Oil on canvasSigned, titled and dated versofactory, industry, power, landscape, industrial

Inkjet print 5 edition number 11/40Signed and dated lower right corner. Edition 11/40 in lower left corner.clouds, text, perception, weather, environment, climate

Retro-reflective tape on ply on composition boardfluorescent, found material, reflective, sculptural, indentation, marked, recycled material, repurposed

LithographSigned 'Sibley '85' in lower right corner under printed image. Titled "PAPER GURU" centred bottom under printed image. Edition A/P, lower left corner under printed image.

LithographSigned and dated 'J. Senbergs. '85.' lower right corner under printed image. Titled 'Looking at Jesus Houses in Italy' centre bottom under print. Edition CT/P in lower left corner under printed image.

LithographTitled and signed 'Port piers - J Senbergs. '80.' lower right under printed image. Edition 17/20, lower right corner under printed image.

LithographTitled and signed 'Port Panorama - J. Senbergs. '80.' lower right under printed image. Edition 19/20, lower right corner under printed image.

LithographSigned and dated 'Paul Partos 1985' lower right corner under printed image. Edition A/P, lower left corner under printed image.

LithographSigned and dated 'Paul Partos 1985' lower right corner under printed image. Edition A/P, lower left corner under print.

LithographSigned and dated 'Paul Partos 1985' lower right corner under printed image. Edition Workshop Proof, inscribed under printed image to the right.

LithographSigned and dated 'Allan Mitelman 1985' lower right corner under printed image. Edition A/P, lower left corner under printed image.

LinocutSigned and dated 'Euan L Heng 04' in lower right under printed image. Title 'Night time' under printed image. Edition 11/25, numbered lower left corner under printed image.

Pencil on paperSigned lower right corner beneath drawing, pencil "J.SENBERGES". Not dated.

Blown and fused glassEmbossed stamp 'R' (encircled) on lower part towards base. Not dated.

Oil on canvasSigned and dated on reverse top left "Euan L Heng 85"

Recycled paper shopping bags and wrappings on cardboard construction

Etching on aluminium foilSigned and dated lower right corner beneath printed image "George Baldessin 71" Edition and title in lower left corner below printed image "Edition 25 'window & factory smoke'"

EtchingSigned and dated lower right corner below printed image, "George Baldessin 67" Edition and title "Ed 25 'City Monuments" lower left corner under printed image

Wood engravingSigned and dated bottom right beneath printed image, "Jones 85" Edition and title in lower left corner "A/P Gibsland"

Wood engravingSigned and dated lower right corner below printed image "Tim Jones 1984". Edition and title to the lower left below composition, A/P "Gippland"

On the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Uniforms donator Doug wrote- During the 1980s the Australian wool industry was at its most prosperous times with record numbers of sheep producing wool receiving ever increasing values due to the success of the Reserve Price Scheme, and the overall guidance of the Australian Wool Corporation (AWC). As a humble technician, my role was a low profile newly created position of “Controller, Technical Marketing” where wool was to be marketed on its technical properties, as distinct from the “Product Marketing Group” which exploited trhe traditional high profile approach of marketing wool;s superior fashion attributes. The Woolmark was the tool central to this approach. When the forthcoming Los Angeles Olympic Games was announced, the Product Marketing Group seized upon the chance to show the world that we could make top fashion garments and display them on our elite athletes on the world stage. A concept was launched using a contemporary top designer, Adel Weiss, with the most exclusive fabrics and knits available, and all with a lot of hype. This launch failed dismally for the following reasons- - The designer did a wonderful job presenting an excellent fashion range on perfect skinny models. The AOC however wanted a uniform which had an obvious Australian appearance when fitted to elite, and frequently muscular, athletes. - The fabrics chosen did not reflect the performance required by travelling athletes, there was no recognition of the need for ‘easy care.’ - There was no recognition given to the problem of measuring, manufacturing and distribution of a range of articles when the selected athlete could be domiciled anywhere in Australia. - There was no appreciation of such historical facts as Fletcher Jones, who had been unofficial suppliers dating back to the 1954 Olympics in Melbourne, and the Fletcher Jones board member, who was also an AWC board member, and was not in favour of the change. The project passed from Product Marketing to Public Relations, a big spending off-shoot of the AWC Chairman David Asimus, and due to the day to day operations of the project was passed to me and PR took care of the financial matters. The first task was to meet with the AOC and find out exactly their requirements. This lead to the production of a design and manufacturing brief, cointaining exact time lines for each event required to ensure an appropriate uniform on every athlete chosen to represent his/her country on the date given for the Opening Ceremony in Los Angeles. Working backwards the timeline becomes- 1. Noted the exact date of the Opening Ceremony. 2. Estimated the date for distributing completed garments to each athlete. 3. Estimated the time span available for measuring each athlete and commence making each component of the ensemble to the individual measurements of each athlete. 4. Decided the date for making the final choice of uniform design concept. 5. Decided the date for distribution of the design brief to selected designers. These five steps were spread out over a two year period. The Commonwealth Games occur midway between each Olympic Games, work on the Olympic uniform commences the week after the Commonwealth Games closing ceremony and MUST be ready by the prescribed day two years hence. The project also had to remain cognisant of trade politics existing within the span of the task, as well as the temperament of designers in general. It is no overstatement to say that in the past every designer in Australia believed they could, and should, be chosen to design the Australian Uniform. The final choice of designer almost always faced criticism from the fashion press and any designer who had been overlooked. However, with the contenders receiving an exacting brief the numbers of serious contenders greatly reduced. The Los Angeles Olympic Uniforms. A further reason for the AWC bid failure to design the LA uniform was that the AOC had already chosen Prue Acton to design it. This was based on her proven performance during previous games as she had a talent for creating good taste Australiana. Her design concepts also considered the effect when they were viewed on a single athlete as well as the impact when viewed on a 400 strong team coming on to the arena. A blazer trouser/skirt uniform in bright gold was chosen for the formal uniform. It was my task to select a pure wool faille fabric from Foster Valley weaving mill and have sufficient woven and ready within the prescribed timeline. The trouser/skirt fabric selected was a 60/40 wool polyester plain weave fabric from Macquarie Worsted. This fabric had a small effect thread of linen that was most attractive when dyed to match some eucalyptus bark Prue had brought back from central Australia. For the Opening Ceremony uniform, Prue designed a series of native fauna, a kookaburra for the men’s shirt and a pleated skirt with a rural scene of kangaroos, hills and plants. This presented an insurmountable printing challenge to the local printing industry as it had an unacceptably large repeat size and the number required (50) was also commercially unacceptable. The solution was a DIY mock up at RMIT and the employment of four student designers. The fabric selected for this garment was a light weight 19 micron, pure wool with a very high twist yarn in alternating S and Z twist, warp and weft. This fabric proved to be the solution to a very difficult problem, finding a wool product which is universally acceptable when worn next to the sin by young athletes competing in the heat of a Los Angeles summer. Modifications to this fabric were developed to exploit its success when facing the same problem in future games. Garment Making- The most exacting garment in the ensemble is the tailored blazer, plus the related trouser/skirt. Unfortunately tailoring athletes that come in various shapes and sizes such as; - Weight lifters develop an enormous chest, arms and neck size. A shirt made to a neck size of 52 would produce a shirt with cuffs extending well beyond the wearer’s hands. - Basketball players are up to 7 feet tall and garments relying ona chest measurement grading would produce a shirt with cuffs extending only to elbow length. - Swimmers develop enormous shoulders and slim hips, cyclists by contrast develop thighs I liken to tree trunks and a uniform featuring tight trousers must be avoided at all cost. Suffice to say many ensembles require specialist ‘one off’ treatment for many athletes. Meanwhile there is a comfortable in between group who can accept regular sizes so you can cater for these by having back up stock with plenty of built in contingencies. Athletes may be domiciled anywhere in Australia, this creates a fundamental problem of taking their measurements. The Fletcher Jones organisation was key to answering this problem due to their presence in every capital city, as well as many provincial towns around Australia. Each athlete on being selected for the Olympic Team was simultaneously requested to visit their nearest Fletcher Jones shop. The standardised measurement data collected was shared with the other manufacturers, e.g. Pelaco Shirts, Holeproof Socks and Knitwear, Maddison Belts, and even Hush Puppy Shoes. As the time for the Games approached the AOC made arrangements for combining meeting of all. Selected available athletes at the Australian Institute of Sport, Canberra, where, among other things, they were fitted and supplied with their uniform. The method evolved as follows.Men’s cream coloured button up, collared shirt. Images of a kookaburra have been printed onto the shirt, a single kookaburra on the left breast and a pair of kookaburras on the reverse of the shirt. The kookaburras are printed in a brown tone to complement the cream colour of the fabric.On tag - FMaustralian wool corporation, 1984 los angeles olympics, olympic uniforms, men's uniforms, sport, athletes

The conduct of the LA games changed many factors in a short space of time. The Americans made their Games a huge financial success, whereas other countries, e.g. Canada, was left with a huge debt. The key to this was SPONSORSHIP which soon replaced the old Australian way of fundraising with pub raffles. It also began to change the atmosphere where the AWC had previously been valued for their generous donation. There was a move by commercial specialist uniform marketing organisations paying sponsorship money to publicise the fact that they were clothing high profile athletes. Old loyalties remained but became tested more and more as time progressed. For example, each uniform was expected to include an Akubra hat, why? Because it always had. For the same reason the uniforms also had Driza-Bone Coats. The day before the Seoul Opening Ceremony it rained in Seoul, so at the Opening Ceremony the Australian Team emerged in their Driza-Bones, made from cotton, not a wool fibre in sight, and the wool growers were footing the bill for over a million dollars. Thoroughly embarrassed, I resolved to avoid this situation next time by having all uniform fabrics pre-treated with Scotchguard prior to garment making.The scarf is brightly coloured in blue, green, yellow, purple and red on a plain cream base fabric. The lines of colour run on an angle across the fabric as jagged, irregular lines with small motifs of Australia, the Southern Cross stars, fish, triangles and a wave pattern, placed throughout. The centre of the scarf is dominated by a depiction of Australia presented in yellow. Within Australia are eucalyptus leaf shapes as well as mountainous shapes and the wave shape that is featured elsewhere on the scarf. The left hand short hem of the scarf has a differing pattern with larger lines running on the opposite angle to the rest of the scarf. Within the larger lines the same motifs are again printed.

This overcoat was designed and tailored by Dominex, a company that sold clothing in high end department stores such as Myer and David Jones in the 1940s through to the 2000s. As pictured in the accompanying advertising, Dominex looked to produce clothes for women to “casually, confidently wear … the exquisite styling and superb tailoring of… Dominex Coats”. This sentiment was carried by the company for more than 60 years. Amanda Morgan, a director of the Dominex fashion label in an interview from 2003 said “Not everybody wants sass, or sex, or high fashion for that matter. Au contraire. Our customers will be stylish, sophisticated and womanly, but we don’t do shoestring straps or asymmetrical lines." Dominex was a label specialising in exceptional quality "traditional" dressing for corporate wear. Their clothes looked to provide women with a return to the tried and true values of elegant, unpretentious, classic dressing. "Our look is European-influenced," Morgan explained further. "Inspired by Armani, Valentino, Chanel and Escada. Suits have been specially dyed in France to ensure the perfect shade of ice blue, lemon, grey, or slate. Fabrics are natural, silk and linen. Shapes are stylish, with an almost 1930s feel; classic pants, silk shirts, structured overcoats with elegant-length” Returning to this overcoat, it has a label on the inside which reads “Pure Wool Material by Godfrey Hirst of Geelong”. Nowadays Godfrey Hirst produce flooring products and are the largest manufacturer and exporter of residential and commercial carpets in Australasia. They have expanded into hard flooring and left their fashion days behind. This overcoat serves as a useful example of a different time for the company; before they made the change to concentrating exclusively on flooring, when they produced fabrics to be tailored for the height of Australian fashion. This overcoat was purchased and worn by Joan Waller, aunty of the donor, Kim Rosenow. Kim said her aunty was from Ballarat but frequently shopped in Melbourne to keep up with the latest trends. Her aunty Joan fitted the target demographic of Dominex well, as she needed to look sophisticated and elegant at social events and work. Kim donated the overcoat to the National Wool Museum in 2021. Green singled breasted overcoat with a narrow overlap and one column of buttons for fastening. The overcoat features notched lapels of a medium width and two large buttons of a green & dark green marble. The overcoat has two semi-visible jetted pockets at the hips. Internally, the overcoat features a black silk lining for comfort. It also features a stitched patch on the left side of the opening which reads “Pure Wool Material by Godfrey Hirst of Geelong”. At the collar, another patch reads “Dominex REGD”. At the cuffs, the overcoat finishes in a type of gauntlet cuff which stretches back over 200mm. The decorative finish utilises no buttons and has thick piping to accentuate this design feature. The overcoat finishes with a simple invisible hem at the bottom.Wording, gold. Patch stitched at collar: “DomineX / REGD.” Wording, black. Patch stitched at left off opening: “PURE WOOL MATERIAL BY / Godfrey Hirst / OF GEELONG”dominex, fashion, women's corporate wear, godfrey hirst, overcoat, wool clothing

With more and more woolsheds being connected to power lines, the need for electric shearing gear markedly increased from the 1960s onwards. The greater economy made electric gear an attractive proposition to many graziers. Requiring only an electric shearing motor, for small and medium scale operations, electric shearing motors were a more economical way of shearing a wool clip. The other option for graziers was Overhead shearing gear, which also required an Engine to provide shared power to a row of shearing stations. Still working, this Sunbeam Electric Shearing Motor – Heavy Duty Model, features a slow speed motor totally enclosed for protection against dust and insects. The full bearing down tube is easily removed and stored to be out of the way when not in use (not pictured). Providing 0.5 hp, which is twice the power ever needed for shearing sheep, this buffer allows for fluctuations in voltages that can occur in rural districts. Inventor Frederick Wolseley made the world's first commercially successful power-shearing system in Australia in 1888. US company Cooper, which had been founded in 1843 as a maker of sheep dip, began selling Wolseley equipment in the USA in 1895. The Chicago Flexible Shaft Company successfully entered the power-shearing market a few years later and entered into a joint venture with Cooper. It set up a branch in Sydney and sold shearing sets, and engines to power them, into the Australian market. In 1921 the US parent company, realising it needed to make products whose sales were not as seasonal as those of shearing equipment, made its first household appliances and branded them Sunbeam. In 1933, changes in exchange rates and taxes led the company to manufacture engines and shearing equipment in Australia via subsidiary Cooper Engineering, which changed its name to Sunbeam in 1946. Although most Australians know of this company as a major manufacturer of household appliances, its rural division flourished and retained the Sunbeam name for shearing equipment even after it was taken over by New Zealand company Tru-Test in 2001. This 0.5 horsepower vertical brushed motor air-cooled engine was designed to drive a single shearing plant. From the central cylinder which features a yellow “Sunbeam” sticker, a grey 240v power lead can be found on the left-hand side. A blue capacitor is located next to this power lead. Below, two legs extend and meet to form a foot which is fastened to a wall. On the right-hand side of the engine, a specification plate is located on the central cylinder. A yellow directional arrow sticker is located on the rotating section of the engine below the specification plate (location for photography, this section is designed to rotate and hence this sticker is not fixed in this location). At the rear of the cylinder, a plastic cap with small air cut outs protects the air-cooled engine from contaminants. At the front of the engine, the location for securing the bearing down tube is located. On the right-hand side of the lock for the bearing down tube is the handle, to which a string is often attached for switching the motor on and off by a shearer bent at the waist (not pictured). Sticker. Gold writing. Front of shearing motor “Sunbeam” Plate. Inscribed. Side of shearing motor. “Sunbeam / SHEARING MOTOR / MADE IN AUSTRALIA / 0.5 H.P. / 220/240 V / 1 PHASE A.C. / 4.0 AMPS / 50 C/S. / CONT. RTG. / 1425 R.P.M. / CLASS A INSUL / NO. J244560 / TYPE: NSB5C2/49." sheep sheering, shearing equipment, sunbeam, electric shearing motor

Cooper S.E. Ball Bearing Grinder made and guaranteed by Sunbeam Corporation Limited. Grinders like this example have been made the same since the early 1900s, with this grinder thought to have been produced in the 1960s. It is belt driven, with the other end of the belt being attached to an engine; the same engine that would have powered the overhead shearing equipment in shearing sheds. It was common for shearing teams to bring their own equipment, especially pre-1960 as most shearing sheds were not connected to power, and shearers preferred to work with their own equipment. The engines that powered the shears and grinder were typically fuelled with kerosene or petrol. The large circular disks are attached to the bolt that protrudes from the grinder and fastened tightly with a nut. An example of seeing a similar grinder in action can be found on the following link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7eimI_Gm9o. Inventor Frederick Wolseley made the world's first commercially successful power-shearing system in Australia in 1888. US company Cooper, which had been founded in 1843 as a maker of sheep dip, began selling Wolseley equipment in the USA in 1895. The Chicago Flexible Shaft Company successfully entered the power-shearing market a few years later and entered a joint venture with Cooper. It set up a branch in Sydney and sold shearing sets, and engines to power them, into the Australian market. In 1921 the US parent company, realising it needed to make products whose sales were not as seasonal as those of shearing equipment, made its first household appliances and branded them Sunbeam. In 1933, changes in exchange rates and taxes led the company to manufacture engines and shearing equipment in Australia via subsidiary Cooper Engineering, which changed its name to Sunbeam in 1946. Although most Australians know of this company as a major manufacturer of household appliances, its rural division flourished and retained the Sunbeam name for shearing equipment even after it was taken over by New Zealand company Tru-Test in 2001. The grinder is formed from a central arch shaped block of green painted metal. Much of this paint has been lost to age, leaving the grinder in a ‘farm used’ condition with much surface oxidation present. On the front of the arch is a specification plate, reading “Cooper S.E. ball bearing grinder. Made and guaranteed by Sunbeam”. At the foot of the arch, three bolt holes are found for securing the grinder to the base of a solid wooden surface. Two of the bolt holes are found on the front of the grinder, with another found on the rear. From the central arch, a bolt protrudes to the right of the grinder. This large bolt is for securing a grinding plate to the grinder. Above the central arch is a pendulum which holds the comb / cutter that is being sharpened. From the pendulum, a large arm extends down (not pictured) to meet and strike the plate spinning at a rapid speed. On the left-hand side of the central arch of the grinder, a wheel is found which a belt is attached to for power. This belt is then attached to a separate engine, spinning the wheel and hence powering the grinder. The wheel is partially covered with a section of protective bent tube, designed to provide protection from the rapidly spinning wheel. Below this wheel is the belt shifter. It is designed to move the protective bent tube from one side of the grinder to the other, to accommodate the grinder in the setup of different shearing sheds. The two separate grinding plates are identical. They have a slight slope for sharpening the comb and cutters in the correct method, with a slight bias towards the base, or “tooth”, of the equipment. The disks have a large central bolt for attaching to the grinder. They have tags on the horizontal axis of the grinding plates, for securing the plates in transportation, and to help with initial alignment when setting up the grinder. The reverse of these grinding plates has the same green painted metal finish found on the grinder. This paint is also in a ‘farm used’ condition, with surface oxidation present. The grinder would be provided from the factory with a comb holder, shifter for securing the grinding plates, emery cloth and emery glue. The emery cloth is what does the actual grinding and is applied to the grinding disks, replacing once well worn. These items can be seen in the final images in the multimedia section, showcasing advertising for this grinder. Plate. Inscribed. “Cooper / S.E. BALL BEARING GRINDER / MADE AND GUARANTEED BY / Sunbeam / CORPORATION LIMITED / SYDNEY MELBOURNE / ADELAIDE BRISBANE ”sheep shearing, shearing equipment, sunbeam, grinder

Copy book used by Lola Ann Myers at Stewart Street State School from 1916 onwards. From collection of Betty McPhee; donated by Cathy McCann.Small paperback schoolbook. Maroon covers with Australian motifs. On back cover, picture of student seated at deskAustralian Copy Book Sixth and Seventh Grades|Quotations|Poetry and Prose|Commercial Letters and Formsbooks, school/educational