View allAll Photos Tagged methodical

thegoldensieve.com

 

A good thing continues

 

Some six months ago, I posted almost 100 images and a few thoughts I felt were missing from the many existing RX1 reviews. The outpouring of support and interest in that article was very gratifying. When I published, I had used the camera for six full months, enough time to come to a view of its strengths and weaknesses and to produce a small portfolio of good images, but not enough time to see the full picture (pun intended). In the following six months, I have used the camera at least as frequently as in the first six and have produced another small set of good images. It should be noted that my usage of the RX1 in the last six (and especially in the last 3) months has involved less travel and more time with the family and around the house; I will share relatively few of these images but will spend some time sharing my impressions of its functionality for family snapshots as I am sure there is some interest. And let it be said here: one of the primary motivations to purchase the camera was to take more photos with the family, and after one full year I can confidently say: money well spent.

The A7/r game-changer?

 

In the past six months, Sony have announced and released two full-frame, interchangeable lens cameras that clearly take design cues from the RX1: the A7 and the A7r. These cameras are innovative and highly capable and, as such, are in the midst of taking the photography world by storm. I think they are compelling enough cameras that I wonder whether Sony is wasting its energy continuing to develop further A-mount cameras. Sony deserve credit for a bold strategy—many companies would have been content to allow the success of the the RX1 (and RX1R) generate further sales before pushing further into the white space left unexplored by camera makers with less ambition.This is not the place to detail the relative advantages and disadvantages of the RX1 versus the A7/r except to make the following point. I currently use a Nikon D800 and an RX1: were I to sell both and purchase the A7r + 35mm f/2.8 I would in many ways lose nothing by way of imaging capability or lens compatibility but would pocket the surplus $1250-1750. Indeed this loyal Nikon owner thought long and hard about doing so, which speaks to the strategic importance of these cameras for a company trying to make inroads into a highly concentrated market.Ultimately, I opted to hang onto the two cameras I have (although this decision is one that I revisit time and time again) and continue to use them as I have for the past year. Let me give you a quick flavor of why.

The RX1 is smaller and more discrete

 

This is a small a point, but my gut reaction to the A7/r was: much smaller than the D800, not as small as the RX1. The EVF atop the A7/r and the larger profile of interchangeable mount lenses means that I would not be able to slip the A7/r into a pocket the way I can the RX1. Further, by virtue of using the EVF and its loud mechanical shutter, the A7/r just isn’t as stealthy as the RX1. Finally, f/2 beats the pants off of f/2.8 at the same or smaller size.At this point, some of you may be saying, “Future Sony releases will allow you to get a body without an EVF and get an f/2 lens that has a slimmer profile, etc, etc.” And that’s just the point: to oversimplify things, the reason I am keeping my RX1 is that Sony currently offers something close to an A7 body without a built-in EVF and with a slimmer profile 35mm f/2.

The D800 has important functional advantages

 

On the other side of the spectrum, the AF speed of the A7/r just isn’t going to match the D800, especially when the former is equipped with a Nikon lens and F-mount adapter. EVFs cannot yet match the experience of looking through the prism and the lens (I expect they will match soon, but aren’t there yet). What’s more, I have made such an investment in Nikon glass that I can’t yet justify purchasing an adapter for a Sony mount or selling them all for Sony’s offerings (many of which aren’t to market yet).Now, all of these are minor points and I think all of them disappear with an A8r, but they add up to something major: I have two cameras very well suited to two different types of shooting, and I ask myself if I gain or lose by getting something in between—something that wasn’t quite a pocket shooter and something that was quite a DSLR? You can imagine, however, that if I were coming to the market without a D800 and an RX1, that my decision would be far different: dollar for dollar, the A7/r would be a no-brainer.During the moments when I consider selling to grab an A7r, I keep coming back to a thought I had a month or so before the RX1 was announced. At that time I was considering something like the NEX cameras with a ZM 21mm f/2.8 and I said in my head, “I wish someone would make a carry-around camera with a full frame sensor and a fixed 35mm f/2.8 or f/2.” Now you understand how attractive the RX1 is to me and what a ridiculously high bar exists for another camera system to reach.

Okay, so what is different from the last review?

 

For one, I had an issue with the camera’s AF motor failing to engage and giving me an E61:00 error. I had to send it out to Sony for repairs (via extended warranty and service plan). I detailed my experience with Sony Service here [insert link] and I write to you as a very satisfied customer. That is to say, I have 3 years left on a 4 year + accidental damage warranty and I feel confident enough in that coverage to say that I will have this beauty in working order for at least another 3 years.For two, I’ve spent significantly less time thinking of this camera as a DSLR replacement and have instead started to develop a very different way of shooting with it. The activation barrier to taking a shot with my D800 is quite high. Beyond having to bring a large camera wherever you go and have it in hand, a proper camera takes two hands and full attention to produce an image. I shoot slowly and methodically and often from a tripod with the D800. In contrast, I can pull the RX1 out, pop off the lens cap, line up and take a shot with one hand (often with a toddler in the other). This fosters a totally different type of photography.

My “be-there” camera

 

The have-everywhere camera that gives DSLR type controls to one-handed shooting lets me pursue images that happen very quickly or images that might not normally meet the standards of “drag-the-DSLR-out-of-the-bag.” Many of those images you’ll see on this post. A full year of shooting and I can say this with great confidence: the RX1 is a terrific mash-up of point-and-shoot and DSLR not just in image quality and features, but primarily in the product it helps me create. To take this thinking a bit further: I find myself even processing images from the RX1 differently than I would from my DSLR. So much so that I have strongly considered starting a tumblr and posting JPEGs directly from the RX1 via my phone or an iPad rather than running the bulk of them through Lightroom, onto Flickr and then on the blog (really this is just a matter of time, stay tuned, and those readers who have experience with tumblr, cloud image storage and editing, etc, etc, please contact me, I want to pick your brain).Put simply, I capture more spontaneous and beautiful “moments” than I might have otherwise. Photography is very much an exercise in “f/8 and be there,” and the RX1 is my go-to “be there” camera.

The family camera

 

I mentioned earlier that I justified the purchase of the RX1 partly as a camera to be used to document the family moments into which a DSLR doesn’t neatly fit. Over the past year I’ve collected thousands and thousands of family images with the RX1. The cold hard truth is that many of those photos could be better if I’d taken a full DSLR kit with me to the park or the beach or the grocery store each time. The RX1 is a difficult camera to use on a toddler (or any moving subject for that matter); autofocus isn’t as fast as a professional DSLR, it’s difficult to perfectly compose via an LCD (especially in bright sunlight), but despite these shortcomings, it’s been an incredibly useful family camera. There are simply so many beautiful moments where I had the RX1 over my shoulder, ready to go that whatever difficulties exist relative to a DSLR, those pale in comparison to the power of it’s convenience. The best camera is the one in your hand.

Where to go from here.

 

So what is the value of these RX1 going forward, especially in a world of the A7/r and it’s yet-to-be-born siblings without an EVF and a pancake lens? Frankly, at its current price (which is quite fair when you consider the value of the the body and the lens) I see precious little room for an independent offering versus a mirrorless, interchangeable lens system with the same image quality in a package just as small. That doesn’t mean Sony won’t make an RX2 or an RX1 Mark II (have a look at it’s other product lines to see how many SKUs are maintained despite low demand). Instead, I see the RX1 as a bridge that needed to exist for engineers, managers, and the market to make it to the A7/r and it’s descendants.A Facebook friend recently paid me a great compliment; he said something like, “Justin, via your blog, you’ve sold a ton of RX1 cameras.” Indeed, despite my efforts not to be a salesman, I think he’s right: I have and would continue to recommend this camera.The true value of the RX1 going forward is for those of us who have the thing on our shoulders; and yes, if you have an investment in and a love for a DSLR system, there’s still tremendous value in getting one, slinging it over your shoulder, and heading out into the wide, bright world; A7/r or no, this is just an unbelievably capable camera.

Benji est un Jack Russell terrier de 4 mois et demi. Il se promène quatre fois par jour: son maître l'accompagne dans ses trépidentes aventures :)

Ne vous y fiez pas: Benji est un "ès crocs"qui a déjà à son actif, la destruction méthodique d'un canapé... bientôt nous retrouverons ses expertes expériences dans un prochain épisode des "Démolisseurs de l'extrême" ;)

"Ben, c'est pas tout ça... mais ça donne faim toutes ces compos photo,... je vais allé me mettre quelque chose sous la dent" :))

 

Benji is a Jack Russell terrier (four and a half months old) who walks four times at day: his master accompanies it in its trépidentes Adventures:.

Don't rely: Benji is one "of crocs" which has already to his credit, the methodical destruction of a sofa... soon ourselves its experiences experts in an upcoming episode of "Wrecking of the extreme";)

(So, it''s not all that... but it gives hunger all these compos photo,... I went put me something under the tooth":).

Rebecca Baumann’s practice spans a range of media including kinetic sculpture, photography, performance, digital animation and installation. Central to her work is an ongoing fascination with the complex workings of human emotion and the pursuit of happiness through celebration and ritual. Methodically planned and executed, Baumann’s work often utilises colourful festive materials such as confetti, tinsel, smoke, balloons and streamers, which are momentarily, and sometimes violently, brought to life by various mechanisms including fans, ball-throwers, clocks and detonators.

 

Automated Colour Field (2011) is a kinetic sculpture consisting of a vast wall-mounted grid of 100 flip-clocks, each with their numbered panels replaced by paper cards in a variety of colours. The battery-operated clocks keep their own time, turning the paper cards on the minute and the hour, to create a kaleidoscopic field of colour. As in many of Baumann’s works, the mechanisms used to activate her chosen materials and the incidental noises these mechanisms generate are an important element of the experience she creates. In this work, the analogue clocks activate the paper cards, producing a low background hum and soft pattering sound like raindrops falling on a tin roof.

 

Baumann is preoccupied with the difference between how people perceive colour and time and how these phenomena are scientifically visualised and measured. Her main focus is the intimate relationship between colour and emotion; and the way specific colours and colour combinations can elicit particular feelings or moods. The artist explains she is interested in the way ‘colour is both universal and subjective’ with the capacity to ‘move people beyond cognitive and conscious thought’.(1) Bringing time into this equation, Baumann links the continually changing arrangements of colour generated by the flip-clocks to the fluctuating spectrum of emotions people experience over any 24hr period.

 

Informed by psychology, colour theory and art history, Automated Colour Field makes reference through its form and title to a movement in abstract painting known as Colour Field. Links can also be made to German artist Gerhard Richter’s colour chart paintings of the 1960s and 70s, which mimic the charts used by paint manufacturers and incorporate chance distributions of colour. Like Richter, Baumann uses processes of chance and a commercially available colour palette in her work, describing her placement of the coloured cards as being driven by a spontaneous rather than pre-planned impulse, resulting in an arbitrary arrangement of colour.

  

White pills and multicolored pills on desk calendar a pill a day

 

All my photographs are copyright protected, If you wish to use my photos please contact me and we can discuss usage fees.

 

©Jim Corwin_All Rights Reserved 2022, Contact me at jscorwin@mac.com or visit my PhotoShelter site using the link Jim Corwin Photography on my Profile Page.

My website is jimcorwin.photoshelter.com

My E-Mail Address is jscorwin@mac.com

Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) was a French botanist. He was born to a well-to-do family in Aix-en-Provence. Tournefort initially took up studies in theology. However, as he had a marked inclination towards natural sciences, he turned to medicine. He completed his studies at the University of Montpellier. In 1681, he was in Barcelona doing research in botany. In 1694 Tournefort published his first three-volume work, in which he classified 8846 plants. In 1698 he became Doctor in Medicine of the University of Paris. At that time his treatise was also translated into Latin. Tournefort became a famous physician and naturalist. He travelled extensively in Western Europe (Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, England). He had published a number of works on botany, and had acquired a fabulous collection of nearly 50.000 books, as well as costumes, arms, minerals, shells and various curiosities. Thus, he already had a very important career behind him when Louis XIV entrusted him with the mission to bring new plants to the Royal Botanical Garden.

 

Tournefort started out on his voyage to the Near East in the spring of 1700, at the age of 44, accompanied by a painter and a doctor. He visited thirty-eight islands of the Greek archipelago, as well as Northern Anatolia, Pontus and Armenia, and reached Tiflis in Georgia. Tournefort returned to Marseilles in June 1702.

 

His manuscript, composed of his letters to the Minister of the Exterior Count de Pontchartain, was published posthumously in 1717. A number of re-editions followed, while his work was also translated into English, German and Flemish. There is also a Greek translation of the first part. The fact that Tournefort had discovered new plants in his journey led him to publish a supplement to his main work of botanical classification in 1703. He taught Botany in the Académie, while continuing to practice medicine; at the same time, he was in charge of the Royal Gardens, where many plants he brought from his travels were cultivated with success. Having survived a multitude of adventures, Tournefort died of an accident in 1708. He did not live to see the publication of his travel chronicle, which in the following three centuries became the basic manual to all travellers to these regions. Until today, researchers from numerous fields turn to Tournefort’s text, as it remains an invaluable source of information. He describes the places he visited in a particular systematic manner.

 

The systematic way he organizes his information on topography, economy, administration, ethnic composition, customs and habits of everyday life shows how one can arrive at truth and knowledge through research, methodical study, classification and generalisation. To document his research, Tournefort cites a hundred and thirty-five texts by Greek and Latin authors as well as Byzantine writers, Humanists, and earlier travel accounts.

 

He methodically narrates his visit to each island, and describes the locations as well as events that he witnessed and encounters with locals. He then continues with the island’s history from ancient times to the current age, citing the corresponding myths, and comparing with the information provided by ancient coins. Subsequently, he writes on the island’s administration and taxes, commerce, products and prices thereof. An entire chapter is dedicated to the Greek church. Tournefort also writes on monasteries and churches, house architecture and caves. He also describes the customs, the dress and the occupations of the inhabitants. He concludes his chapters with geographical observations from the highest point of each main region.

 

Naturally, his work includes engravings of city views, locations and monuments as well as plants, instruments and costumes. The text becomes alive with vivid descriptions of his encounters with islanders, be it Turks, Franks, Greeks or privateers. Of special interest are his descriptions of fortresses, ports, safe havens and his information on map drawing.

 

The second volume is a publication of his thoroughly documented manuscripts. It was not edited by Tournefort himself as had happened with the first. On numerous occasions he refers to the politics, administration and ethnic composition of the Ottoman Empire. He continues with his journey on the southern coast of the Black Sea to Armenia. The work closes with a short description of Smyrna and Ephesus.

 

Tournefort is considered the first to have shown the islands of the Archipelago to be “travel material”, as he offered information which inspired the interest for further research, and also highlighed each location’s wealth and uniqueness.

 

Written by Ioli Vingopoulou

 

Fransız botanikçi Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) Aix-en-Provence'da varlıklı bir aile içinde doğar, ilk önce tanrıbilim (teoloji) dersleri izler ancak genç yaştan beri doğa bilimlerine eğilim gösterir. Bu yüzden Montpellier'de tıp öğrenimi görüp 1681'de botanik araştırmaları yapmak üzere Barcelona'ya gelir. 1694 yılında üç ciltlik ve 8.846 bitkinin sınıflandırmasına ilişkin ilk eserini yayınlar; 1698'de Paris Tıp Fakültesinden doktor unvanını alır ve bu kazanımı yapıtının latince çevirisi izler. Doktor ve doğa bilimcisi olarak ün salmış, Batı Avrupa'da (İspanya, Portekiz, Hollanda, İngiltere'ye) seyahat etmiş, botanoloji ile ilgili kitaplar yayınlamış, 50.000'e yakın kitaptan meydana gelen bir kitaplık oluşturmuş, ayrıca yerel kıyafet, silah, mineral, deniz kabuğu ve daha başka ilginç şeylerden oluşan hayranlık uyandıran koleksiyonlar sahibi olmuşken, kral 14. Louis ona Kraliyet Botanik Bahçesine yeni bitkiler getirme görevini verir. Tournefort 1700 yılının ilkbaharında, 44 yaşındayken, yanına yoldaş olarak bir ressam ve bir doktor alarak Yakın Doğu'ya doğru yola çıkar.

 

Ege adalarından 38 tanesini ziyaret eder, Kuzey Anadolu'nun her tarafını gezip Karadeniz ve Ermenistan yörelerine gelir, Tiflis'e varır. Tournefort, 1702 yılının Haziran ayında Marsilya'da karaya ayak basar.

 

Kaleme aldığı metin (Dışişleri bakanı Kont de Pontchartain'e yolladığı mektuplar biçiminde) ilk olarak 1717'de yayınlanır, bu ilk yayını bir çok yeni baskı izler ve eser ingilizce, almanca ve flamanca gibi dillere- ilk kısmı yunancaya da - çevrilir. Yeni keşfettiği bitkilerin daha önce belirlemiş olduğu sınıflandırma sistemine eklenmesi sonucu olarak 1703'te yeni bir cilt yayınlar. Tournefort botanik profesörü sıfatıyla Akademide dersler verir, doktorluk mesleğini ve bunlara koşut olarak Kraliyet Bahçesinin sorumluluğu görevini sürdürür. Gezilerinden getirmiş olduğu birçok yeni bitki bu bahçede başarılı bir şekilde yetiştirilir. Tournefort geçirdiği birçok maceradan kefeni yırtmışken, üç asır boyunca her gezginin bu bölge için başucu kitabı olacak seyahatnamesinin yayınlanmasını göremeden 1708'de bir kaza sonucu ölür. Bugün hâlâ çeşitli dallardan araştırmacılar Tournefort'un metnine başvurup son derece değerli bilgilerinden faydalanmak durumundalar. Eseri anında ingilizce, hollandaca ve almancaya çevrilmişti.

 

Gezdiği yerleri betimlerken belirli bir yöntem izleyerek topoğrafya, ekonomi, yönetim, milletler sentezi ve günlük yaşamdaki örf ve adetlere ilişkin bilgiler verirken, Tournefort, bilginin gerçeğe uyup uymadığı konusuna araştırma, düzenli okuma, sınıflandırma ve genelleştirme yoluyla yanaşılabileceğini kanıtlıyor. Kanıtlayıcı belgeleri arasında antik Yunan ve Latin yazarlarından, ayrıca Bizans yazarlarından ve daha eski hümanist bilgin ve gezginlerden 135 tane metin bulunmakta.

 

Ziyaret ettiği her ada için düzenli olarak ziyaretini anlatıp birçok yeri ve olayı hatta yerlilerle olan görüşmelerini de betimler. Bunlara ek olarak, adanın eski çağlardan gününe dek tarihi ve bununla ilintili efsaneler, sikkeler hakkında, yönetim, vergilendirme usulleri, ticaret, ürünler ve fiyatları hakkında bilgiler verir. Ayrıca Yunanistan'ın dinî (kilise) yaşamına başlıbaşına bir bölüm ayırır. Manastırlar, kiliseler, evlerin mimarisi, mağaralar hakkında yazar, adetler ve kıyafetleri betimleyip halkın uğraşlarından sözeder ve önemli yörelerin her birinin en yüksek irtifasından yaptığı coğrafya gözlemleri ile anlatımını bitirir.

 

Doğal olarak eserinde şehir, yer, anıt, bitki, alet, ve kıyafet görünümleri ile ilgili gravürler de yer almakta. Ayrıca metni ada halkıyla (Türkler, Latinler, Yunanlılar, korsanlarla) ilişkilerinden çarpıcı betimlemelerle de çeşitlenir. Kitabında hisarlar, gemi barınakları, güvenli limanlar hakkında yaptığı betimlemeler ve harita çizimi ile ilgili verdiği bilgiler özel ilgi uyandıran kısımlar arasındadır.

 

Eserinin birinci cildinin yayına hazırlığını kendisi denetlemişken ikinci cilt kendi ayrıntılı yazılarına sadık kalınarak basılır. Bu cildin başındaki birçok bölüm Osmanlıların siyasal, yönetimsel ve etnografik durumuna ayrılmıştır. Bunun devamında Karadeniz'in güney kıyılarında yaptığı Ermenistan'a kadar varan yolculuğunu anlatıp kitabı İzmir ve Efes'in kısa bir betimlemesi ile bitirir.

 

Böylece Tournefort, başkalarında arayış isteğini besleyecek nitelikte malzeme sağlamanın yanısıra, gördüğü her yerin sonsuz zengiliğini ve kendine özgü niteliklerini yüzeye çıkarması açısından Ege adalarına bir "yolculuk uknumu" veren ilk şahıs olarak bilinir.

 

Yazan: İoli Vingopoulou

 

Methodically covering distance high above Riley Street

With so few flowers in bloom at this time, I had to really be on the lookout for Hummers. The foraging Hummers also have to be on the lookout for any blooming plant.This lady was methodically sampling all of the red blooms on an adjacent ornamental shrub in my daughter's back yard. She also visited this cactus growing next to it. I saw only a few flying Hummers species (mostly female Anna's and Costa's). These ladies are segregated from each other for IDs mainly on their bill shapes. This bill is said to be straighter... but there is overlap. This lady also usually has a dark spot on her throat (visible in this shot).

 

IMG_0096; Anna's Hummingbird

Mr and Mrs Triller. Another species that is found over a wide area but just adds to the wide verity of birds found around this really small area. It will be interesting to return to this spot at the end of our dry season to see how much water and life remains in the same location.

 

Please Share. :)

 

Varied triller. Lalage leucomela

 

Common to very common in the north, they are uncommon to rare in the colder south. Typical habitat is rainforest, vine forest, riverine thickets, eucalypt forest and woodland, with a particular preference for the border areas between closed and open forests.

Varied trillers work their way slowly and methodically through foliage at any level searching in pairs or small groups for insects and fruit, and making repeated rolling contact calls almost continuously.

Their nest is an open, shallow cup, barely large enough to hold a single egg. Nests are made of fine twigs, bark, vine tendrills, rootlets, plant stalks and grasses. The whole is bound together with spider web and lined with lichen or rootlets. The nest is usually in a horizontal fork, near the end of a thin branch of a small tree. Trees chosen are often paperbarks or mangroves. Both adult birds share the incubation of the egg and the feeding of the nestling.

On October 1, 2012 I spent an interesting day out at the Marin Headlands watching the ingenious riggers of the Bigge Crane & Rigging Company move a 16” gun up the hill to Battery Townsley. Battery Townsley in the Marin Headlands and Battery Davis on San Francisco’s Ocean Beach were the two Bay Area batteries armed (of four planned) with 16” guns in World War II. Each battery had two gun emplacements within a huge concrete construction housing guns, munition storage, generators, and in the case of Townsley up to 150 resident troops.

 

Battery Townsley received its two guns in 1939 and was ready for action soon thereafter. Placing the guns was no small feat since they are the largest rifles ever made for the US arsenal. Each barrel weighed almost a quarter-million pounds and stretched 68 feet from breech to muzzle. The battery was decommissioned as an artillery emplacement by 1948 and its guns were cut up for scrap in that year.

 

Fast-forward to the current day, the Marin Headlands are now part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area and visitors can take a short hike up the hill to see Battery Townsley. For several years now a group of park volunteers has been restoring the battery. If you time your visit to coincide with their open house days you can tour the interior of the installation – great fun. As part of this restoration project a plan was developed to install and display a surplus naval gun nearly identical to the guns originally mounted at Battery Townsley. The surplus gun was sourced from the Naval Weapons Depot in Hawthorne, Nevada where it had been stored since 1953. In one of those pleasant little turns of history the company that won the modern day bid to move the barrel from Nevada to the Marin Headlands was Bigge, the same company that moved the original guns in 1939.

 

These photographs were taken during a pleasant day watching the crew methodically move this huge gun up the hill and into its storage place next to the battery. I began the day with a series of pole photographs of the gun in the Rodeo Beach parking lot (there was no wind in the morning). In the early afternoon I shot a quick round of kite aerial photographs at Rodeo Beach, the gun was still at the Rodeo Beach trailhead while transport hydraulics were tuned. I then hiked up to Battery Townsley to photograph the placement of the gun. I had originally planned to shoot a quick series of the gun being pulled through one of the hairpin turns on the approach road but my timing was off and I did not want to add distraction to what was a rather intense hauling session.

 

Kermit’s Haircutting & Styling, 9 N Main St., Sparta, NC

May 9, 2009

 

Kermit Pruitt is a local fixture in the Alleghany County seat of Sparta. His barber shop is decorated much like you would want to see – antique barber paraphernalia (with a large pole inside), newspaper clippings and pictures of bluegrass singers, pictures of the old Sparta Theatre, a clock with a barber pole, antlers, and a bumper sticker: “Lose Weight Fast, Get a Haircut.” The shop has two barber chairs and enough space for 12 other customers to wait their turn. A customer before me spoke with him about antiques, distilling adult beverages locally, and a recent tornado in the area. When it came my turn we discussed bluegrass musicians, as well as people moving to the area because they like it. Kermit approached my haircut methodically even sharing with me what he intended to do before cutting. The haircut cost me $10, and I would visit Kermit if I’m ever in that part of the NC mountains again.

 

FOAM3D™ FABS FINGER FOOD FOR LUNCHABLES® LAUNCH

 

situation

Encased in iconic yellow packaging, once retrieved from a backpack, a Kraft Lunchables® is easy espied across any lunchroom—and its holder made the immediate envy of their companions. Available in a variety of youth-centric cuisine configurations, a Lunchables® is the midday meal that instantly outclasses any lunchbox leftovers or pedestrian PB&J. From portable pizza kits to the infallible trifecta of ham, cheese, and crackers, replete with a replenishing Capri Sun, these self-contained lunch kits are designed to inspire creativity. Intended to spur imaginations and overturn the traditional taboo of playing with your food, Kraft Lunchables launched the Lunch-A-Build This campaign. Featuring detailed online schematics on how to construct your own finger-food sculptures, kids can build and upload (with parents/guardian permission) their own edible artwork! Looking to showcase their interactive Lunch-A-Builds and further promote participation, Kraft entrusted Britten to build some outsized Foam3D™ Lunchables® creations for their mobile touring displays.

 

solution

Each aspect of the massive Lunch-A-Build would be carved from uniform 1.5 foam blocks. Utilizing the leading Rinoceros® CAD modeling software to create the design and employing cutting-edge FROGMill™ CNC milling equipment to carve the foam, the Britten team began to methodically manufacture each piece. Crafting macro-scale torn pizza crust (complete with frayed edged texture), immense cheese squares and colossal chicken kabobbles (Lunchables®ß speak for nuggets), each element was sculpted and primed for paint. Rounded out with some touch-up sanding, a base coat of paint, and a custom air-brushed Standard Coat finish for that perfect textured look and added protection, these enormous Foam3D™ Lunchables® elements looked almost edible!

 

impact

The final result was three impressively immense Lunch-A-Build sculptures—a pizza crust grand piano with mozzarella cheese ivory keys, a snack cracker-hulled boat with salami gunwales and cheese paddlewheel, and a ponderous dinosaur with rotund chicken kabobble legs, a spine ridged with cheese slice spikes, and all pinned together with pretzels. This completed trio was nothing short of astonishing. Loaded onto custom Lunch-A-Build branded trucks with customized glass box display, these Foam3D™ creations were destined to tour Cleveland, Philadelphia, and San Francisco and generate some gleeful attention for Lunchables®. Made possible by the Foam3D™, it’s no doubt that this fanciful fare will serve as mobile food for thought and will have creative minds turning out Lunch-A-Build creations of their own!

 

britteninc.com/portfolio/foam3d-lunchables

something about fixed-gear cyclists... you can tell this guy is on a fixed gear even before methodically checking the chainline and the brake cable lines. is it the posture? the paint-spattered jeans? the rolled-up cuff? i dunno.

 

i saw a lot more fixed-gear bicycles this time out compared to last October. For that matter, I saw a lot more bicycles.

 

!p

Construction is steadily moving forward on the 18,000 sq. ft. Possum Creek Skatepark in Gainesville, Florida.

 

Led by Spohn Ranch's COO, Mark Bradford, the crews in Gainesville are quickly turning what were once just some dreams scribbled on paper into one of Florida's premiere concrete skateparks.

 

Through a combination of advanced pre-cast concrete technology and methodical on-site concrete pours, the skatepark is nearing a flawless finish with less than 30 days on site.

Cornell Labs:

(www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Little_Blue_Heron/id)

  

Little Blue Heron

 

Egretta caerulea

ORDER: PELECANIFORMES

FAMILY: ARDEIDAE

 

A small, dark heron arrayed in moody blues and purples, the Little Blue Heron is a common but inconspicuous resident of marshes and estuaries in the Southeast. They stalk shallow waters for small fish and amphibians, adopting a quiet, methodical approach that can make these gorgeous herons surprisingly easy to overlook at first glance. Little Blue Herons build stick nests in trees alongside other colonial waterbirds. In the U.S., their populations have been in a gradual decline since the mid-twentieth century.

  

Size & Shape

 

This is a fairly small heron with a slight body, slender neck, and fairly long legs. It has rounded wings, and a long, straight, spearlike bill that is thick at the base.

  

Color Pattern

 

Adult Little Blue Herons are very dark all over. At close range or in good light, they have a rich purple-maroon head and neck and dark slaty-blue body. They have yellow eyes, greenish legs, and a bill that is pale blue at the base, black at the tip. Juveniles are entirely white, except for vague dusky tips to the outer primaries. Immatures molting into adult plumage are a patchwork of white and blue.

  

Behavior

 

The Little Blue Heron is a stand-and-wait predator, rather than a frenetic, dashing-about predator. They watch the water for fish and other small morsels, changing locations by walking slowly or by flying to a completely different site. They nest in trees, usually among other nesting herons and wading birds.

  

Habitat

 

Look for Little Blue Herons on quiet waters ranging from tidal flats and estuaries to streams, swamps, and flooded fields. They are usually found in only small numbers at any one water body, often tucked into hidden corners.

   

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

thegoldensieve.com

 

A good thing continues

 

Some six months ago, I posted almost 100 images and a few thoughts I felt were missing from the many existing RX1 reviews. The outpouring of support and interest in that article was very gratifying. When I published, I had used the camera for six full months, enough time to come to a view of its strengths and weaknesses and to produce a small portfolio of good images, but not enough time to see the full picture (pun intended). In the following six months, I have used the camera at least as frequently as in the first six and have produced another small set of good images. It should be noted that my usage of the RX1 in the last six (and especially in the last 3) months has involved less travel and more time with the family and around the house; I will share relatively few of these images but will spend some time sharing my impressions of its functionality for family snapshots as I am sure there is some interest. And let it be said here: one of the primary motivations to purchase the camera was to take more photos with the family, and after one full year I can confidently say: money well spent.

The A7/r game-changer?

 

In the past six months, Sony have announced and released two full-frame, interchangeable lens cameras that clearly take design cues from the RX1: the A7 and the A7r. These cameras are innovative and highly capable and, as such, are in the midst of taking the photography world by storm. I think they are compelling enough cameras that I wonder whether Sony is wasting its energy continuing to develop further A-mount cameras. Sony deserve credit for a bold strategy—many companies would have been content to allow the success of the the RX1 (and RX1R) generate further sales before pushing further into the white space left unexplored by camera makers with less ambition.This is not the place to detail the relative advantages and disadvantages of the RX1 versus the A7/r except to make the following point. I currently use a Nikon D800 and an RX1: were I to sell both and purchase the A7r + 35mm f/2.8 I would in many ways lose nothing by way of imaging capability or lens compatibility but would pocket the surplus $1250-1750. Indeed this loyal Nikon owner thought long and hard about doing so, which speaks to the strategic importance of these cameras for a company trying to make inroads into a highly concentrated market.Ultimately, I opted to hang onto the two cameras I have (although this decision is one that I revisit time and time again) and continue to use them as I have for the past year. Let me give you a quick flavor of why.

The RX1 is smaller and more discrete

 

This is a small a point, but my gut reaction to the A7/r was: much smaller than the D800, not as small as the RX1. The EVF atop the A7/r and the larger profile of interchangeable mount lenses means that I would not be able to slip the A7/r into a pocket the way I can the RX1. Further, by virtue of using the EVF and its loud mechanical shutter, the A7/r just isn’t as stealthy as the RX1. Finally, f/2 beats the pants off of f/2.8 at the same or smaller size.At this point, some of you may be saying, “Future Sony releases will allow you to get a body without an EVF and get an f/2 lens that has a slimmer profile, etc, etc.” And that’s just the point: to oversimplify things, the reason I am keeping my RX1 is that Sony currently offers something close to an A7 body without a built-in EVF and with a slimmer profile 35mm f/2.

The D800 has important functional advantages

 

On the other side of the spectrum, the AF speed of the A7/r just isn’t going to match the D800, especially when the former is equipped with a Nikon lens and F-mount adapter. EVFs cannot yet match the experience of looking through the prism and the lens (I expect they will match soon, but aren’t there yet). What’s more, I have made such an investment in Nikon glass that I can’t yet justify purchasing an adapter for a Sony mount or selling them all for Sony’s offerings (many of which aren’t to market yet).Now, all of these are minor points and I think all of them disappear with an A8r, but they add up to something major: I have two cameras very well suited to two different types of shooting, and I ask myself if I gain or lose by getting something in between—something that wasn’t quite a pocket shooter and something that was quite a DSLR? You can imagine, however, that if I were coming to the market without a D800 and an RX1, that my decision would be far different: dollar for dollar, the A7/r would be a no-brainer.During the moments when I consider selling to grab an A7r, I keep coming back to a thought I had a month or so before the RX1 was announced. At that time I was considering something like the NEX cameras with a ZM 21mm f/2.8 and I said in my head, “I wish someone would make a carry-around camera with a full frame sensor and a fixed 35mm f/2.8 or f/2.” Now you understand how attractive the RX1 is to me and what a ridiculously high bar exists for another camera system to reach.

Okay, so what is different from the last review?

 

For one, I had an issue with the camera’s AF motor failing to engage and giving me an E61:00 error. I had to send it out to Sony for repairs (via extended warranty and service plan). I detailed my experience with Sony Service here [insert link] and I write to you as a very satisfied customer. That is to say, I have 3 years left on a 4 year + accidental damage warranty and I feel confident enough in that coverage to say that I will have this beauty in working order for at least another 3 years.For two, I’ve spent significantly less time thinking of this camera as a DSLR replacement and have instead started to develop a very different way of shooting with it. The activation barrier to taking a shot with my D800 is quite high. Beyond having to bring a large camera wherever you go and have it in hand, a proper camera takes two hands and full attention to produce an image. I shoot slowly and methodically and often from a tripod with the D800. In contrast, I can pull the RX1 out, pop off the lens cap, line up and take a shot with one hand (often with a toddler in the other). This fosters a totally different type of photography.

My “be-there” camera

 

The have-everywhere camera that gives DSLR type controls to one-handed shooting lets me pursue images that happen very quickly or images that might not normally meet the standards of “drag-the-DSLR-out-of-the-bag.” Many of those images you’ll see on this post. A full year of shooting and I can say this with great confidence: the RX1 is a terrific mash-up of point-and-shoot and DSLR not just in image quality and features, but primarily in the product it helps me create. To take this thinking a bit further: I find myself even processing images from the RX1 differently than I would from my DSLR. So much so that I have strongly considered starting a tumblr and posting JPEGs directly from the RX1 via my phone or an iPad rather than running the bulk of them through Lightroom, onto Flickr and then on the blog (really this is just a matter of time, stay tuned, and those readers who have experience with tumblr, cloud image storage and editing, etc, etc, please contact me, I want to pick your brain).Put simply, I capture more spontaneous and beautiful “moments” than I might have otherwise. Photography is very much an exercise in “f/8 and be there,” and the RX1 is my go-to “be there” camera.

The family camera

 

I mentioned earlier that I justified the purchase of the RX1 partly as a camera to be used to document the family moments into which a DSLR doesn’t neatly fit. Over the past year I’ve collected thousands and thousands of family images with the RX1. The cold hard truth is that many of those photos could be better if I’d taken a full DSLR kit with me to the park or the beach or the grocery store each time. The RX1 is a difficult camera to use on a toddler (or any moving subject for that matter); autofocus isn’t as fast as a professional DSLR, it’s difficult to perfectly compose via an LCD (especially in bright sunlight), but despite these shortcomings, it’s been an incredibly useful family camera. There are simply so many beautiful moments where I had the RX1 over my shoulder, ready to go that whatever difficulties exist relative to a DSLR, those pale in comparison to the power of it’s convenience. The best camera is the one in your hand.

Where to go from here.

 

So what is the value of these RX1 going forward, especially in a world of the A7/r and it’s yet-to-be-born siblings without an EVF and a pancake lens? Frankly, at its current price (which is quite fair when you consider the value of the the body and the lens) I see precious little room for an independent offering versus a mirrorless, interchangeable lens system with the same image quality in a package just as small. That doesn’t mean Sony won’t make an RX2 or an RX1 Mark II (have a look at it’s other product lines to see how many SKUs are maintained despite low demand). Instead, I see the RX1 as a bridge that needed to exist for engineers, managers, and the market to make it to the A7/r and it’s descendants.A Facebook friend recently paid me a great compliment; he said something like, “Justin, via your blog, you’ve sold a ton of RX1 cameras.” Indeed, despite my efforts not to be a salesman, I think he’s right: I have and would continue to recommend this camera.The true value of the RX1 going forward is for those of us who have the thing on our shoulders; and yes, if you have an investment in and a love for a DSLR system, there’s still tremendous value in getting one, slinging it over your shoulder, and heading out into the wide, bright world; A7/r or no, this is just an unbelievably capable camera.

2012年入選 2012 Selected Work Award

 

陳況豪 / 大台南地區

拍攝動機:

本創作計畫需要採取一種抽離視野的方式,來大量尋找臺灣各處地景或建築風格怪異、差距大的地方,當有系統的呈現,構築出另一個約定俗成後的真實社會,藉由兩邊風格迥異,看似真實卻又超現實的場景、背景,以一種觀光客的凝視,指出照片中人與人、空間之間,如此靠近卻又不熟悉狀態的第三意義。

 

CHEN, KVANG-HAO / Greater Tainan area

Why I Took These Pictures:

My current project involves using an abstracted approach to record any peculiar or unique sceneries and architectural features that catch my eye in all corners of Taiwan, especially ones that offer marked contrasts of style or mood, and then present them in a methodical fashion to construct an alternative image of conventional society by superimposing the unusual and quirky on the commonly perceived reality. The result are apparently “normal” but simultaneously surreal scenes and backgrounds as seen through the gaze of a tourist, revealing how the interaction between people and people, as well as people and spaces, creates both nearness and a feeling of distance and strangeness.

Winner’s Speech:

I'm not saying that my photo is in the same class as a Vermeer still life but it took me about 30 minutes from start to finish and, working slowly and methodically, Vermeer only produced somewhere between 34 and 63 works.

 

As for the subject matter, from left to right, that's a Lepus plastica, an Aloe Vera, a Gomphocarpus physocarpa and an Aloe I haven't identified.

"François Gabart, 29, is seen as one of the most gifted yachtsmen of his generation. He is a friendly and methodical skipper with a rigorous and scientific approach to his job, which does not prevent him from enjoying offshore racing with an enthusiastic freshness."

IN: www.vendeeglobe.org/en/skipper/31/francois-gabart.html

 

Capitainerie, Les Sables d'Olonne, Vendée, France, 01/2013

A bulldozer is methodically pushing snow over the edge, working its way down to the highway. The snow is really deep beneath the Liberty Bell avalanche chutes. (East side crews.)

These funerary portraits were carved in the great ancient city of Palmyra almost two thousand years ago. Then part of the Roman Empire, Palmyra grew internationally sophisticated and wealthy as a major outpost for trade caravans in the Syrian Desert. The local population embraced Roman ways in many aspects of their lives, as evidenced in the hairstyles and clothes depicted here, as well as by spectacular architecture and sculpture.

 

The form of this work—with side-by-side figures posed frontally—was inspired by traditional Roman tomb monuments. Couples usually depict a husband and wife, but the inscription in the Palmyrene dialect of Aramaic identifies the people as Yarkhai, son of Ogga, and his daughter Balya. The father’s right arm is held in a sling created by the draping of his cloak. The daughter raises her right hand to touch her veil and, with her left hand, holds the end of her cloak. These gestures follow the conventions of hundreds of surviving Palmyrene funerary sculptures and offer clues as to how wealthy men and women of Palmyra wanted to be seen and remembered by their families and their peers. Scholars believe that these poses may have indicated virtues, such as dignity and modesty. The sculpture was made for a wall tomb in a tower or temple setting and would have been accessible to later generations. We know Balya died before her father did from the drape suspended behind her on pins with palm fronds. The figures have a strong sense of presence appropriate to their function of commemorating the departed.

 

This sculpture carries special significance in light of the recent destruction of many ancient works of art and architecture in Syria. From the first to the third century, the art and architecture of Palmyra, standing at the crossroads of several civilizations, united Greco-Roman, Persian, and Indigenous elements in a strongly original style. The ruins of the ancient city were designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1980 in recognition of its history as one of the most important cultural centers of the ancient world. However, the country of Syria has been engulfed in civil war since 2011, when a civil uprising escalated into a brutal, multiparty conflict between the government of Bashar al-Assad and various armed factions. One of these factions is the Islamic State, also known as ISIS. ISIS militants have methodically destroyed numerous artworks and ancient sites across Syria and Iraq, claiming that the works are blasphemous, while also profiting from the illegal trade in looted antiquities. In the spring of 2015, Khaled Asaad, the elderly former curator at Palmyra, his colleagues, and his family worked heroically to conceal or evacuate artifacts as Islamic State forces approached. ISIS overran Palmyra in May 2015, publicly executed Khaled Asaad, and blasted the ancient ruins with explosives. Syrian government forces recaptured Palmyra in March 2017 and archeologists have begun to assess the damage to the historic sites. Human rights organizations report that, as of March 2017, over 465,000 people have been killed in Syria’s civil war. Eleven million people have been forced to flee their homes and seek safety in other parts of Syria and, as refugees, in other countries.

Construction is steadily moving forward on the 18,000 sq. ft. Possum Creek Skatepark in Gainesville, Florida.

 

Led by Spohn Ranch's COO, Mark Bradford, the crews in Gainesville are quickly turning what were once just some dreams scribbled on paper into one of Florida's premiere concrete skateparks.

 

Through a combination of advanced pre-cast concrete technology and methodical on-site concrete pours, the skatepark is nearing a flawless finish with less than 30 days on site.

"François Gabart, 29, is seen as one of the most gifted yachtsmen of his generation. He is a friendly and methodical skipper with a rigorous and scientific approach to his job, which does not prevent him from enjoying offshore racing with an enthusiastic freshness."

IN: www.vendeeglobe.org/en/skipper/31/francois-gabart.html

 

Capitainerie, Les Sables d'Olonne, Vendée, France, 01/2013

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

This is a photo to show proof and evidence of the methodical, carefully orchestrated 'IPI' conspiracy across the board: politically, religiously, dynastically motivated from the rivaling factions' rife from ancient to modern times...This is a photo of Laura Rangel founder of 'karito kids' and her side kick: lisa steen proctor not shown this photo: comapare this image of laura rangel and 'laurie' pete's ex-wife: very similar and look at her 'IPI' toy doll: a picture od 'Ling' doll,ehh: resembles me, ehh...a political, religious, dynastic faction rife of a conspiracy: 'IPI' across the board...a picture is worth 1000 words and more...oh what a wicked web woven and decieved now uprooted, brought to light..for the world to sea...aye, maties!

Rip Stencil BOBBY M. RAW 13%

I shot this focus stack close-up (14 frames) on a very cold (-20°C) Boxing Day (December 26).

 

This is right next to the Bow River and morning mist had created wonderful hoar frost on all the vegetation.

 

I worked for about 2 1/2 hours in the sun wearing my warmest wool, fleece, and down clothing. I had to be very methodical with the camera gear: no breathing on anything (condensation) and no touching anything metal with bare hands (pretty quick frost bite). I also had to be careful about not sliding down the steep embankment into the water, or worse, dropping some gear down there.

 

There was a light breeze coming down the river and all the vegetation was moving slightly. I had to do a bit of clean-up of the merged image after Photoshop blended the layers. This is not something I regularly like to do to my photos, but was necessary in this case.

💡HOW 🔽

🔥ACTION ONE (7,5✔️) (👨‍🔧Mixing and Carving) Mix the ingredients and knead the dough :

👣Step 1 (1,5✔️) 0:03

👣Step 2 (6✔️) 0:22

 

🔥ACTION TWO (0,5✔️) (👨‍🔧...) Let the dough rest :

👣Step 3 (0,5✔️) 1:06

 

✅Finish 1:19

➕8 ✔️Experience Points in cooking

 

👩‍🔬eXplanation :

Mix 25g of fresh yeast (you can use another type of baker's yeast) in 400ML lukewarm milk.

Then pour 4g of sugar. After, on a flat work surface (Or with your robot, petrin ... etc. You can use a big bowl too.) Pour 500g flour. Spread the flour, leaving a small crevice in the center to add 4g of salt and pour your milk with the yeast little by little while stirring.

Begin petrification of the paw for several minutes by adding 45ML of olive oil during petrification.

Once finished pour a little flour into a bowl and put the paw in it, pour some flour on top of the dough too. Allow

the dough to rest in a relatively warm and humid place for 3 hours (minimum advise) (You may deposit a lukewarm water container if the dough's resting location is an enclosed area).

 

ℹ️1 Tablespoon = 15G - 15ML (About)

ℹ️1 Teaspoon = 5G - 5ML (About)

 

⏳Cook in Less Than 1 Minute : www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5M50VREHR4&list=PLCnt1yP-rsm...

 

🏆Difficulty :Very Easy (Level 1)

🎓Skills : Some little notions of cooking

️Senses : 👀Vision 👆To Touch 💃Proprioception 👃Smell ♨️Thermoception 👅Taste

👩‍🏫Intelligences : Kinesthetic Body Intelligence

🔢Intelligence Logic Mathematics

💡Imagination

🙇State of Mind : 😶Focus

😔Patient

🤔Perfectionist

😵Methodical

😉Organize

 

️Tools (🔨5)

🔨2 Bowls (1 #Optional)

🔨1 Spoonful

🔨Metering (Ingredients)

🔨1 Big Bowl

🔨Cooking System

 

🍲Ingredients 7 (1#) (📜Recipe) : 16 (Panzerotti) 2292

🍚Olive Oil 🔍45ML 270 Calories

🍚Milk Lukewarm (Half skim) 🔍400ML 183 Calories

🍚Fresh Yeast 🔍25g 90 Calories

🍚Sugar 🔍4g 15 Calories

🍚Wheat Flour 🔍510g 1734 Calories

🍚Salt 🔍4g 0 Calories

🍚Water (#Optional) 0 Calories

 

⚠️Consider nutrient intake too and not essentially calorie intake

 

📋WHAT 🔽

🍳How To Cook {5} Step by Step

🌟Panzerotti Dough with Milk

💫Panzerotti Dough World

🌌Dough/Main Course/Secondary Dish Galaxy

✨Cooking Universe (🍳)

📝Type : Cooking of Panzerotti Dough ( Preparation of various recipes for meals)

🎨Style : Panzerotti Dough with Milk

️Language : International (🇬🇧 description and steps in English, but comprehensible by the whole world)

 

️You can use your playlists as filters, to find what you're looking for exactly : www.youtube.com/channel/UCb1N-vNT8Y1-qx0PdlvLRpg/playlists

 

📖HOW MUCH 🔽

👣3 Steps

🔥2 Actions

✔️8 Experience Points

️5 tools

🍲Need 7 Ingredients (1#Optional)

2292 Calories (About) 1 Panzerotti = 143 Calories

🔍Dosage (Weight) (About) : 445ML (💧Liquid) - 543G (Solid) (1= 28ML (💧) 34 () Weight of total ingredients used

👫How many people : 2-6 Persons (4 Medium) (Main meal)

⏱️Preparation Time : 15 Minutes Minimum - 1 Hour Maximum

⏰Waiting Time : 3 Hours ~ 5 Hours

️6 Senses

👩‍🏫3 Intelligences

🙇5 State of Mind

 

WHO 🔽

👩‍🍳Cook by Carmen

🎥Filmed by LG : Samsung Galaxy S7

📡Posted by LG

️Video made by LG (Windows Movie Maker 2017)

©Etoile Copyright (Cooking)

©Ikson (Music)

 

🎵Music Used Ikson - Blue Sky

Support Ikson :

ℹ️ How to use music : iksonmusic.wordpress.com/

📌https://soundcloud.com/ikson

📌https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyB3YiRU9OXJgIkRi-Z3wEA

📌https://twitter.com/Iksonofficial

📌https://www.facebook.com/iksonmusic/

📌https://www.instagram.com/iksonofficial/

 

🎼Music promoted 📂 by eMotion

️Video Link : youtu.be/O2Ma7MTkoTE

 

❓WHY 🔽

Learn How To Cook Panzerotti Dough with Milk

 

📍WHERE 🔽

Pontault Combault (🇫🇷 France)

🇮🇹Italian Food

🇸🇪Sweden Music

 

🕓WHEN 🔽

📅10 December 2017

⌚Duration : 10 Minutes Minimum ~ 12 Hours Maximum

⚠️The duration depends on the performance and tools used by the author. That is why this is indicated from the minimum to the maximum

 

👉Follow us :

💥Facebook : www.facebook.com/Emagination-245483199189790

💥Instagram : www.instagram.com/emaginationetl

💥Flickr : www.flickr.com/photos/emaginationetl

💥Dailymotion : www.dailymotion.com/eMaginationETL

💥Youtube : www.youtube.com/channel/UCb1N-vNT8Y1-qx0PdlvLRpg

💥Tumblr : emaginationetl.tumblr.com

💥Pinterest : pinterest.com/eMaginationETL

💥Google + : plus.google.com/u/0/b/105408529185776891361/1054085291857...

💥Twitter : twitter.com/eMaginationETL

 

#HowToCook

 

💌Contact : emaginationcontact@gmail.com

 

v.2.002

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

For Our Daily Challenge - Look What I Found

 

There are two wild bush honeysuckles in the backyard and every year, Robins methodically devour every last berry. They are often too heavy for the smaller branches and have to resort to a variety of acrobatics to reach the more succulent treats.

 

Don't use this image on websites, blogs or other media without explicit permission.

© Barbara Dickie All rights reserved

 

Oil on canvas.

2005 Mexico.

This painting is the one that set me on the path of the abstract. After five years of trying to be able to create something new to my eyes, something really inspired me. In March of 2005, I painted this in three exhausted days. In that time I had yearned to be to create something similar to abstract art; something different than the boring and methodical techniques.

When my "friends" from Leon the city where I was living, saw this painting for the first time, they laughed, also one of these guys told me, that he could make five exact copies such as the original. But I told me inside of me that I could achieve whatever I wanted and I believed in me. The title of this painting, and another of my works speaks of the state of mind in which I found myself in the moment that I was painting. In some case, the title can reflect what I was thinking in that moment, or there may simply be some similarity between the title and the shape or form of the art.

Pouring a deep black earth colour, rich roasted coffee flavours and hints of dark chocolate guide your palate through a java-laden journey. Methodically crafted with only the best local espresso, this one-eyed jackal is no wildcard

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

View large on black

 

"A TEST OF ENDURANCE"

 

Wave after wave of swimmers raced across the sand and dove headfirst into the sea. Arms churned as bodies sliced through the waves in a long line that went as far as my eyes could see. Then, they turned around and began to make their way back to the beach. Heads bobbed to the side as they took in fresh breaths of air. Finally, great splashes of water sprayed everywhere as the swimmers reached the shore, a mixture of grim determination and cheerful smiles etched across their faces. A series of cheers erupted from the crowd waiting for them on the beach as they raced across the sand once again to their bikes for the next leg of the competition.

 

This was the scene at Hwasun Beach where nearly 1100 men and women took part in the 2011 Iron Man Korea Jeju Triathlon. Participants swam 3.8 km, bicycled 180.2 km, and ran 42.2 km for a total of 226.195 km on a difficult course that wound its way over rolling hills between Daejeong-Eup and the World Cup stadium in Seogwipo.

 

Cyclists worked their way methodically up a steep incline just outside of Jungmun and then coasted down a hill, thumbs up as they passed me, clearly relieved to finish that part of the race. But, the hardest part was yet to come: a full marathon that would test the will and endurance of these athletes.

 

Five grueling hours later, the end in sight, Balazs Csoke from Hungary, using all his remaining strength, dragged his exhausted body across the finish line, completing the race in 8 hours, 48 minutes, and 18 seconds. Korean hopeful Yeun Sik Ham finished strong, clocking in at 9:36:02 while Kate Bevilaqua of Australia was the top woman, finishing the race in 9 hours, 39 minutes, and 42 seconds.

 

www.jejuweekly.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=1730

 

*********************************************************************************************************

 

More images from the race www.flickr.com/photos/dmacs_photos/sets/72157627105746342/

 

Slideshow www.flickr.com/photos/dmacs_photos/sets/72157627105746342...

 

Please view my stream LARGE on black:

 

DMac 5D Mark II's photos on Flickriver

 

Follow me on Twitter @ twitter.com/#!/dmac5dmark2

 

*********************************************************************************************************

Granite rock, which is brought in by barge, is methodically placed in the Piankatank River near Gwynn’s Island in Mathews County Virginia. The rock is the basis for the newest, 25-acre oyster reef in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. The Norfolk District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is overseeing the more than $2 million sanctuary reef project in partnership with the Virginia Marine Resources Commission and the Nature Conservancy. (U.S. Army photo/Patrick Bloodgood)

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

Call me Ishmael. . . . Whenever I find myself growing grim about the mouth; whenever it is a damp, drizzly November in my soul; whenever I find myself involuntarily pausing before coffin warehouses, and bringing up the rear of every funeral I meet; and especially whenever my hypos get such an upper hand of me, that it requires a strong moral principle to prevent me from deliberately stepping into the street, and methodically knocking people's hats off- then, I account it high time to get to sea as soon as I can.

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) was a French botanist. He was born to a well-to-do family in Aix-en-Provence. Tournefort initially took up studies in theology. However, as he had a marked inclination towards natural sciences, he turned to medicine. He completed his studies at the University of Montpellier. In 1681, he was in Barcelona doing research in botany. In 1694 Tournefort published his first three-volume work, in which he classified 8846 plants. In 1698 he became Doctor in Medicine of the University of Paris. At that time his treatise was also translated into Latin. Tournefort became a famous physician and naturalist. He travelled extensively in Western Europe (Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, England). He had published a number of works on botany, and had acquired a fabulous collection of nearly 50.000 books, as well as costumes, arms, minerals, shells and various curiosities. Thus, he already had a very important career behind him when Louis XIV entrusted him with the mission to bring new plants to the Royal Botanical Garden.

 

Tournefort started out on his voyage to the Near East in the spring of 1700, at the age of 44, accompanied by a painter and a doctor. He visited thirty-eight islands of the Greek archipelago, as well as Northern Anatolia, Pontus and Armenia, and reached Tiflis in Georgia. Tournefort returned to Marseilles in June 1702.

 

His manuscript, composed of his letters to the Minister of the Exterior Count de Pontchartain, was published posthumously in 1717. A number of re-editions followed, while his work was also translated into English, German and Flemish. There is also a Greek translation of the first part. The fact that Tournefort had discovered new plants in his journey led him to publish a supplement to his main work of botanical classification in 1703. He taught Botany in the Académie, while continuing to practice medicine; at the same time, he was in charge of the Royal Gardens, where many plants he brought from his travels were cultivated with success. Having survived a multitude of adventures, Tournefort died of an accident in 1708. He did not live to see the publication of his travel chronicle, which in the following three centuries became the basic manual to all travellers to these regions. Until today, researchers from numerous fields turn to Tournefort’s text, as it remains an invaluable source of information. He describes the places he visited in a particular systematic manner.

 

The systematic way he organizes his information on topography, economy, administration, ethnic composition, customs and habits of everyday life shows how one can arrive at truth and knowledge through research, methodical study, classification and generalisation. To document his research, Tournefort cites a hundred and thirty-five texts by Greek and Latin authors as well as Byzantine writers, Humanists, and earlier travel accounts.

 

He methodically narrates his visit to each island, and describes the locations as well as events that he witnessed and encounters with locals. He then continues with the island’s history from ancient times to the current age, citing the corresponding myths, and comparing with the information provided by ancient coins. Subsequently, he writes on the island’s administration and taxes, commerce, products and prices thereof. An entire chapter is dedicated to the Greek church. Tournefort also writes on monasteries and churches, house architecture and caves. He also describes the customs, the dress and the occupations of the inhabitants. He concludes his chapters with geographical observations from the highest point of each main region.

 

Naturally, his work includes engravings of city views, locations and monuments as well as plants, instruments and costumes. The text becomes alive with vivid descriptions of his encounters with islanders, be it Turks, Franks, Greeks or privateers. Of special interest are his descriptions of fortresses, ports, safe havens and his information on map drawing.

 

The second volume is a publication of his thoroughly documented manuscripts. It was not edited by Tournefort himself as had happened with the first. On numerous occasions he refers to the politics, administration and ethnic composition of the Ottoman Empire. He continues with his journey on the southern coast of the Black Sea to Armenia. The work closes with a short description of Smyrna and Ephesus.

 

Tournefort is considered the first to have shown the islands of the Archipelago to be “travel material”, as he offered information which inspired the interest for further research, and also highlighed each location’s wealth and uniqueness.

 

Written by Ioli Vingopoulou

 

Fransız botanikçi Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) Aix-en-Provence'da varlıklı bir aile içinde doğar, ilk önce tanrıbilim (teoloji) dersleri izler ancak genç yaştan beri doğa bilimlerine eğilim gösterir. Bu yüzden Montpellier'de tıp öğrenimi görüp 1681'de botanik araştırmaları yapmak üzere Barcelona'ya gelir. 1694 yılında üç ciltlik ve 8.846 bitkinin sınıflandırmasına ilişkin ilk eserini yayınlar; 1698'de Paris Tıp Fakültesinden doktor unvanını alır ve bu kazanımı yapıtının latince çevirisi izler. Doktor ve doğa bilimcisi olarak ün salmış, Batı Avrupa'da (İspanya, Portekiz, Hollanda, İngiltere'ye) seyahat etmiş, botanoloji ile ilgili kitaplar yayınlamış, 50.000'e yakın kitaptan meydana gelen bir kitaplık oluşturmuş, ayrıca yerel kıyafet, silah, mineral, deniz kabuğu ve daha başka ilginç şeylerden oluşan hayranlık uyandıran koleksiyonlar sahibi olmuşken, kral 14. Louis ona Kraliyet Botanik Bahçesine yeni bitkiler getirme görevini verir. Tournefort 1700 yılının ilkbaharında, 44 yaşındayken, yanına yoldaş olarak bir ressam ve bir doktor alarak Yakın Doğu'ya doğru yola çıkar.

 

Ege adalarından 38 tanesini ziyaret eder, Kuzey Anadolu'nun her tarafını gezip Karadeniz ve Ermenistan yörelerine gelir, Tiflis'e varır. Tournefort, 1702 yılının Haziran ayında Marsilya'da karaya ayak basar.

 

Kaleme aldığı metin (Dışişleri bakanı Kont de Pontchartain'e yolladığı mektuplar biçiminde) ilk olarak 1717'de yayınlanır, bu ilk yayını bir çok yeni baskı izler ve eser ingilizce, almanca ve flamanca gibi dillere- ilk kısmı yunancaya da - çevrilir. Yeni keşfettiği bitkilerin daha önce belirlemiş olduğu sınıflandırma sistemine eklenmesi sonucu olarak 1703'te yeni bir cilt yayınlar. Tournefort botanik profesörü sıfatıyla Akademide dersler verir, doktorluk mesleğini ve bunlara koşut olarak Kraliyet Bahçesinin sorumluluğu görevini sürdürür. Gezilerinden getirmiş olduğu birçok yeni bitki bu bahçede başarılı bir şekilde yetiştirilir. Tournefort geçirdiği birçok maceradan kefeni yırtmışken, üç asır boyunca her gezginin bu bölge için başucu kitabı olacak seyahatnamesinin yayınlanmasını göremeden 1708'de bir kaza sonucu ölür. Bugün hâlâ çeşitli dallardan araştırmacılar Tournefort'un metnine başvurup son derece değerli bilgilerinden faydalanmak durumundalar. Eseri anında ingilizce, hollandaca ve almancaya çevrilmişti.

 

Gezdiği yerleri betimlerken belirli bir yöntem izleyerek topoğrafya, ekonomi, yönetim, milletler sentezi ve günlük yaşamdaki örf ve adetlere ilişkin bilgiler verirken, Tournefort, bilginin gerçeğe uyup uymadığı konusuna araştırma, düzenli okuma, sınıflandırma ve genelleştirme yoluyla yanaşılabileceğini kanıtlıyor. Kanıtlayıcı belgeleri arasında antik Yunan ve Latin yazarlarından, ayrıca Bizans yazarlarından ve daha eski hümanist bilgin ve gezginlerden 135 tane metin bulunmakta.

 

Ziyaret ettiği her ada için düzenli olarak ziyaretini anlatıp birçok yeri ve olayı hatta yerlilerle olan görüşmelerini de betimler. Bunlara ek olarak, adanın eski çağlardan gününe dek tarihi ve bununla ilintili efsaneler, sikkeler hakkında, yönetim, vergilendirme usulleri, ticaret, ürünler ve fiyatları hakkında bilgiler verir. Ayrıca Yunanistan'ın dinî (kilise) yaşamına başlıbaşına bir bölüm ayırır. Manastırlar, kiliseler, evlerin mimarisi, mağaralar hakkında yazar, adetler ve kıyafetleri betimleyip halkın uğraşlarından sözeder ve önemli yörelerin her birinin en yüksek irtifasından yaptığı coğrafya gözlemleri ile anlatımını bitirir.

 

Doğal olarak eserinde şehir, yer, anıt, bitki, alet, ve kıyafet görünümleri ile ilgili gravürler de yer almakta. Ayrıca metni ada halkıyla (Türkler, Latinler, Yunanlılar, korsanlarla) ilişkilerinden çarpıcı betimlemelerle de çeşitlenir. Kitabında hisarlar, gemi barınakları, güvenli limanlar hakkında yaptığı betimlemeler ve harita çizimi ile ilgili verdiği bilgiler özel ilgi uyandıran kısımlar arasındadır.

 

Eserinin birinci cildinin yayına hazırlığını kendisi denetlemişken ikinci cilt kendi ayrıntılı yazılarına sadık kalınarak basılır. Bu cildin başındaki birçok bölüm Osmanlıların siyasal, yönetimsel ve etnografik durumuna ayrılmıştır. Bunun devamında Karadeniz'in güney kıyılarında yaptığı Ermenistan'a kadar varan yolculuğunu anlatıp kitabı İzmir ve Efes'in kısa bir betimlemesi ile bitirir.

 

Böylece Tournefort, başkalarında arayış isteğini besleyecek nitelikte malzeme sağlamanın yanısıra, gördüğü her yerin sonsuz zengiliğini ve kendine özgü niteliklerini yüzeye çıkarması açısından Ege adalarına bir "yolculuk uknumu" veren ilk şahıs olarak bilinir.

 

Yazan: İoli Vingopoulou

 

Dad has a small procedure he follows each time he visits, almost like a ritual. He places a kneeling pad carefully on the ground, clears the dirt beneath the flower pot, pours water to wash the headstone, then uses a brush to lift away leaves and dust until the stone is clean again. It is methodical and practical, but carried out with such deliberate care that it is deeply emotional to watch.

1 2 ••• 65 66 68 70 71 ••• 79 80