Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Historic building recording uses photographs to document elevations' details, emphasizing structural analysis.
The building recording was undertaken in accordance with the standards defined in Understanding Historic Buildings; A guide to good recording practice (HE 2016). The site visit was conducted on 14 May 2025 by Richard Hardy IHBC, Senior Historic Buildings Consultant. The weather for the visit was clear and sunny. Photographic Record The photographic record includes general and detailed shots of the elevations, where visible. Specific architectural details that relate to date, alteration, or function were subject to more detailed photographic recording. These principally include any detailing and decoration, or features relating to the historic development of the building. Due to the presence of the scaffold, all general views of the building and specific elevation photographs were considerably compromised and do not illustrate an unimpeded view of the elevations. This has compromised the ability to fulfil photography items 1, 2 and 3 of the Historic England requirements for a photographic survey (HE 2016). Instead, the focus of the survey was to obtain photographs at a relatively close distance from positions on the scaffold at all accessible levels. Viewing angles from these positions were substantially limited and encompass oblique and close up photographs of elevation elements as the recorder progressed around the exterior of the building. Consequently, photographs encompass small sections of each elevation only, with limited opportunity for wider shots. Where apertures were covered by external security panels, these panels were removed prior to the taking of photographs. The photographic record incorporates a combination of shots taken during two separate site visits. As such, some photographs comprise images that feature security panels. However, where this is the case, the exposed apertures will be accounted for in other photographs. The photographic survey comprises digital images of the building and was created in compliance with Historic England guidance. All record photographs were taken using a Digital Single Lens Reflex (DSLR) Camera with a sensor of a minimum of 20 megapixels. Lenses were chosen to reflect the requirements of the particular feature/features being recorded. Images are saved in TIFF and RAW format. Some files were converted to .jpeg format for use in this report and these were handled appropriately to ensure unnecessary compression did not occur during file transfer or management, but TIFF versions will be maintained in the project archive. Appropriate levels of Metadata will be maintained and included in the digital archive following the approach set out in the Historic England guidance. Due to the identified constraints of the survey presented by the presence of the scaffold, the record is supplemented by the output of a recent photogrammetry survey which provides an extremely detailed image of each elevation, sufficient for the analysis of individual stones, apertures and architectural features. This data was capture prior to the erection of the scaffold and is included in this report as Figures 4 and 5. In addition, extracts from the photogrammetry output will be used at a large scale to illustrate each defined section of both elevations. These extracts will be positioned at the beginning of each elevation section. The photographic record did not include any interior elements of the building; as such, items 4, 6 and 8 of the Historic England requirements (HE 2016) for a photographic survey are not included in the record. Written Record The written account includes the location of the building; any designations; and the date and circumstances of the record and name of recorder. Limitations of the assessment The principal limitation of the survey was the presence of scaffolding around the entire structure. This has substantially compromised the ability to record the elevations except for relatively close up photographs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Richard Hardy (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: