of the eye is still at sea, and the other half at land) and upload to wiki?-- ✯Earth100✯ ^‿^TalkContribs12:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! Could you possibly upload an image of Cyclone Nadia? I'm about to publish an article on it, located here, and the biggest thing missing is a satellite pic! --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:43, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha well I guess it was just luck. Anyway thanks for helping out the older Southern Hemisphere storm seasons. They are the most neglected in the project and for the amount of data on most storm I'm surprised by how little articles we have on them. Supportstorm (talk) 00:27, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, I've felt bad about that for a while. I'm glad User:Yellow Evan and User:Kiewii have both been helping back there. The sad thing is that they're not that old. They're just in the 1990s. I'm gonna try and make sure that the most important storm each season from 1990 to the present has an article in the SWIO, since that basin is worse than AUS or SPAC. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I've been very busy the last week and this might be the only time I have. Ok first you might need a lot of free space on your HDD as the map images can be very large. I want you to download the jpegs from this link: http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=74117. Now a very important link is where I find most of my satellite imagery which is here: http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/archdat/test/kml/TC/. Now here is were we need to understand that the map images and satellite imagery are not in scale. You will need to have the ability to re size and stretch the satellite images to match the features on the map image, such as rivers, coastlines, etc. This can be particularly frustrating and time consuming. After you have perfectly matched features on the satellite picture to the features on the map we can now move on to the next step. Crop the image, click on the magic wand tool and have the settings to; 15 tolerance, anti-alias on, and contiguous on. Click on the brightest area of the image, and keep pressing the similar option until you are happy with how much of the clouds you have selected. Feather the selected area by 2 pixels, then select any black areas (anywhere the satellite did not record a image) with the add to selection option. Inverse what you have selected. Now switch to the map layer and take the clone stamp tool with this settings; Mode: Exclusion, 46% opacity, 100% flow. Alt+click anywhere on the map layer, don't move the mouse then click again. Undo the clone stamp and switch to the satellite image layer (You should still have the memory of the map layer with your clone tool) and fill the entire image with the clone tool. Switch the settings to screen and do the same thing. Then switch the settings to color and once again fill the image. Deselect the image. Go to Image>Adjustments>Replace Color. Select the brightest area of the image, completely Desaturate the area, and than chose how much you want to set the fuzziness so that it still looks natural. Now if you have the option; Image>Adjustments>Shadows/Highlights. Increase the shadows to a point were it still looks natural, but not too noisy and decrease the highlights if needed. If this step produces a undesirable image readjust the settings till it looks good. Equalize the image and fade it so that it removes most of the haze in the image. Correct the contrast and adjust saturation if needed. Re size the image to it's native resolution and flatten image. You should be about done at this point, but if you do not like the results try experimenting. This is what I have been doing, but please note that I will likely change and improve the steps in the future like what I did in the past. Any question or clarification on any step I will be happy to help. Supportstorm (talk) 00:07, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: I have no problem with you using JTWC for dates when they are the only warning centre, but we have to be careful and can not just take the dates direct from their BT as it includes points for Tropical Disturbances and Extratropical cyclones.Jason Rees (talk) 00:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I think they only track a storm when it is tropical. So all points on their BT are valid and do not include when it was a disturbance or extra tropical. Supportstorm (talk) 02:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disturbance Points or whatever are included at times but i realize they dont distinguish for older systems - which is a pain in the but. To circumnavigate this problem i always pull up the relevant ATCR and check it or i remember that the JTWC do not declare things tropical outside of the WPAC till it reaches 35 kts.Jason Rees (talk) 03:13, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed you've replaced the Bob01 picture with a higher definition one? Where's the source for it? And feel free to replace all cyclone, typhoon, hurricane, images with a better one!
I'm still getting the hang of this new program HDFLook which process the original HDF files into Geo-tiffs and has a much improved image quality than both WMS and the MODIS Gallery images. Only problem is I still don't know how to merge two HDF Files together correctly yet. Supportstorm (talk) 23:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Supportstorm, could you upload an image Rafael at peak intensity?
(STO12's image dosen't looks pretty good, as it dosen't show the center in the image, and the whole storm's convection.)
Looking' forward to that image mate! -- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉TalkContribs05:54, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Supportstorm, greetings from Hong Kong, China. There's an ongoing discussion, on whether or not JMA TDs at Tropical Depression intensity should be kept out of the "Other storms section"
Note: You received this message because you have contributed to tropical cyclone related articles and I thought you may be interested.
Keep it up!
Hello Supportstorm! I just like to say, that you should upload images of Tropical Cyclones instead of STO12. Your images are wonderful in shape and definition. However, would you mind fix the color, and brightness? -- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉TalkContribs04:44, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well unlike STO12 I can't upload images at a timely manner as I have a usually busy schedule, so it's a tug-a-war kind of issue of having images quickly or with quality. I know what you mean on the brightness. I'm trying to keep a high dynamic range on these images, but I think I over did it on my Sandy image. The color I believe is at a good level, but any suggestions? Thanks for your input! Supportstorm (talk) 05:02, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I dono, but it looks too grey on your Sandy image. But i think, the image has to follow the shape of a storm, otherwise it won't look good. Also, an image showing the whole's storm convection is the best to me.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉TalkContribs14:58, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh sorry, as i really didn't know that until i checked the history minutes later! But i did made the image good as possible. You see i opened the 2012PTS article page, and i didn't reloaded it once i prepared to update the image.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉TalkContribs14:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I've already had that discussion with some else on Wikimedia. the problem comes with the use of the program I'm using. While it's fine creating images at lower latitudes it begins to stretch the subsets too wide the further north or south you go. Once I figure out how to combine subsets this problem should go away. Now you complained about the images being to grey that's because I de-saturated the oceans, now I leave it as is and you say it's too blue. The only thing I'm trying to achieve out of using this program is the quality of images is far superior than found on both those sources. I'm going to get better at this, just like how I got better at colorization of satellite images. Supportstorm (talk) 10:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking at the 8 pm report.[4] They are still calling it a "post-tropical cyclone" indicating that they have not re-upgraded it to a hurricane yet. The 9 pm report says there have been hurricane gusts, but not hurricane winds.[5]Apteva (talk) 01:15, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can see that you only want your images on articles, and that you don't give anyone else a chance to display their images. Just because that your images may be better or not, it doesn't give you the right to say that another person's image is apparently not good enough. Just because your main purpose on Wikipedia is to donate tropical cyclone images, doesn't mean you are the rightful user to ONLY do this. Give someone else a chance for once and try to help them into the same interest that you have. ST✪1215:53, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On the left is the WMS Image. On the right the HDF File
I'm sorry about earlier, but I'm just tired of everyone doing this too. I'm not a good article editor so that's way I work only in image as I'm most familiar with how it all works. The only thing is you've done this to me several times before, and I spend sometimes up to 2 hours creating an image to have it replaced 10 minutes later. And since no one person whill have a same view on how a image should be done it will be an issue in the future. Now here is my reasoning to what I did. I use original HDF Files which are much higher in quality and data than images from the WMS which is what everyone else is using. It takes more resources to create such an image, and you must consider that. I provided an example to the quality issue of WMS. Simply put it has way too much noise.
Why do you need to take such a long time to convert to an HDF? Isn't there software for that to make it faster? Remember you won't always have your way on Wikipedia, people will want to do the same things you are doing. But putting so much into a photo I think is little bit of a waste of time, people will try to replace or redo what you have done, but if you put so much into it and have it "destroyed", it makes Wikipedia a lot less entertaining to contribute to. There is such software that enables you to do what you are doing much faster, at least I'm hoping. Happy editing. ST✪1201:40, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. At the moment there really isn't another program as simple as the one I'm using, it's putting the subsets together that's the problem. The reason I'm doing this is to provide the best quality image weather or not people appreciate it. Sure it's frustrating sometimes, but it's good practice to be able to apply that ability to where it counts. Supportstorm (talk) 02:04, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is indeed good practice, and it will most definitely help you in your future if your wanting a job based around photography or image editing. I do recommend something more speedy on Wikipedia since your images can be changed very frequently. I do appreciate your hard work on the images that you upload. Happy editing. ST✪1216:00, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know, I do a good job with my images. Not everything needs to be altered by you, and I'm tired of you continuing to ignore me. Please stop! Supportstorm (talk) 18:17, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a big problem, even though my images are not totally identical to NASA's gallery images mainly do to the fact they have specially created "reflectance code" that are applied to the process. Your fixes to the images are even more unnatural then the very slight blue hue that is present in mine which I can correct. It is too red or yellow which leads me to think that you only apply auto color correct and are usually over saturated. Supportstorm (talk) 04:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! I was wondering, by chance, pretty please, if you could get an image of Cyclone Kesiny hitting Madagascar on May 9, 2002? Thanks :) Happy thanksgiving, too. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:19, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are no images of Kesiny at exactly landfall, but there's a MODIS image of it a few hours before it does, so that's the one I'm going to upload. It could take about half a hour to process the data, just to let you know. Hope you have a great Thanksgiving too, I can smell my turkey slow smoking in the back yard and I can't wait :) Supportstorm (talk) 20:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to ask, but when you have the chance, could you get an image for Cyclone Jery in 2002? [6] - that's the only storm of the season without a storm image. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:23, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Really this is the only MODIS image that was captured of the storm while it was at tropical cyclone status, and it only show about 3/4 of the storm. If you want there's a AVHRR image of it at closer to peak intensity that shows the entire storm, but is much lower in resolution than the MODIS, that I could upload. Supportstorm (talk) 22:25, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nice. We're working on a worldwide good topic for 2002 (so 01-02 and 02-03 in the SHEM), so it'd be great if all of those storms had images :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:58, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that about a month ago and thought it was a good idea. You know we could, form time to time, do the same for other years or topics and have the project community focused on helping out. Supportstorm (talk) 23:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Supportstorm, do you know where i can find non copyrighted, year 2000-2012 archives of infrared satellite images of the western north pacific, and i'm taking about the full northern hemisphere, that means it includes, and shows the Japan region. And are they available in every hour image, and only in the japan region? thanks.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉Talk Contribs 05:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't know anywhere that would have that, maybe typhoon2000.com. That's the only place that would have that and I know there stuff is copyrighted. Supportstorm (talk) 11:39, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find what i am looking for, but do you mind if you can tell me how to remove lines from black and white cyclone images? I've been trying to do it for some while, but i don't where and how to do it.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉Talk Contribs 14:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Storms of 2004 or later will have a folder labeled ATCF, from there you locate the satellite, resolution, and time of a image you want. Download the zip file and unzip it on your computer. Relabel the jiff file into a tiff file and from there you can view it on most image software. These images are full resolution and are free from the grid and texts. On storms older then 2004 you have to manually process the grid out of the image with the single row marquee tool. Supportstorm (talk) 21:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What version of Photoshop do you have that can't open tiff files? To remove the lines zoom in all the way on a single line and, using the tool, click the pixel above or below. Right click and use the free transform option and cover the line with the selected area. Do this to each line. Supportstorm (talk) 11:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My version is PS Cs6, 64bit. Anyway, my computer is different, and at least the .jpg file works for me. It works for everything in my computer.
Hey, i mange to remove almost all of the lines, but the progress was haltered when it said :" Warning:No Pixels are more than 50% selected.
The selection edges will not be visible."
Help!-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉Talk Contribs 05:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I made that. I've never had that problem before, but here are some suggestions. If you have the feathering setting set above 0 it will not work, or you could check and see if this works. Edit > Preferences > Transparency & Gamut > unselect Use Video alpha. Supportstorm (talk) 11:35, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Where are you finding all of the formation and dissipation dates for the storms that you've been changing? If you have references for the formation/dissipation dates, those should be added to the article. Inks.LWC (talk) 12:30, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with JTWC is that they don't distinguish, in their best tracks, between when a system was a tropical depression and a low pressure area. In the ACTR they have their official dates for when a system was in fact tropical so that should be used instead of the BT. I'm just combining the two sources. Supportstorm (talk) 12:39, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yo, ho ho
Hey, why do we always happen to upload the images in around the same time, and sometimes even the same shape!?
I open a wiki page, and when i see it isn't updated, just to find out that after clicking save, you already uploaded one. What a coincidence!--✯Earth100✯(talk✉)12:57, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@Earth100, yes, but I didn't like the end result and nothing I did seem to work for it. Peter Weis, that's a nicely written article you did. Really enjoyed it. Supportstorm (talk) 11:07, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, i suggest you try your best, and here's the big idea: Upload it to Wikipedia nomater what, and we will have a look at it, before futher decisions. Com'on, you can do it, if you just happened to upload the 15 millionth file on commons, why can't you do that?--✯Earth100✯(talk✉)05:00, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, i've been trying to enhance the cyclone images, but i just coundn't fix the color. You see, i brought Photoshop with money, and it is a bit frustrating that you are not good at using it.--✯Earth100✯(talk✉)05:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hope that's a typo. Anyway it's frustrating, at first, to use. You've got to familiarize yourself with the tools and what is needed to make or enhance an image. Supportstorm (talk) 11:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Date and timestamp for Evan image
Where did you get this picture from? [7] the link you provided is [8], but I'm not seeing anything resembling that image at that location. That link matches up with this one: [9]. Inks.LWC (talk) 13:30, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
You can disregard all that. Apparently my browser is doing something weird and was making your link default to the Terra version of the satellite. Inks.LWC (talk) 14:05, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have yet to come across a good archive for MTSAT or GMS. The best would probably be at Digital Typhoon. Find a date going back to 1978 that you want. Download the KML file, and select properties. Copy the source link and paste it in a web browser. It should be a high resolution, geometrically corrected image. Unfortunately this is the easiest way to browse images and I'm certain the images are copyrighted. Here's an example. Supportstorm (talk) 20:01, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you going to use the images for. For personal reasons Digital Typhoon is the way to go. For scientific reasons you will need to be able to correctly execute the methods found here to access the images. For further guidance please use this website. I'm not that experienced with such programs, so don't ask me how to run them. Good luck Supportstorm (talk) 03:10, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Here's what to do. You will need a program that will read KML file (Google Earth). Go back to Digital Typhoon home page and select a date of an image you want. Download the global KML file. When you open it up in Google Earth select the channel that you want (IR, VIS, etc.). Then right click and select properties. In properties there should be a web-address where the file is located. Copy and paste it in a web browser. It should look like the example image I linked to earlier. Supportstorm (talk) 03:48, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dont worry about it since its an easy mistake to make since Brisbane have the primary warning responsibility prob due in part to Evan and the time of year, i would recommend that we just leave both infoboxes as currently active for now since its apparently going to be doing the hokey cokey between the two basins for the next 72 hours.Jason Rees (talk) 18:22, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing!
Supportstorm, how do you make your images just like the NASA's images?
You see, 2 Months ago i was clicking and clicking in Photoshop and happened to did something which made the images like the Gallery ones but i just can't remember which one. Happy New Year Supportstorm!--✯Earth100✯(talk✉)03:03, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Earth! Well I'm not doing much to the images I get from the WMS. Lowering the brightness of the image and increase the value of the levels in the Image>Adjustment tab is really all. This way you create a greater dynamic range that is similar to NASA's images. Supportstorm (talk) 11:47, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here; >Image>Adjustments>Brightness/Contrast decrease it to about -40 or similar level. Then Go to Image>Adjustments>Levels and slide the middle icon to the left. Now not every image is going to be the same so follow these steps to a level appropriate for the image. Supportstorm (talk) 21:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Still one weird problem, how do i fix the darkening, and the colors?
The land and sea just don't look natural, the land looks too blue green and the sea looks to blue. --✯Earth100✯(talk✉)06:47, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds like a color profile problem. When you open a picture go to Edit>Color Settings. This might be the problem, the reason why is that different color profiles will have different effects on a pictures appearance. You want it set on sRGB, or similar profile. The only reason you would want it set to something different is if you want to extend or limit the amount of colors in an image or make an image ready for certain applications (T.V.'s, monitors, some web layouts, ect.). If that doesn't help then lets keep trying to troubleshoot. Supportstorm (talk) 11:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That blur is from the extremely poor quality of WMS images. The colors in that Saola image is very good, so I wouldn't worry too much about it, but be careful not to overdo the highlight darkening. Supportstorm (talk) 03:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In IBTrACS Amelia was tracked as three different systems by three different centers. It was just a bit funny because every time I thought I had the right information I would find a new part of the track. Supportstorm (talk) 03:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Since I didn't have much work to do these past few days, I decided to try to color up a GOES image, using GIMP (I can't buy Photoshop!) It's the first time I've used an image editor/manipulator for any specific purpose. Do you have any suggestions for the image produced at right?
For the most part you have the right idea, but it looks like you've used a gated filter on the image that only allows bright areas to be represented. It's similar to the lighten tool on Photoshop. The only downside to doing that is that it makes the clouds seem cut and pasted on the background which isn't all that natural in appearance. Instead I would use the magic wand to highlight the clouds, feather, then select inverse. Use the clone stamp tool, have the mode set to color, and copy the background image on top on your satellite picture. It will most likely look more natural, but if anything else just experiment with settings and the tool sequences until you like the image. You may also want to see my discussion with Earth100 about it. Supportstorm (talk) 00:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful to align the land of the satellite image and the background image. You'll get a fuzzy or mirrored effect if you don't. Also you will need to find a way to make the clouds white and not allow the background image to bleed through. I don't have much experience in GIMP so I would know little about how the tools handle to make the clouds correct. With your permission may I upload a version that I made so you can make comparisons? Supportstorm (talk) 03:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2012–13 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zambezia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Would you wish to have a partial copies of 1961-1962 Mariners Weather Logs?
The JTWC summary in the May 1962 issue should resemble a condensed version of their own report, but it could be another possible source. What I have scanned currently from JTWC in that issue covers the first 1/2 page of the annual summary (not much), which includes Tess and Alice. The monthly north Pacific ocean summaries from the 1961 and 1962 MWL's likely have more information than this. Each scanned portion of MWL is 10-20 MB in size, depending upon how many images they contain. If you want copies of these, respond with a simple response here, and then send me an e-mail to my work e-mail. I can share them via skydrive.com, if there's interest. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Check your e-mail for how to access them. Let me know on here and via e-mail when you are done downloading the MWL issues. I uploaded all of the 1961 and 1962 issues. Thegreatdr (talk) 00:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I got that image and identified it from the caption in the seasonal article. It is possible they made a mistake...will have to see if they published any sort of correction. Meanwhile, Dolores and Francesca are the exact same image within that article. Hmmmm. =/ Thegreatdr (talk) 14:01, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All I know is that both images were visually the same, and there's enough proof from books I have and government websites to indicate the storm in the picture was Ava. I wouldn't know much about any of the other storms because of my lack of image resources for the 60's and 70's era of weather satellites. It's possible that some images were mixed up on accident. Supportstorm (talk) 18:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I didnt know that we were applying any notability factor for tropical depressions bar putting them into "Other Storms" much to the displeasure of Meow and Earth100.Jason Rees (talk) 09:37, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well I just figured that with only one warning being issued on the depression that it would not have enough notability to warrant a section. If someone could provide enough source on it to justify it a section, that would be fine. I would rather just exclude it than to have a blank section. Sorry for not consulting anyone else on this, that was my wrong. Supportstorm (talk) 10:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Im not saying give it a full section - we should just chuck it in an Other Storms section possibly along with the March TD, however it could be that we are forced to give it a section within the NIO subject to what happens in the next few days with the IMD.Jason Rees (talk) 11:36, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Split off 1974-1975 Southern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclone season into a new article
...per your edit comment. My edits were beginning to cause issues since at least one storm name was used twice in the 1970-1975 season article. I realized afterwards that this is not normally how season articles are split off for the Southern Hemisphere, so make whatever changes you need to. Because of the wikilink confusion, I don't think the season can remain in the 5 year article. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, but will we keep the 1974-75 southern hemisphere in one article or split it into the three basin like we have done in newer seasons? I my opinion I wouldn't mind doing either or, just not have it like it was and leave it looking like someones half finished sandbox. Anyway it will take some work on the articles to justify doing so. Supportstorm (talk) 23:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding a few satellite pics for that season! I undid a little bit of what you did. I removed the JTWC infoboxes for example (hope you don't mind), since they added so much space for a storm that did so little. Also, in the main infobox, I changed the dates to what MF says as far as the beginning and end of the season. We don't really have a good standard for that, but I think it's logical since MFR was the main warning center then. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:47, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
While I understand the removal of the info boxes, I still think those cyclones should at least be mentioned in the article. Maybe in an other storm section? Supportstorm (talk) 20:24, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Out of curiosity, and to avoid an edit war, why was Harry removed from the SWIO article? It looks like Reunion's area goes eastward to 90E, and Harry tracked as far west as 77E. Curious. Thegreatdr (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Harry was exclusively in the Australian basin which, was from 80E to 160E, so Harry never entered the SWI. Based on the best track the closest it got to 80E was 80.4E. That was when BoM stopped tracking it and Reunion never picked up advisories or included a BT for Harry. If you have proof for that 77E reading then re-enter it into the basin, because there's currently no evidence it belongs there. Supportstorm (talk) 20:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The MWL track passed 80E. If the RSMCs stated otherwise, we have to go by them. Does this mean our TC basin graphic within the basin article is correct? That's where I got the 90E number from. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oy. So either, depending on the year. Yeah, this needs to be in the basins article. Thanks for the response. I've sent queries to the talk pages of the project and the basins article. We really need this stated in the basins article, considering it is GA. We should consider including this in the annual basin articles as well. Struck out what was fixed. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
{ec} If i may but in here: According to BoM Harry dissipated "just as it passed out of the [Australian] Region", so the lack of a BT from Reunion doesnt surprise me since it has to be a 30kt TD for 24 hours or more and in the SWIO before they will consider BTing it, however id be curious to see if the JTWC monitored it while it was in the SWIO. As for the basin divider, it was changed in 85/86 to 90E, which raises an interesting question on how we should deal with these systems in various articles.Jason Rees (talk) 20:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
MWL was published by NESDIS during this time frame, so chances are that they used the Dvorak T number to establish when a system became TD, TS, or HU strength (using a 1 min average). While NESDIS shouldn't overrule an RSMC, it could supplement the info if there is ambiguity. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
While the MWL is a respectable source it would be wiser to go by what the RSMC says, avoid further confusion with TC stats in the SWI and vise versa. It might be worth mentioning it if someone fills out the storm's section. Supportstorm (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
02-03 SWIO
Regarding this edit, Kalunde was considered a very intense tropical cyclone, including by Gary Padgett (who, while not the most reliable, is considered reliable enough for Wiki, especially in terms of what the agencies said). Thanks for fixing up the dates, I was about to do that when I saw you took care of it for me :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I use OS X, so is there any difference for installation? I had followed directions, but nothing generated. -- Meow16:39, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hm... you don't have to use Cygwin then, maybe just clicking on HDFLook from it's folder will render the same thing as on Cygwin since they are both Unix based. If you somehow got HDFLook running so far it is probably sending the images to where it's home folder is. Supportstorm (talk) 22:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I know I do not need Cygwin. I downloaded HDFLook for OS X, put Maps into the HDFLook folder (MAC_OS_X_INTEL), opened the application (HDFLook) via Terminal, and followed your steps from 5. It still has not generated anything. I cannot give you a screenshot because Wikipedia blocks it. -- Meow11:56, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't know why it's not working. I'll investigate the problem in my Ubuntu OS to see if the same thing happens. Also you can use Imgur to link your screenshots on Wikipedia. Supportstorm (talk) 01:27, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Surely I did follow those steps. It just did not generate anything, as I have also searched the file in my system. Activity Monitor showed that the application was idle.-- Meow03:18, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Big news!!!
This image, will appear on the commons MAIN page on June 10 2013!! Please view it on that day!
The flower was photographed and grown by me, and is now also considered a Quality image! --✯Earth100✯(talk✉)05:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
::The image has to be High in quality, successfully nominated in featured images candidates, before having any chance of being on the main page. Sorry for my late reply.
I made a few changes to the track map generator, and now it installs on OS X 10.7 with little problems. Can you download the newest version, from GitHub, and let me know whether you run into any snags? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff)03:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for showing interest in solving my problem, but I'm still getting undefined reference to cairo in the track.c file when installing the program. Happen to know why that is? Supportstorm (talk) 03:37, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When the compiler runs into the #include directive, it looks for cairo/cairo.h in its include path; however, that path would resolve to /usr/local/include/cairo/cairo/cairo.h.
Type gcc -g -Wall -Werror -I/usr/local/include/cairo -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/libpng12 -I/usr/include/pixman-1 -L/usr/local/lib -lcairo tab.c track.c tcr.c atcf.c hurdat.c md.c -o track to compile the code while bypassing pkg-config (that way we can figure out if there is a problem with the include path, or if there is an issue with the linker).
Check if apt-get reports libcairo2-dev is installed, on top of libcairo2. It should be installed since you have the header files in the include directory, but I just want to double-check that. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff)22:45, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you use the correct data its already in HURDAT Format, however have a poke through Keith Edkins Website and you should find a track converter. :P Jason Rees (talk) 01:24, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've been using his converter, yet it doesn't convert the IBTrAC csv file that has all the available data from different agencies. I'd like to use the merged track that it provides to create a more complete track of a storm. As far as I know there isn't a reasonable way of converting it into a HURDAT format. Supportstorm (talk) 01:40, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I like using the merged track data for basins in which multiple agencies track each system. It produces a usually more consistent track which is helpful especially in the WP. In the CSV file format if you could somehow extract the coordinate from the merged track, winds from JTWC, and the nature of the storm from the RSMC, that would be exceptionally helpful. By the way, Titoxd, you are doing a fine job with the program and it's coding :) Supportstorm (talk) 00:44, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see your point. I reverted it back, my bad. Also, for future images, can you orient your images north if there is a sufficient swath? That would be helpful, thanks. - HurricaneSpin(Talk)05:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Glad that you could see what I meant, as for the tilted images, I only do that when it's necessary, such as when the full storm cannot be displayed with a north orientation. NASA will sometimes do the same with it's images if the storm is on the edges of the swath. Supportstorm (talk) 06:05, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Understand what you are saying, but I found that the gallery version of Andrea is not oriented northward and does not cover the full NE extent of Andrea's outer rainband/frontal feature. Again, sorry for any misunderstandings and appreciation goes out you for uploading hurricane imagery. Cheers, - HurricaneSpin(Talk)06:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for June 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1970 Pacific typhoon season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page HKO (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I do not have a good way of converting IBTrACS to HURDAT, but Mr. Neumann's data is closer to the complete track and is already in HURDAT format. Hope that it is sufficient for now. Supportstorm (talk) 19:47, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was under the impression that we would only use running best track files, as the invest files are not necessarily updated when changes to the tracks are made. It might be a good idea to raise a discussion at WT:WPTC about what sources are acceptable for track maps, if nothing else so I can make changes to the code to automatically download those files from the NHC anonymous FTP servers. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff)18:33, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I thought those were the best running track. I'll start using the correct file source from now on. On another subject it appears that the NRL has restricted almost all access to it's database. I went on there earlier to update the Cosme image and was greeted by a forbidden address. This might be a problem for resources linked to or are using that database, especially the track files. Supportstorm (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I just checked links from Keith Edkins tracks and they are functioning, so no problems there. The only difference this makes is it restricts the navigation of the database not the actual content. Supportstorm (talk) 19:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, got it. Sorry then. To avoid image conflicts in the future, maybe we could work something out? A little communication is always better than conflicts on the mainspace. - HurricaneSpin(Talk)19:57, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've been thinking about that. Would it be alright if we split basins. Like I take the Atlantic and East/Central Pacific you can take the West Pacific and Southern Hemisphere? I know of someone else who already has the North Indian. I'm saying this because I couldn't think of another way of fairly handle the responsibility of images. This is not a recent issue either, it has been on going since before I got here in 2009. Supportstorm (talk) 19:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I completely understand you and I hate seeing identical images ending up in Commons. And yeah, I know, this happened quite a but in 2008 before I switched to uploading to Commons. But dividing by basins wouldn't be completely work out very well either, considering that I am usually quite inactive during the winter as well as that I mostly contribute to and edit articles belonging to Atl/EPac. - HurricaneSpin(Talk)19:59, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, first off, it isn't a bad thing that we are having image conflicts, which it indicates that we are both dedicated to contributing. Since I live a couple of time zones west, I will not be up early enough to do Terra swaths most of the time. Maybe I'll do Aqua swaths and you will do Terra swaths? Since Aqua is ascending and Terra is descending they don't intervene very often. - HurricaneSpin(Talk)20:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I hadn't notice your comment till now, I guess it got caught up with my discussion with Jason. I'm awake usually from 13 UTC to 4 UTC so that's why I made to suggestion to do it by basin, because I won't be able to supply Terra images for part of the West Pacific and Southern Hemisphere until I wake up. Supportstorm (talk) 19:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I can tell that I am couple of hours west. But by the time the periapsis of the orbit reaches the SWIO and AUS, I wont be up. How about this: I take care of the Pacific and you can take care of all the other basins. If I am still awake then I will proceed to doing AUS or SWIO. - HurricaneSpin(Talk)03:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. Also I'll be inactive for a while so feel free to upload any images. I'm leaving the Atlantic all up to you, since it is the main basin on en-wiki that everyone cares about and it will be a decent place for a little show off your awesome image skills :D - HurricaneSpin(Talk)07:21, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, that's strange, but I guess it shouldn't be a major problem. Also, I've noticed that some of your images are unnecessarily narrow and long, which tears up the infoboxes quite a bit. Since the Aqua ascending swath is directly overhead Chantal, I think it might be better if you make your images a little shorter and wider, which looks best to fit in the infobox. But anyways, thanks for your contributions toward imagery, it is greatly appreciated - HurricaneSpin(Talk)20:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well some NASA gallery images are like that, but sometimes I was limited in the cropping possibilities when the storms were on the very outer limits of the swath. I'll try to keep that more in mind in the future. We still haven't solved our problem though which you deleted from my talk. Supportstorm (talk) 20:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry. I had an edit conflict and moved your comment further up to match the relevant replies. I didn't delete it. Gimme a sec and I'll work our problem. - HurricaneSpin(Talk)20:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tropical Disturbance 01
Be careful with what your write about this system, we need to make sure what we are putting down is true and verifiable on paper and not just via images.Jason Rees (talk) 20:06, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So wheres the reference to it being TD 1? - wheres the reference to say that BoM monitored this TD as a tropical low (TDEP) on July 1 and moved very slowly westwards to be first noted by Reunion on July 6 at 9S/91.6E which is still inside the Australian region. Sorry if this comes over the wrong way i think its a fantastic find, but i dont want to be getting things wrong so early in the season.Jason Rees (talk) 20:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
La Reunion noticed a low moving into their area of responsibility on July 6, after BoM had monitored it while embedded within a through near the equator on July 1. La Reunion stated it was a tropical disturbance in the daily ITCZ bulletin on July 8. If the references are not significant enough to claim the low existed while in the BoM area by all means remove it, but they did post locations of its location in those references which is where I got its movement from. Supportstorm (talk) 20:33, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I know that Reunion were talking about a weak low on July 6 and a tropical disturbance on July 8, but they did not classify it as 01 unless you can prove otherwise. The low did exist within the Australian region i can not dispute that since Reunions first point was 9S/91.6E, BUT we do not know that it was a tropical low at that time or that it was monitored all the way form July 1 to July 6 as the same system unless you can prove it.Jason Rees (talk) 22:27, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings Supportstorm! I don't make tropical cyclone maps, but I'd like to know how you got tropical wave points and extratropical storm points from IBTrACS. Example at right is Typhoon Iris from 1951. There are some tropical wave points and a bunch of extratropical points, but I'm not sure how you distinguished those from the other, tropical cyclone points from the associated IBTrACS data. As I mentioned before, I don't make trackmaps, but when I write associated content and prose for these storms it confuses me when I see the tropical wave/extratropical points, since I myself can't distinguish it in the IBTrACS data. Thanks in advance, TheAustinMan(Talk·Works)00:38, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The nature of the storm comes from the best tracks of the individual agencies that track it. In this instance the CMA showed Iris as being below tropical depression intensity for the first 12 hours in their best track. The JMA indicated the storm became extra-tropical on May 11. The sources to the individual best tracks are at the bottom of the page you have linked in your text. This should help you out when it comes to reading the storm nature in both the IBTrACS csv file and the incorporating best track files. Supportstorm (talk) 01:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! Any chance you could get an image of either Tropical Storm Domoina striking eastern Madagascar (January 21, 1984) or of the storm over South Africa (January 30, 1984)? I'm almost done with the article, but it's pretty bare as it stands. Hope all is well with you :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:36, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yay, awesome! It looks so much better now :) If you're bored, the season needs images... but I totally understand if you can't do it now. I'll probably be working on the season for the next week or so. Since it is the 80's, I'm thinking the TC's would need some headbands and some heavy metal to jam out to, heh. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've got the time to do it tonight. I'll have you know that Def Leppard, Journey, and the Scorpions will be playing the entire time :P Supportstorm (talk) 00:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
FYI On the JMA WWJP25 it still says: TROPICAL DEPRESSION 1012 HPA AT 31N 172E WEST SLOWLY which is Yutu so we have to keep Yutu as active :).Jason Rees (talk) 11:31, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! I was wondering if you might possibly be able to upload an image of Cyclone Joy in the Australian region as it was making landfall on December 27, 1990? I'm currently writing an article on it, and an additional image would help complete it. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! I'm currently working on a sandbox for the aforementioned cyclone, and by the time you read this, it'll probably be published at Cyclone Gretelle. There is a perfect spot for another image, so I was wondering if, by chance, you could upload one of the storm while in the Mozambique Channel on January 30? Hope all is well with you! :) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:00, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Can you go through the imagery for 97-98 SPAC at some point, id like to get it to GA soon and would love soem decent images for Alan Bart and others.Jason Rees (talk) 22:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! I was wondering what you used for that track map there. Someone re-uploaded your version onto Wikipedia (since you released it into the public domain), and while it looks cool, I just wonder how you actually made it, and whether we can/should use it for WP. My biggest concern is the estimated intensity, how you went about that. Cheers. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this shouldn't be here. I used weather maps to get intensity and position for every day and interpolated it to 6 hour points, but for the most part it is original research that was meant for the wikia only. Supportstorm (talk) 01:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1970 Pacific typhoon season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page None (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello there, Supportstorm. Yesterday an anonymous user added the infobox hurricane current and it was good. But it also sates that JTWC classified it as subtropical, so I put the sentence that JTWC classified it as subtropical (even though, i did not know that). Do you think it is really subtropical??? If it is, reply back in my talk page:) and I will state in the infobox hurricane small that it is also subtropical. Have a good day. Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, ok. But do you think I should put in the infobox of Mitag that JTWC declared it as subtropical, just like Tropical Storm Yutu in 2013? Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:51, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've processed the files, however the images I create using HDFLook are not true color like the the ones you find in NASA's gallery. The program runs an atmospheric correction however has never been able to create spot on correct colors. It's close but not perfect. But anyway, hope the picture was what you wanted :) Supportstorm (talk) 05:25, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Now the picture is not 100% but 99% perfect to me, which is very enough for everyone. Thank you anyway. :D -- Meow06:11, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You need the map at 21600 X 10800 resolution and replace it with the map picture that come with the program. Next you can either edit the track.c file and change the res option from 1024 to 2700 or you can type --res 2700 every time you create a map. There are higher resolution maps on that page however I don't believe it would matter much unless you are creating a track map for a specific area or country. Supportstorm (talk) 19:30, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, but how are you finding the times for the images you are uploading? I mean specifically the one you just uploaded. I found that one a little while before you uploaded it, but I could never upload it because I had no way of knowing the time. If you can respond, thanks. If this question was already asked and I did not see it, my apologies. Is there a link you could give? Thank you again. Dustin(talk)18:37, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I noticed that Meow brought up a similar question above. Did you use a special editor to create the image from one of NRL's grid-images? If so, could I know which tool you used? Thanks! Dustin(talk)05:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Since I may get these images form multiple place in the NRL website I generally have them linked to the main page. However to answer your question, I mainly use Photoshop to color/ manipulate images. Supportstorm (talk) 17:58, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Because the gallery images are higher in quality and have less evident jpeg compression artifacts than the worldview images. The images are less distorted at higher latitudes. The algorithm wrapper they use may be better suited for a particular scene. And to keep consistency within the project and to avoid the whole "My picture is better" argument. Supportstorm (talk) 18:55, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Matmo is not at higher latitudes. I downloaded the PNG image to edit so the lossless is much weaker than the Rapidfire one. You could compare them by pixel to pixel. -- Meow18:59, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's at a high enough latitude for some distortions to be evident. The source for jpeg, png, and tiff are all the same with worldview, it hardly matters what format you choose it will have artifacts all the same. I just did a comparison of the two. The gallery images has artifacts as well but is more accurate with color. Supportstorm (talk) 19:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I don't mind when you upload the gallery version over my own uploads, but when you do that, could you please update the source url on the Commons description page? Thanks. Dustin(talk)20:31, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
_tracks.jpg)
_tracks.png){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vicente_Jul_23_2012_1732Z.png){kind=link}
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Evan_Dec_13_2012_0105Z.jpg){kind=link}
![[9]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Evan_Dec_12_2012_2215Z.jpg){kind=link}
![[11]](http://www.force-13.com/1.png){kind=link}
