|
|
|
date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:27:22 -0800 (PST),
group: uk.rec.subterranea
back
Monkton Farleigh Mines
Evening all,
After reading about Monkton Mines and the local Corsham network I was
curious to know why they painted the underground area white?
Looking at Ridge (etc) they did not do similar....is there a reason
for the white paint - or was it a purely aesthetic reason as to 'bouce
back' the most optimum light?
date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:27:22 -0800 (PST)
author: unknown
|
Re: Monkton Farleigh Mines
I do not know why white was chosen, but the reason Ridge was not
painted, is because it was never finished.
On 9 Feb, 01:27, glebid...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Evening all,
>
> After reading about Monkton Mines and the local Corsham network I was
> curious to know why they painted the underground area white?
>
> Looking at Ridge (etc) they did not do similar....is there a reason
> for the white paint - or was it a purely aesthetic reason as to 'bouce
> back' the most optimum light?
date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 00:06:58 -0800 (PST)
author: Clunk
|
Re: Monkton Farleigh Mines
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:27:22 -0800 (PST), glebidior@hotmail.com wrote:
>Evening all,
>
>After reading about Monkton Mines and the local Corsham network I was
>curious to know why they painted the underground area white?
>
>Looking at Ridge (etc) they did not do similar....is there a reason
>for the white paint - or was it a purely aesthetic reason as to 'bouce
>back' the most optimum light?
IIRC it was to optimise the available light as suggested.
I attended a lecture many (many!) years ago on cave photography where
the suggestion was made to white paint the inside of ammunition boxes
used to carry your photo gear.
I tried this and it proved to be a very useful tip.
GrahamC
date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:13:10 +0000
author: Graham C
|
|
|