Posts written by dennis

I’m not really sure it was a compliment when others describe him as out, standing in his field. Dennis has worked throughout California, Nevada and Arizona on a variety of HABS, HAER and HALS projects. Safety is taken very seriously. Usually it’s traffic but other obstacles can get in the way. Working on the side of the road with cars passing by at 65 mph only feet away can be daunting. Staring down a half ton bovine equal so.

He has been creating historic documentation for 20 plus years. With this experience comes the ability to overcome technical and logistical obstacles to create his stunning views and visual narratives.  He is based in the Pasadena area of Los Angeles and has extensive experience creating HABS HAER HALS in Pasadena, Los Angeles, Port of Los Angeles, Port of Long Beach, Long Beach, Upland, Carson City, San Francisco, Oakland, Modesto, Yosemite National Park, Palo Alto, Riverside, Rancho Cucamonga, Southern California (So Cal), Northern California (No Cal), Nevada (NV) and Arizona (AZ). And then there are those he can’t disclose due to signing a NDA, (nondisclosure agreement). Many can be view at the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Online Catalog PPOC.  Type Dennis Hill in the search box. Additional work is also archived in the Southern California Edison Collection at the Huntington Library, San Marino CA

Dennis Hill working on a HALS project in Carson City NV.

Occasionally, when I’m asked to do a HABS HAER or HALS documentation especially when it is a “HABS-like” project, it is specified as to being to one of the following Levels. As far as the photography aspect, there is basically 2 items that differentiate the various levels. Levels I, II, and III all require large format, distortion correcting cameras, anarchically processed black and white film. The difference is in the addition of “photocopies” of drawings and/or historic views. Photocopies as defined by the Secretary of the Interior is a photograph, with a large format negative, of a photograph or drawing.

To further confuse, a “historic view” is a photograph taken a long time ago. Therefore, Level I includes historic photographs and drawings, if available, Level II includes historic views, if available and Level III does not include either. And to get further into the weeds, both are considered “available” if they actually exist and are either copyright free (in the public domain) or the copyright holder has given permission for it to be in the pubic domain. It is up to each contributor to determine the copyright status of all submitted items.

The second differentiator is the use of a scale within the photograph(s). Level I requires that each view contain the scale and a duplicate view without the scale. Thus, the number of deliverable views is doubled.

Level II and III require that the scale be used in a minimum of one view, usually placed at the principal façade. A duplicate without the scale is also required.

Level IV is not considered adequate documentation for HABS HAER HALS and is used as an inventory tool prior to a full documentation.

Level I
Photographs: photographs with large-format negatives of exterior and interior views; photocopies with large format negatives of select existing drawings or historic views where available.

Level II
Photographs: photographs with large-format negatives of exterior and interior views, or historic views, where available.

Level III
Photographs: photographs with large-format negatives of exterior and interior views.

Level IV
Documentation consists of completed HABS/HAER/HALS inventory cards. This level of documentation, unlike the other three levels, is rarely considered adequate documentation for the HABS/HAER collections but is undertaken to identify historic resources in a given area prior to additional, more comprehensive documentation.

How to get started? To get started all we need is a copy of your mitigation requirements pertaining to your HABS HAER or HALS documentation. Federal, State and cities interact with historic preservation mitigation requirements through a number of avenues including National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 106, National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Environmental Impact report (EIR), and mitigated negative declaration (MND). We will talk directly with the Planning Dept. to confirm exactly the items needed to fulfill your obligations and move your project along. We have been creating historic documentation for 20 plus years. We are based in the Pasadena area of Los Angeles and have extensive experience creating HABS HAER HALS in Pasadena, Los Angeles, Southern California (So Cal), Northern California (No Cal), Nevada (NV) and Arizona (AZ).

Photography Guidelines

Transmittal Guidelines

HALS Documentation

HALS (Historic American Landscape Survey) documentation is the newest of the historic documentations known collectively as HABS HAER HALS. Started only about 20 years ago, it is also one of the least utilized documentations. By comparison, HABS started during the Great Depression nearly 90 years ago and has thousands of recorded project sites. HALS documentations are required of landscape sites that exhibit historic significance, associated with people or events of historic significance or is a prime example of a master landscape architect.

A recent example is the Belli-Lompa Ranch in Carson City Nevada. Because there are several structures on-site dating to the 1920’s, you’d think that this would call for a HABS (Historic American Building Survey) documentation. Some of the reasons for a HALS documentation are the usage of the property, a major road way (streetscape) dividing the site, naturally occurring water drainage and irrigation. Streetscapes have become a major emphasis for HALS documentations.

In this HALS project, we documented streetscape, fencing, pastures, drainage, irrigation, a barn and several outbuildings associated with ranching in contextual, elevation and detail views.

Why do I have to do this? One of the first questions I get is “why do I have to do this?” In the late 1960’s the Federal government decided it was important to preserve and documents our built and archeological history. In 1966 they passed the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and codified it through Section 106. Section 106 (NHPA) requires federal agencies to consider the effects on historic properties of projects they carry out, assist, fund, permit, license, or approve throughout the country. If a federal or federally-assisted project has the potential to affect historic properties, a Section 106 review will take place. By the early 1970’s many State and local governments enacted their own rules, laws and ordinances using Section 106 as a guide. The historic review does not prevent razing of structures but adds an additional layer of review and public comment to the process.

Cities can follow HABS HAER HALS to the extent they want. Since local governments are looking to Section 106 only as a guide, they can adopt any procedure they want as long as it does not involve Federal funding or oversite. Some cities require all 3 components, written narrative, measured drawings and large format archival photography prints and negatives. Other jurisdictions only require the photography

Why so much money? If all 3 components are required, a complete small historic documentation (written history with a possible EIR) could run into ten of thousands of dollars. The photography is usually only about 10-15% of the total cost.

The photography itself has three areas of expense. The first is the time required to do the on-site photography. Generally, only about 12-15 exterior images a day can be made. Indoors, with the addition of supplemental lighting, that number falls to around 9-12 images. While on-site, a sketch map showing the location and compass heading along with other field notes need to be made. The on-site work encompasses about 40% of the workload.

Second is the time required to get the film processed and scanned, prints made, prints, negatives and archival enclosures need to be labeled following the Secretary of the Interior Standards. An Index with photo captions needs to be assembled. A sketch map showing where each image was taken needs to be drawn. Next, a PDF of all deliverables (for distribution to other than the archival repositories) needs to be prepared. The deliverables need to be packaged for shipment. Since the negatives are each an original that can’t be reproduced, the shipment needs to be insured for a its replacement value. This is generally the cost to re-shoot the entire project. The second part takes about 60% of the time.

The third part of the expenses are the deliverables themselves, mainly the film, film processing, film scanning, and archival prints. There was a time when black and white was used instead of color due to cost. Color could be 4 times the expense as compared to B&W. Those days are gone. For every click of the shutter, my cost runs almost $10. Depending on how many negatives are required (usually 1-3 per view) I need to take extra just in case something happens. Even the printed Index needs to be on archival bonded and not standard photo copy paper.

What can I do to save money? One might think the best way to save money is to limit the number of views (images) taken. This can be short sighted. Each project needs to be “thoroughly yet concisely” documented. Return trips for on-site work is way more expensive and time consuming than doing the project correctly the first time. Although city staff usually relies on my opinion, they are the final arbiter of needed views.

The other single most important way to save money is to be prepared. Gaining access to all parts of the site is very important. Removal of visual obstructions can also take valuable on-site time. Boarded up windows not only cover important details; they necessitate the need to set up additional interior lighting. Construction and other exterior fencing blocks contextual views. The same goes for brush and other overgrown vegetation.

Voluntary submittal to the Library of Congress. I always suggest that instead of multiple copies of negatives and prints going to various local repositories, do a voluntary submittal to the Library of Congress (LoC). The LoC requires only 1 each negative and print, they have the climate-controlled archives and once scanned, they are available on-line 24/7/365 free of charge for anyone to find and use. Some localities agree and are fine with a digital PDF file, others still require at least one local set of deliverables.  

How to get started? All we need is a copy of your mitigation requirements pertaining to your HABS HAER or HALS documentation. We will talk directly with the Planning Dept. to confirm exactly the items needed to fulfill your obligations and move your project along. We have been creating historic documentation for 20 plus years. We are based in the Pasadena area of Los Angeles and extensive experience creating HABS HAER HALS in Pasadena, Los Angeles, Southern California (So Cal), Northern California (No Cal), Nevada (NV) and Arizona (AZ).

All too often we get caught up in business and don’t realize when a dream client comes along. So, it was a little surprising when an architect in Louisiana, Domain Architecture, contacted me regarding their project in Southern California. This is when you have to love technology. I gave them my price and terms. Instead of negotiating over price they asked if the could share the images and cost with the contract furniture company? I agreed and they sent me over renderings of specific views that they wanted captured. They also gave me a list of other views.
Here is an example:

Click Here for Additional Samples

Recently I’ve been asked by some clients for my original camera RAW files. Some of these clients only want to receive the camera RAW files while others want them in addition to other formats. The request for these files has become a hot issue for professional photographers. Below are a few reasons why photographers are reluctant to provide RAW files.

First, a little background. What exactly is a RAW file (not to be confused with Adobe Camera Raw)? A RAW file is the file that comes directly from the camera without any type of adjustment. Each camera sensor is made of individual points called pixels. The total number of pixels on the sensor is measured in megapixels. One megapixel is one million pixels or points on the sensor. A 24 meg camera would have 24,000,000 pixels. Each camera manufacturer has its own proprietary format. Pixels only measure the amount of light at a point in the image. Pixels don’t see color, only measuring the relative light or dark in the scene. Each pixel has a filter of red, green or blue over it in order to measure the respective color. Together RGB makes daylight or white light: all the colors we can see. The image shown on the camera back is actually a JPEG image, which has been adjusted or processed by the camera.

So why don’t professional photographers want to give away their RAW files? The first reason is that even if the client has Photoshop or Lightroom it takes a skilled and experienced user to handle the files properly. This is similar to architects who are reluctant to giving away their CAD or Revit files.

Second, is the importance of what the photographer does in post-processing. The initial capture is only the first step in creating a final image. The photographer’s skill and experience during post-processing is as important as the initial capture. Post-processing is a multi-step procedure in which each step builds upon the previous to create the vision of the photographer. When consumer cameras capture an image the camera automatically makes assumptions about the scene and image before it is displayed on the camera back. This is why consumer cameras have settings for snow, beach, mountains, people etc. It helps the camera decide how to process the image. Using the RAW format all adjustments are in the hands of the photographer.  Photographers typically only want to release a final product that is consistent with their brand, vision and style.

To illustrate, below are three images of a scene taken for a recent client. The first is the RAW file just as it came from the camera. The second image is what was sent to the client after post-processing. The client wanted a ‘normal’ scene with good highlight and shadow detail because it was to be used it in scouting movie, TV and other film production locations. The third is another possible interpretation of the scene taking the post-processing even further. Which is the correct or most authentic to the scene? All of them. It all depends on the vision of the photographer and purpose of the image.

To see additional samples click here

The Society of Architectural Historians, SAH.org, held its 2016 Annual International Conference at the Pasadena Convention Center earlier this month. Academics and professionals from around the world convened in Pasadena to share new research on the history of the built environment. In addition to the conference’s 42 paper sessions, SAH presented 18 guided architectural tours of the Pasadena/Los Angeles region as well as a seminar that examined SurveyLA, Los Angeles’ city-wide historic resources program developed by the J. Paul Getty Trust and the City of Los Angeles. The SAH-Getty International Program as well as the SAH Opening Social Hour was held at the Pasadena Convention Center on Friday night. Images from these events can be found here. Dennis Hill volunteered his time providing images and assembling the Welcome Bags given to each attendee.

For information regarding architectural, HABS/HAER or Content Creation, please contact Dennis Hill, creator