Heritage Photography January 2022

HERITAGE PHOTOGRAPHY

HERITAGE PHOTOGRAPHY

Journal of the Archaeology and Heritage Group

January 2022

Editor David Bryson FRPS heritage.editor@rps.org

Advisory Editor Eric Houlder LRPS

Advertising enquiries David Bryson heritage.editor@rps.org

Archaeology & Heritage Group Committee Members

David Bryson FRPS Chair and Heritage Photography editor heritage.editor@rps.org

Mike Glyde Secretary heritagesec@rps.org

Amanda Schonhut Treasurer heritagetreasurer@rps.org

David Bryson FRPS heritage.editor@rps.org

Jim Souper ARPS

Shaun Parkes

Published by the Archaeology and Heritage Group of the Royal Photographic Society, January 2022.

Copyright in all text and photographs is held by the credited authors, or as otherwise stated. No part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted or stored in any form without prior written permission of the Publisher.

Print ISSN 0958-0565 Online ISSN 2632-3346 Front cover photograph Digging for Britain

The Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir by Sergey ShchekotovAlexandrov

EDITORIAL

3 Perspective: on the New Year DAVID BRYSON FRPS FEATURES

4-9 Memories of SuttonHoo

ERIC HOULDER LRPS Reminisences prompted by the recent film “The Dig”

10-12 A small object witrh a big surprise.

ROBERT GALLOWAY LRPS A stanhope and its hidden photographic treasure.

13-21 Gaining the higher ground: Adventures in low level drone photography. Parish Churches in Worcestershire.

MIKE GLYDE

22-24 Two boats on a long Canal Route to the South Bank and the Festival of Britain The story behind some Family photographs

DAVID BRYSON FRPS

25-36 An Instant of Heritage

SERGEY SHCHEKOTOVALEXANDROV A perspective on Unesco World Heritage sites and festivals in Russia.

Perspective: on the New Year

DAVID BRYSON FRPS

Best wishes to all members for a fruitful 2022.

The first edition this year hasn’t really ended up with a theme it is just showing great examples of members’ stories and photographs.

Themes unless they naturally come together can be restrictive. So the more material or ideas for current or future issues the better so I have as wide a choice as possible for future issues from members’ photography and stories so much the better.

If a theme develops great if not I just look forward to publishing the stories and photographs you submit.

As always I can only publish from the work that is submitted to me. If you would like to get feedback and submit stories/ideas of photographs for the journal please contact me by e-mail. heritage. editor@rps.org

This issue starts with Eric Houlder’s reminiscences about Sutton Hoo in view of the recent film”The Dig”. Then we take a look inside a Stanhope with Robert Galloway.

From the very small to larger edifices we take to the skies to see aerial view of some of the Parish Churches of Worcestershire with Mike Glyde.

The next piece takes us back to the Festival of Britain with some family photographs and the story of canal barges travelling from Lapworth to London.

The last piece takes us to the UNESCO sites, monuments and festivals in Russia from Sergey one of our newest members.

E-mail Reminder

Do add your e-mail details to your RPS profile as this is the only way, other than the journal that the A&H Group and RPS can let you know what is happening including the AGM and to give you advance notice of online events through the RPS’s Broadcast system.

Facebook

This year has already seen some amazing archaeological and palaeontological finds many of which have featured in our facebook group posts as well as on “Digging for Britain” on the BBC featured on the front cover with a site photograph by Mike Glyde our honorary secretary

New Challenge for the New Year

Mike Glyde invited the group members to photograph the heritage monument in their city and take 3 pictures for the New Year’s Challenge collection.

Sergey chose the EGYPTIAN GATE monument in St. Petersburg. This structure was built in 1827-1830 . The facility was designed by the Scottish architect

Adam Adamovich Menelas.

At the beginning of the 19th century, there was a fascination with Egyptomania in different European countries. And many houses were built, buildings on Egyptian themes. So in Russia, such gates were built. The gate is the entrance to St. Petersburg.

It should be noted that when St. Petersburg was developed in the 18th and 19th centuries, many different specialists from European countries came: including architects, gardeners, ship builders,doctors, merchants and scientists. Specialists from England have made a huge contribution to the creation of St. Petersburg. The architect Adam Adamovich Menelas built many different buildings and parks in the city.

Do join our private facebook group and contribute your own images and thoughts. https://www. facebook.com/groups/rpsah

MEMORIES OF SUTTON HOO, PROMPTED BY THE RECENT FILM ‘THE DIG.’

As someone who, in the course of his work as a supervisor on the second Sutton Hoo dig, actually met and spoke with some of the characters portrayed in the recent film, may I be allowed to correct one or two misapprehensions promulgated by the film?

I liked Ralph Fiennes’ portrayal of Basil Brown, though I remember Brown as much shorter, slighter and more broad in his speech. I met him several times, the last being on site at West Stow in 1971. I remember he reached to just past my shoulder, and I was six feet tall - then!

The film’s portrayal of Phillips, however, was an insult to a fine archaeologist. Phillips spent a day on site at Sutton Hoo in August 1968. With our director Paul Ashbee all morning and lunchtime, and the afternoon largely with me.

I was in charge of the excavation of the North Eastern quadrant of the overlying mound that season. Phillips, quite correctly, asked permission to enter the trowelled area, introduced himself as we stood on the tail of the mound, and spoke of the then current work, and his experiences in 1939.

Physically he was at least three inches taller than I, big, but not overweight, and quite deferential to a young supervisor of far less eminence in the world of archaeology. To my chagrin, none of my friends took a picture of us conversing on the ship mound; this was long before selfies. I liked him. He was nothing like the short, fat, overbearing and bombastic Phillips of the film. Phillips’ chief contribution was to introduce a modern grid and recording system, with proper planning. The film failed to show any recording, and the diggers seemed to be just scraping away serendipitously, not maintaining levels, and dragging finds out of the ground before planning and photography.

The film’s reconstruction of the ship failed to convince, as Sutton Hoo is on sand with little

topsoil, so real mud as we have here in Yorkshire is unknown. This latter criticism is only likely to be understood by those who have actually dug in the Suffolk Sandlings.

More serious, as you emphasise, is the substitution of a fictitious male character for two women photographers who took some of the first colour images in British archaeology. Mercie Lack ARPS, and Barbara Wagstaff ARPS did sterling work in recording the excavation. Their contribution to the site archive was critical, but no mention at all.

Having said all this, I enjoyed the film as pre-war Suffolk was not very different from post war Suffolk, and many memories were re-kindled. Sutton Hoo has a magical atmosphere and Joan, my wife and I love to visit as often as we can. Of the very many excavations we have participated in, this is the only site we return to again and again.

Eric Houlder LRPS, Supervisor, Sutton Hoo, 1967-69. The original letter, and the edited version actually published, set out my objections to the characterisation of the main players in the Sutton Hoo drama.

Comparing notes with friend and colleague Peter Rooley, it transpired that we both enjoyed the film but the mis-characterisation of people and site annoyed us. So what really transpired at Sutton Hoo in the Sixties?

The usual story begins with Brown’s investigations on Sutton Hoo Heath in 1938, and concludes with the outbreak of the Second World War.

In preparation for this latter event, Mrs Pretty had asked him to stay on to fill in the ship outline, and to help dig out and erect her Anderson air raid shelter. Meanwhile the treasures, mostly fragmentary at this stage, were transferred to the British Museum (BM) and without unpacking from their protective coverings immediately transported to the disused

The following is the full text of my letter to The Times, published (condensed)

on the first of February 2021: ERIC HOULDER LRPS

My first impression of the ship from the stern. Dr Bruce-Mitford standing with white shirt. © Eric Houlder LRPS, by courtesy of the late R Bruce-Mitford and the Trustees of the British Museum.

The area in which the 1939 spoil from the burial chamber was tipped. The recording team is busy in the left background plotting in finds three dimensionally. © Eric Houlder LRPS, by courtesy of the late R Bruce-Mitford and the Trustees of the British Museum.

Dr Bruce-Mitford with what appears to be a mast step. © Eric Houlder LRPS, by courtesy of the late R Bruce-Mitford and the Trustees of the British Museum.

Close-up of the recording team in action. Left to right: Jane Osborn; Joan Houlder; Richmal Ashbee. © Eric Houlder LRPS, by courtesy of the late R Bruce-Mitford and the Trustees of the British Museum.

Aldwych underground station for safe-keeping during hostilities.

Phillips began his work producing an interim report, and the various experts completed their specialist reports and plans. So far, so good.

However, the expert from the Maritime Museum, Lt Commander Hutchinson, was immediately recalled into the Royal Navy for the duration, which he did not survive, and some of his plans were later destroyed in a V1 attack.

Following the cessation of hostilities the finds were retrieved from the Aldwych and unpacked

It soon became apparent that pieces of several items were missing, particularly the helmet, shield and harp. Dr Rupert Bruce-Mitford, who had taken over the Sutton Hoo project following his demobilisation realised that a return to the site was necessary, but in the financial situation then current, it was impossible to do more that make tentative attempts to re-construct the items involved; hence the rather make-shift appearance of the helmet as initially displayed.

Funds were not available for a return to the site until the mid sixties. In consultation with his good friend Paul Ashbee, a comprehensive campaign was planned, beginning with the re-excavation and conservation of the ship outline. This was to be followed by a meticulous re-excavation of the whole site outside the actual vessel, and extending well off the actual mound in all directions.

At this stage it is important to understand the methodologies used by the previous excavators at Sutton Hoo. Basil Brown who began the work in 1938 learned his archaeology by practising it and by reading. However, the most up to date book available to him was JP Droop’s Archaeological Excavation, 1915. This is still available as a modern re-print, and offers us a window into the techniques current just before the World War I.

In contrast, Charles Phillips was a pioneer of stratigraphic archaeology as taught by Wheeler’s Institute of Archaeology and as later described in Wheeler’s Archaeology from the Earth. Had Phillips initiated the dig he would have created a grid over the whole mound and then excavated either all the squares, or perhaps alternate segments of a circle centred upon the mound. Next he would dig the remaining areas including the baulks. As it was he could only superimpose a grid over the great trench skillfully, though anachronistically, opened up by Brown.

The modern Open Area technique was then in its infancy, and personal conversations with Peggy Wilson ( née Margaret Markham-White) revealed subsequently that she had initially discussed using

this technique with Paul Ashbee and his wife, Richmal. In view of the previous historiography of the site, Ashbee decided to extend Phillip’s grid and continue using the Wheeler Box System, though that name was yet to be coined at that time.

Thus, in 1965 Dr Bruce-Mitford and a team of conservationists had a nylon cover on a scaffolding frame erected over the ship and began to carefully remove the protective covering of grass sods placed on the outline in September 3rd 1939

After revealing the much-eroded ship outline they cautiously numbered each clench-nail and (after an impression was taken) placed it in a box for eventual dispatch to the BM. Needless to say, everything was recorded three dimensionally, after which an impression was taken in plaster of Paris. Then the team excavated beneath the decayed planking and frames to look for traces of a keel. When found this was a shallow D-shaped structure. They also secured samples to test for phosphate compounds indicative of body decay products. The writer was lucky enough to spend a couple of days working on the ship before joining the team on the spoil heaps. In July of 1967 Paul Ashbee and his hand-picked excavators – including myself – began to carefully excavate the spoil heaps deposited by Phillips’ team.

The stratum containing the spoil from the 1939 excavation was easily identified, and it was then forensically trowelled by the team of skilled archaeologists. Each find, no matter what its apparent origin, was precisely recorded three dimensionally, carefully cleaned and boxed for dispatch to the BM. Some of the items were complete (unexploded) mortar bombs, shrapnel or live and spent 303 rounds from the site’s wartime use as a training ground, but others were pieces of the burial deposit including fragments of the helmet, harp and shield. This was an exciting time for we archaeologists, but a frustrating one for a budding site photographer as he only occasionally had opportunity to take pictures. Site discipline was of course quite strict in those days.

Among the distinguished visitors to the site was Basil Brown himself. I was surprised how short he was, but how personable once one gained his confidence. He allowed himself to be photographed with a number of the volunteers, especially Rhoisia and Bridget Copinger-Hill whom he had worked with on the original dig. Another visitor was famous Suffolk author Ronald Blyth who’s Akenfield had recently been a best seller.

An insignificant schoolboy visitor was so impressed that he grew up to be the scholar Dr Sam Newton, of Time Team fame.

By September 1967, the spoil heaps had been excavated down to the 1939 ground level, where the black decayed grass on which Mr Pretty et al had once stood still showed as a definite layer. The site then closed for the season, as was the normal practice.

To be continued... not to self add references e.g. Times etc

ERIC HOULDER LRPS

Rhoisia Copinger-Hill’s picture of Paul Ashbee and Basil Brown in 1967. © Kate Massey. Kate is Paul and Richmal Ashbee’s daughter, and I thank her for the use of this picture.

A small object containing a big surprise

A small piece of ornamentally carved bone, was found beside the 19th Century piece of souvenir Mauchlineware which I described in the January 2019 issue of Heritage Photography, pp 20-21. At a glance the piece of bone does not seem of much interest. ROBERT GALLOWAY, LRPS

The small rod of bone, 73mm long and about 9mm in diameter. The rough left-hand end

been broken off some small object. It is decorated along its length with holes through the rod forming part of the

The right-hand end is terminated by a sphere 9mm in diameter with a 3mm diameter hole through it which is filled by a glass rod. This glass rod is 9mm long, flat and white at one end and markedly convex at the other. Herein is the big surprise!

However, hold the object up to the sky (a bright light source), look through the convex end of the little glass rod in the bone sphere and behold a group of photographs!

What have we here? Something that I have neither seen nor heard of before. A search of the Web indicates that the little glass rod containing tiny photographs and with convex magnifying end is known as a Stanhope.

How old is it? There are some clues in the photograph on the next page. The top right-hand photo. is captioned, “the new University” which was built on Gilmorehill and completed in 1870. Consequently, the Stanhope cannot be older than 1870. The lower left-hand photo. Is captioned ”Georges Square”; one side of George Square now comprises the very impressive Victorian Glasgow City Chambers completed in 1888, which would surely have been included in the Stanhope photo. had they existed when it was taken. This suggests that the Stanhope is older than 1888. The prominent period of Stanhope production was the second half of the 19th century.

As to who made it, there is a name in a curvaceous script which begins, “Mc “ but beyond that I

have been unable to decipher either from my photographs or from direct viewing by eye.

A brief history of Stanhopes see references for links at the end of this piece.

The story begins in 1839 when John Benjamin Dancer devised a way of making microphotographs only about 3mm2 in size, so small as to require a microscope to see them. He used them to show how good were the microscopes which he sold! In 1857 Rene Dagron saw the commercial possibility of a small simple device which contained both microphotographs and optical magnification to enable them to be seen. For the optical magnification he made a miniature version of the “one piece microscope” invented about 50 years earlier by Charles, the third Earl of Stanhope and Dagron’s novelties became known as ”Stanhopes”. In 1862 Dagron is said to have had 150 workers in his factory.

Concerning photographing the images in the Stanhope. It has been noted that the photographing of Stanhope images is “arduous” and that a microscope has been used; I agree with “arduous” but I was not helped by my microscope, possibly because its minimum magnification 40x is

could perhaps be due to having

decoration.

What is seen looking through the convex end of the little glass rod. Note that the eye must be within 10mm of the convex end to see this and what is seen is contained within 3mm diameter in the glass tube. I found this very difficult to photograph, but more about that later.

The arrangement used to produce photo.2. An LED light panel was placed on a desk shining upwards with a small sheet of opal glass on top to provide an area of uniform illumination on which the Stanhope in the bone holder could be placed as required. The iphone was held securely only just above the Stanhope using a phone-tripod clamp on a sturdy tripod.

too high. The photographic problem is to record what is contained within only a 3mm diameter in the Stanhope and can only be viewed through the convex end of the little glass rod. When viewed directly by eye the image looks much brighter, just as a photographic transparency commonly is much brighter than a print made from it. My first attempts were made with interchangeable lens cameras with various lenses and combinations of lenses that I had used for macro work. The results were a complete failure, at best showing a dark blur in a circle of light. Realising that the eye has to be only a few mm from the convex lens end of the glass rod, this closeness could not be replicated with typical interchangeable lenses which have their front element recessed into the lens mount by several cm. To get the Stanhope close to a camera lens and so resemble direct eye viewing, I tried my compact camera with which the Stanhope to camera lens separation could be about 10mm. This was encouraging but not yet good enough; the resulting photos showed only about 2/3 of the complete image and were so unsharp that that none of the captions or text could be read. It seemed necessary to lessen the separation between Stanhope and camera lens. An iphone camera lens must be very close to the rear surface of the iphone and seemed worth a try and indeed produced photo.2 using the arrangement shown in photo.3. The wide angle lens on an iphone 7+ was used and gave an image 4032x3024 pixels which was processed in Lightroom

to black and white (as were the original Stanhope images), cropped to remove irrelevant background as in photo.2 (2102x2021 pixels) and given an application of “clarity”.

References

en.wilkipedia.org/wiki/Stanhope_(optical_bijou) www.collectiblescoach.com/2013/11/stanhopecollecting-guide.html

Hunter Oatman-Stanford, Royalty, Espionage, and Erotica: Secrets of the World’s Tiniest Photographs (https://www.collectorsweekly.com/articles/secretsof-the-worlds-tiniest-photographs/ )

University of Glasgow Old and New, https://www. gla.ac.uk/myglasgow/library/files/special/exhibns/ month/july2008.html

Glasgow City Chambers, https://en.wilkipedia.org/ wiki/Glasgow_City_Chambers

Stanhope lens, hpps://en.wilkipedia.org/wiki/ Stanhope_lens

Gaining the higher ground: Adventures in low level drone photography

Over the past few years, the presence of small unmanned air vehicles (SUAVs), more commonly called drones has risen dramatically from preserve of military use and high end commercial platforms to affordable devices available to anyone over the High Street shop counter. MIKE GLYDE

SUAVs come in all shapes and sizes, from novelty toys to large 8 rotor beasts as well as fixed wing devices. There are a range of SUAVs that have decent cameras on board capable of 20Mp images and 4k video, most with built in cameras and fixed lenses, others with the ability to attach DSLRs or multi spectral cameras. I am not going to discuss the ins and outs of all this variety, but simply share my experiences in getting into and applying drone photography with regards to heritage.

Here I am also not going to discuss their wider legal requirements and restrictions of flying a drone in the UK, but shall focus on the photography, after all this is the RPS. I would like to use this article to share my experiences, methods, and post processing techniques in creating what I consider to be quality photographs encapsulating the essential qualities of photography.

1. Conducting traditional aerial photography in the early 2000s in a Cessna 172

Subject, composition, exposure, and presentation.

My background as an archaeologist has led me through traditional aerial photography from a Cessna 172, seeking and recording archaeological sites from the air and mapping them. This highlevel photography is very different than what can be delivered from a drone, as they are limited greatly by the height and range that they can operate. What they are ideally suited to is low level oblique photography.

In 2018 I purchased a DJI Mavic Pro with the intention of using it for archaeological survey and photography. I undertook formal training and obtained my CAA Permit for Commercial Operations to ensure that I was experienced enough to fly safely and within the law.

The Parish Church project came about through a gradual process. I first started photographing churches in my local area just out of interest, the buildings being generally isolated (in this part of the county) and of a wide range of dates and architectural styles. As I photographed more I decided that it would be an excellent project to take low level aerial images of all the counties

churches, all 199 of them. I have sought and received consent from the various Parish Church Councils to operate the drone from their respective churchyards in advance of taking the pictures. As a sweetener I gift a copy of the final picture to the parish to use as they feel fit, with the only proviso to credit me as the photographer. So that’s the background, now lets discuss the photography, how is it done, and what lessons I have learned.

Firstly, it is important to state from the outset that the operator of the drone takes the photograph, not the drone. The flying may be semi-autonomous, but the camera is controlled solely by the operator. It transmits a live view of what the camera sees to the hand-held receiver and remote control

The remote pilot has control over the image in a number of ways. You can shoot in RAW, JPEG or both (I use RAW). The lens is fixed aperture, but you can control the focus, the shutter speed from 8sec to 1/8000sec and ISO from 100-1600. Focus can be set to manual and auto, to focus you tap the image on live view you want to focus on, and the camera focuses on that. You also have the ability to switch between landscape and portrait mode,

2. The drones eye image displayed on controller.

with the on-board camera mechanically rotating 90° degrees.

The screen also shows a histogram and over exposure warning where high lights are blown out. In fact, apart from aperture control, you can control the image just as any other fixed lens camera.

The Mavic Pro produces 12.7Mp sized images. While not as high as later models, as you will see in the pictures reproduced in this article, this still produces remarkably sharp and clear images, further improved with a bit of post processing. The lens is a 35mm equivalent with a fixed aperture of f2.2, capable of focusing from 0.5 to ∞.

Having described how versatile and familiar the camera system is, now let’s turn our attention to the three essential photographic qualities.

Subject, Composition and Lighting

Given the small lens size and 12MP sensor it’s important not to try and photograph a subject that will be small in the final image. That’s not to say you can’t get great landscape images, but fine detail wont reproduce properly when enlarged. Buildings therefore make an ideal subject matter (subject to flying restrictions and permissions etc.) as they can

dominate the frame and provide the focus for your image.

People who know me are very aware that I am a stickler for composition, a well composed images shows you have thought about your image before you have taken it. Just as with ground-based photography, you need to move around your subject to explore compositional opportunities, best lighting etc. Just remember to keep an eye on where your drone is at all times to avoid overflying areas you shouldn’t and hazards such as trees or overhead cables. To help frame an image the display can be overlayed with grids in different formats such as the go to 1/3s which helps you create pleasing compositions. As well as being able to switch between landscape and portrait mode, the camera has the ability to tilt from 10° above horizontal to vertically straight down, so there are all the tools to compose your image how you wish. As with all photography light is key and get the best images you need the good lighting on your subject, therefore days with intermittent cloud and sunshine work best. Sometimes however nature is on your side, and you could have dark rain-soaked clouds and a beam of light from a break in the clouds to illuminate your subject producing a more dynamic

3. St Mary’s Elmley Castle with Netherton, Near Bredon Hill, Worcestershire, a break in the showers produced wonderful lighting.

image, but that’s luck!

When photographing the churches many ducks have to line up. My physical availability, weather conditions and timing. To help plan the best time to take images I use a phone application called Sun Locator Pro ( https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ sun-seeker-tracker-compass/id330247123), which enables you to set a location and a time and it will show you the light and shadow (assuming full sunshine) at any given time. This is useful as I can look at a church on a map of Google earth, then work out where the best light should be, then it tells me the time I need to be there when the light is falling where I want it. I do this for some churches, others it is more of a matter of when I can physically be there! One church that benefited from an evening shoot, was St Michaels at Great Witley, which has a prominent golden cupola which reflects the evening light beautifully. I had planned this shot for weeks waiting for the said ducks to behave and stay in line!

One of the greatest restrictions in being able to create a successful image of a church is often

something that enhances the location, and that is the tree cover within the surrounding churchyard. It is uncommon for these trees to spoil the appreciation of the church from ground level, but from low level aerial viewpoints they can mask much of the structure and therefore you need to fly higher and further away or photograph it from its less ideal viewpoint. A fine example of this was at St Bartholomew’s, Grimly, which has a very characteristic and charming porch, which was completely obscured by trees when viewed from the air, meaning the final image, which was based on the only usable viewpoint, does not reveal the full character of the building (photo 5)

Of course, there are other restrictions and consideration when operating a photographic drone, and this includes flying over built up areas, where minimum height restrictions apply (50m). This makes photographing churches in the larger villages and towns problematic, however where there is some open space nearby it can help set the church in its setting rather than focusing on the church itself. Photo 6 shows Upton On Severn, where the 19th century church with its tall spire, can be seen at

4. Britain’s Finest Baroque Church, St Michaels & All Angels, Great Witley.

4. The difficulty in finding the best composition with well treed church yards. St. Bartholomew’s, Grimley

the southern end of the medieval high street, with the remains of the medieval church at the opposite end.

Exposure

As mentioned previously, you have full control over the image apart from aperture. However given the

fact that you are not photographing anything close up, the depth of field of the images is pretty much front to back when your subject is 20-30m away. Getting the best exposure is not always straight forward as unlike looking through a viewfinder, you need to look at screen, with all the issues of reflection and bright ambient light making it difficult to get right, and often they can be a little

overexposed as you try to see what’s right on the screen, and here you need to relay on the histogram to ensure a balanced exposure. Shooting in RAW however means its straightforward to reduce adjust the overall exposure if it’s not quite right, however as photographer I am to get it right in camera.

Having completed a flight and returned home, the images are downloaded from the on-board SD card into Adobe LightRoom Classic for sorting and editing.

As the resolution of the images is not huge, large

areas of similar tone, particularly in the sky, can look quite grainy when zoomed in. I have found that the amazing TOPAZ Denoise AI software does an outstanding job of smoothing out the grain with no loss of overall image clarity, in fact it most often improves it. It also upscales the image slightly. While you do have to pay for this software, I personally cannot recommend it highly enough. So having run the image through Denoise AI, I can apply any basic edits to the image. I do not like going overboard with editing. The image has to

5. The Parish Church of Saint Peter and Saint Paul Upton-on-Severn, Worcestershire

look natural and not over processed. The following work flow is typical for each image, but of course some images may require more or less treatment to get the feel and quality I am looking for. (Photo 7)

The drone has a wide angle lens which can sometimes result in converging verticals, or the horizontal plain was not quite horizontal when the image was take, so subtle use of the transform tool. Once the image looks correct, I then crop. As I am hoping to do an exhibition and book, images are cropped to the standard 10x8 format unless for compositional reasons a different ratio works better.

Drone images can also benefit with a bit of Dehazing which creates better colour depth. My go to are edits from here normally includes a graduated reduction of exposure for the sky, and localised dodge or burning on the highlights and shadows (Photo 8).

What started out as a bit of fun has become a pretty big project. While none of this was aimed for profit, I hope that once all 199 churches have been photographed that I will publish them as photo book. However there are still many churches to go so may be looking at the end of 2022 to complete the project and am now waiting for winter snow to provide atmospheric images for the a number of images.

A Learning Experience

In taking photos of a single subject, it soon became apparent that I was developing a particular image style in the final images. This helps greatly in seeing the collection as a whole and not a disparate group of images. It also meant that when taking the photographs, I began to automatically compose and frame as best I could to fulfil that style, that was further enhanced buy a set process if post processing.

7. Basic image processing in Lightroom.

8 St Peters. Pirton, a beautiful building nestled away in the trees.

Two boats on a long Canal Route to the South Bank and the Festival of Britain

I had always wondered what the story was behind some family photographs in my mother’s collection as they weren’t about family but events near Knowle where my mother grew-up and took photographs using her Box Brownie. DAVID BRYSON FRPS

BY researching using the British Newspaper Archive https://www.britishnewspaperarchive. co.uk/ I found out about the story behind the celebrity actress Frances Day sending the boats on their way from Lapworth.

Detail of symbols on one of the posts.

After the Second World War the canals and waterways of Britain were in need of development to encourage their use. The highlight of the year in 1950 was the National Canal Festival and Rally of Boats held at Market Harborough. A hundred boats attended the event that was designed to become a

Frances Day the actress having cut the ribbon to start the journey on board one of the canal boats at the start of their journey to London.

One of the narrow-boats pulling the second barge on their way to London.

Frances Day after cutting the ribbon to mark the start of their journey to the Festival of Britain.

major annual gathering and showcase for the Inland Waterways Association (IWA) https://www.waterways. org.uk/. However, the IWA found they couldn’t afford to run a festival in 1951, though they did want to make sure they were represented in London at the Festival of Britain.

exhibition tour of narrowboats peculiar to British waterways. Before reaching the Southbank pier where they will be moored they will travel 133 miles and passed through 149 locks.

Lapworth to London

Miss Day cut a blue ribbon across the bows and the boats moved off to the first lock to the strains of “God save the King” and “Cruising Down the River” Lapworth lies on the junction of two canals, the Stratford, and the Grand Union.

The canal passes through Lapworth on its way from Birmingham to Leamington Spa via Shrewley, Hatton and Warwick and eventually on to London.

The Stratford Canal passes through Lapworth on its way from Kings Norton Junction in the suburbs of Birmingham to Stratford, where it joins the River Avon

Coventry Evening Telegraph - Friday 18

May 1951

Midland Canal Barges on Show at the festival. Two canal boats last might completed their voyage of 133 miles from Warwickshire and were on show at the South Bank Exhibition today.

They passed out of the Grand Union Canal into the Thames at Brentford, today to moor alongside the Thames Sailing Barge Sara off the Exhibition.

The two boats a motor boat and a “butty” boat left Lapworth, Warwickshire on Aptil 23rd and have passed through 149 locks. They are Birmingham Boats actually used for canal work in the Midlands. Unchanged from 200 years ago, they are decorated in the traditional way with castles in bright paintwork and Turk’s head ropework.

by JEANNE BRYSON

April 1951

Two boats with a mission: Canal Route to the South Bank. Two sisters left a small Warwickshire village yesterday for the festival of Britain.

The “sisters” were Ivy and Antries two narrow-boats barges to the layman and they carried illustrious crews with Frances Day, rhe actress, to send them on their way from Lapworth. Their mission is to show visitors to the Southbank

Birmingham Daily Gazette - Tuesday 24th

Photographs

One of the crew dressed in traditional clothes for bargees.

An Instant of Heritage 2021

“An Instant of Heritage 2021” shows author’s photographs of cultural heritage objects of three countries: Russia, Italy and the United States. Aa a documentary photographer from St.Petersburg, Sergei ShchekotovAleksandrov, and his camera visited the Russian cities of Murom and Veliky Novgorod, St. Petersburg and Peterhof photographing monuments and other examples of cultural heritage. SERGEY SHCHEKOTOV-ALEXANDROV

Making photos has numerous functions in our lives. One of them is the photographic documentation of cultural heritage objects and landmarks. Taking photos of UNESCO World Heritage sites and their monuments is a particularly significant part of this area of practice.

Biography

Sergey Shchekotov-Aleksandrov is an independent documentary photographer born in 1960 in Yekaterinburg. He has been living in St.Petersburg since 2014. He graduated from the Ural State University (Journalism Department) in 1989. Sergey specializes in photography of non-material and material culture, nature and everyday life, urban landscapes, museum institutions.

I am a member of the Union of Journalists of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region, a member of the Creative Union “Photo Art” (Moscow),which has a blog “What do we know about Worldpressphoto”, the channel “Kilometres of photographic roads” on “Yandex. Zen.” Sergey is an author and curator of various traveling photo exhibitions and documentary photography events held in different years in some regions of Russia (Sverdlovsk region, Nizhny Novgorod region, Vladimir region and others). Among them: “Photokaleidoscope: 150 Years of Photography”, “Simple and Complex Impressions”, “Photo studio Free Theme Plus Nature”, “Silent Moscow”, “India. Light and Stone”, “White Colour”, “Open Air Museum – the City of St. Petersburg”, “Cultural Monuments and Museums” and others. Photographer’s website: shchekotovphoto.ucoz.net

The series of photo events “INSTANCES OF HERITAGE” is a program of photos to popularize outstanding cultural heritage objects and UNESCO objects in Russia and in different countries, which

involved my participation as a documentary photographer in the work in the “St. Petersburg International Cultural Forum.” The photography program is held regularly, once every 1-2 years, and moves from one district of St. Petersburg to another.

Usually photo events (photography evenings, photo exhibitions) are held in libraries. The program is being created with the participation of the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Section; since 2015, 5 events have taken place: in the Gatchina district of the Leningrad region in the town of Gatchina (2016), in the Petrodvortsovy district in the town of Lomonosov (2017), in the Kurortny district in the town of Zelenogorsk (2018), in the Krasnoselsky district (2019), in Vasileostrovsky district (2020). In November 2021, the new photo exhibition “An Instance of Heritage” was created in the Central District of St. Petersburg for the new St.Petersburg International Cultural Forum.

The photo exhibition consists of two sections: “Russian monuments of history and cultural heritage” (3 photo stories) and “Foreign monuments of history and cultural heritage” (2 photo stories). Photographs from Russia are included in this feature.

Russian monuments of history and celebrations of cultural heritage

Murom is an ancient Russian city in the Vladimir region, founded in 862 A.D. The population of the city is just over 100 thousand people. Murom is located on the left bank of the Oka river.

The first mention of Murom can be found in the “Tale of Bygone Years”. It was one of the cities under the rule of Prince Rurik. Despite its checkered past and long existence, the city has managed to preserve the appearance of a real Russian town in keeping with the best traditions. This is evidenced

by many temples and monasteries, monuments and sights. The famous hero of epics, the warrior Ilya Muromets, who was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church, was born in Murom. In 2008, on the day of the 1146th anniversary of Murom, the water tower regained its original meaning: water flowed from its taps. But the water comes not from the Oka river, but from an artesian well. An iron removal station has been installed in the tower, and the residents of Murom note that this water is soft, pure, and you can drink it without boiling.

Geometry of the Ancient City: Murom. 2019

Murom Water Tower in Vladimir Region - Russia, 2019.

Impressions of St.Petersburg. In the State Museum-Reserve “Peterhof. 2014

The State Museum-Reserve “Peterhof” includes the sights of the southern coast of the Gulf of Finland. I walked with my camera along the territory of the palace and park ensemble, which is located between the Grand Peterhof Palace and the coast of the Gulf of Finland. This area and buildings are associated with the founder of St.Petersburg, Peter the Great, and are a UNESCO site together with the historical center of St.Petersburg and the related group of monuments.

This is the hall of culture named after the 1100th anniversary of the city of Murom. 2019

View of the Grand Peterhof Palace. 2014 (see information on page 27)

A fragment of an open air photo exhibition about the restoration of Peterhof after the Nazi invasion during the Great Patriotic War. 2014

The village of Verbovskiy. A photograph of birdhouses near the school. “Blackbirds, fly to us! We will build you beautiful palaces.”

This monument commemorates the great Russian victories. It was installed in honor of the 25th anniversary of the Battle of Poltava, the decisive battle of the Northern War. On June 27, 1709, on the feast day of St.Sampson the Hospitable, who was considered the patron saint of the Russian army, the Swedish army was defeated. 2014

The ideological center of the Grand Cascade is the sculptural group “Samson Breaking the Lion’s Jaws”,

Personal directions and reflection

In conclusion, I would like to say a few words about the future of my photographic projects.

Firstly, I intend to continue to publish the photo exhibitions “An Instance of Heritage 2021”. And again to show you new photographs related to cultural heritage.

Secondly, I intend to publish my own photobooks, not only electronic books, but also printed editions on a specific topic. In 2021, I published a printed book “Photographing Cultural Heritage”, in which I talked about the photography events and monuments in St.Petersburg in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019.

My book from which these photographs are excerpts is already on sale, and you can buy it both on my website http://shchekotovphoto.ucoz.net/index/internet_magazin/0–219, and in partner stores.

Thirdly, I would like to continue to publish new e-books in the future, in order to popularize the issues of preserving cultural heritage with the help of Heritage Photography and other publications.

St.Petersburg International Forum.

Also, I would like to say some words about the St.Petersburg International Forum.

First, how does this forum work?

St.Petersburg International Cultural Forum is a relatively young public event. It has been held since 2012. Similar cultural forums are held in other regions of Russia. There is, for example, the Moscow Cultural Forum, the Ural Cultural Forum, etc.

At such events, a variety of figures from the sphere of culture of Russia and cultural figures from different foreign countries meet and communicate.

The St. Petersburg International Cultural Forum is the largest cultural event in Russia. Today, it is visited annually by about 30 thousand registered participants. About 100 countries send their representatives to the forum. There are a lot of regional delegations.

The forum has an internal structure: 14 sections, 3 tracks, a business site, Lecture Hall 2.0, a site for guest countries, a festival site, contests for art patrons and cultural workers. And a number of other programs.

I hold my photo events of the cycle “Instances of Heritage” as a part of the work of one of the sections “Preservation of Cultural Heritage”.

Fountain alley. The Grand Peterhof Palace, the facade stretches along the terrace for almost 300 meters, occupying a dominant position stylistic harmony.

position in the composition of the Peterhof grounds. It ties the Upper Garden and the Lower Park together into a single

Celebration of traditional festivals

Photo story from the collection “White Colour”

White Colour is a collection of different photo stories in my archive related to ancient Russian monuments.

First of all, this is the story of the White-stone monuments of Vladimir and Suzdal (UNESCO heritage site). The Vladmir-Suzdal principality was a capital of the country for some time.

Another series of photographs are of the monuments related to the history of the Hanseatic trade route. The key role in this trade route is associated with the ancient Russian city of Veliky Novgorod.

Dance “Khorovod” during the festival “Cucumber Day in Suzdal.”

Entertainment during the “Cucumber Day in Suzdal” festival

The merchants’ rows near the Volkhov River in Veliky Novgorod which are related to the history of the Hanseatic trade route.

Marly a small palace in the western part of the Lower Park of the palace and park grounds.

The Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir which was erected in 1158-1160 by the order of Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky as the main city cathedral of the new capital of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality. Sergey Shchekotov-Alexandrov