[stepper77]

Originally Posted by BigKidD

Thank you for this tour of Oakland, stepper77. Growing up, I truly only passed through Oakland going to the City. Yet on a few occasions I would make it down to Jack London Square. As I examine my return to the Bay Area, Alameda County will certainly be a possibility. Least I forget the Chronicle continually posting articles about recent events of crime across the bay in Oakland. Of course nothing egregious ever occurs in SF....

Until I started working in Oakland, I had the same experience and perception. But, working here has really opened my eyes and so much has changed in those nine years. While it used to start to feel dead after 3-5pm, there have been so many new restaurants, bars, apartments, and condos opening up they have brought much more vitality during after work hours. Of course the city still has its problems and "Occupy" certainly didn't help matters. But, Oakland is truly a largely undiscovered gem by most.

Originally Posted by p-vidal naquet's ami

Many congratulations on your excellent and beautiful photographic rendering of Oakland. Your aesthetically beautiful photos capture the oft-hidden, denied, and unacknowledged beauty––yes, beauty!––of Oakland. Even in those photos capturing the grittier sides of the city, the images attribute to the rough hewn stretches a rarely seen dignity, a surprising tenderness and compassion.

Of the numerous photographers who have captured Oakland on film for this site, you and Nineties Flava are by far my favourite exemplars. Your work in particular comes across as that of an urban Ansel Adams, marrying both a sacred aesthetic and a profane sensuality to wilderness areas, in your case, a wilderness of steel, glass, and asphalt as much as it is of American constructs of race and class (which your work turns on their heads, so to speak).

Nineties Flava's work, by contrast, reminds me of a Karl Hugo Sclmotz –– with the suggested social commentary of a Dr. Kenneth Clarke––capturing the reconstruction, revitalization, and reimagining of Oakland in our minds by depicting the city's myriad complexities and contrasts. Both of your work overturns prejudiced (often racist) myths and notions about Oakland by showing how beautiful the city actually is (and hence, how vibrant and worthy of our respect its citizens really are) and, in Flava's rendering, how complex and nuanced the city's overall culture really is via its neighborhoods that reflect concentrated, culturally vibrant wealth, striving middle-classes, and embattled, embittered impoverishment.

Seriously, Oakland's citizens are all the richer for both of your contributions. And so are we who come to these threads.

High praise, indeed, thank you!

Originally Posted by Danny

Fantastic compilation of shots from Oakland, stepper77!

There´re many beautiful pictures in this long thread. The most I´ve liked are those taken from that hill with that amazing view of San Francisco´s skyline.

I´ve liked the sky in many of your shots and those pretty houses and neighbourhoods.

Thanks for this great work and for introducing Oakland so good.

Congratulations and greetings from Madrid, Spain!

Originally Posted by WesternGulf

Great stuff! Lovin' the last shot.

One day I saw a billboard that read "Oakland, the best view of San Francisco" and I got kind of defensive about it because I took it as degrading Oakland as if that was all it had to offer. However, the saying is true, many of the hills and vistas in Oakland provide for some incredible views of SF. My last photo, for example, is one of my favorites too.

Originally Posted by xzmattzx

I've looked at this twice, but for some reason have not responded yet. Oakland looks like a great city, and some of your pictures of Downtown make it appear like it's Seattle, or maybe Portland. I don't think mmany people realize that Oakland has a Downtown or that Oakland has that stock of historic buildings.

I was looking at aerial images and Street View images of the four blocks mentioned on that plaque after reading that the certain area was the original home of the University of California. What building are they referring to as one that dates from that era or is the particularly historic building? I see a bunch of commercial buildings and a couple apartment buildings, but I don't know what would stand out of those structures.

I agree. Oakland is truly rich with historic buildings. Many still in need of restoration.

What was even more interesting to me about discovering that plaque is that I work for UC Office of the President and didn't know this about our history. I just happened upon the plaque walking between our main building on 12th & Franklin and my office in the Kaiser Center on Lakeside & 21st. The plaque itself is on what would be the northwest cover of a parking garage on 13th & Franklin. There are no remaining buildings from the original university as far as I can tell. Here is the history from wikipedia:

In 1849, the state of California ratified its first constitution, which contained the express objective of creating a complete educational system including a state university. Taking advantage of the Morrill Land Grant Act, the California Legislature established an Agricultural, Mining, and Mechanical Arts College in 1866. Although this institution was provided with sufficient funds, it lacked land.

Meanwhile, Congregational minister Henry Durant, an alumnus of Yale, had established the private Contra Costa Academy, on June 20, 1853 in Oakland, California. The initial site was bounded by Twelfth and Fourteenth Streets and Harrison and Franklin Streets in downtown Oakland. In turn, the Trustees of the Contra Costa Academy were granted a charter on April 13, 1855 for a College of California. State Historical Plaque No. 45 marks the site of the College of California at the northeast corner of Thirteenth and Franklin Streets in Oakland. Hoping both to expand and raise funds, the College of California's trustees formed the College Homestead Association and purchased 160 acres (650,000 m²) of land in what is now Berkeley in 1866. But sales of new homesteads fell short.

Governor Frederick Low favored the establishment of a state university based upon the University of Michigan plan, and thus in one sense may be regarded as the founder of the University of California. In 1867, he suggested a merger of the existing College of California with the proposed state university. On October 9, 1867, the College's trustees reluctantly agreed to merge with the state college to their mutual advantage, but under one condition — that there not be simply a "Agricultural, Mining, and Mechanical Arts College," but "a complete university," within which the College of California would become the College of Letters (now the College of Letters and Science). Accordingly, the Organic Act, establishing the University of California, was signed into law by Governor Henry H. Haight (Low's successor) on March 23, 1868.[5]

The University of California's second president, Daniel Coit Gilman, opened the Berkeley campus in September 1873.