EyV: Assignment 2, Collecting - Text

↑ Back - image history - contact sheets - tutor feedback

The full text of the assignment is at the bottom of the page. A summary is in the next section. Comments on the progress of the assignment are in chronological order below that.

Summary - Aug 20 - Sep 11 - Sep 25 - Oct 5 - Oct 25 - Oct 28

Discards from the submissions page

summary brief - first draft - second tranche - third batch - first cut - second cut - third cut - submission text

Summary

A series of 6-10 photographs on Crowds, Views, Heads, or choose another subject.
Illustrate the use of focal length, aperture and viewpoint.
Write 500-100 words covering: an introduction to the subject, technical comments on the images, an evaluation, both technical and aesthetic.
The aesthetic evaluation should comprise: "what worked well, what didn’t work so well and how the series might be improved in the future".
And, to quote, "Include a link (or scanned pages) to any exercises from Part Two in your learning log that you’d like your tutor to comment on.
Reflection - Check your work against the assessment criteria for this course before you send it to your tutor. Make some notes in your learning log about how well you believe your work meets each criterion."

20Aug18

Generally speaking, I would prefer to choose my own subject and will probably do so whenever permitted.

My first thought was to work on my variant on Square Mile, church congregations leaving after a service. This appeals as the variation in buildings used as churches is a significant social development. Years ago there were cathedrals, churches and chapels (in descending order of size and magnificence, ascending order of noise and enthusiasm). Nowadays, flourishing churches are to be found in ex cinemas, ex bingo halls and nondescript buildings on industrial estates. Examples of all of these are known locally. The addition of the congregation would also be interesting.

Eltham Parish Church

I tried it out yesterday and immediately ran into problems:
1. Cathedrals are relatively easy to photograph as they are usually set in grounds. Urban churches are not, they are surrounded by other buildings, or if not that, by trees. It is difficult to get a clear, representative shot.
2. The congregations do not co-operate. They leave slowly rather than en-masse, often, stopping for a chat or a tea at the end. There are some examples on the images page.
3. I also had concerns that the congregations might be suspicious of being photographed.
Conclusion: this is a nice idea but it will only work if I contact all of the churches and arrange to take the photographs. That is unlikely to happen.

I have not let go of the idea of churches, but perhaps a better starting point is the actual brief. This is a technical exercise and that is more important than the subject. It needs:
a) some medium, some wide angle;
b) large and small apertures to explore focus:
c) viewpoints;
d) the text includes, "small aperture and slow shutter speed" so some crowd movement would be possible.
e) use a "single format, either vertical or horizontal". I will probably go for square.

I have in mind photographing a single church, possibly St Stephen Walbrook.

11Sep

Given the requirement for cohesion in the set of images, this reinforces the idea of a single subject, such as a specific building. There is a OCA tutor-led walk this weekend at Canary Wharf: that would be sufficiently cohesive, but I will still photograph the church. It is perhaps unusual for a card-carrying humanist to take delight in photographing churches but that, as Forrest Gump might say, “is all I’ve got to say about that”.
1. Close focus, good background
2. Exterior of building – stitch might be needed
3. Try to access other buildings for high shot
4. Deep dof wide angle
5. Subject movement
6. People shot
7. Dome from below – viewpoint
All the same format, probably square. Break the rule for double width pano?
That list will more or less do irrespective of the subject.

25Sep - Priority adjustment

A faintly Damascene moment last night when I realised that the subject was at least as important as the brief. In the post below, I wrote, "This is a technical exercise and that is more important than the subject". Last night I revised this and blogged it today,

My stated goal prior to the visit was to go through the list of shots for this assignment … and use this location as the factor that makes them cohere. Last night I had a better idea - document the church photographically (first priority) and make sure I cover the brief's technical requirements while doing so (second priority). That is more satisfying.

Before the course, I would just have snapped the outstanding features that were readily accessible and given no thought to trying to explore and reveal the subject as a whole.

Before the next visit, consider the aspects and features of the subject that need to be photographed and then tie those up with the technical requirements of the brief.

blog

5Oct - St. Stephen

Two visits have been made to the church so far, on 24th September and 4th October.

Having decided to scope this assignment as a full pictorial record of the church in 6-10 images incorporating the technical requirements of the brief, I have been meaning for a while to list the major features to be covered. They are (having picked up a leaflet in the church on 4th):

• front exterior
• dome exterior - might be impossible
• dome interior
• general interior (might be double-size) added 18Oct
• altar - quite a good shot in the bag
• pulpit
• organ - can be dropped
• font
• mosaic of St Stephen
• altar

With nine ten subjects and a maximum of ten images, there's not much room for maneuverer.

25Oct

From the blog,

If there is a good general interior shot that includes and gives context to the main pieces, that might justify concentrating on details of the pieces themselves (the pulpit canopy, one figure from the font) rather than a more formal and traditional documentation. blog

28Oct

The structure of these initial pages into submission / images / text is breaking down somewhat as today's analysis has been written on the submissions page. The conclusion will be copied below for preservation:

The new list, then, is:

• 1. front exterior - fig. 3
• 2. dome exterior - fig. 4
• 3. dome interior - fig. 5
• 4. general interior - to be done
• 5. altar and pulpit - to be done
• 6. altar detail - fig. 6
• 7. font detail - to be done
• 8. mosaic detail - to be done
• 9. window - fig. 2
• 10. one spare

In terms of the brief, which calls for "combinations of focal length, aperture and viewpoint", a variety of focal lengths and viewpoints are already in play, shallow DoF is included but a demonstration of deep DoF is needed.

Discards from the submissions page

summary brief - first draft - second tranche - third batch - first cut - second cut - third cut

10Sep18 - whatever the subject, the technical brief is the first priority

• six to ten photographs
• combinations of focal length, aperture and viewpoint
• a single format, either vertical or horizontal
• 500–1,000 words
• introduction + description + evaluation
• link to learning log
• reflection
• reworking

First draft (19Oct)

After a a false start on church congregations, I decided at some point in August or September (see text log) to photograph St Stephen Walbrook which is a small, unusual and delightful church conveniently near to Cannon Street station. It was designed by Christoper Wren after the Fire of London, includes a dome which is said to be his "trial run" for St Paul's and is now surrounded by modern office blocks. It contains a massive (approximately) circular altar by Henry Moore. Three visits have been made so far, 24th September, 4th October and today, 19th October.

The plan is to: 1. "fully document" the church in 6-10 images (that will be 10, then); 2. aim to produce a set suitable to illustrate a booklet; and 3. cover the assignment brief in terms of " test[ing] out combinations of focal length, aperture and viewpoint for the set". An approximate list of targets was drawn up on 5th October and has been tinkered with since:

• front exterior
• dome exterior - might be impossible
• dome interior
• general interior (might be double-size)
• altar - quite a good shot in the bag
• pulpit
• organ - can be dropped
• font
• mosaic of St Stephen
• altar

Today [19Oct] I produced the first shot I am content with - I still intend to improve on it, but it's good enough to have a border added. It is discussed at some length in the image log.

One enduring image from the first visit is fig. 2: all the windows are plain (i.e. unstained), distorted glass, through which the surrounding office buildings can be seen, in this case the new Bloomsbury building. The light was just right for this image and the colours have not been so intense since: there is a better composition available that includes a small subsidiary window, but this image might make the final cut, even though it is not on the target list.

second tranche (28Oct)

Another visit on 26th October with a new wide angle zoom produced some good results. These are shown and discussed in some detail on the images page. As with the entry above, likely early versions of final images (i.e. that's the viewpoint but the image will be improved) are in the box below.

Fig. 3 The final image will probably be a variant of this, viewpoint further to the left when the tree has shed its leaves (see discussion here) and hopefully a more interesting sky.

Fig 4. A shot of the dome exterior and cupola was always on the wishlist, but the surrounding office blocks refused entry and the verger advised that the tower is unsafe. Fortunately, the verger also mentioned a small raised churchyard at the back of the building that offers this view. Again, a changed viewpoint through leafless trees and a better sky are preferred.

Fig 5. The dome interior is much easier with the w/a lens. The shot still needs to be improved by correcting the exposure for the Cupola, as discussed here.

The general interior image is still being worked on. A discussed here, the probable final view will be West-East as it allows a wider view because of the entrance. Similarly, a joint shot of the Henry Moore altar and the pulpit is also in the pipeline.

Fig 6. a detail from the altar has been tried at every visit with a variety of lenses and viewpoints. The first attempt has not been bettered for composition and revealing the texture of the piece, but the lectern in the background is a distraction. The lectern is massive and will not be moved, the reverse shot from the other side has an even more obtrusive pillar and so the solution will be to keep trying with another lens.

The favoured font image (as the stone font in isolation is unexciting) is a detail from the font cover with shallow DoF, see 19th October. It needs reshooting with fill-in flash.

The St Stephen mural in the entrance stairwell will be shown as a detail (see 26th October).

The new list, then, is:

• 1. front exterior - fig. 3
• 2. dome exterior - fig. 4
• 3. dome interior - fig. 5
• 4. general interior - to be done
• 5. altar and pulpit - to be done
• 6. altar detail - fig. 6
• 7. font detail - to be done
• 8. mosaic detail - to be done
• 9. window - fig. 2
• 10. one spare

In terms of the brief, which calls for "combinations of focal length, aperture and viewpoint", a variety of focal lengths and viewpoints are already in play, shallow DoF is included but a demonstration of deep DoF is needed.

third batch (22Nov)

Quite a successful visit on 22nd November, with one more day available if needed. The front exterior hasn't been improved upon; the dome exterior has (marginally); the dome interior now has a wider choice of nearly identical images. The general interior is a little better but the window and the mosaic have not improved.

The positive news is below.

Fig 7. For the altar and pulpit, there is a choice of three images and this one offers the best balance of detail and composition.

Fig. 8 The font detail has the carved figure in focus and although the out of focus background is not as pretty as earlier efforts, at least it is exposed correctly with fill-in flash.

Fig. 9 To fill the empty #10 slot, there is a rather pretty shot of the reflection on a grand piano lid with a choir practice in the background.

first cut (24Nov)

The list of subjects decided on 28th October was,

• front exterior - fig. 3
• dome exterior - fig. 4
• dome interior - fig. 5
• general interior - to be done
• altar and pulpit - to be done
• altar detail - fig. 6
• font detail - to be done
• mosaic detail - to be done
• window - fig. 2
• one spare

The order can reconsidered to flow through the sequence in which they would be encountered - exterior front, back, mosaic, general, font detail, dome, altar, altar detail, window, reflection.

It is currently Saturday and the question is, Is it necessary to use the final visit slot on Monday? To fulfill the brief, a clearer demonstration of deep DoF would be good (although I'm not sure what I would actually use as a subject). I would like to explore the texture of the altar. Further thought required.
Consider the brief, "test out combinations of focal length, aperture and viewpoint for the set". There are focal lengths from (35mm equivalent) 16mm to 106mm; apertures from f/1.7 to f/8; [and incidentally, shutter speeds from 1/2000 to 0.3 sec]; a variety of viewpoints has been used, but the dome exterior from above proved impossible. As regards " "[using] the exercises from Part Two as a starting point", there's not much in the way of distortion (although anything using the wide zoom is arguably distorted, the dome and general interior do not have anything in the close foreground to manifest heavy distortion), but what is lacking is deep DoF with minimal aperture. Monday it is then, with the 23 and 45 primes for detail and a tripod.

text

second cut (24Nov)

There are three choices to make for the second and final cut: candles, mosaic and dome exterior. One day left to decide. And the jury is still out on which front exterior to use, but no new image is available from the 26Nov visit.

A decision is also needed on the sequence in which to present them

text

text

text

third (and necessarily final) cut (30Nov)

Following my RAW epiphany (see blog), all the chosen images have been reprocessed as RAW (where they exist) through Affinity. In most cases the processing has also been simplified, although some batch composites remain necessary because of the dynamic range of the church interior.

That will have to do, apart from one obvious problem: the altar is (inevitably) present on most of the interior shots and keeps changing colour (or shade or hue). This is particularly noticeable in image G which needs lightening - the original JPG version above is no better. [Later] The second revised version is a little better but there is still a noticeable difference, especially between the adjacent images Gii and H.

text

Submission text, first draft 28Nov18

Introduction
If an assignment has the option for “a subject of your own choosing” (REF) it is likely that I will take it. During the first assignment, I had thought of photographing church congregations as they left on Sunday mornings as this would illustrate the interesting variety of local religious establishments, but this was abandoned after the first run when it was discovered that they leave very gradually and not en masse (I was also a little concerned that some might be suspicious or disapproving of my presence). Staying with the religious theme, I decided to photograph my favourite church, St Stephen Walbrook which is conveniently accessible. My approach changed over the seven visits I made. At first my main intention was to concentrate on the technical requirements of the assignment and , “test out combinations of focal length, aperture and viewpoint” (REF); then I veered towards documenting the church as though for an article or pamphlet, taking my lead from an unillustrated A4 handout (REF); by the end it was a combination of the two, being subject-driven but always aware of the brief.
To set the context, the church is a small church with an unconventional layout, conveniently near to Cannon Street station. It was designed by Christopher Wren after the Fire of London, includes a dome which is said to be his "trial run" for St Paul's and is now surrounded by modern office blocks. It contains a massive 8-ton (approximately) circular marble altar by Henry Moore.

247 words

Description
In terms of the brief, there are focal lengths from (35mm equivalent) 16mm to 106mm; apertures from f/1.7 to f/8; (and, incidentally, shutter speeds from 1/2000 to 0.3 sec); a variety of viewpoints has been used, but the dome exterior from above proved impossible. As regards "[using] the exercises from Part Two as a starting point", there's not much in the way of distortion (although anything using the wide zoom is arguably distorted, the dome and general interior do not have anything in the close foreground to manifest heavy distortion).There are examples of shallow depth of field, particularly image 5 where this was the specific goal and most of the images have appropriate depth of field with middle- and background detail, but there is no image with a foreground subject at f/22 and hyperfocal focusing because no such image made the final cut.
143 words

Evaluation
I believe the set makes a creditable effort in illustrating the main features of the church (as listed in their handout) while being visually interesting and exploring aspects of the lenses available.
The most difficult shot to achieve was the general interior view (Fig. 4) in which I try to illustrate that the building is (more-or-less) square, is broken up by the large, intrusive pillars that support the dome, and is dominated by the massive, central Henry Moore altar.
The dome interior was impossible to accommodate until I bought a new lens, whereupon this (Fig. 6) and the general interior become far easier to achieve without image stitching. Overexposure of the central cupola was always a problem.
I was disappointed not to get an exterior shot of the dome from above. The church is surrounded by office blocks but none would allow me access to an upper floor window: the church tower is too unsafe to allow access even to the church warden (who promised to send me some photographs he had taken several years ago but did not). Fig. 2, taken in the small churchyard is a pleasant substitute.
Perhaps the most important shot is Fig. 7 which shows the finest piece in the building, the Moore altar and also (in the background) the enormous and spectacularly ugly dark-wood pulpit.
Figs. 9 and 10 were serendipitous: the nearby Bloomberg building “staining” the plain glass window and the reflections on the lid of a grand piano which was only in place for one of the visits.
The mosaic of St. Stephen is not an interesting subject and it is inconveniently located in the entry stairwell but as an artifact is important to the church.
Both exterior shots can be improved when the leaves have fallen off the trees.
The images taken and the selection process are discussed in some detail on the web site (REF).

278 words
Part Two
There is nothing in particular I wish to emphasise from Part 2 of the course. My comments on the course text and my responses to the exercises are at http://baphot.co.uk/pages/eyv_part_2.php , making a rather long and unwieldy web page. I have separated the course text and the exercises for Part 3 to improve the navigation.          
55 words

Reflection
This will be done in more detail on the web site to meet the word count limits for this document.
Technical Skills – I feel that I have used the equipment reasonably well to illustrate my subject. I am not aware of anything I set out to show that has failed on technical grounds. The major learning point for this exercise was previously I have just photographed what is easily accessible and available and ignored the rest. Here I consciously tried to show “all” of the church and in doing so had to make compromises because the subjects are fixed, the background always cluttered and the interior lighting always difficult (mostly dark with intrusive highlights).
Quality – The coherence of the set is inherent in the subject and so, unlike the first assignment, this largely  takes care of itself. I struggled with deciding the order in which to show the photographs. The contact sheets are shown on the web site. http://baphot.co.uk/pages/asg_2_contacts.php
Creativity – I do not regard the set as particularly creative, but as my intention was essentially documentary, this is not a particular failure.
Context – I do not really understand this component yet and note that it is presented later on in this course and more particularly in Year 2.

208 words

247 + 143 + 278 + 55 + 208 = 931

Submission text, second draft 30Nov18

Introduction
If an assignment has the option for “a subject of your own choosing” (Bloomfield, 2017, p.52) it is likely that I will take it. During the first assignment, I had thought of photographing church congregations as they left on Sunday mornings as this would illustrate the interesting variety of local religious establishments, but this was abandoned after the first run when it was discovered that they leave very gradually and not en masse (I was also a little concerned that some might be suspicious or disapproving of being photographed). Staying with the religious theme, I decided to photograph a church, St Stephen Walbrook which is conveniently accessible. My approach changed over the seven visits I made. At first my intention was to concentrate on the technical requirements of the assignment and, “test out combinations of focal length, aperture and viewpoint” (Bloomfield, 2017, p.52); then I veered towards documenting the church as though for an article or pamphlet, taking my lead from an unillustrated A4 handout (Meyer, n.d.); by the end it was a combination of the two, being subject-driven but aware of the brief.
To set the context, St. Stephen Walbrook is a small church with an unconventional layout, conveniently near to Cannon Street station. It was designed by Christopher Wren after the Fire of London, includes a dome which is said to be his "trial run" for St Paul's and is now surrounded by modern office blocks. It contains a massive 8-ton (approximately) circular marble altar by Henry Moore.

251 words

Description
In terms of the brief, there are focal lengths from (35mm equivalent) 16mm to 106mm; apertures from f/1.7 to f/8; (and, incidentally, shutter speeds from 1/2000 to 0.3 sec); a variety of viewpoints has been used, but the dome exterior from above proved impossible. As regards "[using] the exercises from Part Two as a starting point" (Bloomfield, 2017, p.52), there is little lens distortion (although anything using the wide zoom is arguably distorted, the dome and general interior do not have any close foreground to manifest heavy distortion). There are examples of shallow depth of field, particularly image 5 where this was the specific goal and most of the images have appropriate depth of field with middle- and background detail, but there is no image with a foreground subject at f/22 and hyperfocal focusing because no such image made the final cut.
In terms of processing, I experienced a late epiphany, attending a volunteers’ briefing session for ArtUK’s sculpture photography project. They require submissions in RAW with minimal processing (straighten and correct clipping) and I reprocessed all my chosen images in the last three days before submission to work from RAW. There are some extremes of dynamic range for the indoor shots that required bracketing, but the amount of post-processing has diminished significantly.
214 words

Evaluation
I believe the set makes a creditable effort in illustrating the main features of the church (as listed in their handout) while being visually interesting and exploring aspects of the lenses available.
The most difficult shot to achieve was the general interior view (Fig. 4) in which I try to illustrate that the building is (more-or-less) square, is broken up by the large, intrusive pillars that support the dome, and is dominated by the massive, central Henry Moore altar.
The dome interior was impossible to accommodate until I bought a new lens, whereupon this (Fig. 6) and the general interior become far easier to achieve without image stitching. Overexposure of the central cupola was always a problem.
I was disappointed not to get an exterior shot of the dome from above. The church is surrounded by office blocks but none would allow me access to an upper floor window: the church tower is too unsafe to allow access even to the church warden (who promised to send me some photographs he had taken several years ago but did not). Fig. 2, taken in the small churchyard is a pleasant substitute.
Perhaps the most important shot is Fig. 7 which shows the finest piece in the building, the Moore altar and also (in the background) the enormous and spectacularly ugly dark-wood pulpit. The altar inevitably appears in many of the interior shots and its colour variation colour variation between images has been noted but not addressed successfully.
Figs. 9 and 10 were serendipitous: the nearby Bloomberg building “staining” the plain glass window and the reflections on the lid of a grand piano which was only in place for one of the visits.
The mosaic of St. Stephen (fig. 3) is a mundane subject and it is inconveniently located in the entry stairwell but as an artifact it is important to the church.
Both exterior shots can be improved when the leaves have fallen off the trees.
The images taken and the selection process are discussed in some detail on the web site (Blackburn, 2018a).
343 words
Part Two
There is nothing in particular I wish to refer to from Part 2 of the course, but any comments and advice would be welcome. My comments on the course text and my responses to the exercises are on the web site (Blackburn, 2018b), making a rather long and unwieldy web page. I am separating the course text and the exercises for Part 3 to improve the navigation.  
69 words

Reflection
This will be done in more detail on the web site to meet the word count limits for this document.
Technical Skills – I feel that I have used the equipment reasonably well to illustrate my subject. I am not aware of anything I set out to show that has failed on technical grounds. The major learning point for this exercise was that previously I have just photographed what is easily accessible and available and ignored the rest. Here I consciously tried to show “all” of the church and in doing so had to make compromises because the subjects are fixed, the background always cluttered and the interior lighting always difficult (mostly dark with intrusive highlights). My late change of working method has already been noted.
Quality – The coherence of the set is inherent in the subject and so, unlike the first assignment, this largely takes care of itself. I struggled with deciding the order in which to show the photographs. The contact sheets are shown on the web site (Blackburn, 2018c).
Creativity – I do not regard the set as particularly creative, but as my intention was essentially documentary, this is not a particular failure.
Context – I do not really understand this component yet and note that it is presented later on in this course and more particularly in Year 2.

221 words

251 + 214 + 343 + 69 + 221 = 1098 words

References
Blackburn, N. (2018a) EyV: Assignment 2, Collecting - Images [online]. Available from: http://baphot.co.uk/pages/asg_2_images.php [Accessed 30 November 2018]
Blackburn, N. (2018b) EyV: Assignment 2, Collecting - Images [online]. Available from: http://baphot.co.uk/pages/eyv_part_2.php [Accessed 30 November 2018]
Blackburn, N. (2018c) EyV: Assignment 2, Collecting - Images [online]. Available from: http://baphot.co.uk/pages/asg_2_contacts.php [Accessed 30 November 2018]
Bloomfield, R. (2014) Expressing your vision. Updated 2017. Barnsley: Open College of the Arts
Meyer, H. (n.d.) A thousand years of the Church of St. Stephen Walbrook. s.l.:s.n.

Questions on referencing:
1. Bloomfield – how should “Copyright OCA 2014; Updated 2017” be shown?

Assignment

Create a series of between six and ten photographs from one of the following options, or a subject of your own choosing:
• Crowds
• Views
• Heads
Use the exercises from Part Two as a starting point to test out combinations of focal length, aperture and viewpoint for the set. Decide upon a single format, either vertical or horizontal. You should keep to the same combination throughout to lend coherence to the series.
• Crowds make a great subject for photography, not least because they are so contemporary. A city rush hour is a good place to start but events also offer great opportunities to photograph the crowd rather than the event. The foreshortened perspective of the telephoto lens will compress a crowd, fitting more bodies into the frame, but it can also be used to pick out an individual person. A wide-angle lens can capture dynamic shots from within the action.
• If you choose to make a collection of views you need to be prepared to do some walking so keep the weight of your equipment to a minimum – you’ll walk further and see more. A tripod will be important to allow you to select a combination of small aperture and slow shutter speed to ensure absolute sharpness throughout the frame. The weather and time of day will be crucial, whether for urban or landscape views. A wide-angle lens is the usual choice but Ansel Adams also used a medium telephoto to foreshorten the perspective, bringing the sky, distance and foreground closer together.
• Heads: Frame a ‘headshot’, cropping close around the head to avoid too much variety in the backgrounds. The light will be paramount and a reflector is a useful tool (you can ask the subject to hold it), throwing light up into the face, especially the eyes. The classic headshot is buoyant but neutral which is quite difficult to achieve, but try to achieve a natural rather than an artificially posed look.
Assignment notes
Send your photographs to your tutor accompanied by assignment notes (500–1,000 words) containing the following:
• An introduction to your subject.
• A description of the combination of aperture, focal length and viewpoint you’ve used, and how they affect the images.
• An evaluation. You’ll want to evaluate the technical aspects of your assignment, but it’s also important to evaluate how well the series works as a whole. When writing your evaluation, use the following structure: what worked well, what didn’t work so well and how the series might be improved in the future.
Include a link (or scanned pages) to any exercises from Part Two in your learning log that you’d like your tutor to comment on.
Reflection
Check your work against the assessment criteria for this course before you send it to your tutor. Make some notes in your learning log about how well you believe your work meets each criterion.
Reworking your assignment
Following feedback from your tutor, you may wish to rework some of your assignment, especially if you plan to submit your work for formal assessment. If you do this, make sure you reflect on what you’ve done and why in your learning log. OCA, Photography 1: Expressing your Vision, pp. 52-53