are negatives of photographs ansel adams work or not
The article presents some possible support for the hypothesis that the photographic negatives bought at a sale at a private home are in fact, Ansel Adams' work. The lecturer, however, remains unconvinced, and he refutes all the points that are made in the passage. He claims that although there are similarities between these negative and Adams' work, these negatives cannot be attributed to him. His further demonstrations are as follows.
Firstly, while the bent pine tree is present in Adams' photographs as well as the negatives, there is a perfectly simple explanation for this apparent coincidence. This leaning pine tree was not a random tree; by contrast, it is a famous landmark in the Yusemete park. Thousands of people visited this area, and evidently, the leaning pine tree was the most popular landmark there. Hence, it is expected of this tree to appear in the photographs of many artists besides Adams.
Secondly, although there were handwritten place names on the envelopes, for instance places in the Yusemete, many of them were mispelled. Virginia Adams, on the other hand, was born and raised in Yusemete, and she was taught by his artist father the names of these places. How logical it would be to account these errors in spelling to her, someone who has been familiar with this region since childhood?
Finally, the process in which photographers used to develop negatives in the 1920s was a rather dangerous one, involving highly flammable chemicals. These materials could easily catch on fire. Thus, although there was a fire in the Adams' studio back then, these fires were likely to happen in every photographer's studio, and they did. Therefore, fire damage on the remaining negatives cannot be regarded as exclusive to Ansel Adams' work.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 8, column 300, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'photographers'' or 'photographer's'?
Suggestion: photographers'; photographer's
...se fires were likely to happen in every photographers studio, and they did. Therefore, fire d...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, finally, first, firstly, hence, however, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, well, while, for instance, in fact, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1481.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10689655172 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70249147389 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589655172414 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.2266313399 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.7333333333 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0 7.06452816374 156% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.318375504416 0.272083759551 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0967499201873 0.0996497079465 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130430239581 0.0662205650399 197% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192730239232 0.162205337803 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.159155042689 0.0443174109184 359% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.