Donna, I think I'd be hassling the Vic BDM! Not because I think they've done anything wrong but digitising images is difficult - they go for the average and so, of course, many (darker, lighter, whatever) don't come across too well. But, usually, the offices concerned are more than happy to provide a better paper image (at no cost) for digital images which are hopeless.
Donna, yes your uploads worked brilliantly (I've never tried one!). The second one better as far as I'm concerned.
Donna and Sue, hope you have good results from the private correspondence re convicts to which you refer. And Sue, that the MANSFIELDs and JUDDs (yours?) come good.
And perhaps earlier Sands & McDougalls PO directories might help.
This is a great puzzle!
JAP
PS: As Sue says, the places (and abbreviations) in the Vic Indexes could be anything and can be totally misleading. Local Registrars seemed to use whatever abbrevations suited them so there's no way there can be a definitive listing. On another RC thread there was reference to the abbrevation Chil (usually Chiltern in NE Vic as I assumed); but it turned out to be Chilwell near Geelong!!