Project 52 by Frank Miller

[pnodrog]

It makes perfect sense. You could try blending the masked (slow) layer using lighten. Then any ultra bright sparkle from the bottom layer may peek through. Am I making any sense?

P.S. This comment relates to your waterfall shot. Week 1
P.P.S. Looking at your progress no doubt you no longer need help with your initial shots.

[FrankMi]

It makes perfect sense. You could try blending the masked (slow) layer using lighten. Then any ultra bright sparkle from the bottom layer may peek through. Am I making any sense?

P.S. This comment relates to your waterfall shot. Week 1

I hadn't thought about using that approach Paul. I'll have to give it a try next time I'm doing one of these!

P.P.S. Looking at your progress no doubt you no longer need help with your initial shots.

That’s one of the great goals of Project 52 - to be in competition with your previous efforts, do your best to learn new techniques, and apply what you are learning to produce better results. Plus, it's a lot of fun! It would be very difficult to accomplish without the considerable feedback of so many of the folks here at CiC.

[Edit] I just tried using the Lighten Blending Mode with the original fast and slow water images and at about 50% opacity I get bits and pieces of water drops amongst the fast flowing water. It does indeed add the 'sparkle' effect that you allude to without losing any of the impact of the fast flow.

A great idea! Thanks Paul!

[Nicola]

Actually Donald, I didn't give that much thought and I should have. I guess it just felt right to me. In my mind I'm seeing an 8-wheeler steam-locomotive running full throttle out of the bridge with smoke and sparks billowing up through the cupola.

Here it is with the tighter crop. I may have lost my ability to be subjective by this point. Does anyone have any comments on which would be preferable and why?



I would have also liked to been able to get high enough to get some of the Lamoille River in the composition but I didn't have any 40' tall stilts with me in the car. <sigh!>

Frank
since the first glance, I noticed the extra space Donald pointed out. I prefer the last image because it is more focused on the subject.
I also think, IMHO, that that tree in front of the bridge doesn't concern much to the image. did you try to shoot from the opposite side of the railway? it seems to me that there isn't anything covering the bridge from that side.
hope this helps
ciao
Nicola

PS next time try to jump 40' high and take the picture with the river

[Donald]

Here it is with the tighter crop. I may have lost my ability to be subjective by this point. Does anyone have any comments on which would be preferable and why?

I think that gives the bridge much more impact. It now dominates the image, in the way that I feel it does (or should) dominate its landscape. I think we can now see into the bridge and feel that we are there beside it. It places us at the location, in my view.

[FrankMi]

Frank
since the first glance, I noticed the extra space Donald pointed out. I prefer the last image because it is more focused on the subject.
I also think, IMHO, that that tree in front of the bridge doesn't concern much to the image. did you try to shoot from the opposite side of the railway? it seems to me that there isn't anything covering the bridge from that side.
hope this helps
ciao
Nicola

PS next time try to jump 40' high and take the picture with the river

LOL! Thanks Nicola. It was possible and advantageous to photograph the bridge from the other side with the sun behind me. Unfortunately, it would take a long circuitous hike to get there in marshy land with very tall weeds. We had been warned about being careful about an abundance of deer ticks this year that were carrying Lyme disease so I thought better of it.

[FrankMi]

I think that gives the bridge much more impact. It now dominates the image, in the way that I feel it does (or should) dominate its landscape. I think we can now see into the bridge and feel that we are there beside it. It places us at the location, in my view.

Good catch Donald! Thank you!

[Nicola]

LOL! Thanks Nicola. It was possible and advantageous to photograph the bridge from the other side with the sun behind me. Unfortunately, it would take a long circuitous hike to get there in marshy land with very tall weeds. We had been warned about being careful about an abundance of deer ticks this year that were carrying Lyme disease so I thought better of it.

for the little I know you
I was sure you have had a good reason to do not shoot from the other side!

[FrankMi]

The overriding goal for most of my images in Project 52 is perfecting the skill of visualizing the composition. To me, that is the most important aspect of getting it right in-camera. If the image isn’t pleasing, it doesn’t matter how technically correct it is. No one is going to want to look at it. This week is no exception.

Those that are familiar with the musical (or the movie), The Sound of Music, have been introduced to the Von Trapp Family. Escaping Nazism in the early 1940’s, the family came to America where they earned their living touring and performing as the Trapp Family Singers.

They eventually settled in Stowe, Vermont and opened a bed and breakfast which has grown over the years to become the current 96-room Austrian-style Trapp Family Lodge.

This image shows one small part of the main lodge.



Although the view from the lodge is fantastic, there was a haze in the valley the day I was there and I couldn't get high enough to get a good shot over the cars in the parking lot. Yea, yea, yea, excuses, excuses!

[pnodrog]

Harden up man - marshy land, tall weeds, deer ticks and now you can't fly?

[Letrow]

I didn't know that about the Von Trapp family. Looking at the photo, the roof caught my eye. It seems to be sloping down slightly and I think it could do with a very slight tilt. I am curious now as to how the whole lodge looks.

[FrankMi]

I didn't know that about the Von Trapp family. Looking at the photo, the roof caught my eye. It seems to be sloping down slightly and I think it could do with a very slight tilt. I am curious now as to how the whole lodge looks.

Thanks for viewing and commenting Peter!

If I scroll the image up and line up the top of the roof with the top of my monitor screen, that part looks level to me. What part of the image is looking tilted? I may need to apply some skew to correct it.

The Lodge is on a slope the drops down to the right into a multi-level outdoor parking lot. The lodge entrance is under the section on the right. I couldn't find a location from the front where I could get a good shot of more than part of the lodge at a time so I choose the view that I felt was most interesting.

As I wasn't a registered guest, I wasn't comfortable with exploring the back or interior. If you are interested, there are more pictures and the Sound of Music/Trapp Family history on their website at: http://www.trappfamily.com/

[Letrow]

Thanks for viewing and commenting Peter!

If I scroll the image up and line up the top of the roof with the top of my monitor screen, that part looks level to me. What part of the image is looking tilted? I may need to apply some skew to correct it.

The Lodge is on a slope the drops down to the right into a multi-level outdoor parking lot. The lodge entrance is under the section on the right. I couldn't find a location from the front where I could get a good shot of more than part of the lodge at a time so I choose the view that I felt was most interesting.

As I wasn't a registered guest, I wasn't comfortable with exploring the back or interior. If you are interested, there are more pictures and the Sound of Music/Trapp Family history on their website at: http://www.trappfamily.com/

I think you are right Frank. I tried scrolling it up like you did and it comes out level. My eyes were obviously deceived.

[FrankMi]

After first climbing Mount Washington by auto almost fifty years ago, my wife and I have wanted to take the Cog Railway to the summit. This summer we got to do just that. This railway is the world’s first mountain-climbing cog (rack-and-pinion) railway and was completed in 1869 by Sylvester Marsh.

The track is elevated above the surface to allow snow to be more easily cleared. With an average grade of 25%, some sections, such as at Jacob’s Ladder, exceed 37%. Shown below is the current coal fired Steam-Powered locomotive which makes the climb daily. This locomotive, the Waumbek, is the ninth Cog Steam-Powered locomotive to be used on the railway and was built in 1908. In order to keep the boiler operational, it is tilted to be closer to level during the climb. The Waumbek consumes a ton of coal and 1,000 gallons of water to make one three mile trip to the top. Most trips to the top of Mt. Washing today are powered by diesel-hydraulic locomotives.



The first locomotive built for the Mount Washington Cog Railway was "Old Peppersass" was designed specifically to climb extremely steep gradients of nearly 38%. The engine received its nickname when it was observed that it, "Looks like a peppersass bottle doesn't she?" The resemblance came from the engine's upright boiler which was angled to keep it nearly vertical while the locomotive was on steep grades. This was essential to keep the water level in the boiler as even as possible.

[FrankMi]

The top of Mount Washington can be an unforgiving place to be when the weather turns abruptly for the worst. Since 1849, there have been 137 fatalities, mostly caused by hypothermia, and most of these deaths did not occur in the winter.

To give you an idea of what to expect at the summit of Mount Washington, here are a few statistics.
• Highest sustained wind (world record, 4/12/34): 231 MPH
• Average wind velocity for the year: 35.3 MPH
• Lowest temperature Jan 1934: -47°F
• Highest temperature Aug 1975: 72°F That's right the all time high is 72!
• Average annual snowfall: 256 inches
• Max snowfall in a season (1968-69): 566.4 inches
• Winds exceed hurricane force (75 MPH) on average 104 days a year
• The summit is in the clouds about 60% of the time

To put it in perspective, when the temperature is -45° and the wind is blowing at the average for Mount Washington - 35 MPH, the wind chill factor is at -123°!

Why so much wind? This is partly due to the convergence of several storm tracks, mainly from the South Atlantic, Gulf region and Pacific Northwest. In addition, it is centered in the winter polar Jet Stream.

This image is of the Tip Top House, built in 1853 on the top of Mount Washington as an 8 bunk hotel.

[Donald]

Sorry Frank, I'm falling behind in terms of noting the images coming up on here.

I love the clarity you have got in to the Tip-Top House. What altitude is that at?

[FrankMi]

Sorry Frank, I'm falling behind in terms of noting the images coming up on here.

I love the clarity you have got in to the Tip-Top House. What altitude is that at?

Thank you for viewing Donald!

Mount Washington peaks at 6,288 feet. Not very high by most standards, but the highest in the northeast U.S. In some respects, the fact that the winds can compress, accelerate, and go over the top of the mountain (instead of having to go around the peak) contributes to the high wind speeds at the top.

[FrankMi]

This week's goal is to portray a relatively common sight in Vermont, the covered bridge, in an interesting and informative way.

In New England, bridges were covered to keep the wood dry and thereby avoid rot. This became the trend in 1805 when a bridge designed by Timothy Palmer, an architect proved most durable, extending the life of a wooden bridge from 10-15 years to as much as 80 years. The most common type of covered bridge in Southern Vermont is the Town Lattice. The size of the height and width of the bridge openings were dictated by the size of the local hay wagons when carrying a full load of hay.

Most covered bridges are painted red because iron ochre was an inexpensive pigment. Would you like to make your own covered bridge paint? Here are the ingredients from the original recipe: 2 quarts of skim milk, buttermilk or whey; 8 ounces of newly slaked lime, 6 ounces of oil from ground flaxseed, 2 ounces of turpentine and 1.5 pounds of pulverized ochre.

The first four bridges are located in the Bennington – Manchester area of the Shires of Vermont.

The Silk Road Bridge was built across the Wallomsac River in 1840 and is 88 feet long. The original name for this bridge was the Locust Grove Bridge.



The Paper Mill Bridge was built at the site of a 1790 paper mill and spans the Walloomsac River with a length of 125 feet.



The Henry Bridge was built in 1840 and spans the Wallomsac River at a length of 117 feet. This bridge received its name from Elnathan Henry who constructed the Henry House in 1769. The Henry House operates today as a Bed & Breakfast Inn and is located directly across from the bridge just out of sight to the left.



The Chiselville Bridge was named for a former chisel factory nearby but was previously named High Bridge and the Roaring Branch Bridge. The Chiselville Bridge spans the Roaring Branch Brook, was built 1870 and is 117 feet long. The Chiselville Bridge survived the flood of 1927, which destroyed hundreds of Vermont covered bridges.



Emily’s Covered Bridge was built in 1844 and spans the Gold Brook in Stowe Hollow close to Stowe, Vermont at a length of 49 feet. Unlike the previous covered bridges, the design of this bridge is known as a Howe Truss bridge.

Is this bridge haunted?

People will warn you that you must be careful when crossing Emily's Bridge, and many refuse to cross it after dark. It is said that a ghost named Emily haunts the historic covered bridge, and she's not just a spooky specter that allows the watcher a fleeting glimpse before vanishing back into nothingness. This ghost is feared as she is known for shaking cars and slashing victims with invisible claws.

For about 150 years, horses and cars have been mysteriously clawed. People have heard a woman's voice, seen ghostly figures, and witnessed strange lights at Emily's Bridge.

[Donald]

Fascinating, as well as being high quality photography.

I think that 'interior' shot of the paper Mill Bridge is particularly impressive just because a challenging lighting situation has been dealt with so magnificently, as well as providing us with a well composed image. Wonderful to see that interior construction.

[FrankMi]

Fascinating, as well as being high quality photography.

I think that 'interior' shot of the paper Mill Bridge is particularly impressive just because a challenging lighting situation has been dealt with so magnificently, as well as providing us with a well composed image. Wonderful to see that interior construction.

Thank you Donald! I also found the interior design to be fascinating and noted that many of the bridges from this era used wooden pegs in place of bolts in a number of locations. When I look carefully I can see where repairs have been made over the years and usually that is where the wooden pegs gave way to metal bolts. It was a fascinating experience that I would have loved to extend to more of the 80 covered bridges still in existence in Vermont.

[FrankMi]

What can you do if you just can’t capture the image the way you want because you don’t have the right equipment with you or it is simply not possible due to circumstances beyond your control? That is what I was facing with this scene.

In Barcelona you will see an abundance of highly detailed and very interesting architecture. It is one of the most fascinating cities in Europe I had had the pleasure to visit. Getting a clear shot of some of the buildings can sometimes be a challenge!

Although I was delightfully fascinated by the architecture in this old building, the trees really hid much of the fine detail.



So I thought; what if I move in closer? Can I get the trees out of the image?

Well, yes, sort-of, maybe. The problem is that without a tilt-shift or ultra-wide angle lens, I couldn’t get the entire building in with one shot. OK. So what if I shoot two images and stitched them together as a panorama? Might work?

Well the Right side seems to be useable, almost.



Let’s try the Left side. UT-OH! I wasn’t able to get in close enough to get rid of the ugly light pole.



Hmmmmm…. What if I take a few steps to the left, just far enough so that the part of the building that was covered by the light pole can now be seen?



OK. I guess the first thing to do is to align the two left images in layers and using a mask and reveal the part of the second image where the first image was covered by the light pole. First I tried using Edit/Auto-Align Layers but found that the original Left image got skewed way out of alignment.



After I undid that change, I reversed the order of the images so that the second image was on top and tried again. We can see part of the first image peeping out below the second image. This was better!



I'll need to move the second image back below the first image so that we can do the masking.

We may need to stretch and skew the bottom image a bit to get them to line up as the shooting angle for the top image wasn’t exactly in the same place as the bottom image. You may also need to use and adjustment layer for Brightness/Contrast on the bottom layer to get that to match as well. Sometimes you’ll also need to break up the mask into smaller sections and do one section at a time.

Because the second image didn’t cover the first all the way to the bottom of the light pole, I’ll need to do some cloning as well. Fortunately, the part that needs to be cloned has an exact copy right beside it.



Now we should be ready to create a panorama from the Left and Right images. But first, if we were to try to do an Edit/Auto-Align Layers, we would end up with the same dramatic skew problems we saw earlier as the software doesn’t know that the images have some fairly significant keystone issues.

What we’ll need to do first is to use Edit/Transform/Perspective and Skew to get each side of the image corrected. Before I do that though, I’ll add some canvas behind the image so that the result image doesn’t stretch beyond the canvas and get lost.

Once the image is no longer keystone’d, you can use the Move tool to change the aspect ratio to match the original image above. The result will likely end up looking something like this.



We can now do the same process on the right side of the image.



Now we should have a much better chance of getting a well aligned panorama. It may be worthwhile to use a Brightness/Contrast Adjustment Layer on one of the images to get it to match as closely as possible to the other before you run the Edit/Auto-Align and Edit/Auto-Blend Layers (Panorama).



We are now ready for the final clean-up. Do we want the tourists in the image? If so, which ones? Do we want to fill in the missing sky and/or add more of the foreground? Do we want to keep the tree branches?

Fortunately, all of these changes are possible because when we were shooting the scene we took additional images so that we could address problems like cloning out the lamp pole. We already have additional sky available from the first image above.



When we compare this to the original image above, we realize that we have lost some contrast and the image could stand a touch of ‘pop’. At this point, I check for noise, sharpness, white & black points, colour balance, etc. and adjust as necessary for my feel for what I think is as close to the original scene as I can get.



The harsh sun brings out the detail, but what if we want to experiment with the look and feel?

Thanks to David’s thread Sea View Walton-on-the-Naze I thought I’d try to see what this might look like as an oil painting…



...and your thoughts?