Project 52 by Frank Miller

[FrankMi]

Maybe that could be a photo challenge, who can take a picture of liver and onions and make them look good. Except that if no one likes to eat them, what do you do with them?

LOL! Fortunately my wife likes liver and onions otherwise I guess I'd have to get a dog!

[CLK]

I have eaten them in the past and if properly prepared they not are too bad. However, can't think at the moment how I would prepare them to make them look good in a photo. If I do I'll post the picture, freeze the liver and onions and send them to your wife.

[FrankMi]

This week I’m looking at some of the more interesting ‘behind the scenes’ locations to photograph that we rarely ever think about. Usually when we consider the Great Coliseum in Rome, we have visions of Gladiators fighting for the favor of the crowds, the Emperor and their lives.

Capable of seating 50,000 spectators, the ‘Colosseum’ was used for gladiatorial contests and public spectacles such as mock sea battles, animal hunts, executions, re-enactments of famous battles, and dramas based on Classical mythology.

Although we may envision a blood soaked sand floored arena where wild animals stalk slaves in a fight to the death, there is another side to this gruesome spectacle and that is how the theatrics were accomplished.

Under the sand in the coliseum is a maze of tunnels and chambers where the scenery, props and wild animals in cages were kept. When the time came, the arena could be quickly changed into a forest or jungle before releasing the wild beasts from hidden chambers underneath and behind the scenery on the hapless fighter who often had no idea what he would face or from where it would appear.

Here is an artist’s sketch of what was under the floor of the great coliseum and how the arrangements for the spectacle were played out.



This is what it looks like today. This is a three shot panorama taken from very close to the arena level.



And a view from the stands…

On the right just above the arena was the Emperor’s viewing box. On the opposite side of the arena was the viewing box of the empire’s six Vestal Virgins. We don't see many of either these days!



The arena itself was 83 meters by 48 meters. It comprised a wooden floor covered by sand (the Latin word for sand is harena or arena), covering an elaborate underground structure called the hypogeum (literally meaning "underground"). Little now remains of the original arena floor, but the hypogeum is still clearly visible. It consisted of a two-level subterranean network of tunnels and cages beneath the arena where gladiators and animals were held before contests began. Eighty vertical shafts provided instant access to the arena for caged animals and scenery pieces concealed underneath; larger hinged platforms, called hegmata, provided access for elephants and the like.

The hypogeum was connected by underground tunnels to a number of points outside the Colosseum. Animals and performers were brought through the tunnel from nearby stables, with the gladiators' barracks at the Ludus Magnus to the east also being connected by tunnels. Separate tunnels were provided for the Emperor and the Vestal Virgins to permit them to enter and exit the Colosseum without needing to pass through the crowds.

Substantial quantities of machinery also existed in the hypogeum. Elevators and pulleys raised and lowered scenery and props, as well as lifting caged animals to the surface for release. There is evidence for the existence of major hydraulic mechanisms and according to ancient accounts, it was possible to flood the arena rapidly, presumably via a connection to a nearby aqueduct.


For more information, take a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colosseum

[Geoff F]

Interesting views there, Frank.

I have read about the area being flooded for naval battles but the experts still seem undecided about how the floor could be made watertight.

[Donald]

This week I’m looking at some of the more interesting ‘behind the scenes’ locations that we rarely ever think about.

Fascinating. I knew nothing of that (have never really studied Roman history). Thank you, Frank.

[FrankMi]

Interesting views there, Frank.

I have read about the area being flooded for naval battles but the experts still seem undecided about how the floor could be made watertight.

I guess it depends on whether that was done, as some think, prior to installing the hypogeum as this area was a lake at one time. Another thought was that only the central channel was filled with water, which would not be difficult to do if they lined it with wood. Here they lined a barge canal aqueduct with wood where it crosses over a river.

[FrankMi]

Fascinating. I knew nothing of that (have never really studied Roman history). Thank you, Frank.

You are more than welcome Donald. Photography has opened up an entire world of knowledge that I was not aware of and I learn new things every day as a result.

[SpiderBob]

Absolutely fascinating, thank you. I now need to read up more on this.

[FrankMi]

Absolutely fascinating, thank you. I now need to read up more on this.

Glad to hear that it helps spur you on to learning more Bob!

[FrankMi]

This week I had a chance to get up into the Great Smokey Mountain National Park along with 10,427 other ‘Leaf-Peepers'. Finding a place to stand was, at times, a challenge. We did get to explore about 15 miles of dirt roads that are impassible once the snow falls - shucks, I'm not sure they were all that passable this week either!

We did get to see some Elk and Black Bear but didn't get close enough to the first set of bears to get a shot. The second bear popped up unexpectedly about eight feet away. My wife said "Do something!!!" to which I replied "I think I have!" Needless to say I didn't get a shot of that one either!

The goal was to try to capture and reproduce in the image the brilliant colors of the Tennessee Smokey Mountains as we saw them.

I'm not sure I succeeded but we had fun and perhaps you will find this image to be passable. To enhance what might otherwise be just a blob of Autumn colours I located a fence that should help outline what will hopefully be the most interesting parts of the image.

[Donald]

My initial reaction was to feel that is was slightly over-tonemapped for my tastes. But then, upon studying it I'm not so sure that it has been tonemapped. Given I've never been in the aforementioned mountains then i don't know what the colour is like, but I think that I'm looking at is how it really is.

What is clear however, is that, in my view, it is a glorious composition. The fence is just perfectly proportioned to the rest of the scene, neither overwhelming the image nor just being an insipid irritation.

[Geoff F]

What is clear however, is that, in my view, it is a glorious composition. The fence is just perfectly proportioned to the rest of the scene, neither overwhelming the image nor just being an insipid irritation.

Yes, that fence ties the scene together and creates an excellent perspective view.

[FrankMi]

My initial reaction was to feel that is was slightly over-tonemapped for my tastes. But then, upon studying it I'm not so sure that it has been tonemapped. Given I've never been in the aforementioned mountains then i don't know what the colour is like, but I think that I'm looking at is how it really is.

What is clear however, is that, in my view, it is a glorious composition. The fence is just perfectly proportioned to the rest of the scene, neither overwhelming the image nor just being an insipid irritation.

You are correct Donald, this image has not seen any tonemap processing. I did take the original as a three image Auto Bracketed Exposure so that I could pick up the sky detail from the under exposure and shadow side of the fence from the over exposed image.

One of the greatest challenges I find with fall leaves landscapes is that multiple colours at a distance blend into mush in an image. When we see it live it is easy to pick out the brilliant colours, and they do reproduce in an image if we are close enough but the moment we step back a bit, all the colours seem to blend into almost a dull monotone.

For that reason I tried to select items with the bright colors as close as I could as you can see in the left, right, and centre of this shot. The 'feeling' of the distinct colours then seems to translate better to what is in the background. If all of the colour is at a distance, the results are very disappointing and rarely reflect what we actually see when we are there.

[terrib]

First of all, I love the picture and I love the composition. But it doesn't really look like a photograph to me. Not so much the road and the grass, but the fence and trees have a painterly feel - at least on my monitor. Was this something you did in PP?

[FrankMi]

Yes, that fence ties the scene together and creates an excellent perspective view.

Thank you Geoff! This was one that I had time to play with before pressing the shutter so it is as close as practical to a full sensor image.

[FrankMi]

First of all, I love the picture and I love the composition. But it doesn't really look like a photograph to me. Not so much the road and the grass, but the fence and trees have a painterly feel - at least on my monitor. Was this something you did in PP?

Hi Terri, there are several things I did in Post Processing, some of which I do with every image.

First, in ACR I adjusted the Exposure for a clean histogram, particularly on the Over and Under exposed images of the three image AEB set. I also reduced the blown highlights using Recovery and recover shadow detail with Fill Light if needed.

Second, in this image I blended in the sky from the Under exposed image and the shadow side of the fence from the Over exposed image. This is what our eyes do as we look around a scene like this. I think we often don't expect images to look the way we really see them because the camera has a number of limitations prevent it from duplicating what our eyes see and our brain processes. Rarely does this kind of image match what we actually saw unless we photograph each piece like the sky, the back of the fence, and even the colour of the leaves separately and them combine them more like our brain does when we are actually there.

Third, I pixel-peep the entire image for noise and usually need to apply at least a mild amount of noise reduction, particularly when using a tiny 1/2.3" sensor and the camera’s relatively weak JPG processing as is the case with the Canon SX40 and similar cameras.

Fourth, I pixel-peep to see if any capture sharpening is required. I usually find that with JPG images that have been camera processed, a minimum amount of capture sharpening is required.

Fifth, I examine the image for selective sharpening and colour tone changes. For example, the asphalt was razor sharp has been slightly defocused to minimize attention on this part of the image. The fence was sharpened slightly to bring out the detail in the wood grain a bit to hold the attention to the fence and the parts of the scene that are within it. The foliage was treated with a 50% blend of Topaz Labs Adjust ‘Autumn’ preset to slightly enhance red and orange leaves to help make up for the colour loss (blending) that occurs when the camera is further back from multiple colour subjects like tree leaves. This is an area where it is really easy to cross the line and get the image too vibrant. The best way I know to verify how far to go is to get close-up images of the leaves where the colours are as accurate as possible then try to match those colours as closely as you can. Often I find that you actually have to reduce the vibrancy a bit as the actual colour intensity seems to be stronger than we expect in an image.

Sixth, I check the Black and White points and may or may not make full or even partial changes based on these points if the image improves with these settings.

Last, I crop as needed. This image has almost no cropping other than to get it to 1600 X 1000 pixels for CiC posting and then I use Unsharp Mask for output sharpening.

To me, a Painterly image is something like what Thomas Kinkade would do, beautiful enough to sell many copies at outrageous prices, but more of an artist rendition than an accurate photograph of reality. I try to accurately reproduce what I see but I would rather lean subtly to the colourful if the alternative is to lean subtly toward the dull and boring.

Hope this helps!

[jprzybyla]

Love what you did Frank, beautiful image and creative use of the fences. I filed away that idea for possible future endeavors.

[FrankMi]

Love what you did Frank, beautiful image and creative use of the fences. I filed away that idea for possible future endeavors.

Thank you Joe! The right kind of fence can be a powerful asset to a landscape image. In this case I had to shoot from a relatively low position to make it work well.

[dje]

Frank I only just came across this post but boy am I glad I did. Beautiful colours and a fantastic composition. Very creative indeed. And it does have a "painterly" look about it.

Very nicely done.
Dave

[Letrow]

Great shot Frank. That gate really ties it together. Beautiful colours in the background, you were lucky to be there.
Not sure what lens you brought along for this shot, but a wide angle, like the Tokina at wide might have been interesting as well for this subject.