Lacunosus

[Michael Lerch]

I spot lacunosus clouds a few times a year. Because the variety falls under the Stratus species , Lacnosus can be difficult to photograph. With a field of Lacunosus measured in miles or kilometers, where do you focus on: near, far, left , right? I have yet to get a whole field of lacunosus in focus. With the breath and depth issues of a field of lacunosus comes the lighting problems; even over the entire field? As with examples below, there is the depth of lacunosus clouds themselves that has to be dealt with, much less the field of lacunosus clouds. So they are a challenge. I am not sure a photograph of lacunosus can capture the ” magical” feeling I get when I am directly under a lacunosus ” spell”. Perhaps ” spell” can be associated to any cloud experience that transcends or transforms or transports the observer, the spotter.

[Howard Brown]

Very interesting, MikeL, but not the species Stratus. Lacunosous according to The Cloud Collector’s Handbook is found in Stratocumulus, Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus (and it adds enigmatically noctilucent – a bug?).

I could not find lacunosus in Hamblyn’s books at a quick glance. Your pics are almost lacunosus and mamma?

[Michael Lerch]

Ahh! hygge, a more correct appellation of species would be stratoformis, which as you point out, can be stratocumulus, altocumulus , cirrocumulus and even noctillucent. That lacunosus is stratified, horizontally displayed and at that, manifested over large swaths of sky, makes for challenging photo sessions . The above field of lacunosus was photographed close to work, the east valley . The lacunosus was the lowest I’ve ever witnessed allowing for a better perception of depth of the cloud structure. No mamma, just that the white is actually above the grey structure of lacunosus. This display, is one of the thinnest or least dense displays of the woven. The pic below was taken a few months later almost directly over my house. The lacunosus is denser . Interestingly, the field traveled from south east to north north west rather than the norm of sw to ne.

[Howard Brown]

MikeL, ‘Stratiformis’ is in Hamblyn’s glossary, but since it suggests stratus and is not a species itself I would prefer not to use it in our context. However, we are now really into administrivia which bores most, so lets settle for something like ‘widespread’?

[Howard Brown]

Hygge howlers

My apologies, MikeL – too late at night, too rushed. I used to have a penchant for spelling (it’s funny but I thought ‘penchant’ as I was writing ‘pension’). And of course stratiformis is a genuine species.

Unfortunately (in my opinion), I can not now edit my mistakes above and below (since this post appears to be inserted below my major howler (which I am replying to) and above the ‘pension’ spelling howler).

[Gavin Pretor-Pinney]

I’ve corrected your pension typo, Hygge.

[Bill Ward]

Hi,

I can’t say for sure but the NLC Laconosous might have me to blame…
A number of years ago I took images of a very unusual NLC display that had “holes” in it.

Now, the description lacunosus is from the latin, full of hollows or sometimes net or honeycomb like. However net like structures appear in NLC all the time so to differentiate between these linear features and more circular holes. The holes as a separate entity if you see what I mean. I proposed a lacunosous term might be applicable viz type L, be used to describe this.

Lacanosus being the closest tropospheric cloud which can have distinct holes I used this as an example. See images attached

Tropospheric: Cirrocumulus Laconosous.

Ergo

NLC: Laconosous.

This has been picked up an re-circulated by lots of places. But in many years of observing NLC I’ve only ever seen it a handful of times. Seems the “genuine” Type L is quite rare. So enigmatic it most certainly is…. ;-)

Keep your eyes peeled, I’d love to see more images of this.

cheers,
Bill.

[Howard Brown]

NLC

Bill, you are a scientist, I think. I am a hobbyist with a penchant for administrivia.

The scientist should advance hypotheses for others to assess. The ICA says NLC have been in the literature for over a century; the ICA defines and describes NLC, albeit very briefly; the ICA is more expansive on how to observe, record, photograph NLC (and Nacreous).

My comment was based on coding and classifying clouds. NLC does not appear in the Cloud Classification table for any genus e.g. in the Handbook pp 104 – 105; this was the reason for my error suggestion, but I accept the Handbook might have worded differently to cover Bill’s hypothesis. The Met Office PDF Cloud Types for Observers, 1982, (q.v.) mentions NLC on (hardcopy) page 32 only under ‘Special Clouds’ and says ‘They are ignored when assessing CH and C’.

[Michael Lerch]

hyg..Fascinating,, Cloudspotter’s Guide has Stratiformis as Species of the mentioned Clouds, and is specific to..”.extend over a large area”; widespread indeed. To illustrate, a few pics from April 2015 sightings of the Lacunosus. The first gives a scale, yes that is the Superstition Mtns, pic taken from near work. Second shot is almost directly over head with some sun halo. The field seemed to mature out of nowhere as I took pics of what you see in the first shot. Third shot is a week later at my home. As I recall, a good wind is involved in moving these observed fields of lacunosus. There is suggestion of undulatus in the 2nd shot. Both events were at altocumulus levels, that is, higher than the first set of photographed lacunosus.

[Howard Brown]

#79492 (I suppose that refers to the particular post which this reply will appear beneath).

MikeL that is more than a hint of undulatus. Perhaps we should look out more for multiple varieties in one shot, which is permissible.

Bill’s coloured arc must be a hint, though, as I have not seen it yet – perhaps he has a better screen than I. EDIT: Oh, on second thoughts, if I move my head to look at the screen rather more sideways than head on, then I do see the more cumuliform parts of the middle picture become a touch greenish yellow???

Incidentally, I am told by CAS that user editing capability is currently set for one hour from posting.

‘H’

[Bill Ward]

Hi Hygge,

I’ve dabbled briefly as a student that’s all. Indeed the fun is in the minutiae!

I’ll need to decide on how I’m going to spell them though, my spalling is crep….;-)

And Hi to Michael,

Your pics are fantastic, I really like the middle one with the hint of a coloured arc, lovely!

Whatever the reason, I do find NLC absolutely fascinating. I find them simply intruiging. I can still remember the night in July 1986 when I first saw them. The sky was just glowing with them. It was a remarkable sight and that sensation of intrigue has never gone away.

cheers,
Bill.

[Michael Lerch]

okay hyg..look at the upper left quadrant of the 2nd pic of 79492. You mite see a pink/yellow arc from upper horizontal to lower vertical. The area behind the arc is slitely darker. Yes that is part of a sun halo. Its a bit more difficult to see in the first of the pics below. There are two close ups and the last pic is a small patch next to the main field, that began to form but never got mature past what you see there. It dissipated from the point in time of the photograph. Part of the sun halo can be discerned in the upper rite quadrant of the first shot below.
And Bill, I would consider myself very fortunate to witness NLC. Currently I live too far south to expect seeing NLC. ( Phx Az) but who knows what travels await me? As mentioned, two close ups of lacunosus and a baby that never got any bigger. If you can drag these to desk top and then blow them up as big as possible,,you mite be in for some fun. I get lost for hours in lacunosus.

[Michael Lerch]

My apologies! I had forgotten about these lacunosus pics from a late afternoon shoot a while back. The angle of light produced some interesting effects. They are best if you drag to desk top then make as large as you can.

[Author]

Posts