St. Joseph’s Church

# 5927-B

# 5927-B

St. Joseph’s Church, in downtown Rochester, was completed in 1846 but was destroyed by fire in 1974.  It’s been designated a City Landmark and the stone shell has been a park since 1980.  It’s still a wonderful piece of architecture and the shell appears to be in relatively good shape.  Prior to the fire, the Church had a 4 AM service for the numerous bakers in Rochester because they had to start work very early.  I don’t know from experience, but they say it was well attended.

# 5960

# 5960

# 5965

# 5965

# 5947

# 5947

# 5934

# 5934

Advertisements

20 thoughts on “St. Joseph’s Church

  1. Paul

    That is a beautiful church. In thinking about that 4 AM service, I hope that they weren’t ringing those bells at that time. Though, now that I think of it, when I was in Mexico, they rang those bells pretty doggone early, most days before sunrise!

    Reply
  2. TomDills

    These are some wonderful photos of an important landmark. I see it as a possible long-term project. There was a similar structure here in Charlotte that has been renovated into artist’s studios. A better use of bank money than many we’ve seen lately. Keep these going.

    Reply
    1. oneowner Post author

      Apparently, the roof was wood framed and collapsed in the fire. The square footage is not that great on this Church, either, so it probably wasn’t suitable for renovation. But they don’t build them like this any more.

      Reply
      1. disperser

        That part I don’t get . . . they use mind control to keep them in there, and people outside aren’t generally anxious to get in there.

        . . . must be decorative . . .

    1. oneowner Post author

      Thanks, Mark. it’s been over a year since I shot these but I had problems recovering the shadows and highlights. The new controls in LR5 did a terrific job with these, though.

      Reply
  3. ehpem

    I am getting a deja vu feeling all over again with these shots. Did you post them in your old blog, before you worked them up some more, or was that an earlier visit?
    I am staying away from LR5, it does not work with my plug in for timelapse, at least not the last time I checked.

    Reply
    1. oneowner Post author

      Yes, some of these are the same shots posted in the old blog, but re-processed in LR5. Originally, they were processed in LR3 but that version lacked the ability to bring out shadow and highlight detail like LR5 does. It bothered me that I did not have the foresight to bracket the exposures for this series, and I never found the time to go back and re-shoot. Though there is not a significant difference (at least for me) from LR4 and LR5, I decided to continue to be current because it performs 95% of all the editing I do now and there are a few new features that I wanted.

      Reply
      1. ehpem

        They are good shots, worthy of improvement when you can. I find that there is so much information in the RAW files, that I am less often shooting brackets and more often pulling it out with LR.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s