COLLEGE DEGREE FRAMES : BACHELORS DEGREE IN ENGLISH.
college degree frames – The Original
College of Mount St. Vincent Administration Building
The striking administration building complex of the College of Mount Saint Vincent is dramatically situated on a high hill commanding a sweeping view of the Hudson River and the unspoiled Palisades. Surrounded by a rolling seventy-five acre campus in the Riverdale section of the Bronx, the buildings present a picturesque profile in keeping with their romantic setting. The site was acquired from Edwin Forrest, one of this country’s leading 19th-century actors, by the Sisters of Charity for their New York motherhouse and academy on December 20, 1856. Construction of the first building, designed by Henry Engelbert in the Early Romanesque Revival style, began the following May and took two years to complete.
The Order of the Sisters of Charity, the first Roman Catholic religious community founded in this country, was begun by Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton (1774-1821) in 1809. The earliest charitable institutions established by the Church in the city were placed under the direction of the Order: the Roman Catholic Orphan Asylum, incorporated 1817; Saint Vincent’s Hospital, opened in 1849; the New York Foundling Asylum, incorporated 1869; and the first parochial schools and academies. During their long history in this country, the Sisters of Charity have instituted over two hundred educational and charitable endeavors in response to pressing social and civic needs. _
For their first thirty years in New York, the Sisters served as missionaries sent from their motherhouse in Emmitsburg, Maryland. In 1847, a separate and independent motherhouse and academy were established in a former tavern at McGowan’s Pass near 106th Street in what is now Central Park. A small complex of buildings, which grew around the McGowan’ s Pass house, was named Mount Saint Vincent, but in 1856 the land was acquired by the City of New York for park purposes, and the Sisters of Charity acquired the Forrest estate in Riverdale. The buildings" served a number of uses after they were taken over by the city. Frederick Law Olmsted and his wife lived there while Central Park -was being constructed, and during the Civil War they were used as a hospital staffed by the Sisters of Charity for wounded Union solders. The McGowan house became a tavern again in 1866 and the chapel became a sculpture gallery. The complex burned in. 1881, but some of the stained glass from the chapel has been incorporated into the present chapel at Riverdale.
The first building of the College on the Forrest estate was designed by Henry Engeibert, an architect active -in New York City from 1852 to 1879. he first appears in the New York City Directories in 1852/53, listed as an. architect working with another architect, John Edson, at 85 Nassau Street. Their association was brief, lasting only five years. The earliest known work designed by these men was the brownstone First Baptise Church built in 1856 on the southeast comer of Fifth Avenue and East 35th Street in the Early Romanesque Revival style. The building attracted attention and favorable con-rent a- the time of its completion. The most notable feature of the church was the interior lighting. With the exception of the three windows between the towers of the Fifth- Avenue facade, the side and rear walls were not pierced by windows. / The interior was lit by three skylights in the roof of the nave. Each skylight, 12 feet in diameter and glazed with ornamental glass, was in the center of a corns 30 feet in diameter. This inferior arrangement bears a striking resemblance to the interior of the sculpture galleries in the Munich Glyptothek, completed in 1830, by Leo von Klenze. It was written of the First Baptist Church that,"…the interior has not been excelled… in any Protestant church on this continent; and it is pronounced the first [i.e. foremost] Baptist church in the world. "
Another prominent church attributed to the firm, is St. Mary’s Abbey Church (1855) in Newark, also designed in the Early Romanesque Revival style but for Benedictine monks. This church complex was said to be modelled on the Bonifaciusbasilica in Munich, begun in 1835 by Georg Friedrich Ziebland for a Benedictine Abbey. The fact that" these two early works in which Engelbert was involved are strongly reminiscent of buildings in Munich, indicates that the firm was quite familiar with work executed in Southern Germany after 1330. It may also indicate Engelbert’s origins about which nothing is known. It may have been the success of these two works that led tile Sisters of Charity to select Engelbert as the architect for their new motherhouse. Whatever the reason for their choice, the association between -die Order, the Catholic Church and Engelbert was a productive one.
Among his better known religious structures are Holy Cross Church (1868) and Academy (1869) on West 42nd and 43rd Streets; Saint Gabriel’s Church (1864) and Rectory (1
College Park Trails
Last one today…I was able to edit these and update my Flicrk page with about one frame for every scan, scans are 4 or 5 frames, and these were shot & developed 11/12/10 and scanned then and I’m just rescanning them for the first time.
The problem is not taking the shots even with a crappy camera. It’s editing them. "Post-processing" them, whatever you want to call it. And not because of the complexity of the adjustments required or shooting film, but because you have to actually open the images up, wait for Gimp (or Lighroom or whatever to do whatever, and then save them and it all totally depends on how long the tool takes to do each step. But you’re not going to edit 500 shots at one time anyway. It doesn’t matter *what* tool you use, you can’t edit 500 shots at once. The only way to do that is to configure the camera to produce the right output with the right alignment etc all when you take the shots.
Sure, they’re really good or your standards aren’t too high, you can shoot direct to Flickr. But let’s just think about this for a moment on two levels. First, do we really want shots that are so good that we don’t have to do *anything* to them, to be happy with them? If you could buy a camera that was light, small and cheap, you take it out, walk around, point it, shoot it almost without thinking and certainly no skill just an eye for a shot, you bring it home, set it next to your computer and it automaticalyl uploads the images or maybe even they’re already uploaded for you, you can check them on your iPhone or iPad right away and they’re perfect: aligned, cropped, D-lighted, HDR, "smart-sharpened", whatever? Would you be happy with that? I would have to think about that. It would reduce the entire process to the mere idea of taking pictures. I don’t *need* to take a picture to see what it is going to look like. The damm scene is right there. I’m walking around, I’m taking pictures, I’m not taking them to get perfct shots. I’m taking them as much for the *challenge* of perfecting imperfect results as I am for the exercise, the walk outdoors and the pictures themselves. To me it would be a big problem to have something "automatically" do something for me that I could and should do myself for the simple reason if nothing else that I know how to get from point A to B, and I’m not told what point A is, what point B is, what they should be, and how we got from there to here, and why that had to be done. It would defeat the purpose for me of doing my work to have other people produce my work. Not because of the money but because of the *process*. For me the process reinforces the reality of the situation. It allows me to make hypotheses, formulate tests, and confim my hypotheses and promote them to theories and then onto laws. It gives me a good ground in reality. If someone else produced my shots I would be totally dependent on them to tell me what is going on, and thus, completely malleable. I have three possible answers: one they’re telling the truth, two they are just wrong but think they are right, and three they are outright lying. That vastly complicates the process.
This is what social-compartmentalization does to us, it causes us to have an unsafe, unhealthy over-reliance on others to do the right thing. When that does not happen as with human nature is inevitable, then who do we blame? Them for cheating us, or ourselves for even relying on them in the first place? Can we truly say that we are innocent, entirely without blame, for "innocently" making deals and expecting people to hold up their end of the bargain knowing full well that they *could* cheat us? Some would say "yes of course, I am not the criminal so I am not responsible".
Ah but you *are* the one who chose to make a deal with that person. It is a fallacy to think that therefore you are free of blame if the deal falls through.
But people do this all the time. Why? Because they can. There is no reality that is completely external to them to force them to accept the reality of the issue. The "reality" is all in their minds. When people have control of their own realities, naturally they will twist them to suit their own ends. The thing about photography that is really really good for me and for a lot of other people is that you might control the camera and lens and process the data but you can’t just force your images to look the way that you want them to just because "you feel like it". You can talk all the crap that you want to talk. The image is staring right back at you. And it is not going to be impressed by your bullshit, the height of your skirt, the size of your breasts or the number of zeros on your paycheck. Sure you can change the image, but you can’t just make it look like you want to just because you want it to look that way. You have to really deal with Real
college degree frames