1862 THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS
Vol. VI
ver: Aug. 14, 2007
START:
NOTES:
--Italics have been retained from publications, which use them for both titles as well as emphasis. To more easily locate image titles, I have continued this italicization when titles have been rendered in all capitols or put in quotes, however italics have NOT been used when the general subject of an image is mentioned.
--Image numbers listed in articles can be either an entry number in an exhibition, or the photographer’s own image number as found on labels.
--All names have been bolded for easy location. Numbers frequently refer to the photographer’s image number, but can also refer to a number in a catalog for a show. Decide whether to bold or not if can tell.
--It is not always possible in lists of photographers to know when two separate photographers are partners or not, e.g., in a list, “Smith and Jones” sometimes alludes to two separate photographers and sometimes to one photographic company. Both names will be highlighted and indexed but a partnership may be wrongly assumed. Any information to the contrary would be appreciated.
-- Brackets [ ] are used to indicate supplied comments by the transcriber; parenthesis
( ) are used in the original sources. If the original source has used brackets, they have been transcribed as parenthesis to avoid confusion.
--“illus” means that I have the view mentioned and should be scanned and included.
--Articles by photographers about technical matters – only name and titles have been listed. If other names are associated with the paper they are listed as well.
--Meetings of Societies – Names of officers, members attending or referenced, dates and locations of meetings have been given. If the reports are very short or discuss photographs, then the articles have been copied; if administrative or technical in nature, they have not.
--“[Selection]” = This has been used when not all portions of a feature are copied, such as The Photographic News’ “Talk In The Studio”. If the word does not appear, then the entire feature was transcribed.
-- Some journals, e.g., The Art-Journal, cover both photographer and painting/drawing. As they frequently refer to the production of both the photographer and the painter as “pictures” it is not always possible to tell when photography is indicated. If there is doubt, it will be included but a note will be added stating that the names listed may in fact not be photographers.
--Mostly articles totally discussing technical aspects of photography, products, etc. are not transcribed unless they are part of a larger article covering photographs. When technical descriptions are too lengthy to transcribe that is noted.
--Cultural sensitivity – these are direct transcriptions of texts written in the 19th-century and reflect social comments being made at that time. Allowances must be made when reading some texts, particularly those dealing with other cultures.
1862: P News, Jan. 3, vol. VI, #174, p. 3-4:
Scientific Gossip [selection]
The eclipse of the sun—total in some parts of the world although but partial in England—which happened on Tuesday last, the 31st of December, has not attracted the attention which such an occurrence seems to deserve. In London it commenced at nine minutes to tow in the afternoon and ended at eight minutes to four; the time of greatest phase being at seven minutes to three, when nearly half the sun’s diameter was obscured by the moon’s intercepting body. Being small compared with several eclipses that have lately occurred it has been little thought of; it is one, however, of considerable interest to science, and it is to be hoped that some of our readers will not have allowed to pass so favourable an opportunity of showing the eminent adaptability of their art in recording, permanently and unerringly, a photographic record of this important natural phenomenon. In other parts of the world the eclipse was total, the line of central shadow having passed, successively, over the Carribean Sea, the Island of Trinidad, and the North Atlantic Ocean; entering the the [sic] West coast of Africa, near Cape Verd, traversing the Sahara or Great Desert, Tripoli, and the Mediterranean Sea, but having been lost in sunset just before reaching the Morea. It will thus be seen that although the totality was invisible to all the great observatories and centres of civilization, it passed over several spots where ready access could be gained by astronomers and photographers, or where they were already located. At Trinidad, one of the first places where the totality would become visible there are many amateur photographers, and the important West India Islands are not very far distant for an astronomical excursionist, considering the importance of the object. The next land which it would touch would be near Cape Verd; this is readily accessible from several flourishing settlements on the coast, and also from the Islands of the same name; whilst it would scarcely be considered too far by sea from Teneriffe, the scene of Piazzi Smyth’s important labours in physical astronomy. Perhaps, however, the most important station to Europeans is Tripoli; a short sea voyage from Malta, and also readily accessible from the important cities and states bordering the Mediterranean, this town would offer peculiar faculties for the observation of the phenomena of totality, whilst it would not occur at too late an hour in the afternoon to render its observation, both astronomically and photographically, a matter of difficulty, owing to the low altitude of the sun; we understand, indeed, that arrangements were made to observe it in this neighbourhood by the Moorish astronomers, who so carefully noticed the phenomena of the eclipse of July 1860, in the same country. We may, therefore, anticipate with confidence that this total eclipse will not have been allowed to come and go without having been amply scrutinized by competent scientific observers.
An interesting fact is mentioned in the transactions of the Physical Society of Bombay, just published. In a typographical and geological sketch of a portion of the province of Jhalawan, the writer took with him a photographic apparatus, stereoscope, and slides. The instrument was, as might be supposed, a source of extreme wonder to the people. The Marwarree Sidar of Kholwar, coming one day to obtain medicines for his sick son was shown some stereoscopic pictures of the neighbourhood. He was vastly astonished and delighted, and not a little mystified as to how it was managed to get the fortress of Gwujjuck [sic] shut up in so small a space as the stereoscope. The author states that there is a vast difference with the natives as to their capability of understanding pictures. A man, to whom a stereograph was shown and who had never seen a picture of any sort in his life before, detected at once the little figure of a man standing at the door of a Mosque; while an intelligent native office, on being shown a large portrait of her Most Gracious Majesty, naïvely asked if it were a camel.
1862: P News, Jan. 3, vol. VI, #174, p. 9-10:
Photographic Tourist.
Photographic Pencillings of an Eastern Tour.
Taking a pleasant, hurried, final leave of my few good friends and true, one briskly invigorating, and hearty December morning, after duly superintending the stowing away of luggage, I sprung into the railway carriage, and away I went, feeling that I really was, at last, on my way to quit dear old England for a long-promised tour amid scenes associated with so much that is dear to the Christian’s heart. That night I stopped myself away, horizontally, in one of the berths on board the boat which conveyed me across the channel, and woke up to go ashore and be horridly annoyed by the suspiciously overhauling of my various traps, especially the photographic. This trouble over—I had to pay duty, by-the-bye, for such glass as I took with me—I was speedily in the streets of Paris.
Paris is said to be the home of art, and I have seen, in the pages for which I am now writing, that photography is regarded as superior in artistic quality there than here. Now I am no artist myself, although an amateur photographer, but I must say that while no one can deny that art is more widely understood and appreciated in Paris than in London, French art, in all its applications, including photography, is, after all, wanting in the elements which we English best understand. It is brilliantly attractive in all the more popular qualities, but does not indicate much thought or feeling. Its paintings are almost gaudy in colour, and their subjects seem always to be more or less melo-dramatically treated; and as to its photography, I have no patience with those who would compare, detrimentally, the productions of Robinson, Heath, Mudd, Bedford, Rejlander, and other eminent English masters, with works of a similar character by their French representatives. With reference to portraiture, however, although I think we have as many good photographers devoted to this branch of the art in London, whose pictures at least equal those of their French brethren, I certainly think the French have not so many of those hideous libelers of “the human face divine” as we, unfortunately, tolerate or encourage. In France, as a rule, the people would laugh to scorn productions which ehre find admirers and imitators. In short, while their art is more widely spread, ours, to my thinking, at least, has greater depth, or, in other words, while the French have less bad art, we have most good art.
I was very much struck, during the few days I remained in Paris, with its numerous street improvements, apparent in every direction. Grand new boulevards seem to have sprung up with magical rapidity, and although but a few years had elapsed since my previous visit to this mighty city, the changes and improvements were something to wonder at. I looked in vain for many of the narrow streets once so numerous beside the Seine, and with no little interest upon the many new cites reared by private speculation encouraged by Government aid.
Starting by the Lyons railway, I was duly conveyed to Marseilles, from whence I embarked for Malta. I will not say much of the voyage. I did not see much of our progress; the more prominent memories of those days at sea are not pleasant ones—in fact, humiliating though the confession may be, I—wasn’t quite well. I certainly have certain indistinct remembrances of a swaying and rolling, a creaking and jolting, a rising and falling of the vessel; of a torpid state of mind, and a limp colapsible [sic] state of body; but can recall little else until we reached our destination, and, to my inexpressible satisfaction, I landed and found myself in the streets of Valetta. I thought, as we entered the blue waters of the harbour (containing vessels from most of the nations of the world), and looked upon the pale-faced, strongly-fortified rocks, caught glimpses of the imposing-looking city, gazed upon the grand fort of St. Elmo, and perceived the other fine buildings reposing under a bright clear sky, I had seldom seen a more pleasing sight.
The day of my arrival being Sunday, I attended divine service in a large plain-looking church, erected by the late Queen Adelaide, the congregation being largely composed of the civil and military officials of the Government.
The streets of this fine city are very picturesque, and although I had not intended to unpack my apparatus here, I was unable to withstand the temptation they offered. So I secured several views, including the ancient palace of the Governor, which of old was that of the Grand Master of the Knights of Malta, and one or two of the somewhat dilapidated, but still stately and grand, old Auberges, together with some of the forts; one of a little road-side chapel, stumbled over on my ramble to the reputed scene of St. Paul’s; shipwreck (situated five miles from the city), &c. &c. The houses and streets combine favourably in a picture, but the latter are very frequently far more pleasant to an artist’s eye than an artist’s legs, a walk up some of their steep ascents being verily “sich a getting up stairs.” But these streets of stairs, and the novel aspect of the houses, which, although of nearly equal height, are of the most varied and irregular kind of architecture (chiefly Moorish), and have a variety of huge overhanging balconies, with projecting windows of ornamental sand-stone, giving all that variation of line and chiaroscuro which we seek in making pictures. My street views are also most agreeably enlivened, where instantaneous, by the variety of costume among the figures and groups they contain, and in other cases by a carved stone fountain or two, none the worse in my negatives for being time-worn and dilapidated. I have two of these photographs now before me, one in which may be traced the somber figures and curious triangular turned up hats of a couple of priests, the negligently worn caps of some labouring men, sitting and talking on the steps, a monk, an English soldier, some women with their heads by no means ungracefully draped in the folds of their mantillas, and a party of Greek seamen, quite dramatic looking characters, sauntering indolently on their way; the other is of a more crowded and animated character, and was taken from the water-gate, with its stairs, and stalls, and its thickly crowded variety of men and women in all sorts of widely different costumes. Beggars, and boatmen, soldiers and sailors, monks and priests, fish-stalls and fruit-stalls, half-naked vendors of all sorts of eatables, some dirty makers and street-vendors of cigars, mayall be traced in the latter photograph if you have patience, and eyes good enough to separate the component figures of this confused crowd of forms and figures which make one of the most interesting and successful mementos of my visit to Malta. M.H. (To be continued.)
1862: P News, Jan. 10, vol. VI, #175, p. 21:
Critical Notices:
Instantaneous Stereographs, of Various Subjects. By G. W. Wilson, Aberdeen.
We have recently received a parcel of Mr. Wilsons’ charming stereographs, including a variety of subjects, landscape, marine, and street views, and interiors. It is now late in the day to say, that each one of these pictures, no matter what the subject, is little short of perfection. In conversation with a friend the other day on the subject, we found ourselves somewhat at a loss for a word which, in any special sense, characterized these pictures. They are delicate, they are vigorous, they are perfectly defined, they are clean, they are atmospheric; the subjects are well chosen; they have all these characteristics and many more; but it is difficult to say that any one of these takes precedence of the others. We were obliged to fall back on a somewhat negative term, and speak of their entire faultlessness; of the absence of anything we would wish different. The landscapes are so well composed, so full of gradation and of atmosphere; the interiors are so perfectly rendered, so full of detail, and yet so grand and forcible, free alike from heaviness and chalkiness; the marine pieces are so marvelous in light and shade, and cloud and water; the street scenes are so perfectly defined and free from either under exposure or blurring of the moving figures; all are so harmonious and well chosen, that it becomes easier to declare them free from fault than to point out the especial sources of their excellence.
Amongst the most recent are a series of views of some of our principal war vessels. Amongst these are to be found, perhaps, the most perfect specimens of instantaneity which have yet been produced. Some of the vessels are engaged in “great fun practice,” and the plate has been exposed the moment when the cannon has belched forth its cloud of smoke, the immense volume of which is as crisp and perfectly defined as if it had been perfectly stationary, instead of a curling, wreathing, rapidly-changing ass of vapour. With all this the ship is perfectly made out in every part, hull and cordage, without the slightest trace of under exposure in any part. “H.M.S. Cambridge, No. 316,” is an admirable example of this perfect instantaneity. There are two, we observe, of the same subject, and with the same number; but that presenting the broadside of the vessel is the most perfect.
We may here call attention to a useful practice adopted by Mr. Wilson in mounting. The paper containing the name of the subject extends over the whole of the back of the slide, and has the advantage of counteracting any tendency of the card to curl from the mounting of the prints on the other side.
1862: P News, Jan. 10, vol. VI, #175, p. 22:
Critical Notices:
Instantaneous Views of London, &c. C. E. Elliott, Aldermanbury Postern.
We have had the pleasure of seeing and reviewing many hundreds of instantaneous stereographs; but we must candidly confess that we have never felt greater surprise and delight, than we have experienced in examining some of the slides not before us. The subjects are of two kinds; street scenes, and views of cloud and water. Regarding the former we must express some qualification with our praise. Whilst they are very good considering the difficulties of producing instantaneous views of the streets of London, owing to the smoky condition of the atmosphere even at favourable times, they have some faults which scarcely belong to that cause. Some of the views have been taken from a great altitude, with the camera tilted, so as to look down on the scene, and the result it a peculiarly tumble-down kind of effect in the buildings. WE may mention “No. 57, St. Paul’s from the foot of Ludgate Hill,” as a specimen of this defect, which ought certainly to be avoided. Some of the pictures are also a little chalky and under-exposed. Having said this much, we may add that they are, notwithstanding, decidedly beyond the average of such productions: the scenes well chosen, and the photography clean and vigorous.
When we approach the marine and atmospheric effects we can adopt entirely another tone of comment. Here all are charming, and some are perfect. We observed last week, in some remarks on the progress of instantaneous photography, that Mr. Wilson would have to look to his laurels. We had these pictures before us at the time we wrote, and in the photographer who produced them we believe Mr. Wilson will find his most formidable rival, if that rivalry can be considered formidable which simply comprehends a friendly struggle as to who shall best illustrate the great powers of a great art, and is conducted with the respect and esteem which we are sure must characterize the feelings of the neophyte competitor, and are certain will not be absent in the veteran.
The views before us comprise scenes chiefly on the Thames and the Solent; and have been produced under such conditions of light and atmosphere as we have rarely seen secured. In some there is a marvelous weird effect, which almost fascinates the spectator with the apparent vastness and solemn grandeur of the scene. A fine illustration of this is “123, Sunset at Ryde.” The sky here is the charm, as the water in one part is a thought [sic] chalky: but what a sky! The horizon is surmounted by one immense bank of cloud which stretches across the entire picture; the sun has just sunk behind this cloud, but a rich warm glow of light radiates from it, and illumines the whole arch of the sky. The picture at once suggests colour, and we see the deep purple black of the cloud dense, but yet full of vapoury form and texture; and we see the golden light running through various tints and gradations into the blue of the upper sky. We should like an inch cut off the lower part of the negative, and the remainder enlarged to about twelve by ten. If well done, such a picture would be one of the finest things the art has produced. Even more perfect and quite as picturesque, but without the weird grandeur of the last is “No. 82, Sunset at Greenhithe.” This is perhaps one of the most satisfactory specimens of chiaroscuro we have ever seen in a photograph; both foreground and sky are perfect. The sun has just descended behind an immense bank of dark cloud, the jutting fleecy edges of which it fringes with silver; a rift in the clouds shows the clear sky, and above the rift is a mass of cirrus cloud, the lower edges of which are illuminated by the sinking sun. The only bit of pure white in this picture is the delicate fringe of illumination to the clouds; all the rest consist of various gradations of demi-tint and shadow, in the most harmonious arrangement. We commend this slide to those of our readers interested in the matter, as a study of chiaroscuro. One of the most perfect studies of cloud we have met with is “No. 89, A study of clouds at Southsea.” Here a mass of cumulus clouds, which cover the sky, possesses modeling and roundness, sufficiently perfect to give apparent solidity. This is not obtained at the expense of other parts of the picture, for a square rigged vessel in full sail is perfectly made out in every detail, as is also the water. We have not space to particularlize further, or we might mention several others, each very fine indeed in their kind. We may especially refer to Nos. 87, 83, 51, 93, and 106, all of which are nearly perfect.
We have not received from the publishers definite information on a subject we always like to mention in notices of this kind. We refer to the name of the photographer who produced the pictures. We are strongly inclined, however, from internal and other evidence, to us satisfactory, to award the credit to a gentleman who, some eight or nine years ago, was a pupil of our own in the Daguerreotype process—Mr. Valentine Blanchard. If our conjecture be correct, we have pleasure in congratulating Mr. Blanchard on his success in producing stereographs which rank as high in artistic merit as any which have come under our attention. We would suggest to him the high value which many of these would possess if enlarged; and as he and the gentlemen with whom he is allied in business are proficient in the use of the solar camera, we hope to have an opportunity of seeing some of these stereoscopic negatives reproduced in large-sized pictures, which, if we are not mistaken, would take the photographic world by surprise.
1862: P News, Jan. 10, vol. VI, #175, p. 22:
Critical Notices:
Euclid in the Stereoscope. By G. F. Sams. London: The Stereoscopic Company.
This is a highly ingenious and useful application of the principle of binocular vision to an educational purpose. The diagrams of the first twenty-one propositions in the eleventh book of Euclid, treating of planes and solids, are produced on stereoscopic slides, so that when viewed in the stereoscope the geometrical figures are seen in their proper relief and solidity. Many of our readers will remember the interest excited a few years ago by the publication of a stereoscopic slide drawn from Cruikshank’s “Bottle,” by Mr. Sang. The principle on which slides with the proper stereoscopic relief could be produced from one picture was first promulgated, we believe, by Mr. Sutton and Mr. Sams acknowledges his obligation to that gentleman for the method by which these diagrams are produced. The slides are neatly engraved, and the stereoscopic effect very perfect. They are interesting as illustrations of the principle of binocular vision, and cannot fail to be welcome aid to the mathematical student.
1862: P News, Feb. 7, vol. VI, #179, p. 72:
Talk In The Studio [selection]
THE PRINCE OF WALES AND PHOTOGRAPHY.—We have much pleasure in announcing the first public act which illustrates that the heir to England’s throne takes as deep an interest in photography as his late royal father. In the Eastern tour, which he is about to take in as private a manner as possible, accompanied by a very limited suite, eight gentlemen only accompanying, Mr. Francis Bedford, photographer, forms one of that eight. A complete equipment for photographic operations will be taken so as to secure, under the best possible conditions, photographic mementoes of a journey through scenes so fraught with historic and sacred associations. Mr. Bedford has, we believe, received permission to publish the series of photographs, when, after their completion, the requirements of Her Majesty are supplied. The 13th instant is fixed for the Prince leaving England.
THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.—The Annual Soirée of the Photographic Society will be held in the Great Hall at King’s College, on the 25th of April next. It has been suggested that it would have been desirable to hold it a month later, to admit of the opportunity of a re-union of Continental and English photographers, as many foreign artists will doubtless be present at the Exhibition. The evening appointed is, however, the only occasion upon which the hall is at liberty. It is not impossible that many foreigners who may be interested in being present will be in England a few days before the opening of the International Exhibition.
EGYPT IN THE STEREOSCOPE.—Mr. Bonomi has arranged a hundred stereoscopic views in Egypt, taken by Mr. Frith in 1859 and 1860, into a volume, which Messrs. Smith and Elder have published. Our readers know the very high interest and all but perfect beauty of Mr. Frith’s Egyptian views, a great number of which are already familiar in the stereoscopic form to lovers of Oriental scenery and ancient art. Mr. Bonomi has supplied the letter-press, and Mr. Samuel Sharpe added a few notes.—Athenæum.
1862: P News, Feb. 14, vol. VI, #180, p. 78-79:
Critical Notices [selection]
THE JAPANESE: THEIR MANNERS AND CUSTOMS; with an account of the general characterics [sic] of the Country, its manufactures and natural productions. By Thomas Clark Westfield. London; Photographic News Office, Paternoster Row.
The substance of this work was originally delivered as a lecture at the Marylebone Scientific and Literary Institution. It contains a careful resumé of the best information which various explorers have contributed respecting a country and a people, regarding whom so little has been, until recently, known, notwithstanding the great interest attaching to them. The literary portion of the book is characterized by clearness and modesty. The subject has been carefully studied, and is stated with lucidity and brevity. Its espe[cial] claim to the attention of photographers is, that besides being written by a photographer, it is illustrated by a series of very choice photographs, consisting of stereoscopic views of the country and people. These have been selected with considerable judgment from the series of Japanese slides published by Negretti and Zambra. As photographs, they are very good: much better than we have frequently seen produced in a tropical climate, being soft, delicate, and full of detail as well as brilliant. The subjects cannot fail to be very interesting, including, as they do, a variety of characteristic scenery and native portraits. A group of “Japanese Ladies,” in winter costume, especially please us; one of the faces possesses a placid sweetness, which, despite the Tartar type of features, the costume, &c., we should call beautiful.
The work is very handsomely got up in small quarto: it is well printed and handsomely bound; and the photographs are on tinted mounts with ample margin. Altogether, the volume will adorn worthily the drawing-room table.
STEREOSCOPIC VIEWS OF PARIS. London Stereoscopic Company, Cheapside.
The London Stereoscopic Company have just issued a further series of Mr. England’s admirable stereographs of Paris, instantaneous and otherwise. Of the instantaneous street scenes, it is only necessary to say that they surpass, if possible, in definition and detail, his former pictures. Some of the subjects are somewhat crucial tests of instantaneity; here, for instance, in No. 91 is a regiment of infantry, five abreast, with fixed bayonets, marching towards the camera; every detail in every part is rendered without the slightest confusion. Here also in No. 101, “Halles Centrales,” is a busy market-scene, containing a surging crowd of many hundreds of bustling moving people, all perfectly detailed. Many of the subjects are very perfect as pictures, altogether apart from their interest as instantaneous views. Of these we may mention No. 106, a view in the Rue Royal, with natural clouds, which is a most charming composition, and a fine photograph. In this series, Mr. England has produced some very fine interiors. In speaking of them we accord them very high praise when we state that we think some of them are equal to Wilson’s interiors. Several views of the interior of the church of St. Etienne du Mont, which we believe presents some considerable difficulties as regards the question of lighting, are exceedingly fine. The magnificently carved pulpit, which, though nearly black and dimly lighted, is here secured with the most perfect definition, detail, and gradation. There are also some fine pictures of scenes in the Bois de Bologne, which are very perfectly executed.
1862: P News, March 21, vol. VI, #185, p. 139:
Critical Notices: [selection]
INSTANTANEOUS STEREOSCOPIC VIEWS, taken on Dr. Hill Norris’s Dry Plates, by H. Sampson, Southport.
However much faith we may have in a process, we like to see tangible results. Descriptions may be very accurate, but they are always the results of other peoples’ impressions. In relation to instantaneous pictures, this is especially true: when no further guide can be obtained than is supplied by a narrator’s impressions, an instantaneous exposure may mean anything from a tenth of a second to one or more seconds, whilst the result which may be called a picture, is possibly nothing beyond a silhouette without detail. With results before us, there need be no mistake on the latter point, whilst as regards the former, some data is generally supplied by the amount of definition or blurring in moving figures.
We have before us something like a couple of dozen stereoscopic slides of marine views, with shipping and steamers at full speed, and street scenes, with moving figures. As the results of dry plates, they are truly marvelous, and we may state at the outset, without any derogation from their excellence, that whilst they are not equal to the best of Wilson’s, England’s, or Blanchard’s pictures by the west process, the majority of them equal and surpass much that is called instantaneous photography. The subjects chosen are very daring, and involve great contrasts: here a stormy sea, with shipping in the distance, with a boat landing through the surf in the immediate foreground. Here a view of the new iron pier at Southport, with a gay assemblage of nor less than a hundred persons; and another “On the Shore” at Southport, with a motley crew of many scores of persons. It is somewhat singular that these views are best in which we should most readily have expected failure. The pier just referred to is one of the best exposed and best defined pictures in the series; clouds, water, figures, foreground, all being good. The scene on the shore is also very good, as are various street scenes in Liverpool. Most of the pictures have natural clouds. In some of the marine views there is under-exposure, and in some a want of instantaneity; but there is enough in all to prove that more may be done. We have no particulars as to the lens or aperture; but we are disposed to believe that something better might be effected. In the printing also, Mr. Sampson has scarcely done himself justice; the tones being too black and heavy for the subjects, a warmer tone would have relieved the appearance of under-exposure, which some of the pictures possess. On the whole, we are highly gratified by the series, as giving high promise of what may be done with instantaneous dry plates. We congratulate Dr. Hill Norris on the result, for whilst we have ourselves produced instantaneous pictures on his plates, and heard of others doing so, this is the first commercial series which we have seen issued.
1862: P News, March 21, vol. VI, #185, p. 144:
Talk In The Studio [selection]
MR. BEDFORD AT THE PYRAMIDS.—We notice that Mr. Bedford is attempting instantaneous effects in his eastern tour with the Prince of Wales. The Times correspondent describing the visit of the royal party to the Pyramids states that the cavalcade was successfully photographed by Mr. Bedford before its return to Cairo.
STEALING NITRATE OF SILVER &C.—A plate cleaner named Williams employed by the London Stereoscopic Company was recently charged before the Lord Mayor with robbing his empolyers [sic]. The prosecutor, Mr. George S. Nottage, managing partner of the Company said: the prisoner had been in their service since September last. A few days ago, from information they received, they were led to believe he had been robbing them. He was called from his work and questioned on the subject, when he confessed to have stolen 13 ounces of nitrate of silver, or, he added, it might be more, belonging to them. The value of it was about 2[£], 12s., at the ordinary retail price of 4s. an ounce. He also admitted he had robbed them of four valuable lenses, pledging them afterwards at so many different places, and giving at each a false name and address. They were worth from 12s. to 21s. apeice [sic], but he had pawned them for a few shillings scarcely a tithe of their value. He likewise confessed to several minor thefts of chemicals used in photography. Mr. Nottage said, in reply to the Lord Mayor, their business was of a character requiring from them a certain amount of confidence in the persons about them who were always intrusted with considerable quantities of valuable chemicals. They had received a character for honesty and good conduct with the prisoner from a photographer at Woolwich, in whose service be [sic] had been, and who had since admitted he gave it with the knowledge that the prisoner had robbed him on one occasion.
1862: P News, March 21, vol. VI, #185, p. 144:
To Correspondents: [selection]
M.A.O., (Helensburgh.)—The Stereoscopic Exchange Club was merged some months ago into the Photographic Exchange Club, with new rules and regulations. The rules are printed in the Photographic News for Oct. 18, 1861 (p. 492, vol. V.), and in the Photographic News Almanac for this year. Your specimens would doubtless be accepted by the Committee; the figures are very good indeed. Ladies are admitted with pleasure to the privileges of the Exchange…. [technical comments follow.]
ENQUIRER.—The statement was an error, arising out of some kind of misunderstanding. Mr. Wilson has not given up the use of the triple lens for landscapes, as he states that he cannot get any single view lens to include nearly so much subject as the triple. His instantaneous and other views, including wide angle, are 7 in. by 4 ½ in., and are taken in the same camera he uses for stereoscopic work.
1862: P News, April 17, vol. VI, #189, p. 192:
Talk In The Studio [selection]
PHOTOGRAPHY AND ASTRONOMY.—Mr. Warren De la Rue delivered the Bakerian lecture, at the Royal Institution, on Thursday evening last, in which he described his photographic operations in Spain, in connection with the great eclipse. After the lecture the Astronomer Royal made some interesting remarks on the immense value attaching to photography as a recorder of such phenomena, its superiority consisting in the absolute certainty of its testimony, whilst that of any individual was apt, under such circumstances, to be warped, coloured, or disordered by the intense excitement of the moment, arising even out of honest interest in the subject. Photography was subject to no such sources of error, and hence the great value of its record.
OBSCENE PHOTOGRAPHS, &C., IN BOOK PACKETS.—A notice has been issued by the Post Office authorities, stating that on the 1st of May next, and thenceforward, all photographs, drawings, prints, or other things, which may be obviously and unquestionably of an obscene character, will be excluded from the privileges of the book post, and must not be sent in open covers to any place in the United Kingdom, or to the Colonies, or to any foreign part. It is added that it will be the duty of postmasters to send forward in envelopes, as unpaid letters, any packet which may seem to them clearly to fall within the meaning of this prohibition.
1862: P News, April 17, vol. VI, #189, p. 192:
To Correspondents [selection]
SOUTH LONDON PHOTOGRAPHIC EXHIBITION.—Notice to Exhibitors.—We are desired to announce that a modification has been made in Rule 7. Exhibitors, instead of sending untouched duplicates in the same frame as coloured pictures, are requested to send them in separate frames.
FRANCIS B. [Francis Bedford??].—You will find information on the Solar Camera on pp. 247 and 253 (Nos. 142 and 143), of our fifth volume; and on p. 110 (No. 96), of our fourth volume.
1862: P News, May 9, vol. VI, #192, p. 228:
Talk In The Studio.
THE STEREOSCOPIC COMPANY IN THE EXHIBITION.—We understand that the Stereoscopic Company have been very successful so far in the International Exhibition, several fine large pictures as well as stereographs having been secured of different incidents in the opening ceremony. The following day Prince Frederick William, seated on the throne, and his suite, were successfully taken. The Daily Telegraph, in its account of the opening day, had some amusing remarks on the arrangements and operations of the company, which we quote;-- “Close to the dais, and near that unlucky plaster cast of Lady Godiva, stood a tall, strange-looking parallelopipedon, covered with crimson baize, and having in its eastern face two square apertures. One of those apertures was partially veiled by a yellow curtain; within the frame of the other a human hand was seen from time to time stealthily moving. This curious machine was at first surmised to be either a Fantoccini show, or the cognate temple dedicated to the performances of Mr. Punch; but on closer inspection certain lateral placards became visible, setting forth that the London Stereoscopic Company had obtained from the Royal Commissioners—and at a prodigious outlay too—the exclusive privilege of taking views within the Exhibition building. The tall parallelopipedon was, in fact, the monster camera of the London Stereoscopic Company, and the hand belonged to the ingenious operator, making arrangements for taking those photographs of the ceremony, of which the very earliest proofs were forwarded, per Queen’s messenger, to Her Majesty. We may add that the London stereoscopic Company, finding themselves somewhat pressed for the proper materiel for taking the required pictures, had placed at their disposal the whole of the magnificent collection of photographic lenses exhibited by the world-famous optician, Voigtländer, of Vienna. This ready act of international courtesy emanated from Messrs. Voigtländer’s agent, Mr. Callaghan, of New Bond-street.” That the small temporary erections built for operating chambers, which our contemporary, oblivious of his geometrical studies, styles “parallelopipedons,” should be “monster cameras” is funny enough; but that in order to secure stereoscopic and 10 by 8 pictures from half-a-dozen points of view, the “magnificent collection of photographic lenses” in question should be required by the firm who has undertaken this contract is a superlative joke. The same amusing writer says:-- “We don’t know whether any discreet employé [sic] of the London Stereoscopic Company was dispatched to the dais, with instructions to whisper a police inspector to whisper an aide-de-camp, who in his turn was to murmur a word of entreaty and advice in the ears of the illustrious party on the throne and in the fauteuils; but it is certain that during the convenient period afforded by the performance of the special music, the distinguished group kept themselves in admirable positions, and under every condition of immobility favourable to having their portraits photographed. The Duke, it is true, had once crossed his legs in a somewhat unpicturesque manner; but he suddenly remembered that unseen monitor within the crimson parallelopipedon, and assumed a more artistic pose. Prince Frederick William of Prussia scarcely moved a muscle for ten minutes together. The Archbishop of Canterbury, in his flowing sable canonicals, looked tranquilly venerable. Lord Westbury and Mr. Denison looked as placid, statuesque, and dignified as it seems the privilege of all Lord Chancellors and Speakers of the House of Commons to look. Prince Oscar of Sweden, a remarkably handsome man, of almost gigantic stature, and so exceedingly swarthy as to disappoint some ladies who imagined that all Scandinavians must be fair, till they were told that the Royal Swede was the descendant of the southern Frenchman Bernadotte—the dark Prince never stirred, and seemed as if it would take a blow from Thor’s hammer to move him. The only exception to the rule was Lord Palmerston, who was gossiping now with the Bishop of London and now with the Chancellor, and seemed so heartily to appreciate Auber’s music as at one time to be disposed to dance to it. Let us not forget among the immobiles the Earl of Derby, who looked every inch the “fourteenth Earl,” and who, we fancy, regarded the members of the Japanese Embassy, who sat directly facing him, with an expression of haughty disdain, as though he deemed them creatures of an inferior race; and Lord Sydney, who looked so very respectable and so very quiet, that we shall be disappointed if we do not see his benignant countenance, and his white staff as Chamberlain, developed to the minutest degree in the forthcoming photographs.”
1862: P News, May 23, vol. VI, #194, p. 243:
South London Photographic Exhibition.
From a recent inspection of the pictures now in course of hanging at the Crystal Palace, contributed to the Exhibition of the South London Photographic Society, we have every reason to believe that the display will be eminently satisfactory. Many excellent photographers, whose works we have always examined with interest at other exhibitions, and who are entirely unrepresented at the International Exhibition, have some very superior pictures here. Amongst these we may mention the name of Mr. Annan, of Glasgow, whose fine large, and artistic landscapes, with natural skies, both by the wet and dry processes, will command universal admiration. Mr. Earl, also, contributes a series of the largest landscapes we have seen on one sheet of paper, which are very excellent. Messrs. Jackson Brothers, of Jumbo, near Manchester, contribute a series of artistic gems, in the shape of landscapes with figures. Without entering in detail here, however, we may simply repeat that we find, with pleasure, that this exhibition has afforded opportunity for the display of many very excellent photographs, both in landscape and portraiture, which in the South Kensington Gallery have found no place.
As regards position and publicity, the advantages of the South London exhibitors are out of all proportion superior to those in the garret of the International Building. At the Crystal Palace, the pictures are in an accessible gallery in the most attractive part of the building, within sight and tempting reach of all the hundreds of thousands of visitors who will be present during the summer. The gallery is well ventilated and comfortable, an awning having been erected in this part to shut out the heat of the sun’s vertical rays. The screens are conveniently arranged and neatly decorated, the main colour being maroon flatting, bordered with black and Etruscan yellow. The ample space placed at the disposal of the society permits them to restrict the position of all pictures to within a foot or two of the eye line, so that nothing will need to be “skied,” nor will the visitor break his back by stooping to examine meritorious pictures. The whole of the very large collection of photographs contributed, will, we understand, be hung so that none shall be at a height greater than six or seven feet, or lower than within two feet or eighteen inches of the ground, whilst an effect of the utmost value to individual pictures, as well as to the ensemble, will be gained by leaving a space of two or three inches between all the frames. Some attempt at classification will also be made. Portraiture will occupy one department, landscapes another, and reproductions a third; and these, again, will be divided into sections, consisting of different processes. If the contemplated arrangement can be well carried out in this respect, there can be no doubt of the great value it will possess.
A difficulty will be found here, we fear, arising out of the tardy arrival of some of the promised contributions, the space for which cannot possibly be calculated in their absence. The work of hanging is, however, now going rapidly forward, and contributions arriving late must, we apprehend, be placed as best they may, without strict regard to arrangement.
It was originally contemplated, we believe, to open in the middle of May, but owing to the causes to which we have referred this was found impracticable. It is now definitely determined, we understand, to invite members, exhibitors, &c., to the private view on Saturday, the 31st, when we anticipate the pleasure of examining a very highly satisfactory exposition of photographs.
1862: P News, May 23, vol. VI, #194, p. 244-245:
Celestial Photography.
Mr. Warren De La Rue has presented to the Académie des Sciences, a collection of astronomical photographs and engravings, upon which M. Faye reports that he has carefully examined them, and will endeavour to make their importance in a scientific point of view, fully appreciated. He says—The total eclipse of the year 1860, is too familiar to you to render it necessary for me to detail the great enterprises it occasioned. On the other side of the channel, Mr. De la Rue was charged with the photographic department, and here we have the results of this portion of the English expedition into Spain, placed before our eyes. The original proofs have been enlarged by well known methods, in order that the details of the mysterious phenomena may be better appreciated. Among these photographs, some faithfully represent the first impressions with all their defects, occasioned by accidental jarring: others have been retouched to remove these defects of which the origin is known: all are deserving of the lively interest you have shown in them. It is in fact a real triumph of modern science to be able in this manner to transmit to the remotest posterity, the brilliant but transient phenomena of a total eclipse. It would be useless to repeat in this place the results that may be derived from these remarkable designs for the solution of the problem which astronomers have pursued since the eclipse of 1842; the Académie has received ample details upon this subject, from Padre Secchi, who, in the south of Spain, has also succeeded in obtaining photographs of this same eclipse. I shall limit myself to remarking that the fact of the impression of the protuberances does not prove that these appearances are real objects floating in the supposed atmosphere of the sun. Simple flashes of light would show just as well upon the plates, on the sole condition of having the same intensity. To speak decidedly on this particular, we should find a much more significant argument in the correspondence established by Padre Secchi between the proofs obtained by Mr. De la Rue and his own, obtained at intervals of a few minutes at stations separated by the entire width of the Spanish territory.
Whatever it may be, the success of my honourable colleague of the Royal Astronomical Society of London, is a great step in a new and fertile field of observation. It will be desirable that the Académie, in thanking Mr. De la Rue for his present, should enquire of him the details of the method he has pursued, and particularly respecting the improvements which his recent experience in Spain may have suggested to him for future operations.
But while rendering full justice to these beautiful works, it must not be supposed that we remain strangers, or are indifferent to the progress which is based upon a French discovery. I will remind you, therefore, that in the year 1858, there were presented to the Académie at its sitting on Monday the 15th of March, some beautiful large proofs of the principal phases of this phenomenon, proofs which were susceptible of exact measurements and obtained direct without the intermediate operation of enlarging.* (*It must not be forgotten that Mr. De la Rue’s photographs relate to the phenomena of totality, and that the photographic impression of this phase presents much greater difficulties than that of a partial eclipse.) Upon the first glance at these proofs we may distinguish the smallest spots, and even the very curious and complicated undulations of the marginal faculæ; and on this same occasion you were reminded how useful to science it would be to collect, on the same scale, day by day, and with the same fidelity, a continuous history of the solar disc.
Let us for a moment suppose the Acamémie to be in possession of such designs, continued perseveringly for many years; what problems connected with the constitution of the sun should we not be permitted to solve? Who at the present time can tell, by an attentive but excessively special study of the spots in the sun, that the appearance of these spots is a periodical phenomenon. It is even suspected that the appearance of these spots is connected with the variations of terrestrial magnetism. In taking the remarks of one of our members on the motions peculiar to these spots as a starting point, a learned German has, by the aid of long-continued observations determined the direction and velocity of the currents of the photosphere.
Again, the continuous study of the solar disc presents to us one of the best means of verifying the hypothesis of a group of asteroids in the region of Mercury, which that enigmatical planet which M. Lescarbault’s observations led us for a time to hope would soon be in our possession. Now the proper means of attacking the questions I now raise, and all those reserved for the future, is photography. With photography we do not incur the risk of losing our time in the pursuit of a false idea, for we register all the phenomena at once, those which interest the science of the present day, and those which the science of the future may hereafter claim for observation. Well executed photographs taken on a large scale, and susceptible of exact measurement, are complete and unimpeachable witnesses, which may be as profitably consulted a century hence as now. We cannot, therefore, receive with too much favour the recent progress accomplished by Mr. De la rue in this direction, in which he has for some time past acquired a pre-eminent and indisputable authority; but, at the same time, that this direction be not neglected by us, we must not cease to point it out to persons occupied with photography scientifically, and to show ourselves disposed to welcome the results of their efforts.
I now pass to designs of another kind, which Mr. De la Rue has also presented to us. These designs are based upon minute micrometric measure,, executed with the aid of a Newtonian telescope of 13 inches aperture. We first remark several representations of the great comets of 1858 and 1861. These cometary designs are very beautiful. Yet we find the contours too marked, too hard, the details too forcible. I fear that these defects will prevent astronomers from consulting them, if not with benefit, at least with entire confidence. In spite of their merit and perfect execution by the engraver, these plates please me less than those of the comet of Donati by Mr. bond, and those of Padre Secchi of the last great comet.
We have next the designs of the planets Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. Those of Mars are admirable. I judge of them by memory, for it is a long time since I observed this planet; and I had the good fortune to study it at the Paris Observatory with M. Lerebour’s great lens, at a time when this lens had undergone no alteration, and no design has ever recalled my impressions of that period in so striking a manner as these of Mr. De la Rue.
But what removes these designs from the category of ordinary representations of the celestial bodies, and which will especially excite the attention of the Académie is the putting in practice of an idea at the same time original and profound.
The distance of these planets is such, that their images always appear, even in the largest telescopes like flat figures, without relief, as on maps. It would be physically impossible to apply the method of the stereoscope in such cases; for no two places on the surface of the earth would be sufficiently distant to give the necessary visual angle. Mr. De la Rue has wishes, nevertheless, to make the planets be seen stereoscopically, and he has succeeded. Instead of varying the point of sight, which is impossible, he has varied the moment of observation by some hours, or by some years, according to circumstances. Two images of Mars, obtained at an interval of two hours, correspond for this planet, to an angular rotation of thirty degrees. It is as if the artist had turned so much around the planet to procure a pair of images of it. Placed in the stereoscope, these beautiful engravings must produce a grand effect. With Saturn, of which all the superficial changes assume a figure of revolution about the axis of rotation, the same method leads to no result; but two images of Saturn, taken at an interval of three years and a half, give, in respect to the ring of that planet, the same stereoscopic effect, and exhibit the motion of translation around the sun. I venture to beg of the Académie to have constructed a stereoscope of suitable dimensions, so that we may all enjoy the pleasure of this singular planetary relief, which so naturally represents an unnatural effect, but one not beyond our comprehension. Already a learned Russian has taken advantage of analogous images of the moon, to study certain very delicate points in the confirmation of our satellite.
In conclusion, the photographic proofs and engravings of Mr. Warren De la Rue possess great scientific value; they merit out approbation.
I have the honour to propose to the Académie that it communicates our testimony of their value and importance to the learned secretary of the Royal Astronomical Society of London.
1862: P News, May 23, vol. VI, #194, p. 246-247:
Photography in the Tropics.
By Wm. Fitzgibbon* (*From the American Journal of Photography.)
For some months past I have been promising myself to write you, but the multiplicity of my engagements, and my business occupations, added to no small share of laziness, have prevented me; at last, however, I have made an effort, and I give you its result.
First, I enclose you a few stereoscopic views, and shall occasionally send others, provided you like them. By the first friend I find going home I shall forward some negatives for your Photographic Society; of course I do not know whether you are forming a collection of views from different parts of the world, but if not, I would suggest it; and I am pretty sure if other brethren of the photographic art feel as I do, they will not refuse a little labour to add their mite to the collection.
I have read so much about processes, toning and fixing, &c., by this method and by that, during the last five years, that I have become thoroughly bewildered; you will probably laugh when I tell you that I have scarcely ever seen a toning or fixing process published that I have not tried; some would work, others failed, as to the results stated, in my hands, and others were worthless; as I never made but a few ounces of each, the loss could not be great, and everything was worth a trial. Instead of throwing them away, I put them all together in a glass jar, holding about three gallons, and to these I added occasionally an old hypo bath. Imagine to yourself what a toning and fixing bath it is, a mixture of nearly everything used by anyone; and, as to proportions, well, the less said about that the better. A few weeks age it came into my head to try the mess, and the stereoscopic views numbers one, two, and three are the result. The albumen paper I prepared myself, fifteen grains of chloride of sodium, two ounces, to eighty ounces of water; in this the print changes rapidly, first bronzing, and finally to a dirty red or brick colour; I now wash in several waters until the saline taste is removed, and then pass to the mixture above, and leave it until I get the tone I like, say from twenty to forty minutes, afterwards work as usual. Now, whether these prints will fade or not is a question; so far I have been very fortunate, and it rarely happens that any of my proofs fade. I may here remark that some two years and a-half ago, I toned some albumen prints as follows, and out of over one hundred not one has faded, and I work it now in preference to any other, except the mixture. Nos. 4, 5, and 6 are done so, and are two years old.
On taking from the printing-frame, wash in chloride of sodium, as above, then in water, and tone it—
Chloride of gold ……………. 8 grains
Distilled water……………….16 ounces
Shake well, and add—
Acetate of soda……………… 1 drachm.
This quantity will tone the proportion of thirty-two prints whole-size.
After washing thoroughly, fix in hypo bath, one ounce to five ounce of water. All my work is done in yellow light, and an abundance of it. In the toning bath the proof needs close watching for the first few proofs, afterwards it works slower.
I believe that the principal cause of fading (of course there are several others, such as bad paper, bad toning, and bad fixing, and want of proper care in handling the proofs), is our bad system of washing. The plan of hanging a print up to dry I have never approved of, because I do not believe that any amount of soaking or washing will remove all the effect of the toning and fixing ingredients from the paper; they must be forced out. In a number of your Journal of 1860 you allude to a good plan, that of passing the proofs through a patent clothes-wringer; I have tried it, but the pressure is not enough, as I understand it. I therefore set to work and got a machine that answers a double purpose, and I firmly believe will be found of great utility, not only in removing the water from the proofs, but afterwards in mounting them on pasteboard, and for which a lithographic press is recommended.
I enclose you a sketch (made for me by Mr. Thompson, an American chemist residing here, and who estimates the expense of getting them up, in New York, at from sixteen to twenty-five dollars) and description, to which I refer you; I have now a bungling wooden one, but wish for a proper one, if it can be made at about the price above stated. Please give me your opinion about its utility.
I have lately noticed that an effort is being made to introduce some new articles into collodion, with a view of obtaining sufficient intensity without resorting to redeveloping agents. With this object before me I now send you a sample of cotton known here as “Ixcaco,” which, I think, would be worth the while of making gun-cotton of it, and testing it. The colour is very suitable, and I have an impression it may help. My own experience is, that any collodion of a deep yellowish colour will produce negative pictures of greater intensity than a clear one, provided the colour is not caused by the liberation of iodine from the sensitizing agents used. The cotton in question will produce the effect. It will require picking out and cleaning, as I send it in its rough state. Try it, and if it suits let me know, and I will send you a quantity; I cannot get the right quality of acids here for a fair test, so that some trials I made were failures, the cotton not dissolving.
A root grows here, and is known as camotillo, that produces the effect of turmeric, described in the Xantho-Colloldion; I have tried it with good success; but what I have found answer equally well is the following developer:--
Protosulphate of iron………………. 2 ounces
Distilled water …………………….. 20 ounces
Acetic acid ………………………… 2 ounces
Sulphuric acid ……………………... ½ drachm
Refined loaf sugar …………………. 10 grains
Alcohol …………………………….. 1 ½ ounces
I have obtained negatives with this developer as intense as needs be, though not at all times, for instance, when the exposure has not been right, [.] For positives I use a modification of the developer: half the quantity of acetic acid, and substitute nitric for sulphuric; the result is a clear, bold white and black picture, with well-defined half-tones, and but very slightly metallic. My object in adding the sugar to the developer is, that I find it has a tendency to rot the collodion when added to it; this effect is not observable when used in the developer, yet a like intensity is produced. These facts I learned as far back as 1854, when experimenting with different articles as developers.
You will probably recollect sending me, some time since, a few articles, among which was some iodide of cadmium: on its reaching me, one ounce of it, from some cause or other, was nearly black. I made no use of it, until a few days ago, on running short of the article, I opened the bottle, and found it in a black wet mass. I sensitized a few ounces of collodion with it, and unfortunately threw the balance away; I say unfortunately, because, on trying a picture, on the collodion, settling very bright purple and green colours appeared ( and for which I am unable to account), which still retain all their original brightness; they are not well seen without slightly turning the picture on one side. The editor of one of our newspapers was with me at the time, and has since published a notice of it. I tried a second, and a third, in fact several, and in every instance obtained the same result: in some instances the collodion peeled off on drying, in others it did not. One of these pictures I shall send you for examination, probably you can explain the cause, on seeing it; it has evidently been caused by some peculiar state of the iodide of cadmium used, as nothing of the kind has been produced by the other bottles of iodide.
I trust that you will not find my letter a bore, if you do, throw it away; if not, make such use of it as you think it may deserve. I shall write again, in all probability, about Juen, or July, as by that time I trust I shall be enabled to give you the results of some experiments in which I am now engaged.
I regret to say that, owing to a large number of operators traversing the country, the photographic business is pretty well ruined, as to a fair price or an amount of work. This city, which will hardly support one establishment, has four; and apart from this there are some three of [or] four young men who have learned the business (with a vengeance!), and are now working hard to break it up entirely.
At the present time I am preparing to take advantage of the dry weather for a trip up towards the Mexican frontier, to add to my collection of views and Indian costumes.
A good, simple, dry process would be of great service to me, but as yet I have met with none that gives me the desired results, without being too complicated to work with in a country like this, where an artist has a thousand difficulties to encounter, that are not dreamed of by our friends at home.
Guatemala, March 6th, 1862.
1862: P News, May 23, vol. VI, #194, p. 249:
Photographing from Balloons in Military Reconnoisances. [sic]
Last summer, when Professor Lowe first commenced his ascensions in his balloon, for the purpose of observing the positions of the enemy, the Photographical Society of this city made a communication to the War Department, through their president, Professor Draper, pointing out the great advantage that might be derived from taking photographs of the enemy’s camps from the balloon, and offering their services to aid in carrying the suggestion into effect. The American Journal of Photography suggested that the photographs thus taken might be examined under the microscope, and thus the most minute details might be studied at leisure.
Secretary Cameron, in the multiplicity of his public and private affairs, never found time to reply to the communication, and the matter was dropped.
We see that Professor Lowe has just commenced his ascensions, and we suggest to General M’Clellan, or any other officer who may chance to see these remarks, the propriety of calling upon the Photographical Society for the services which they offered last year. Professor Draper, the president, is a man of European reputation. Professor Joy is vice-president. Many of the leading members are men of position in the world of science, and the high character of the society is sufficient warrant that its suggestions are worthy of consideration. Let our military art accept the wonderful aid tendered to it by the most subtle department of science.—Scientific American.
1862: P News, May 30, vol. VI, #195, p. 255-256:
The International Exhibition.
The British Photographic Gallery.
The photographic visitor to the International Exhibition, will, doubtless, be tempted, as we have been, to flit from one part of the building to another examining, now the fine pictures of Notman, of Canada, then of Angerer, in Vienna, next, those of Ghemar, of Brussels, next those of Albert, of Munich, then, perhaps, those of Hansen, of Copenhagen, or Wothly of Aachen; and next, perhaps, those of Disderi, or Warnod, or Alophe, or Lyte, or Bingham in the French Department. He will, from time to time, visit these and others because they are new to him, and because they are well worth seeing, and above all—no light matter in a building of such extent and such attractions—they are easy of access. Until within the last few days, the British Department has not been in a state approaching completion or permitting criticism. Now, however, it is a little more in order; the awnings are erected, and some ventilation established; the covers are removed from apparatus—we wish we could say as much for the coating of dust on the pictures—and the place is presumed to be nearly complete, it may be more profitable to our readers if we endeavour to go through the contributions in something like consecutive order.
Before proceeding further, however, we must say a word or two more on the shortcomings of the place; not for the purpose of grumbling—we are tired of that—but in the way of warning some of the contributors of a danger which it may be they have not contemplated. Some of the contributors of apparatus have already found to their cost the trying alternations of temperature in the room. French polish has been cracked; collodion bottles have exploded; dark tents and boxes of pine have warped and twisted in all ways; cameras have been stuck together in their sliding bodies by the size with which the lamp-black was mixed to black the inside, melting; and a variety of similar evils have, we may say, been already discovered. Contributors of pictures, however, especially those living at a distance, may not anticipate, nor by personal inspection be able to ascertain, that their pictures are hung against damp walls. In the picture galleries this has already been found to act disastrously on some of the paintings; and steps are being taken, by lining the backs with American cloth, to put a stop to the evil. But no such care need be anticipated in regard to photographs. Already we are startled by the yellow cheesy effect of some specimens, which but a little time ago were pure and white. In water-coloured specimens the effect is still more disastrous. Many beautiful prints, carefully tinted in water colours, represent fair faces as covered with leprous and livid blotches, the effect of some of the pigments changing under the combined action of damp and gases exhaled from the materials of the newly made walls. We hope those contributors who have opportunity will, for their own sakes, look to this so far as may be possible. We may suggest that, in addition to other precautions, or where no other can be taken, a piece of cork, placed at the back corner of each frame, is known by experts in the management of pictures to afford a good protection against damp walls, by preventing immediate contact, and by being a nonconductor.
We have also one word to say about the hanging. Much fault has, we know, been found with this and the general arrangement. It is objected, indeed, that no arrangement of any kind seems to have been made, and that the various contributions of the same contributors are hung about the room at random. To this we may reply that it is an easy matter to find fault with what has been done; but it would not have been found so easy to have done differently. We can speak from personal observation of the industry and effort of the gentlemen to whom the thankless task of superintending this duty was committed. Two of the gentlemen forming the Committee, and the superintendent, were, we know, constant in their attendance and indefatigable in their labours. The third gentlemen of the Committee, whose name, we presume, was added to supply the inevitable aristocratic element, without which such affairs are supposed to be incomplete, is, we believe guiltless of praise or blame in this matter, except so far as either may be due for non-attendance. But in regard to the hanging, we repeat, we do not see how it was possible to do much better. The task was worse than making bricks without straw. Beset on every side with applications, the committee granted allotments for every inch of space on the walls, and then failed to satisfy all applicants. The mass of contributions sent in were to hang somewhere, not one-fourth of them could be hung on the line, or in reasonably accessible positions. As for keeping the contributions of each photographer together, that would simply have been making the matter worse. A, for instance, sends in half-a-dozen or a dozen frames, and because one of them is of sufficient excellence to occupy a central position on the best wall or screen, the remaining eleven indifferent frames are to be hung in the same place to the exclusion of the good frames belonging to B, C, D, and E, respectively. Where space permits nothing is more desirable than careful arrangement and classification, as adding to the convenience and satisfaction of visitors as well as photographers; but where many pictures have to be hung in limited space, the only attempt at justice can consist in giving, as far as possible, the best positions to the most worthy pictures, and where many contributions are sent by one person, in aiming that at least some portion of such contributions shall, if worthy, be hung well, even if the remainder by skied or cornered. But whatever attempts at selection might thus be made, one consideration was imperative; the pictures must be hung in such arrangement as they would best fit, and thus economise space. The result is, there is no denying it, very ugly; very bewildering; but the Committee deserve something better than unreasoning blame for their unrequited labours, and we feel it only due to them to say, that, however unsatisfactory may be some parts, or the whole, of the Department, it arises from causes for which they are in no respect responsible.
A distinct catalogue, and a distinct system of numbering in accordance with this catalogue, has now been adopted. In some instances the process by which the pictures have been produced is appended, but not in all; nor are we furnished in every instance with the name of the subject. With such facilities, however, as we can command we shall proceed in our next to give some consecutive account of the contributions, which the length to which our preliminary remarks have extended, preclude us from commencing this week.
1862: P News, May 30, vol. VI, #195, p. 264:
Talk In The Studio [selection]
MR. VERNON HEATH’S STUDIO.—Mr. Vernon Heath, who, as our readers know, has recently devoted himself entirely to photography, portraiture as well as landscape, issued cards to the press and a select circle for a private view—on Friday and Saturday last—of his specimens, his fine gallery having just been completed. In addition to his fine series of Scottish views taken last autumn—which, in their entirety, have not, we believe, before been exhibited—and other landscapes, a variety of examples of fine portraiture were shown, amongst which the features of especial interest were various portraits of His Royal Highness the late Prince Consort, the last portraits for which he sat. Two or three specimens of the same portraits enlarged were exhibited, the delicacy and softness of which were much admired.
CARD PICTURES IN AMERICA.—Mr. Coleman Sellers, writing to our Liverpool contemporary, says:--“The card pictures have become so important a branch of the photographic art, that we find several of our leading papers publishing two-column articles on the subject. The Philadelphia Press had a very interesting article on the subject, showing the commercial value of these pictures; for, as an article of manufacture and trade, I dare say we shall soon see General M’Clellan, President Lincoln, and so forth, quoted in the price-current lists, as follows:--‘Card pictures rather uppish: some slight advance on former rates. Note the sale of 2,000 portraits of Mrs. Lincoln in ball dress, to one party at two dollars per dozen. Considerable inquiry for proofs from the suppressed plates, but owners refuse to sell.’ I cannot but notice that the name, “cartes de visite,.” Is being rather dropped, and the plain English card-picture used instead.; Our language is quite capable of expressing all our wants, and there is little need of our befogging ourselves with the belief that card-pictures are not visiting cards, but are cartes de visite.
PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORDS OF A STORM.—Mr. E. J. Lowe recently communicated to the Times an account of a severe storm, near Newark, of which a photographic record was taken. He says:--“About 3.30 p.m. mutterings of thunder; from 4 to 4.30, heat oppressive; about 4.45 till 5, exceedingly large and curious hail-stones fell, and the air became chilly. About 5.3[0], looking out of a window facing the east, our attention was attracted by seeing a small pony, closely followed by sheep and cattle, rushing in terror and at great speed from the S.S.E., opposite the house. The pony stopped and looked back, and then started off at still greater speed, as if pursued. On looking in the direction from which the cattle came, we saw the sky quite obscured by a strange dark wall of cloud, which was approaching us. Then a large quantity of hay and straw, which seemed to fill the air, followed by clouds of the blossom of the horse-chestnut and small twigs; then at once, with a roar that is indescribable, came a furious blast, which seemed as if it would sweep the land of all that stood on it. Great trees went down before it, torn up by the roots, leveled as if by a sudden blow. Our impression was that the house must be swept away. This continued rather more than a minute, and was accompanied by gleams of lightning so frequent as to seem continuous. When it passed, there was a torrent of rain, with extremely vivid lightning. The Rev. W. H. Fox and myself took a number of photographs in illustration of the ravages of this great hurricane; so that I think we shall have preserved, very satisfactorily, a record of one of the most destructive storms that has ever visited this island.”
1862: P News, June 6, vol. VI, #196, p. 265:
Who Should Receive Medals—Artists or Exhibitors?
“Palman qui meruit ferat.”
As the period approaches when the awards of jurors in the Exhibition will be made; a question of considerable interest arises, which is, however, one of not less difficulty. On examination of the pictures, and reference to the catalog, it will be seen that the contributor and the artist are not always comprised in one and the same person. A correspondent, whose letter will be found in another column, calls attention to the anomaly which may very easily be perpetrated in the award of medals in such cases, by placing the laurels on brows which have not won them, awarding an honour to the publisher, who exhibits, which unquestionably should belong to the artist who has produced.
We think that it would be unhesitatingly admitted, that it is the skill and ability which produce meritorious works which should be recognized in any award of honours. It is the capitalist who generally gets the largest share of pudding: the skilled hand and the conceptive rain might at least have the praise. But we are aware of the difficulties which at once beset this position. In the glorious and vast treasure of industrial art now collected in the Exhibition building, it would be found difficult, we imagine, in the majority of instances, to select any object and say, this is due to the skill of one man. Take the Western Annexe, for example, and examine with renewed wonder and admiration the various machines which seem to do everything but think, and on enquiry it will be found that there is scarcely one which is not the joint product of many brains. It is possible, indeed, that the first master conception may, in many instances, have emanated from one mind, but in so crude a form that without the more practical executive skill of others, it could never have had a material existence. Take again examples where the industrial more nearly approaches the fine arts, such as the exquisite ceramic productions of Minton or Copeland. In some of these it is the form or design, in some the colour or painting, in others the material in which the object is produced, and in many the combination of all these which win admiration, and deserve the recognition of the public as well as the jurors. To single out the especial artist would be impossible. The exquisite design of a vase may be due to one, the skilful selection and combination of the materials to another, the manipulation to a third, the painting to a fourth, the enammelling [sic] and burning to a fifth, and so on. There can be but one course for the jurors in such cases. It is the skill, the judgment, and the enterprise which directs capital into such channels which the jury must recognize. This enterprise it is, as much as the labour of skilled workmen, which, in a commercial country, raises the standard of its manufactures, and gives its products pre-eminence in the world; and this it is which will always command pre-eminence and win renown.
We submit that the case is different, however, as regards photography. There is no difficulty in deciding to whom the palm belongs. Whatever advantages he may have derived from the purest of chemicals and the best of apparatus, these matters will receive recognition in their proper quarter. Whatever wide-spread publicity his productions may have received through the efforts of an enterprising publisher or employer, there no is [sic; is no] room for doubt at any time that the results of the skilful photographer are due to himself alone, and that he alone should receive recognition in an award to merit. Francis Bedford is at this moment in the employment of the Prince of Wales: his pictures are announced for publication by Messrs. Day and Son, but no one will for a moment dream of crediting either his Royal Highness, or the publishing house we have named, with the merit of Mr. Bedford’s pictures. As a general rule, moreover, there is no obscurity or doubt existing about these matters. Skilled photographers are well-known and recognised; their productions being more familiar evidence than their sign-manual.
There is, or may be however, another difficulty. We have said may be with a reason; we wish in our brief remarks on this subject to discuss it purely as an abstract question, without regard to individual cases; and since the matter has come under our attention we have avoided examination as to whom it might concern. There may be, however, we have said, another difficulty. The jurors, we apprehend, will be presumed to have no official knowledge of either artists or exhibitor, they will not, we fear, have any choice or discretion as to whom they shall recognize in making the award. Injustice in such cases is, we regret to say, not a new or uncommon thing. We remember a case in which an amateur, of high repute, received and accepted an award in a French Exhibition for an astronomical photography, which had been produced and given to him by a friend who was not less distinguished as a photographer. IN such a case the jurors would never dream that the exhibitor was not the photographer also. In the International Exhibition we fear that even where they may know it, they cannot act upon the knowledge.
The difficulties may in some cases be still more complicated. In one of the cases quoted by our correspondent, they are so. Mr. Blanchard’s instantaneous photographs are published by Elliott, but they are exhibited by the photographic firm of which Mr. Blanchard was a partner, and in the first edition of the Catalogue appeared as the contributions of “Smyth and Blanchard.” Since then Mr. Blanchard has, we understand, seeded from the firm; and in the new and corrected edition of the Catalogue, we find Mr. Blanchard’s pictures cataloged with the name of “S. Smyth” from which we conclude that the negatives remain the property of his late partner, whose name in case of an award would, we presume from the Catalogue, be the only one before the jurors.
In the Fine Arts Department, where the contributor and the artist are so frequently distinct persons, this difficulty is avoided by discarding medals altogether. In many of the industrial departments we hear loud complaints of the unsatisfactory management in the juridical examinations; in the photographic department we hope and believe things are better managed, and notwithstanding that three of the jurors are exhibitors also—Dr. Tindall havingt resigned, and his place being filled, we understand, by Mons. E. Delesert, who is an exhibitor in the French Department—we hope for a satisfactory result. In any case, we commend to the attention of the jury the anomaly which may so easily creep into their adjudication, and suggest the importance of exercising, if possible, a discretion which may avoid it.
1862: P News, June 6, vol. VI, #196, p. 267-269:
The International Exhibition.
British Photographic Department.
Within the last few days a corrected and more complete catalogue of the photographs exhibited in this department has been issued. An introductory chapter, or preface, glances at the progress of photography since the Exhibition of 1851, and briefly summarises its present position, as illustrated in the present Exhibition. Referring to the position of photography eleven years ago, the writer remarks:--
“In the Great Exhibition of 1851, Photography had not sufficiently advanced to be placed in a separate Class,--Photographs, and the apparatus used in producing them, were included among Philosophical Instruments. It has now a class of itself (XIV). The art was, in 1851, represented by a large number of Daguerreotypes, some Talbotypes, or Sun Pictures, as they were then frequently termed, and by a few specimens of the albumen process on glass. The collodion process, to which is due the enormous development which has taken place since 1851, was not known previously to the opening of the Exhibition in that year. Photographers were anxiously looking for some material which should be free from the defects of the paper on which the Talbotype negatives were taken. Albumen on glass had been tried with some success. Archer turned his attention to the use of a film of collodion, and was experimenting on it previous to the opening of the Exhibition; and Dr. Diamond, in company with him, took a portrait with some collodion given him by that gentleman, as early as September, 1850. A collodion portrait, taken by Mr. Archer, assisted by Messrs. Fry and Horne, early in May, 1851, and what is termed a positive picture,* (*Very few pictures of this character are shown in the present Exhibition, though the process is that by which the cheap portraits, so common now a-days, are taken. Some may be seen in frame No. 43.) was placed in Messrs. Horne and Thornthwait’s case in the Exhibition, with their Daguerreotype and Talbotype apparatus. Towards the end of June in that year, Mr. Rippingham, by permission, placed in this case some prints from negative collodion plates, the collodion for the purpose having been given him by Mr. Archer. The description of the process was published by Archer, in March, 1851, when it appeared in The Chemist. In the Jury report no other notice is taken of these pictures than that ‘Rippingham has exhibited several Talbotypes, being a series of untouched positives from collodion negatives on plate-glass.’ No medal was given—indeed no one could have then foreseen the influence which these experiments were to exercise on the Photographic Art—and the Jury may well be pardoned for passing them over. In a short time, however, the simplicity of the process and the beauty of the results caused its almost universal adoption, though numerous improvements had, in the mean time, been made in the negative paper processes, more especially that known as the wax paper process, invented by Le Gray.”
Commencing with the first number in the catalogue, we find a valuable application of photography, but possessing no pictorial interest, as it is simply an enlarged copy of a map by Mr. G. Downes. It is from several negatives, printed separately and joined: so far as we can see, is sharp all over and free from distortion or curvature of lines. A frame of genre studies, by Rejlander, come next: most of these, we have seen, and noticed before; but we may again call attention to the wonderful truth and pathos of “A Night in London”. The subject is a half-clothed outcast boy, seated in “looped and windowed raggedness” on the step of a doorway, his head stopped to his knees, and buried in the folded arms, which grasp the knees. The face is hid, but the picture is still eloquent with expression, and tells unerringly its sad tale; desolation and wretchedness are more forcibly told by the position and the hidden face than they would have been by the most woe-begone countenance. The management of light and shadow, and tone, all contribute admirably to the effect, and place unmistakeably the subject of the sketch amongst the class to which Victor Hugo is just devoting his great work, “Les Miserables.”
The next picture which attract our attention, less by their beauty than by our interest in the process, are some views exhibited by Cramb Brothers. These are views of Palestine, on dry albumen plates. The subjects have an interest of their own; the pictures are clean and sharp, and in many respects are good as photography, with the exception of being generally somewhat under-exposed.
Dollomore and Bullock exhibit a variety of landscape and architectural photographs, amongst which we may mention a view of Christ Church, Oxford, as an exceedingly fine, harmonious, and atmospheric picture. No. 16 by Mr. J. Sands, is a view of St. Paul’s, from the Thames, of unusually large size, the plate being about 20 by 16. The negative is, we understand, by the collodio-albumen process, and the result is, in our estimation, decidedly successful, especially when the conditions of atmosphere usually surrounding St. Paul’s is remembered.
Dr. Wright exhibits a frame of pictures as illustrations of what may be produced in his field box or tent, of which we shall have subsequently to speak. These pictures are exceedingly good, and indicate that no manipulatory difficulties are experienced in working in the tent referred to.
No. 24 is a frame of photographs executed by Mr. Herbert Watkins, of various sections of the brain of a chimpanzee, dissected by Mr. J. Marshall, F.R.S. These possess an especdial interest, as affording the basis for comparative examination and estimate of the difference between man and this travesty of humanity.
Cundall and Downes, amongst other excellent contributions, send one possessing unusual interest—a copy of the original manuscript of “Gray’s Elegy.” Also, reproductions of some fine pen-and-ink sketches entitled, “Waifs and Strays,” by E. V. B. Ross and Thompson, of Edinburgh, have a good frame of portraits of children, in which the feeling reminds us considerably of Rejlander; from under-exposure in some, however, and heaviness of accessories in others, there is a general somber effect which would have been better absent.
Paul Pretsch contributes largely of his specimens of photographic engraving, both from blocks in relief and intaglio. Some of these are reproductions of drawings, some of engravings, and some are photographed from nature; some of the plates have been retouched by the engraver, and some are untouched. All possess many excellent qualities, but we do not notice any especial progress during the last year or two. There is some ground for regret, that the descriptions attached are not always sufficiently explicit. Some of the prints which are marked as from untouched plates, leave us in doubt as to whether they are exhibited as photographs from nature or from engravings of photographs. We may mention the print of the “Venus Callipyge,” [sic] which, whilst marked untouched, has the appearance of possessing an acquatint ground or grain. It would have been desirable, in relation to the specimens of a process so interesting, that the descriptive particulars should be fuller. The specimen, which strikes us as best of those exhibited by Herr Pretsch, is No. 162, a large sized copy of the “Venus de Milo.” The picture is hung somewhat high, and is, therefore, beyond the reach of minute criticism, but seen from this distance it leaves nothing to be desired.
The various specimens of Col. Sir Henry James are at present perhaps the most interesting and perfect produced by any adaption of photography, to the ordinary methods of printing by means of ink and press. The process has the merit of being perfect in its kind; all that it aims at or makes claim for, it accomplishes. Its object is to reproduce by photographic agency a printing surfaced from anything delineated in lines or dots. The specimens sent in by Col. James show at once how extensive the range of application is, and how perfect the results. Its value in the reproduction of old, scarce, and valuable engravings, is shown by copies of Hogarth’s “Canvassing for Voters;” “Antique Vases,” drawn by Piranesi; and some panels in the Vatican, painted by Raffaelle, and engraved by Volpato, in 1776. Its value in the reproduction of maps on any scale is now familiar to every one; the specimen here exhibited is a plan of Edinburgh Castle and its environs. No process ever before discovered could in any degree rival this for the production of fac-similes of old documents, such as the Domesday Book. What other method of reproduction could yield anything possessing the interest and value which one of the first editions of Shakespeare so rendered would have, and which the two specimen pages of an edition of 1623, here exhibited actually possess. The exact value as reproductions of some of the specimens, is here exhibited by the display, side by side, of the originals, of prints from collodion negatives, an prints by the zincographic process; and increased interest is given to the contributions by the exhibition of different stages of process, such as the transfer, the completed zinc plate, &c. Here also are some specimens of the process which Col. James has named photopapyrography, by which copies of documents, of which not more than two or three are required, rendering the process of transferring to stone or zinc undesirable, can be produced in printing ink, thus securing the most indisputable permanency. The modus operandi of photopapyrography is not described, but any one familiar with photolithographic processes wsill readily understand how the image obtained on paper, in gelatine and bichromate, may be used to obtain copies in printers’ ink.
Mr. Field exhibits some very excellent specimens of photolithography, but they are unfortunately hung so high as to render critical examination impossible. In this case the image, it is stated, is impressed on the stone by photography, and not by means of a transfer as in Col. James’s process. From the preface we learn that Mr. Field’s process is based on the special action of light on a surface of bitumen of Judea covering the stone, which was one of the first photographic processes which received attention from early investigators. Mr. Contencin exhibits some photo-lithographs, regarding which we have no particulars, except that the image is impressed on the stone, and not transferred. Mr. Ramage also contributes some of his very fine copies of engraving by photolithography. His image is also, we understand, produced from the negative direct on the stone.
Mr. Pouncey exhibits some specimens of his carbon printing, which will not enhance its reputation. In fact we see nothing in carbon printing by means of light, in our own gallery, which will at all compare with the specimens in the French department.
Many of the specimens executed in printing ink by the aid of photography, leave, however, little to be desired. This, in an economic point, is one of the most important and interesting applications of the art. Here the images are depicted in carbon, one of the forms of matter least changeable under the influence of moisture, light, or atmosphere, in fine particles, which are enveloped in a resinous coating, manifestly one of the least alterable conditions of this permanent substance. If photography had done nothing more than produce and perfect such processes as the known processes of photolithography and protozincography, [sic] it would have been entitled to higher consideration from Her Majesty’s Commissioners than it has received in this Exhibition.
1862: P News, June 13, vol. VI, #197, p. 277-278:
The South London Photographic Exhibition.
We cannot help coming to the conclusion that the Crystal Palace at Sydenham possesses, for a Photographic Exhibition, many advantages over the building, which is no palace, at South Kensington; and we fancy that those least disposed to admit this some months ago, will now, in view of the absolute fact, be quite prepared to agree with us. We admit the occasional distraction of music and “frivolous amusements;” but the music is not perpetual; and even the agile Blondin cannot risk his neck for more than an hour a day; whilst the minor claims on attention, such as distant music of the organ or pianos, the plashing of water from fountains, the murmur of a happy multitude in the magnificent grounds, &c., add, we think, to the pleasure—rather than cause any distraction—of examining the photographs, These, and the ready access to the department, the ample space afforded, the good array of pictures, and the excellent arrangement, will all contribute, we think, to make the South London Society’s first Exhibition a successful one.
The first feature which strikes us is a very fine display of reproductions exhibited by Mr. Hering. These consist chiefly of what, perhaps, present the fewest photographic difficulties-=-reproductions of engravings. It is somewhat singular, however, how very rarely this kind of work is well done’; if the copies are soft, they are dingy; if brilliant, they are crude, hard masses of black and white, with the most delicate touches of the graver entirely omitted. The specimens here exhibited are admirable examples of good judgment and manipulative skill, combining to give the best results; the softness and delicacy, as well as the vigour of the originals, being well preserved. Another point appears to have received attention here, which is too often neglected: good copies of the engravings have been selected, as the basis of the reproduction; the difference between the photographic reproduction from a proof impression of an engraving, and one from a feeble, worn-out print or lithograph, is even more striking than in the originals, because, in the photograph of the latter, in the attempt to get vigour, it is almost impossible to avoid hardness. The majority of these reproductions are from the works of the best masters, and few things are more calculated to cultivate the art taste of the young photographer than a careful examination of such pictures. Here is Guido’s “Cenci,” for instance; it is but a bust, but look at the winning grace in the turn of the head; or, as an example of dignity, in a standing position , take the figure of Christ in Signol’s “Qui sine peccata,” &c., and mark, also, the value, in completing the composition, of the unobtrusive column in the background. We might multiply examples; but we counsel photographers, who have the opportunity, to make a collection of photographic reproductions from the best ,maters, and study them carefully as one of the best means of art culture which they can adopt.
There are some other interesting and valuable reproductions besides those of Mr. Hering, of which we have just been speaking. Here are copies of the grand etchings of Albert Durer, exhibited by Mr. Jeffrey, who also exhibits a reproduction from Turner’s well-known “Windsor Castle, from Eton;” and a frame containing three views of the same head, right and left profile, and full face; the subject is a bust of William Fairbairn, by Woolmer. Mr. Dodd also exhibits some copies from Durer’s etchings.
The display of portraits is very good. The most noticeable picture in this department is the colossal group by Mr. A. Brothers, of Manchester. The size of the picture is 48 inches by 21 inches; it consists of between forty and fifty figures, all, or nearly all, of which, if we remember rightly, were on separate negatives. The design and general arrangement of grouping must, of course, have been conceived beforehand. The grouping and composition are so skilfully [sic] managed that the art critic of the Athenæum, when noticing the picture, could not conceive that this was due to the photographer, but attributed it to a happy fortuitous arrangement, remarking that:--“with the felicity that sometimes attends chromatic combinations in the kaleidoscope, they are perfectly grouped in simple masses.” As regards the photographic merits of the picture, the negatives have manifestly been for the most part excellent; there is perhaps a slight tint of yellow in the whites of the picture, but when it is remembered that it was produced by not less than forty-five different printings, and that the paper was fifteen days in hand before the printing was completed, the marvel will be that the colour of the whites is so good. It is, of course, touched, but with care and judgment.
Mr. C. T. Newcombe exhibits some very large portraits taken direct, which are very good; but we must confess that we think that for portraiture of this size, enlargements, from small negatives, permit scope for better results. Mr. Newcombe also exhibits a frame of card portraits, in which the feeling and manipulation are alike good.
Messrs. Maull and Polyblank exhibit some whole-plate pictures as well as card portraits, of which the former are much the best; of the latter we cannot say much. They also exhibit some whole-plate pictures with the general characteristics, as regards proportion and accessory, of card portraits; the result is decidedly successful, and we think worth the attention of photographers generally.
A frame of portraits is exhibited by M. J. de Mouxy. One of these is a photograph on ivory: it is very exquisitely coloured in water colours; from the purity of colour exhibited by the ivory, of which, as the portrait is vignetted, a good deal is seen, it may be fairly assumed that the printing—the chief difficulty on ivory—was successful. In the same frame is a vignetted print executed in a style which is worthy of attention: the general background, instead of being, as is customary in vignetted prints, white, is of a middle tint, into which the image is graduated. This, of course, gives greater force to the lights, and is pleasing in general effect. In this instance the result is, in our estimation, spoiled by very elaborate “touching.”
Mr. Macandrew, of Regent Street, contributes a large number of portraits of public characters, chiefly large busts, the heads being from two or three inches long. Those who have seen the large heads of Pierre Petit, in Paris, will be familiar with the fine effect attainable in the photographs in this style. The majority of Mr. Macandrew’s are very excellent indeed, vigorous, delicate, round, and well modeled; No. 67, a portrait of a lady, is especially fine.
Mr. H. P. Robinson’s “Lady of Shalott,” “Holiday in the Woods,” “Elaine,” &c., our readers are already familiar with. Mr. Noel Fritch’s portrait of a sleeping child is a decided gem. Mr. A. H. Wall exhibits a frame in which the central vignette, and some vignetted card pictures are very pleasing.
Passing from the portraiture, we come to a screen covered with the well-known pictures of Francis Bedford. Most of these are very familiar; but from their real excellence they always seem to possess the charm of freshness. The interiors have unquestionably never been surpassed. Mr. E. C. Buxton contributes a frame containing shipping, genre studies, &c., “The Pickle” yacht, on one of the Scottish lochs, is a very good picture. Messrs. Jackson, Brothers, of Jumbo, near Manchester, contribute a series of their charming studies of rustic grouping and scenery. We have more than once on former occasions referred to these pictures, which are, of their kind, amongst the very finest which have been produced by our art. The subjects are for the most part familiar and accessible to every one; but by careful and judicious selection of position and lighting, we have pictures such as would have delighted Gainsborough. We especially commend these pictures to the attention of those visiting the Exhibition.
Four fine instantaneous pictures, two of which are glass positives, are contributed by Mr. Kibble, of Glasgow. They are chiefly studies of clouds, with sufficient of foreground and water to give force and effect to the compositions. The bank of clouds in one of the glass positives is wonderfully beautiful, and will repay careful examination. Two frames of Mr. Blanchard’s instantaneous stereographs, consisting of marine subjects and London street scenes, are contributed by Smyth and Blanchard; we have been noticed the beauties of many of these slides. Mr. Lennie, of Edinburgh, contributes a frame of similar pictures to those of Mr. Blanchard, some of which possess merit.
Mr. Lyndon Smith contributes some specimens, which are unworthy of his powers. Mr. S. Thompson contributes some of his series published as “Cabinet Photographs,” which we have noticed before. His “Tome of Edward the Black Prince” is, perhaps, the best exhibited, and is a really fine picture, free from the flatness and imperfect lighting which characterises some of his photographs. Mr. Morgan, of Bristol, exhibits some very fine landscapes, at once forcible and delicate. Mr. Ernest Edwards sends some exceedingly fine pictures, of which we may mention one of King’s College Cambridge, and another of Netley Abbey, s especially fine and worthy of attention.
We shall resume our notice next week.
1862: P News, June 13, vol. VI, #197, p. 288:
Talk In The Studio [selection]
A COUNTRY FAIR IN THE STEREOSCOPE.—Mr. Elliott has just issued half a dozen instantaneous views for the stereoscope, the subjects being the various scenes in a country fair, photographed by Mr. Valentine Blanchard during the past spring. Few subjects could present greater difficulties to the artist, nor would many be more effective in the stereoscope. The scenes, in many instances, have had to be taken at close quarters, which would have rendered the slightest movement flaringly apparent, but in this respect the slides are, on the whole, very successful. Some of them present hundreds of medley figures in surging confusion amongst stalls, booths, raree [sic] shows, &c. The scene of some of the slides if the front of the “Female Blondin’s Travelling Circus,” on the open stage or platform of which are clown, pantaloon, sprites, and others, gentlemen in tights and ladies in spangles, and all in motley; a placard informs us that admission to the theatre is one penny, whilst from the position of the clown we feel sure that he is adjuring us to “Walk up,” and “be in time.” The majority of the figures are very sharp, and the effect good. The series forms an interesting records of a time-honoured institution, which is dying out, we believe, for in many places already the statute fair has ceased to exist within the last few years.
THE INTERIOR OF THE EXHIBITION.—Perhaps the most complete record of the International Exhibition, the record which will enable persons in other countries or in after times to form the best idea of its contents, will be the [London] Stereoscopic Company’s stereoscopic views of the interior and its contents, by Mr. England. From a sample dozen or two before us, we ascertain that he is much more successful than from the difficulties existing we had believed possible. The photography is characterised by that delicacy and softness, combined with vigour and roundness, which have generally distinguished Mr. England’s pictures; whilst the selection of subject, point of view, &c., is in most cases very happy. We cannot conceive anything more delightful to those unable to visit the Exhibition than a few hours with stereoscope in hand and this series of slides before them; whilst few who do visit the building will, we apprehend, willingly neglect to secure such a valuable souvenir of its contents. The series, so far as it has gone, consists of general views of the interior from the various commanding points; views of the different national departments; views of various special courts; and views of single objects of interest, such as Gibson’s tinted Venus, which, by the way, looks in the photograph still more like an undressed young lady than in the original. If the Stereoscopic Company are as successful in all their views of the interior and contents as in the examples before us, the result will be one of the most interesting and valuable collections of photographs ever published.
1862: P News, June 20, vol. VI, #198, p. 292-293:
The International Exhibition.
The British Photographic Department.
The Jurors have now completed their labours, and rendered their reports. At what period those reports will be published, we are unable to state; it is indeed undecided as yet by the Commissioners themselves. As one of the primary clauses of “Instructions to Jurors” is an injunction to secrecy in regard to their discussions and awards, information of a definite character cannot at present reach the public; the traditional “little bird,” however, which has from time immemorial prated of secrets, has whispered sufficient to make us hope that the adjudication will be on the whole satisfactory, that nearly a hundred exhibitors will be made happy by the receipt of bronze medals, and considerably more than that number will be distinguished by “honourable mention.” For details, however, expectants must wait for Time, the revealer.
The irregular arrangement and hanging preclude any satisfactory consecutive notice of the pictures, whether in relation to the numbers, subjects, or artists, we shall therefore pursue such order as we can in glancing at the most noticeable contributions. We may mention here that we are glad to perceive that our intimation as to the effect of the damp walls had induced some contributors of pictures tinted in water colours, to remove those which had been injured. Others remain as witnesses of the destructive action going forward. What will be the state of some before October, we will not a present contemplate.
We commence our present notice by calling the attention of visitors to two of the most interesting contributions in the room, but which are, nevertheless, very likely to be passed over by many entirely unnoticed. They consists of two thin quarto albums, laid upon a table in a corner of the room, opposite the visitor, and at his right hand in entering. They are numbered 906, and 907, and are contributed by Mr. R. Harmer, in whose name we have pleasure in recognizing a member of the South London Committee. The first album contains specimens of photography as it may be applied to book illustration; but it is chiefly interesting to the photographer for the examples it contains of effective fancy printing. The especial object is to show that a proper margin of white paper may be secured round a print of any shape, without the necessity of mounting. Here, each on a quarto sheet of paper, are prints of all shapes, oval, square, &c., with a pure white margin of the photographic paper. Perhaps the most effective specimens are those in which the appearance of an India paper tint is produced around the print, and beyond the tint white margin, giving three distinct tints—that of the photographic background, the India paper, and that of the white margin, but all produced on one piece of paper by skilful masking whilst printing. Another style of printing now less pleasing illustrates the effect of apparently vignetting on tinted paper: the image graduates into a pale warm grey or drab, instead of into a background of white, the whites in the image, itself, however, being kept quite pure; whilst around the pale grey into which the vignetting is merged, is a margin of white. This style has somewhat the effect of a crayon drawing on tinted paper, with the high lights put in with white chalk; but is infinitely superior to anything of the kind in its delicacy and force. Other vignettes are printed entirely on a tinted ground, the paper apparently having received a little general exposure before or after printing the negative. This method, which would apparently be so destructive of anything like pure or vigorous prints, becomes very effective in certain cases; for instance, here is a head from a negative which is manifestly hard and over-intense; with ordinary printing it would be chalky in the extreme; but here there are no high lights, the vigour is subdued, the empty patches of white without detail cease to be offensive, as the whole has simply the sketchy suggestiveness of a chalk drawing. Many of the photographs are in themselves very excellent, but under the treatment they have received in printing they become some of the most charming photographic pictures we have seen. Altogether this album is a most instructive contribution, full of suggestion to the printer ambitious to excel in securing the most artistic effects of which his negative is capable; and we heartily commend every photographer who visits the Exhibition to spend a quarter of an hour examining this album. We must not omit to add that the prints are on paper albumenized on both sides, a method proposed in our columns by Mr. Harmer some time ago, as both improving the quality of the prints, and for book illustration giving uniformity of appearance to the paper in prints not intended to be mounted.
Mr. Harmer’s other album contains a hard-a-dozen chromo-photographs, by a method which has been more than once suggested; but not before, to our knowledge, tried. The photographs are printed on papers prepared with the graduated tints produced by lithography, for pencil or chalk drawings. Most of our readers are doubtless familiar with these prepared papers, which are usually sold at repositories for drawing materials, and possess tints graduated for various effects; generally commencing, however, with warm browns for the foreground, running into sunset tints of yellow and red, and these again into the blues. It is upon these tints that Mr. Harmer has contrived by careful printing to produce half-a-dozen landscapes. We understand that no special treatment was adopted; the ordinary processes of sensitizing, fixing, and washing, having been used, but great care exercised throughout. The result is decidedly successful: a new field for the judicious exercise of taste in printing is here not merely suggested, but practically illustrated; and Mr. Harmer, we conceive, deserves well of his photographic brethren for these very pleasing and instructive contributions.
There are scarcely so many subject pieces or genre pictures as might have been anticipated; probably from the uncertainty in which photographers were kept as to their ultimate position in the Exhibition. This cause we know operated in a detrimental manner upon the contributions in various ways, giving little time and less heart for the preparation of especial pictures. Foremost amongst the contributors of this class are the two names, often mentioned conjointly, of Rejlander and Robinson. The former exhibits two or three frames, containing some charming pictures, of some of which we have already spoken; and all of which have, we believe, been before exhibited and noticed. They are mostly hung too high for careful examination: in one frame we can conceive the presence of a variety of little naked cherubs may have influenced this. We should have been glad to see the other frames in a position more worthy of their merits. These contain the well-known art photographs “The Wayfarer,” “God Speed Him,” “The Scripture Reader,” “Absence of Mind,” &c., &c. Those who would examine them carefully must provide themselves with a ladder; or better still, visit the publisher, Mr. Victor de la Rue, or the artist himself in the Haymarket, whom we have pleasure in taking this opportunity of welcoming as a resident Metropolitan photographer.
Mr. Robinson sends several old favourites, including the earliest which first called attention to his unquestionable genius, namely, “Fading Away,” and “She never told her Love,” “Little Red Riding Hood,” “Here they come,” “Top of the Hill,” “Holiday in the Woods.” &c., are also exhibited, “The Lady of Shalot,” his most recent composition picture is also here, and despite criticism, and despite some real faults, it excites much attention and admiration. The general public, who do not give photography credit for the production of such things, after examining attentively, and admiring, generally pass on, exclaiming, “Undoubtedly a very clever copy of a painting.” If photography has contributed, as it undoubtedly has, much to the spread of præ-Raphaelitism amongst painters, unquestionably the præ-Raphaelite painters have reacted on some of our photographers. Mr. Robinson has beyond a doubt come under their spell, and to their influence and example some of the faults in this picture are attributable, as any one examining Millais’s paintings in the Picture Gallery in the Exhibition, especially the “Apple Orchard,” may readily see. Despite all this, however, it is a noble picture, full of true poetry. Mr. Robinson also exhibits “Elaine, with the Shield of Launcelot,” which we noticed at the Manchester Exhibition. We then pointed out some short-comings in the story as told by the picture, and we have since ascertained that it was merely a preliminary sketch for a more ambitious picture, and preserved because of some good points it possessed. It is unquestionably good as a photograph, although defective in some parts as a picture, and we can not help here defending it from some amusingly ungrounded strictures in a notice of the South London Exhibition appearing in a contemporary. The writer in a notice of that Exhibition, on the whole interesting and well intended, takes entire exception to this picture, especially on the ground of tis violation of historic truth in depicting the draperies and accessories, the shield meeting with especial censure. The writer says:--
“Heraldic devices upon the shield were only invented when, locked up in complete steel, the warriors had no other resource left by which to make themselves known to their friends and followers, therefore the rampant lion is out of place. And, once again, the shape of the shield is one which we have every reason to believe our rude forefathers never adopted—all the British shields, of which we have any account or relics remaining, being flat and circular, ornamented more or less with metal knobs and bosses. In the British Museum a shield exists which might well have served as a model for Launcelot’s.”
We cannot help regretting, whilst reading this waste of historic and heraldic lore, that the writer had not taken the trouble to read the Laureate’s poem, a glance at which spares us the necessity of comparing dates and costumes. Mr. Robinson has, we know, studied the poet with a reverent admiration, and has, in these details, at least endeavoured to render him correctly. Let us see how far a device at all, or this especial device is true to Tennyson’s description, upon whom, therefore, the onus of its presence must rest, and, who if he failed to make himself familiar with all that pertained to Arthur’s time is—well, he is to blame, and the critic is, under such circumstances, right. Tennyson tells us that the “Lily Maid of Astolat,” having this shield in her care,
“----fashioned for it,
A case of silk, and braided thereupon
All the devices blazoned on the shield
In their own tinet.”
Further, Launcelot going forth in disguise to contend for the diamond at Camelot, asks of the Lord of Astolat a shield:--
“----and the shield—
I pray you lend me one, if such you have,
Blank, or at least with some device not mine.”
So much then for the presence of a device on the shield. Now let us see if the device be a correct one. Mr. Robinson’s shield has a rampant lion; in the “Idylls” we find the matter thus:--
“And when the shield was brought, and Gawain saw
Sir Launcelot’s azure lions, crowned with gold,
Ramp in the field.”
So much for the rampant lions.
All this, we know is not exactly photographic; but it b ears pertinently upon photographic criticism and upon the historic correctness of a photograph, and we feel it important that photographic criticism should not lose all value by indulging in baseless or ill-informed strictures. Errors of judgment all are liable to, but it is important to avoid errors of fact. If Mr. Robinson ever carry out his original idea, we shall doubtless have a better representation of “Elaine the fair, Elaine the loveable,” and although we shall have the shield with his device of the ramping lions, it will bear indisputable traces of the stern blows which awoke the sympathy of the “Lily Maid of Astolat.”
Mr. Mayall contributes some genre studies, which will, however, bear out his reputation for being unequal. Some of these are very charming pictures, and deserve a much better light than that in which they are hung. “The Great Light shines through the Smallest Window” is a very beautiful picture; the scene is an humble cottage in which a little child reads the Book which contains the words of hope and peace to man; to which an aged peasant listens with evident attention. The subject, the composition, and the photography, are alike good. “A real Ten-pounder” is another good picture, an illustration of an election jeu de mots, the ten—pounder not merely representing a ten-pound householder, but a ten-pound note, which the “hon. Member for Tipem” has slipped into Hodge’s hand whilst asking his “vote and interest.” The story is cleverly told, the photography is good, and the picture is interesting to many, as containing an admirable portrait of Mr. Mayall himself, and one of Alfred Crowquill, as the “honourable member.” There are some other pictures of the same class, and one entitled, if we remember rightly, “One more Unfortunate,” which is a sad travestie on Solomon’s “Drowned, drowned,” exhibited at the Academy two or three years ago.
Mr. Charles Critchett exhibits a couple of studies, “The Nun,” and “The Dairy Maid,” which have considerable merit. Messrs. Ross and Thompson have several frames of very fine studies, in which the feeling and arrangement generally are very excellent; but there is an unfortunate heaviness and blackness, which sadly mars the effect in other respects so good. Heath and Beau exhibit a few pretty vignetted heads possessing much character and archness. There are a few other similar contributions which do not arrest our attention by any especial characteristics.`
1862: P News, June 20, vol. VI, #198, p. 300:
Talk In The Studio:
THE WORKS OF SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN.—Mr. J. J. Cole has produced, or is producing, a series of cabinet photographs which will be highly prized by all admirers of good architecture, consisting of the Churches of Sir Christopher Wren. The specimens we have received are excellent photographs, and possess the additional advantage of having been taken from the best available points of view, the positions being selected with the technical judgment of an architect and man of cultivated taste. The negatives are taken on tannin plates, and are admirable examples of the softness which may be obtained by that process carefully managed, even with the difficulties of a London atmosphere and light. Of those which please us best, we many mention St. Paul’s, from Ludgate Hill, and St. Mary-le-Bow; both pictures are admirable examples of the grace which characterises Sir Christopher Wren’s architecture, and as pictures they are not spoiled by white paper skies; one possesses an atmospheric grey tint, and the other, although partially stopped out, is most skilfully managed, the line of the horizon being broken with clouds in such a manner as to preserve breadth. The series is published by Messrs. Griffiths and Farren.
1862: P News, June 20, vol. VI, #198, p. 300:
To Correspondents: [selection]
--ENLARGED NEGATIVES—Mr. Warner asks us to inform a “constant subscriber,” who has applied to him to enlarge a negative, that it is impossible to enlarge the figures without also enlarging the plate. Surely such information ought to be unnecessary; but Mr. Warner has nevertheless been asked to do it. “Constant Subscriber” must have failed to express his wants properly’; the slightest thought must have convinced him that if a group of small figures fill a small plate, the same figures will require, when enlarged, a proportionately larger plate.
1862: P News, June 27, vol. VI, #199, p. 309-310:
Correspondence.
A Hint to Photographic Tourists.
Dear Sir,--Having recently paid a visit to the Isle of Man, it has struck me as a very singular thing, that photographic tourists seem to ignore the existence of a place possessing so much interest and beauty.
In passing through the streets of London, no one can fail to observe that the views from the Isle of Wight, Jersey, Guernsey, and many places of much less interest, are abundant, while views of that fine old historical relic, Peel Castle, or the beautiful picturesque town of Douglas, are nowhere to be seen.
That it does not arise from paucity of subject I can myself testify, for in my humble opinion the Isle of Man affords more variation and boldness of scenery than the Isle of wight [sic]. And almost every nook and corner of the latter place are familiar to all the little shoeblacks of the Strand. Peel Castle is quite as interesting as Tintern Abbey, but, as I before observed, that is not to be obtained, while to get a fresh view of Tintern Abbey is almost impossible; unless some enterprising photographer where to engage the services of Mr. Coxwell, and even then I should doubt its originality.
Again, I might compare Douglas and Ryde, but, Mr. Editor, I will leave your much more able pen to assign a reason and suggest a remedy for this, contenting myself with the remark, that in no place will photographic tourists find more hospitality and kind assistance than in that much neglected, but beautiful spot, the Isle of Man.—Dear sir, truly yours, Leo Daft. 2, Queen Square, Westminster S.W., 16th June.
1862: P News, July 4, vol. VI, #200, p. 316-318:
The International Exhibition
British Photographic Department.
Portraiture must ever be one of the most important departments of photography, nevertheless, we are disposed to believe, at the risk of being charged with photographic heresy by some, that as yet it has scarcely received full justice. We do not mean to say that there are not some pre-eminently able portraitists; but we think it would be very easy to prove, that portraiture has rarely been pursued with the loving enthusiasm by amateurs, which ahs been given to landscape and other branches of photography. Very few educated amateurs have given it any attention at all, whilst of the professional photographers who pursue photography as a business, how very few are by natural aptitude or education, fitted to excel in this most difficult branch of the art? To attain the highest excellence here, not only should the operator be perfectly familiar with all the principles of art which pertain to this department, and be at the same time a thoroughly accomplished photographer but he should also possess that rapid, almost intuitive perception of character, which will enable him at once to perceive what style, position, lighting, and general arrangement, will be most conducive to perfect vraisemblance, and to satisfactory pictorial results, together with sufficient of the magnetic charm of manner, which places the sitter at once at ease, and induces the happiest expression during the sitting, for unless the idea of a dentistical operation, entertained by so many persons, can be dispelled, there can be no chance of a successful portrait.
Notwithstanding, however, that we believe it is possible to attain a higher standard in photographic portraiture generally, we are fully prepared to admit that there are many very fine examples of this branch of the art in the International Exhibition, both in the British and other departments. It is with the former, however, we are now concerned. Prominent here, as might be anticipated, are the various examples of card portraiture. The fashion which ahs prevailed for the last couple of years, for these small photographs, has done much, we believe, to improve the manipulative part of photographic portraiture. Not that bad photography is entirely uncommon in this department still; but the general quality of the results, or at least such as belong to the merely mechanical part of photography, are materially improved. Moderately good manipulation has become imperative where slovenliness might pass before. The time was, a very few years ago, when the cut-out back-grounds, which originated in France, and touched pictures, were common in portraiture, or when coloured pictures were largely in demand, very moderate and often very bad, results were deemed good enough for touching or colouring, and the obligation to produce clean even backgrounds; sharp, round, well defined images, was by no means imperative. The card mania has, however, changed all that; and the photographer who would maintain any reputation, must manipulate well, whether he be an artist or not. The public have begun to acquire discrimination enough to form some judgment as to the mechanical department; the artistic appreciation is, perhaps, yet to come, although even in this respect, it generally happens that the most artistic photographs please best.
By far the best card pictures, to our taste, here exhibited, are those of Mr. H. P. Robinson, of Leamington. The frame (703, in the photographic catalogue,) is a small one, containing only half-a-dozen pictures, but these are gems. Excellent in composition, easy and natural in pose and general arrangement, soft and delicate, yet, withal, rich and brilliant, they are altogether charming. Pictorial backgrounds, so commonly misused as to render them generally disgusting, are here employed with good taste and natural effect, especially in a standing group, and in the picture of a lady, sitting sketching. Perhaps, next in quality amongst card pictures are those of Mayland, of Cambridge. These are soft, vigorous, and round, generally quiet and well arranged, free from the meretricious and incongruous display of accessories, which is but too common in this class of portraits. Mr. Kilburn, or, rather, his successor, also displays some very good card portraits. Mr. King has been fortunate in sitters, his specimens including the elite of the professional world in music, art, and letters, as well as stars of the drama and of the pulpit. It is always a source of regret when we see, from some of the specimens of an artist, that he can do good work, to find at the same time that from hurry, carelessness, or the lack of a sufficiently delicate appreciation, he sends forth, side by side with the good, other results which are entirely bad.
We find on looking over our notes in regard to card portraits, that a very large proportion of the contributions are marked as “middling.” Many of these have excellent points, but are still in some respects wanting; and many of these, too, by artists of good position; amongst these we may mention such names as Mayer Brothers, Caldesi, and some others whose pictures are hard; Beard, Claudet, and others, who exhibit some very fine pictures, but some of which lack the perfectness of definition desirable in such pictures, or are cold and wanting in richness and vigour. Mr. Hering exhibits some very good card pictures, but immediately in contact with them is a large frame, containing some scores of heads, arranged so closely together in long uniform lines, row over row, as to have a most unsatisfactory and unpleasing effect, giving the appearance at first glance of an immense chess-board. The photography is probably good, but it is impossible to form a good opinion of it displayed in such a style. Messrs. Maull and Polyblank exhibit some very commonplace card pictures, and the London School of Photography some still worse. Descending still further, not by a mere stride, but by an immense leap, we come to a frame, or a series of frames by L. Birnstingl; as we stand before these, we pause and wonder, and as we remember that this department represents British photography, and that the world is invited to examine the display, we feel a hot flush, half of shame, and wholly of annoyance. These are portraits of the “Guarantors,” the representative patrons of science and art in the country, and the portraiture is by the gentlemen who obtained the contract for photography in connection with the Exhibition whilst the building was in progress; so that these pictures possess a quasi-official character, and might naturally be regarded as in some sort representing national character and national photograph.. We must confess we are truly sorry for it. The work is irredeemably bad in every sense. If we believe the photographers, and they should be good evidence, the men of science, art, letters, and wealth, who are prepared to sustain a possible loss in the erection of this monument of the world’s progress, are a herd of the most vulgar, snobbish, and commonplace-looking personages, without one trace of the characteristics of English gentlemen. If the noble lords now considering the Bill for Artistic Copyright, who are impressed with the idea that all photographs are alike, and that it would be impossible to distinguish between the works of different artists, will glance at these frames, they will at least see what monstrosities can be perpetrated by the art when not in the hands of a skilled artist; but we fear a glance at such productions would be sufficient to exclude all chance of photography remaining in a Bill for the protection of fine art. Seriously, it is too bad that some discrimination or control as to the quality of the work as not exercised in the first photographic contract; it is too bad that the Guarantors should be gibbeted in such vile guise in what is to some extent their own building; but it is far worse that such pictures should occupy so much precious space, representing British photography.
In larger portraits, pre-eminent now as ever, stand the productions of Mr. T. R. Williams, who exhibits only vignette heads, thus avoiding the necessity for accessories of any kind. This style is, in our estimation, by far the most pleasing and successful style of photographic portraiture, especially for gentlemen; the interest is entirely concentrated on the most important part, the head. There are no awkward legs or arms to dispose into passable lines; and bring within the defining powers of the lens. All this is favourable to success; but there is about the portraits of Mr. Williams a perfectness and completeness which we have rarely, if ever, seen in any other photographs, whether vignetted or otherwise. It becomes an interesting question, to what this especial pre-eminence is due. Some persons who have examined these pictures have answered it readily, “Oh, it is simply due to skilful ‘touching’! the pictures are elaborately worked up; here is a whole eyebrow put in, and there the hair is worked upon, etc.” It were an easy thing to answer that we have never seen touched work that could compare in beauty with good untouched photography; but we can go further—and we do so because we always deprecate the idea that good work is due to any adventitious aid—we have before us at this moment unmounted duplicates of the photographs in question, and can vouch that they are entirely genuine, pure untouched photography. To what then is this superiority due? “How is it” we are frequently asked by some anxious student, “that I cannot produce such pictures? I have the best lenses, I use the best collodion, and have tried almost all the makers; I get the very best chemicals, but my pictures are not good. Is it the lighting or the lenses, the chemicals or the formula, the exposure or development, which makes the difference between my productions and those of first class photographers?” All these things unquestionably have their share in the result, but perhaps none in any pre-eminent degree. Good lenses, that is suitable lenses for the work, are undoubtedly necessary; for large heads, lenses with sufficient depth of focus to define all parts moderately well, without that cutting sharpness which makes the head appear as if chiseled out of marble. Judicious lighting has perhaps more to do with perfection of results than any other one thing; sufficient direct light to give vigorous and well marked contours, and sufficient diffused or reflected light, to give texture and modeling. It is a very easy thing to obtain texture which degenerates into wiry rugosity; but a careful selection of the lens, and management of the light is necessary to secure in large heads texture without coarseness. Good chemicals are necessary and easily obtained; good formulæ we constantly publish. Judicious manipulation must depend upon nice appreciation and carefully garnered experience; exposure and development must be in proper relation to each other, and to the condition of chemicals: harmonious relation of every part to every other part is the great secret: other things being equal skilful development is perhaps most important. But every step so depends upon the whole, that especial stress cannot be justly placed upon any single operation. We have digressed from criticism into questions of process, because we have often been asked lately, after describing various good pictures, to say something special about the method of producing them, and because Mr. Williams’ pictures are unsurpassed in all that constitutes good photography: wondrous delicacy; perfect roundness and modeling; fleshy texture and transparency, without magnified wrinkles and freckles; great vigour and brilliancy; rich tone; exquisite definition, as well as good taste and fine feeling.
Next, to our taste, in portraiture, are the productions of Mr. Hennah, of Brighton, whose pictures always make us wish that such a thing as albumenized paper had no existence. Mr. Hennah is one of the few, if he be not the only one, who has not been seduced by the charms of surface possessed by albumenized paper. He adheres to plain paper and the ammonia-nitrate printing process. His contributions to the Exhibition are magnificent specimens of the tones obtainable by that process, and many of them, as specimens of portraiture, leave nothing to be desired. Some whole-plate portraits of children, one (420) especially, are perfect gems. John and Charles Watkins contribute largely to the examples of portraiture, and amongst the large number exhibited are many thoroughly excellent pictures, good in every respect; we regret, however, that there is some inequality, some of the pictures are considerably touched, and some yielding to the extreme test of the damp walls show signs of incipient decay, which circumstance makes the touching more apparent. We can conceive that some of these would not have been exhibited but for the interest attaching to the portraits, which comprise such names as Landseer, Millais, Fard, Hook, Webster, and others amongst painters; Dickens, Jerrold, and others, amongst men of letters, as well as many royal and noble personages. Mr. Herbert Watkins also exhibits some good portraits of celebrities, one frame of good photographs consisting only of various portraits of Ristori in different characters.
Mr. D. O. Hill contributes a large frame of pictures, which are subscribed as “Contributions towards the further development of fine art in photography.” These pictures, partly because, we apprehend, of their stepping a little out of the conventional treatment of portraiture, and partly because of the somewhat ambitious description just quoted, have excited some animadversion. They are unquestionably pictures of unusual merit, and it should be remembered that the artist is a gentleman well qualified to aid the art progress of photography, being a painter of considerable reputation, and Secretary to the Scottish Royal Academy of Painting. He is, moreover, a staunch and old friend of photography, having in conjunction with Mr. Adamson, many years ago, executed some of the finest calotype portraits ever produced. These pictures may offend some by being large and bold, and in some instances, tending slightly towards coarseness in their massive vigour, but there is, nevertheless, an amount of true art and good photography, which must challenge admiration. There is a daring use of unusual accessories, which is in some cases very effective. A large group of “Dr. John Brown and his Cousin,” which obtained a silver medal at the last exhibition of the Scotch Society, is a very fine photograph; massive, round, and well composed; a portrait of Dr. Brown alone is also very good. “Through the Trellis” is a very pleasing group, consisting of three girls, one of whom is seen through a wire trellis and the creeping foliage which surrounds it; the subject is a difficult one, but is well managed and effective. “Our Dear Old Nurse” is another very good picture. Some of the specimens, “The Story of the Bruce, “ for instance, would have been as well omitted from the frame; but, as a while, we strongly commend the pictures to the attention of photographers.
M. Claudet exhibits a large number of very excellent examples of portraiture which have many pleasing qualities. M. Joubert exhibits some exceedingly artistic portraits. Mr. Hering contributes some good pictures, some of which, unfortunately, have been slightly touched in body colour, and show the action of the damp walls. The whole-plate portraits of Maull and Polyblank are in many respects good, and altogether much better than their card pictures. Mr. Charles Newcombe contributes some pleasing pictures. Ross and Thompson’s portraits have many artistic qualities. Heath and Beau exhibit some characteristic heads. Mr. McAndrew has some fine bold round vigorous heads. McLean and Melhuish have some specimens, many of which display very excellent qualities.
Touched portraiture is, we are happy to say, only contributed by very few persons. Why it is contributed at all, or why admitted at all, after the announcement to the contrary, we cannot understand, unless it be that unscrupulous persons sent in such pictures to fill the space granted to them, and it was thought better to wink at the broken condition than leave bare walls. Certain it is that some are there. Mr. King, of Bath, sends a large number of these spoiled photographs very gaudily done, and some of which are showing yellow stains of decomposition already. Mr. Mayall sends some very carefully worked pictures in black and white, which are, to our taste, infinitely inferior to untouched prints from the same negatives, some of which we have now before us. Mr. Eastham, of Manchester, sends a large composition group, which is very good, but being touched has no business here. The same may be said of some positives by the tannin process upon enamel glass.
The examples of solar camera enlargement are not numerous in the British Department. M. Claudet contributes the largest number, and many of them a re very fine indeed; but some of them are touched. Mr. Owen Angel, of Exeter, has sent some very good enlargements; but apparently as conscientious in his regard to the conditions issued, as others have been unscrupulous, he has not even touched out slight accidental spots. Messrs. Smyth and Blanchard exhibit some very fine enlargements (609), which are to our taste the finest in the department. On the same screen, as if hung as a foil to that just named, is a picture about half life-size, by Cramb, Brothers, of Glasgow. This is minutely described as being taken direct in the camera without enlargement. We can only regard it as having been sent as a specimen of what to avoid, as anything more hideous, clumsy, or inartistic we have rarely seen.
1862: P News, July 4, vol. VI, #200, p. 319:
South London Photographic Exhibition.
We proceed briefly to conclude our notice of the pictures exhibited at the Crystal Palace, by the South London Photographic Society, which, we believe, continue to excite a large share of attention amongst visitors. The specimens of coloured photographs are not numerous, the committee, as we understand, having rather repressed, than encouraged, contributions of that kind, as not of a strictly photographic character. There are a few very fine coloured pictures, however, one to which we may especially refer, is a portrait of a Spanish girl, by Macandrew, painted by M. Lafollie. This is an admirable specimen of oil painting upon the photograph; the colour is quiet and mellow, low in tone, but still rich and vigorous. The olive tint of the Spanish complexion is delicate and transparent. Altogether, the head is thoroughly well painted. Mr. Wall exhibits the only solar-camera picture contributed; this is a life-size head of a lady painted in oil, a plain print from the original quarter-plate negative placed beside it, shows how admirably the likeness is preserved. The painting is brilliant, but not crude or glaring, the flesh being rich and transparent. It is one of the best oil coloured solar-camera pictures we have seen. There are some other coloured pictures not needing especial notice.
Mr. Warner contributes some prints from enlarged negatives, some of which are very good indeed, and well worth the attention of photographers generally, who are interested in enlarging their negatives by a method within the reach of every one. Here are exhibited, side by side, prints from the original negatives, and prints from the enlarged negatives, affording full facilities for comparison.
Amongst some wet collodion specimens, which it seems arrived late, and hence were not placed in their regular order are some very fine landscapes by A. K. Macdonald. All these are very good, and some very fine indeed. We may especially mention ‘Castle Acre, Norfolk,” a fine old ruin, with overhead an angry-looking sky, giving a peculiarly picturesque effect to the photograph. “At Woolmer, Hants,” is another very fine picture; as is also the “Wagoner’s Walls, Hants.” A photograph of the “Begonia Rex” is a good picture, and an effective example of a photographic difficulty overcome.
Mr. Gladwell sends specimens of a series of very large photographs, by continental artists, amongst whom are Alinari, Cuccioni, and others. The majority of these are magnificent photographs, and many of them of subjects new to the country, and are well worthy of careful examination.
We before omitted to notice, as by far the best card portraits in this Exhibition, three small frames sent by Mr. Hawke, whose pictures we have before noticed in these pages. Round, vigorous, and singularly brilliant, these qualities are obtained without any sacrifice of delicacy or softness. The tone is rich and warm, and the pictures are in very way satisfactory.
Mr. Skaife sends a neat glass case, containing a pistol camera, and a selection of the very charming little photographic gems, which he styles chromo-crystals, as well as some very respectable enlargements on paper, about quarter-size, produced from the miniature glass positives yielded by his waistcoat-pocket camera.
The only contribution in apparatus which has come under our notice is one of the excellent rolling presses of Bury Brothers, of Manchester.
Several other interesting contributions have, we understand, been promised, but have not, as yet, from some cause, made their appearance. Amongst those promised specimen, were a series of Mr. Breese’s exquisite stereoscopic transparencies; we shall hope to see them in the Exhibition shortly.
The South London Society’s first Exhibition is, as a whole, decidedly a success, with but very few drawbacks: the chief of these is, perhaps, the catalogue, which is scarcely so perfect or correct as might be desired, possibly, from being managed by a committee, instead of one responsible officer, in such matters the old adage relating to too many cooks often proving true. As a whole, however, we congratulate the society on the successful issue of the undertaking.
1862: P News, July 11, vol. VI, #201, p. 328-330:
The International Exhibition.
British Photographic Department.
The contributions of coloured photographs to the Exhibition do not call for extended notice, especially in a photographic point of view. Such interest as the coloured portion of the Exhibition did possess is now materially diminished. The majority of the contributors concerned have taken our hint as to the dampness and removed their pictures. Almost all the water-coloured specimens are gone; some also of the yellow and fading plain pictures have been removed, so that bare walls in many cases meet the eye instead of photographs. The most noticeable coloured pictures, or certainly those which will attract the most attention, are the coloured enlargements of M. Claudet. Strictly speaking, these are not photographs at all, that is, they are not drawings by light. M. Claudet recently described the method by which they are produced by projecting the image of a small negative on to canvas by the aid of a solar camera and artificial light, and then tracing the principal features on the canvas by means of a crayon. The general outline, chief shadows, &c., are thus secured in their due proportion as a basis for the further operation of the skilled painter, who is further aided by a print from the small negative to serve as a guide. We know that exception has been taken to the presence of these pictures amongst photographs; but we scarcely think the exception is just. They are at least valuable applications of photography; they are produced from small photographic negatives, and the enlarged image is produced by photographic appliances. As the final image is not produced by the chemical action of light, they are not, as we have just said, in the strict sense of the word, photographs; but they are so nearly related to the art, and the result of such an interesting and valuable application of it to the purposes of portrait painting, that we think there is no more legitimate place for them than the photographic department; and it must be distinctly remembered that they are not put forward as photographs, but the method by which they are produced is describe ed. Some of those exhibited are very admirably painted, and excellent likenesses. The portrait of Mr. Chance, of Birmingham, is a very fine piece of painting, vigorous and forcible, yet, whital, [sic] quiet and low in tone, free from the laboured smoothness of finish which is generally known as “tea-boardiness.” Several other of M. Claudet’s pictures, both enlargements and those taken direct, are exceedingly well painted. Whilst referring to the productions of M. Claudet, we may call attention to a couple of his pictures which have recently been added to the French department. These consist of two large groups, taken direct, one consisting of portraits of the secretaries of the English and French Photographic Societies, Dr. Diamond and M. Laulerie; and the other of five persons, the jurors of Class XIV, Photography. Both these pictures are admirable, and are as fine specimens of photographic portraiture as are to be found in the Exhibition. The photography leaves nothing to e desired; the composition is good; the tone is rich; the images are round, soft, vigorous, and well defined. The likenesses are also admirable. Those in the group of two are perfect in this respect, and full of character. We commend visitors to see those pictures, both for the interest of the subjects, and the excellence of the photography.
Mr. Kilburn, or rather his successor in his name, contributes some very good specimens coloured in oil, and some which are styled “demi-tinted” in water-colours, which are almost as bad as possible.
Mr. T. R. Williams exhibits some of the finest oil-coloured specimens in the department; true and natural in colour, they give both the hue and the texture of flesh; the colouring is indeed well worthy of the photographs, and that is saying a great deal. We must except, however, two specimens apparently coloured by another hand, the portraits of “A Lady and Child” and of “A Highlander;” these are cold and crude, and certainly, to our taste, inferior to the rest of Mr. Williams’ contributions. A tinted enlarged portrait by Mr. Williams is hung too high for for criticism, but it appears very good. Mr. Brothers of Manchester exhibits a coloured photograph on ivory, which is very good, and a large coloured group, which, so far as we can see at the height at which it is hung, is also very good. Messrs. McLean and Melhuish exhibit a frame of coloured miniatures, which are also hung too high for careful examination, but they appear very perfect indeed, and have all the character of ivory. M. Bassano exhibits a large coloured group of officers which has very little art, and is thoroughly unsatisfactory as a picture. Mr. T. Price has some very good miniatures in oil. Mr. Bowers has one or two very good coloured enlargements. Messrs. Smyth and Blanchard have a coloured solar camera picture, which is far inferior to their uncoloured work. Messrs. Gush and Ferguson, Mr. Sutton, and Messrs. Lock and Whitfield have some very carefully coloured miniatures, but with the majority of which visitors to former exhibitions are familiar; they have many beauties, but are marred by some exaggerations in drawing. The latter firm exhibit a very fine life-sized head of a child; this is well painted, and a very charming picture. Mr. Mayall exhibits a few coloured specimens, some of which are good, but none of which we think are equal to his best plain untouched pictures. We regret to observe a growing tendency in photographic colourists, of which this Exhibition furnishes many examples, to the production of mere prettiness, to the entire sacrifice of all true art qualities; transparency, solidity, and the sober quietness of nature are sacrificed for the purpose of obtaining a brilliant display of colour, and that smoothness and miscalled “finish” which is destructive of all texture, vigour, or appearance of life. This arises, doubtless, in good artists, from the habit of constantly painting according to “descriptive particulars,” instead of from life; inferior artists will follow bad examples; and in addition to this, we fear that too often the public desire and patronize this “pretty,” but unnatural style of colouring.
The colouring of photographic landscapes has from some cause never received much attention or favour. How far it might be done successfully by good artists, we cannot tell; but we doubt if the result would ever be worth the pains it would require, if done properly. Certain it is that most exhibited attempts have been failures; of all the vile things of the kind, however, we have never seen anything worse than the “Views coloured in Tempera and Bistre,” exhibited by Mr. Poulton, the photographs are spoiled without anything approaching in the remotest degree to art having been obtained; the result is coarse and gaudy, inferior to our taste to the commonest coloured engravings.
We append one or two extracts from the criticisms of the daily press on photography. The opinions of the outside press are always more or less valuable as fairly representing the opinions of the general public. The article in the Daily News, which we give first is in the main thoroughly just, and appreciative. The incongruity of the classification is shown in a forcible light by the heading appended to the article being simply thus:--
“Machinery: Photography.” After this heading comes the criticisms on pictures, premised, however, by a few trenchant remarks on the classification:--
“It is very evident that at some period of their existence, the powers that be at South Kensington have been made the distorted victims of some incompetent photographer, for the incessant war that Her Majesty’s Commissioners have never ceased to wage against the votaries of the camera plainly indicates a grievous wrong done on one side, only to be wiped out by the most implacable revenge on the other. They commence by classifying photographs amongst machinery, because, forsooth, a camera is a philosophical instrument, a principle which, if carried out, would place lithographs in Class 1 amongst stones, and engineering in Class 31 with copper-plates. A very fierce opposition to this sapient decision as immediately raised, photographers from all parts of the kingdom uniting in protesting against the arrangement. But the opposition was useless, the only result being an enormous mass of official correspondence, all sound and fury signifying nothing. Having insulted the new art by a false classification, the next thing was to burke its display by hiding it from the public. It was accordingly placed in a lofty, though cheerful garret, called the Central Tower, far above the high struggling mark of even the soundest winded visitors. To further degrade it, the Commissioners mixed it up with toys. What, in the name of Cremer, photography has done to be placed side by side with baby jumpers, wax dolls, and other appliances for the improvement of the infantile mind, we do not undertake to determine—we only know that in our opinion the union seems to be at least incongruous.
“Had the search for this attic been ten times as long, and the stairs twenty times as many, we should have been fully repaid for our exertions by the splendid display of photographs of all kinds contributed under the depressing influence of an unjust classification. In spite of their first determination not to exhibit, the best houses have come forward with their best works, determined to show to the world that a photographer is not a mechanician, and that photography is something more than a manufacture. It is at all times a most difficult thing to criticize photographs. There are so many influences at work which may destroy at any moment the result of unceasing pains and educated skill, that the photographic critic is continually in danger of blaming the photographer for shortcomings utterly beyond human control. There is, too, great difficulty in viewing photographs from a medium point just between manipulatory excellence on one side, and natural beauty on the other. The photographs exhibited are, perhaps, the best collection ever brought together, numbering nearly one thousand frames, containing works by all the best photographers, very few of which are below mediocrity. They fall naturally into four divisions—portraits, landscapes, reproductions, and scientific photographs.
‘We would warn our readers that the list of exhibitors contained in the ordinary shilling catalogue is useless, and advise every one to procure the detailed catalogue published by Trounce, and sold in the room, the numbers given in it being made use of in the following remarks.
“Commencing at the south-west corner of the room, the first frame of portraits we come to is a collection of studies by an old public favourite, Mr. O. G. Rejlander (2), which are placed so far out of the line that it would be unjust to criticize them rigorously. From the distance, they appear to be worthy specimens of manipulatory skill and artistic humour. J. B. Dancer (17, 18) exhibits two frames of what appear to be microscopic portraits; but as there is no means of viewing them, nothing can be said about them. R. F. Barnes (33). This gentleman sends portraits of several musical celebrities, but they appear to be coarser than most of his former productions. Ross and Thomson (34, 35) contribute two frames of excellent portraits, which are, however, much diminished in merit by the background being generally much too dark. These two frames are very good illustrations of the great difference in type between English and Scottish physiognomy. On the south-east screen (732) is another frame of portraits, from the same artists, containing some very meritorious efforts in artistic grouping. The heads of the sitters are, however, generally too large. T. R. Williams (49-52), 55-56, 166, 3990494, 414, 821-829, 835) sends a number of exquisite vignettes in his well-known style. It appears to be now generally allowed that vignettes are the most artistic of all photographs. The reason of this no doubt is that a greater amount of artistic feeling is requisite to procure a good result by shading off the background exactly in the proper place and with the right amount of gradation. The productions of Mr. Williams are, as a whole, the best portraits in the exhibition. John and Charles Watkins (58-60, 64-66) exhibit six frames of first-rate portraits, the cartes de visite being the best in the exhibition. These gentlemen excel in placing their sitters in a characteristic position, generally with one or two well-disposed accessories. The lighting, too, of their pictures is excellently managed, the head of the sitter being the most brilliant portion of the picture, the other parts being illuminated distinctly but feebly. Apropos of these very beautiful little works of art—we see a great tendency in other photographers to use backgrounds, more or less badly painted, on which are depicted in the worst taste the pillar, curtain, balustrade, and gathering storm of the ancient La Creevy school of art. This is surely a retrogression. A photograph, to be an artistic production, needs no extraneous aid in the way of bad scene-painting; and we point to the cartes de visite sent by Messrs. Watkins as the best proof that we are right in our notions. Herbert Watkins (24, 85, 96, 135) sends a frame of portraits of Ristori, in eighteen or twenty of her dramatic creations. The photographs are all that could be desired in the way of artistic treatment, but the effect is marred by the absence of spontaneity in the position and expression of the actress. This must always be the case in photographing expression, dramatic effect consisting in the very instantaneity of the movement.
“H. P. Robinson (128-132, 142, 572, 594, 595, 703). The productions of Mr. Robinson are always pleasing from the amount of beauty always contained in his pictures. They are, as our readeras [sic] are no doubt aware, subject pictures, made up in a very ingenious manner from several different negatives. “The Top of the Hill” (128), is simple and good, the action of the girl being extremely natural. “The Holiday in the Wood” (131), with its bevy of children enjoying themselves to their heart’s content, is too well known to need description. The greatest effort yet made by Mr. Robinson is “The Lady of Shallot” (132). She that “floated down to Camelot” is a very beautiful girl, (well known to us through “Fading away,” and other of Mr. Robinson’s productions), lying, with disheveled hair in a boat, that barely ripples the surface of the black stream down which it is gliding. The scene is laid in early spring, and the calmness of the surrounding landscape appears to indicate that the time is evening—a supposition borne out by a strong side light that falls in a magical manner on a willow on the opposite shore. This picture is the best of Mr. Robinson’s works, and will, we hope, bring him the fame he deserves.
“Mayall (152, 153) exhibits two frames of portraits in which the photograph is quite hidden by the black and white touches added by the artists. This gentleman’s show is by no means what it should be; he should either have not exhibited at all, or have sent specimens worthy of his established reputation. The same remarks applies to Kilburn, Mayer Brothers, and one or two more, whose success has no doubt rendered them somewhat careless of fame. Mr. H. N. King, of Bath, sends a large number of theatrical portraits, which would be much better with plain backgrounds. It is really a pity to see good pictures spoiled by ill-painted scenery introduced. Maull and Polyblank exhibit a number of large portraits of celebrated men which, but for a certain uncomfortable air which they all possess, would be entitled to a foremost place. C. Wright (151) sends a number of portraits with very spotty backgrounds. The general treatment of these photographs appears to indicate that Mr. Wright has great artistic ability; but why should he mar the effect of good work by careless manipulation? A very characteristic group of “Young Toole” and “Old Paul” is exhibited by Mr. C. T. Newcombe (171). He also sends some excellent cartes de visite. T. H. Humah, 182, 183, 201, 202, 415-422. These are the best plain portraits in the exhibition. To say at once that everything in them is good, is the best criticism to give them. In general treatment, in position, in lighting, in printing even in mounting and framing, they are worthy of the imitation of every photographer. Joubert exhibits some charming little cartes de visite, the effect of which is entirely marred by the slovenly way in which they are mounted in a very shabby frame.
“There are several enlarged portraits exhibited by A. Claudet, but they cannot be called anything more than successful attempts. Enlarged photographs are, in our opinion, a great mistake. It is not the province of photography to supersede the crayon or the life-size canvas. There are many other portraits that we cannot notice from want of space. Our readers must not therefore suppose that silence is necessarily indicative of censure.
“The coloured portraits are numerous, and for the most part good. Foremost in excellence are those of Messrs. Lock and Whitfield. These gentlemen certainly have succeeded in collecting together, in one frame, an amount of female and infantine beauty rarely seen. Having such models to work upon, and being, as they undoubtedly are, our best photographic colourists, the result could not be otherwise than super-excellent. Next come the very beautiful propuctions [sic] of Mr. Williams, 821-829, which consist principally of vignetted heads, charmingly coloured in oil. The rest of the display is made up by Messrs. Claudet, Heath and Beau, Kilburn, and Mayer Brothers, whose productions are well known to the public. There is a large coloured group of officers, which has received a place to which it is certainly not entitled. It is a large group of military men, made up from a number of negatives, taken at different times and under different conditions of light. The colouring is very bad, and the officers appear to have no connection with each other; in fact it reminds one strongly of the well-known plates in ‘Le Follet,’ and other books of tailoring art. There are several frames of guarantors’ portraits, about which the less that is said the better. M. Claudet contributes a stand of daguerreotype stereoscopic portraits, which come back to one like a dream of ancient days.”
Some other extracts from the daily press, and comments thereon, are compelled to stand over to our next.
1862: P News, July 11, vol. VI, #201, p. 333-335:
PHOTOGRAPHY FOR Travellers and Tourists.
By Professor Pole, F.R.S. * (*From Macmillan’s Magazine)
It is the natural wish of most persons who visit a new locality to bring back pictorial representations of the scenery; and this want is usually met in one of two ways—either by published views or by sketching. In well-frequented places, published views are generally to be had, and command a large sale; and the accuracy of these publications has of late been much increased, and their circulation much promoted, by the more general introduction of landscape photography, and the great increase of its professional practitioners.
But the facility of obtaining views in this way is not without its drawbacks. IN the case of engravings, both the accuracy and artistic merit may be anything but satisfactory; ordinary photographs, though they must be tolerably true, may not represent the particular objects, or show them in the particular way the purchaser may desire; and it need hardly be said that there are vast numbers of localities visited by both travelers and tourists, particularly the former, where neither engravings nor photographs are to be found, and of which it is, for that very reason, most peculiarly desirable to get accurate views. To meet these difficulties, the only resource has usually been hand-sketching. Now, the power to sketch well is undeniably one of the greatest advantages that a traveller can posses; but, unfortunately, though drawing is now one of our stock school accomplishments, only a small minority of those who travel are able to transfer efficiently to paper what they see; and even in favourable cases, though clever and artistic pictures may be produced, the faithfulness of the representations must always be more or less uncertain.
Doubtless, the idea must often have occurred to almost every traveller, what an advantage it would be if he could himself take photographs, where he likes, of what he likes, when he likes, and how he likes. But such an idea must soon have been dismissed, from the supposed incompatibility of this with ordinary travelling arrangements. The usual notions of photographic operations comprehends a fearful array of dark rooms, huge instruments, chemical paraphernalia, water, and mess, which no sane person, out of the professional photographic guild, would think of burdening himself with, on an ordinary journey, and which only a practiced adept could use if he had them; and so the idea of a traveller taking views for himself on his tour is generally dismissed at once as an impracticable chimera.
Now, it is the object of this article to show that such a view of the matter is a delusion, and that any traveller or tourist, gentleman or lady, may, be about a quarter of an hour’s learning, and with an amount of apparatus that would go into the gentleman’s coat pocket, or the lady’s reticule, put himself or herself into the desirable position we have named.
It is not our intention to write a treatise on photography; but we must state generally what the operations are, in order to make our explanations intelligible.
The process, then, of taking a photographic picture consists essentially of three main divisions, namely—1. Preparing the plate; 2. Taking the picture; and 3. Developing the image; and the most common and best known arrangement of these is as follows:--A glass plate of the proper size is coated with collodion, and made sensitive to light by dipping in a bath of a certain solution. It is then, while it remains moist, placed in the camera obscura, and exposed to the image formed by the lens; after which, but still before the plate has had time to dry, it is taken out, and treated with certain chemicals which have the property of developing the image so obtained. The plate is then what is called a “negative;” from which, after it has been secured by varnish, any number of impressions, or “prints,” may be taken at any time.
Now, it will be seen, by the words we have printed in italics, that, according to this method of operation, the whole of the three parts of the process must be performed within a very short space of time; and, since the first and third require to be done in a place to which daylight cannot enter, a dark room, supplied with a somewhat extensive assortment of chemical apparatus, must be provided close to the place where the picture is taken. This method, from the necessity of the plate remaining moist, is called the wet process. It is always employed for portraits, and has the advantage not only of great beauty of finish, but of extreme sensitiveness, requiring only a few seconds’ exposure in the camera.
The wet process was the first, and we believe, fro some time, the only collodion process in use. But, in a happy moment, it occurred to somebody to inquire whether it was really indispensable that the plates should be kept moist during the whole operation, and it was found that, by certain modifications of the process of preparing them, they might be allowed to dry, and that some time might elapse between the preparation and the exposure, as well as between this and the development. The immense advantage this promised to landscape photography led to extensive investigation; and several processes have now been perfected which will secure this result. Plates may be prepared at any convenient time and place, and may be carried about for months, ready for use at a moment’s notice; and, after the picture has been taken, they may also be kept some time before development. The only price we pay for this advantage is the necessity for a little longer exposure in the camera; which, for landscapes, is of no moment at all.
The bearing of this discovery on our more immediate subject will be at once apparent, as it gets rid of the necessity of providing, on the journey, for the preparation and development, with all their cumbersome and troublesome apparatus, and limits what is necessary to the simple exposure, or taking of the picture. Any another advantage of still more importance follows from this—namely, that the plates may be prepared and developed, not only in another place, but by another person. The knowledge, care, and skill required for photography, as well as the stains and all other disagreeables attending it, refer almost exclusively to the preparation and development; the exposure to take the view is an operation of the simplest kind, which anybody may learn in a few minutes, and which is attended with no trouble or inconvenience whatever.
Limiting, therefore, the traveller’s operation to the taking of the picture, let us consider what this involves. The first question which affects materially the portability of the necessary apparatus, is the size of picture to be taken. We are accustomed to see very large and beautiful photographs of scenery and architecture; but these would be impracticable for the traveller, as the dimensions of the plate increase so materially every portion of the apparatus. Differences of opinion and of taste may exist as to the degree of inconvenience it is worth while putting up with; but the writer of this paper, after considerable experience, has come to the conclusion, that the smallest size in ordinary use—namely, the stereoscopic plate—is by far the most eligible one for travelling. The object is not to make large and valuable artistic pictures—that we must always leave to the professional man—but it is simply to preserve faithful representations; and this may be done as well on the small as on the large scale, and with infinitely less trouble. For, though the size is small, the delicacy of detail procurable with well-prepared plats, even in a large extent of view, is something marvelous, as may be easily seen in some of the magnificent stereoscopic views that are to be had in the shops; besides which the stereoscopic effect gives an air of reality to the view, which greatly enhances the value of the representation.
The camera for taking stereoscopic views has now been reduced, by ingenious contrivances, to a very portable size. The one used by the writer is nine inches long, five and a half inches wide, and three inches high—a bout the dimensions of a good-sized octavo book. It weighs a little over two pounds, and hangs by a strap round the neck in walking with no inconvenience. The stand folds up into a straight stick, which is carried easily in the hand. A stock of eight plates, in slides ready for use (sufficient generally for a day’s operations), go into two folding pocket cases. The tourist can thus walk about without the slightest sense of incumbrance, and is prepared, at any moment, to take a perfect stereoscopic view of anything he sees—an operation which will occupy him from five to fifteen minutes, according to the light, and the time he may take to choose his position.
Considered as adding to the baggage of the traveller, these things are hardly worth mentioning—as, with the exception of the stand (which travels well in company with an umbrella), they will all lie snugly in a spare corner of a portmanteau. Of course, however, a stock of plates must be added. A dozen of these, with appropriate packing, will occupy about eight inches long, four inches wide, and one and a half inch high; and from this the space occupied by any number it is proposed to take on the journey may be easily estimated. Suppose there are five dozen—a pretty fair allowance—these, with camera and all complete, will go into a very portable hand-box, or into one of the small black leather bags now so common.
If the operator chooses to go to a little extra trouble, it is highly satisfactory to be able to develop the plates on the journey—which may conveniently be done in the evenings, at a hotel or lodging; and the apparatus for which adds very slightly to the bulk of the preparations. A small case of bottles, five inches square and two and a half inches thick, together with one or two small loose articles, are all the author takes with him. The development of a plate takes five or ten minutes, able to see, the same evening, what one has been doing in the day, is quite inducement enough to do it. But still, we repeat, this is not necessary, as the development may be left to another person and to another time.
We think we have shown how every traveller or tourist may be his own photographer, with much less trouble and difficulty than is generally supposed; and we may add that this is no untried plan. The writer of this article has been much in the habit of travelling; and, for years past, when he has gone on a journey, the little camera has been put into the portmanteau, as unassumingly and as regularly as the dressing-case. It has traveled in all sorts of countries, and has cast its eye on scenes which camera never looked at before; it has been a never-failing source of interesting occupation and amusement, and has recorded its travels in hundreds of interesting views, some of much excellence, and very few otherwise than successful.
But it may be asked, Since [sic] the advantage and usefulness of this plan are so undeniable, how is it that we do not see it in more frequent use? Simply for the reason that the dealers in photographic apparatus have never yet had the enterprise to establish a manufacture and sale of dry prepared plates, in such a way as to insure their popularity.
The manufacture and sale of photographic apparatus and chemicals is now becoming a very large branch of commerce; but many of the large numbers of tradesmen who prosecute it appear to have a much more earnest view towards the profits of the business than to the advancement of the art—for, since the death of Mr. Archer (to whom we owe almost entirely the present state of photography, and who lost a fortune in its improvement), nearly every advance made has been by private individuals. We must not be misunderstood. There are many people who profess to sell dry plates, and these may often be found to possess many of the requisites they should have; but few can be depended on, and none combine all the qualities which are necessary to give the system the full benefit of its inestimable value. Some will not keep long enough before exposure; some that will not keep at all after exposure; some fail in senstiveness [sic]; some spoil soon after they are opened; to say nothing of the constant liability to stains, irregularities, blisters, and all sorts of troublesome and annoying defects, which not only spoil the operator’s work, but—what is of more importance—destroy all reliance on his operations, and so discourage him from undertaking them. We are not sure whether some dealers may not be obtuse enough even to encourage defects, from the short-sighted notion of increasing the sale; but this we can say—that we know no maker who will guarantee the sincerity of his wish to make good plates, by consenting to allow for them if they turn out bad ones. If this state of things arose from imperfection in the art, we should not grumble, but could only urge improvement; but this is not so. It is well known that dry plates can be made, satisfying all the conditions we have named, and which, with care and system in the manufacture, might be rendered thoroughly trustworthy. It is only the indolence or obstinacy of the trade that prevents their becoming regular articles of commerce.
We do not wish, however, to discourage the traveller who may wish to adopt this admirable aid to his wanderings; for the object to be gained is so important that it is worth striving a little for. In the present state of the matter, he must either learn to prepare his own plates—which, after all, is no great exertion—or, if he buys them, he must at least learn to develop them, and must, at the same time, lay in with them a certain stock of patience and temper to meet disappointment; and we can assure him that, even at this price, he will find himself amply repaid. But we again urge that the case ought not to stand thus. The application of the dry processes to portable photography offers a boon almost inestimable to, but yet quite unappreciated by, the traveller and the tourist; and it only needs the zealous and earnest co-operation of the dealer, by so conducting the manufacture as to render it perfect and trustworthy, to raise this application into a branch of commerce of an extent, importance, and profit, little inferior to any in the trade.
1862: P News, July 11, vol. VI, #201, p. 336:
Talk In The Studio.
THE OLDEST EXISTING PHOTOGRAPHS.—At a recent dinner of “The Photographic Club,” we had an opportunity of examining one of the most interesting mementoes of early photographic investigation and experiment. It consisted of a heliograph, in the possession of Mr. Joseph Ellis, of Brighton, whose name will be familiar to old photographers. Mr. Ellis gave some interesting details of the history of the picture, and of his possession of it. M. Nicéphore Niepce, it may be remembered, had obtained permanent photographic pictures many years before the publication of Daguerre’s discovery, and in the year 1827 visited this country, in the vain hope of being able to obtain the attention of the Royal Society. It appeared that he resided at Kew, and the picture in question had been given by him to his landlord at that time, in whose hand an inscription at the back is found to the following effect:--“This prototype (probably error for phototype) was presented to me at Kew, in the year 1827 by M. N. Niepce, the discoverer of the art.—B. Cussell.” Mr. Ellis had seen it in Mr. Cussell’s possession some years ago, and desired to obtain it. Mr. Cussell refused, however, to part with it, regarding it with almost superstitious regard and reverence. For the time, Mr. Ellis had to waive his desire, resolving, however, to keep his eye upon it. He recently learnt that the owner had died, and found, on enquiry, that his effects had been sold by auction. A little search discovered this picture in the hands of a broker, whos chief idea of its value was based on the notion that it was executed on silver. The back had been scratched to test it, and it is to the fact that the metal used was pewter and not one of the noble metals, that this interesting memento, probably one of the earliest sun pictures in existence, was saved from the melting pot. Mr. Ellis purchased the picture, and preserves it with the care naturally pertaining to a picture possessing such historic value. It is a copy of an engraving produced in the camera by the action of light on a film of bitumen, on a pewter tablet. The size was about the ordinary half-plate; the effect is in some respects similar to a Daguerreotype, the image being vigorous and well defined. We may here take occasion to refer the reader interested in the historic details of photography, which are somewhat scarce and scattered, to a couple of published lecture of Mr. Ellis, who, with considerable research, ahs carefully, and with much ability, traced the earliest known facts, evidently entering upon the task as a labour of love.
MR. BEDFORD’S EASTERN PICTURES.—We hope shortly to announce definitely the opening of an Exhibition of Mr. Francis Bedford’s Eastern Photographs, most probably in the German Gallery. After upwards of four months of very rapid travelling by every mode of transit, he has arrived at home in excellent health and spirits, with something like two hundred good negatives, having met with no more serious casualty than the smashing of his camera by an Arab to whom it was entrusted to carry up a rock. The bulk of the negatives were by the wet process. A stock of Dr. Hill Norris’s plates which were taken, gave excellent negatives during the earlier part of the journey; but some trying changes of temperature having rendered them doubtful, Mr. Bedford, not having time for experiment, confined himself in future to the wet process. The appliances for this, we are violating no confidence in stating, were a stock of Ponting’s collodion, and a stock of Thomas’s bromo-iodized, both of which were used with the pyrogallic acid development. The former was found very sensitive, but, owing to the very glaring light, solarized very readily. The use of the bromo-iodized collodion obviated this difficulty, and was found therefore more suitable for the work. Notwithstanding the great intensity of the light, a tolerably long exposure was generally necessary to bring out detail in the black shadows. The heat was found very trying, the plate not unfrequently being partially dry before it could be developed; the use of a weak pyro developer was found the best mode of meeting the difficulty. All the negatives were on 12 by 10 plates. The lenses used were a single Ross and a Grubb, both of which we understand did their work very well. His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales manifested a deep interest, we understand, in Mr. Bedford’s success, making daily enquiry as to the result of operations, and making an occasional attempt at some of the manipulations. His brother, the Prince Alfred, we may here add, is an enthusiastic amateur, undertaking any department of work himself, from cleaning the plates to focusing the negative. Messrs. Day and Sons, as we have before announced, will published Mr. Bedford’s pictures.
1862: P News, Aug. 8, vol. VI, #205, p. 375:
Critical Notices:
A Series of Cabinet Views, Size 6 ¾ by 4 ½. Photographed by G. W. Wilson. London: Marion & Co.
Mr. Wilson is not only one of the ablest Artists In the profession, but he is in a pre-eminent sense an originator of certain styles in which he will find many, we will scarcely say imitators, but at least followers. Instantaneous stereographs had been taken for years, but it was not until Mr. Wilson issues a series of his exquisite sea and cloud pieces, in many of which he set the daring example of pointing his camera in the face of the sun, that such pictures began to have a recognized position amongst the staple productions of the art: and now several able artists are running a close race with the originator in the competition for excellence. We venture to intimate that the class of pictures Mr. Wilson has recently issued, as Cabinet Views, will become largely popular with the public, and with photographers, both professional and amateur, and that this series will, in fact, originate a style which will have many followers. It is quite certain that one barrier to the extensive circulation of photographs, was works of art, has arisen from a certain difficulty as to the proper mode of keeping them; they are scarcely well suited for framing, at any rate they have not a certainly recognized position in interior decoration; and an extensive collection, especially if the pictures be large, demands serious portfolio accommodation. Photographs of a size, then, capable of preservation in albums, especially if suitable albums be manufactured, are likely to become favorites with the public, and hence we conceive that Mr. Wilson in issuing this series will originate a style. Most of our readers know that these pictures are produced with the triple lens, and include a somewhat larger angle of view than is common with landscape photographs, thus often obtaining much in pictorial effect: the size, about 7 by 4 1/2 , is, moreover, exceedingly convenient for handling, and is not so small as to render objects insignificantly diminutive. We believe it is the intention of Messrs. Marion to prepare albums of a similar kind to those used for card portraits. Especially suited to the reception of this size of photographs.
These views are characterized by the qualities which have hitherto distinguished Mr. Wilson’s pictures: judicious and artistic selection of position and light, softness and brilliancy combined, and above all, the unmistakable presence of atmosphere. In many, which are not, however, instantaneous pictures, there are very fine natural clouds, and in others, the sky possesses a graduated or flat tint, but in no instance is it represented by a mass of white paper. Amongst the finest specimens of skies in the non-instantaneous pictures, we may mention that in a view of Aberdeen with the Union Bridge in the foreground, which contains an exquisitely round yet soft and atmospheric bank of clouds. Two or three of the views of Balmoral Castle are charming pictures, and also contain fine clouds. Aberdeen University, and Castle Street, Aberdeen, are both very fine architectural pictures, and excellent illustrations of the value of a graduated atmospheric tint over the sky in making a picture, and preserving breadth. Braemar Castle, Mill on the Cluny, and Bridge on the Cluny, are three of the most charming pictures of the series, admirable examples of the soft rendering of running and broken water; foliage and rocks in the foreground do not lose their slightest detail, and distant hills are perfectly defined without, however, the cutting hardness which ignores aerial perspective. There are also some fine instantaneous pictures in the series, including shipping, water, and clouds. We have not space to notice in detail every picture in the series, nor have we alluded to all their merits, our object being chiefly to draw attention to such points as possess technical interest in the eyes of our readers, to many of whom a selection from such a series will possess high educational value, as illustrating how the overcoming of merely technical and photographic difficulties becomes conducive to the attainment of pictorial excellence. As a whole we have rarely seen a series of photographs more pleasing; combining more of the artistic and photographic beauties necessary to a perfect result.
1862: P News, Aug. 8, vol. VI, #205, p. 375:
Critical Notices:
A Photograph of Some of the Members of the British Association. Designed and photographed by A. Brothers. London: Day & Son; Manchester: A. Brothers.
Mr. Brothers has, on former occasions, earned high praise for the skill and taste with which he has designed and photographed composition portrait groups. The picture before us, however, is unquestionably one of the very best grouped pictures we have seen. The original photograph was a commission for Mr. Fairbairn, President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science last year, when the meetings were held at Manchester, and was intended to commemorate the occasion. The picture consists of twenty-two persons, assembled in Mr. Fairbairn’s drawing-room; the assembly comprises some of the most eminent savans who took part in the proceedings of the Association, amongst whom we may name, in addition to the President himself, the Astronomer Royal, Sir Roderick Murchison, General Sabine, Sir David Brewster, Lord Wrottesley, Professor Miller and others. The figures are arranged in minor groups around three tables, but these three minor groups are united by standing figures so as to constitute one complete and admirably composed group, the individual positions being all so arranged as to aid in producing unity of idea and design, the whole being easy, natural, artistic, and harmonious.
The original photograph was about 33 inches by 20 inches. The number of negatives was thirty-two, twenty for the figures, and twelve fore the background and accessories; the total number of printings was thirty-seven. The mere enumeration of these facts is suggestive enough of the care and skill required, and the difficulties to be overcome in producing a satisfactory result; but a little reflection suggests, how much greater are the difficulties than at first sight might appear. In a recent conversation we had with Mr. Brothers, he mentioned some of these difficulties. A painter in producing a group, or even a photographer in producing a fancy composition group, has the whole of his material before him, and more or less under control. He can conceive his idea, arrange his composition, make his sketch before hand, and work out his ideas in his own way; but the professional portraitist, when called upon to produce a composition like the one before us, rarely possesses any of these facilities: he has to form his design on the spur of the moment, in the absence of the component parts; often in ignorance even of their personal appearance, and sometimes in doubt as to the exact number to be included. The sittings are to be secured at such different times, and in such conditions of light, &c., as may suit the sitter, however ill it may suit the photographer. With all this, it is necessary to secure such accuracy of proportion, and such positions and relations of light and shade as shall constitute a satisfactory and harmonious completed picture. With such artistic difficulties, in addition to all the technical troubles which will at once flash to the mind of the reader, many shortcomings in the result, if they existed, might be pardoned. No such plea is, however, required by the group before us. The likenesses are striking; the positions easy, characteristic, and natural; the composition, grouping, and arrangement of accessories excellent.
The print now published is from one negative 16 by 10, taken from the original picture. In this copy, the photography is very excellent, round, vigorous, and brilliant, and speaking very highly for the perfect photography of the original picture. We have before us also a card picture, containing a copy of the same group, which is an admirable example of photographic reproduction.
1862: P News, Aug. 8, vol. VI, #205, p. 376:
Critical Notices: Instantaneous Views of the Inundations in the Fens. Photographed by V. Blanchard. London: C. E. Elliot.
Few of our readers before reading Mr. Blanchard’s graphic description of a photographic trip to the recently inundated and desolated fen country, would be likely to conceive that anything interesting or picturesque for the camera could be found in such a scene—a dreary waste of waters, and “stretched wide and wild the waste enormous marsh.” Mr. Blanchard has here proved, however, what painters have often proved, but what photographers have found much more difficult, that the trained eye and hand of the artist will secure a picture out of the most unpromising materials; and apart from their deep interest as an unerring record of a great calamity, this series contains many slides of very great pictorial excellence.
“Sunset after a Storm,” No. 150, is an exceedingly charming picture, with fine clouds and sky; the light on the troubled water is very beautiful; a piece of partially submerged railing in the foreground, and a boat in the middle distance, give force and value to the picture. Another sunset view (No. 156) is also a very fine composition: the sun and clouds are calmly reflected in the water, which apparently covers a meadow, the taller grass of which occasionally merges beyond the surface. A forcible picture of the desolation is suggested by a boat with canvas set, sailing past a partially submerged haystack. In another slide, a boat, the same apparently, is approaching one of the drowned farm houses, and is just passing over or through a hedgerow, the pliant top twigs of which just emerge from the surface of the water.
A view from the Middle Level Bank (No. 151) and one from the Gravel Bank, near Marshland Fen engine (157), are two very good slides, admirably illustrative of the subject, and presenting some fine pictorial effects besides. Here also are views of the broken sluice, and of the coffer dam, with a group of celebrated engineers present, and other views possessing historic interest, as illustrating different phases of the inundation and the works connected therewith. The photography is in all instances good, the negatives manifestly being very perfect, and the printing excellent.
We may here take occasion to allude to a happy knack Mr. Blanchard possesses, of giving increased interest to his slides, by excellent description and apt quotation. The inundation series are made valuable by having printed on the back a brief but very clear and succinct description of the position of the land now from the sea, of the draining embankments, and recent inundations. An admirable quotation from Tennyson beneath the title of the slide wonderfully helps the imagination whilst examining its subject. It runs—
“---- we see
Stretched wide and wild the waste enormous marsh,.
Where from the frequent bridge,
Like emblems of infinity,
The trenched waters run from sky to sky.”
This is as apt as the quotation from Cowper on Mr. Blanchard’s instantaneous views of London; running thus:
“ ‘Tis pleasant, through the loopholes of retreat,
To peep at such a world; to see the stir
Of the great Babel, and not feel the crowd.”
Surely Cowper must have had a stereoscope and a pile of instantaneous street scenes before him when he wrote this! Never mind the anachronism!
1862: P News, Aug. 8, vol. VI, #205, p. 376:
Critical Notices: Instantaneous Marine Views for the Stereoscope. By Dages and Harman.
Another series of instantaneous pictures of maritime subjects, chiefly sea, and shipping, and clouds, and comprising some very beautiful atmospheric effects indeed. Messrs. Dages and Harman have visited the east and south coast, and the views are chiefly off Yarmouth or Portland, those of the former place abounding with incident, the latter being chiefly confined to effects of water and cloud, some of which are, however, very fine. No. 197, “Sunset,” and 199, “A Stormy Day,” have magnificent clouds, but require some foreground object to give solidity and force to the whole; the finest atmospheric effect loses much of its value if there be not some fore-ground object, however simple. The Yarmouth views are not wanting in this respect, and some of them are very beautiful indeed. No. 229, A “Fishing Lugger just coming in to the Pier,” is very fine, and sufficiently sharp for the figures, indicating the number of the vessel, to be read perfectly. No. 220, “A Steamer bringing in a Disabled Vessel,” is also very fine, perfectly exposed, and yet with every line of cordage, both in the steamer and ship, perfectly defined. There are a great many other admirably selected views, full of incident, and many of them excellent photographs. Some of them are, however, slightly under-exposed, and some of them a little over-intensified, which gives some tendency to coarseness and hardness. They are all so nearly good, and many of them quite so, that we feel sure that, with a little more care in manipulating, Messrs. Dages and Harman will produce uniformly very perfect results.
1862: P News, Aug. 8, vol. VI, #205, p. 376-377:
Critical Notices: The British Houses of Parliament. London: Ashford, Brothers. [sic]
This will necessarily be a popular series of slides, as few subjects could well be more interesting for the stereoscope than the interiors of the Upper and Lower senate houses of the British Empire. Those who are familiar with the buildings will know that they present greater difficulties to the photographer than many interiors; remembering these difficulties, it will be seen that many of these pictures are well done. We trust their circulation will be as large as they deserve.
1862: P News, Aug. 22, vol. VI, #207, p. 399:
Critical Notices.
PHOTOGRAPHS OF VIEWS AND ARCHITECTURE IN CAMBRIDGE. By W. Mayland.
This series consists of a variety of landscapes in the neighbourhood of Cambridge, and of interior and exterior views of some of the architecture in that city. As a whole, these photographs are worthy of high commendation, the subjects are interesting, the treatment is artistic, and the photography nearly faultless, the delicacy of manipulation reminding us in many respects of the pictures of Mr. Vernon Heath.
“The Robinson Crusoe, from Sheep’s Green,” is a 12 by 10 photograph of a noble old tree, the spreading limbs and graceful foliage of which are beautifully rendered. A great charm about this picture is found in the entourage of the tree, which is the principal object. A rustic cottage, embowered in foliage, small trees, and shrubs, with water in the foreground, reflecting the foliage, all combine to produce a picturesque effect. An opening in the foliage, showing the windings in the river, and giving distance, and a couple of youths fishing, helping the composition without disturbing the repose or destroying subordination, complete the picture.
“The Library, Trinity College,” is one of the most perfect interiors we have met with. The noble and magnificently equipped and arranged library, presents a vista of apparently from a hundred and fifty to two hundred feet, the whole of which possesses satisfactory definition in every part, the perfection of which, and of the half tone and modeling throughout, gives a most marvellous effect of monocular relief, scarcely surpassed in the stereoscope. A memorandum on the corner informs us that the negative was taken in winter, with an exposure of fifteen minutes, iron development, and the full aperture of a Dallmeyer’s triple lens for 12 by 10 plates. This print is 13 ¼ inches by 10 ½ inches, and possesses very satisfactory definition. The picture is both soft and vigorous; brilliant and full of relief, but without black shadows or patches of white without drawing.
“King’s College Chapel” is an excellent piece of photography, but scarcely an artistic picture, the building completely filling the plate; there is sufficient definition up to the edges of a picture 13 ½ inches by 10 ½ inches and vigorous freedom from distortion, the architectural lines being perfectly straight at the extreme edges.
“St. John’s, from Trinity,” is a fine landscape, with the river in the foreground, the distant college being seen through an avenue of well defined foliage. “King’s College from King’s Meadows,” and “Ditton,” are two equally fine pictures.
“Thorwalsden’s Statue of Byron in the Library of King’s College,” is a very perfect photograph, well rounded and soft, of a noble piece of sculpture. The interior of the library, indicated but not made out, forms an excellent background for the statue.
“The Avenue, Trinity College,” is a charming piece of photography of a good subject. The sun glancing through the trees, athwart the avenue, and interlacing the walk with the long cast shadows of the trees and their branches, giving it a most fantastic effect.
“King’s College Chapel.” This is a vignetted print of a very pleasing composition; the many pinnacled building is in the middle distance, the foreground consisting of a mass of fine foliage. The time is winter, and the boughs of the leafless trees bend under heavy masses of snow, which is very finely rendered.
Two views of the interior of Trinity Chapel, one looking east, and the other looking west, are marvelously fine views of a very noble building. Every detail of the old and dark carving is made out, the shadows are rich and transparent, and the prints are full of relief and vigour. The negatives were taken by a 6 by 5 triple, but these prints are 7 ½ inches by 6 ½ inches, thus giving a very wide angle, including a large portion of each side of the interior, whiles the definition is very fine throughout. The stereoscopic effect given by these single pictures is very striking. A view of the cloisters in Trinity College has the same characteristic. This is a very charming photograph, the lighting, the point of view, the amount of softness and detail, and great brilliancy, all displaying the taste, judgment, and manipulatory skill of the operator in a pre-eminent degree.
We recently referred to Mr. Mayland’s card portraits as amongst the finest in the International Exhibition: the series before us affords evidence that his skill in landscape and architectural photography is not inferior to the ability displayed in his portraits. The artistic qualities of his pictures are good, whilst in care, delicacy, attention to minute details, freedom from slovenliness or manipulatory faults, uniform and good printing, they are unsurpassed.
1862: P News, Aug. 22, vol. VI, #207, p. 399-400:
Critical Notices.
PHOTOGRAPHS FROM ENLARGED NEGATIVES. By W. H. Warner, of Ross. London: H. S. Warr, High Holborn.
Our readers will recognize the name of Mr. Warner as a frequent correspondent in our columns, and they will also be familiar with his announcement in our advertising pages, undertaking to produce enlarged negatives for amateurs and the profession. The photographs before us are specimens of the excellence to be obtained by the method of enlargement adopted, which is that described in the Photographic News Almanac for this year, and brought into recent notice by Mr. Heath’s paper, at a late meeting of the Photographic Society. The method consists in producing an enlarged negative from a small one at two operations, a transparent positive being first obtained, and from that another negative. The whole of the specimens before us are on whole plates, and are enlarged from stereoscopic negatives; the amount of enlargement is not, of course, limited to this proportion, but Mr. Warner finds that an enlargement of this extent is pre-eminently satisfactory. These specimens are duplicates of some which appeared in the British Department of the International Exhibition, and were removed on account of injury from the damp walls.
To those interested in this mode of enlargement, we especially commend a view of the South Aisle in Hereford Cathedral, which is, in every sense, a very fine picture, and an excellent specimen of enlargement. As a picture, it is beautifully lighted, and a charming specimen of breadth. Architectural subjects, it will be readily seen, are trying tests for definition in this mode of enlargement, inasmuch, as unlike many subjects, portrait busts for instance, the necessity for fine definition, is not confined to a portion in the middle of the plate, but is carried to the extreme edges. This specimen and many similar ones, are therefore valuable as showing the amount of definition to be secured by the process.
The “Blind Harper, Raglan Castle,” is another picturesque photograph and excellent enlargement. “Oscar,” a fine portrait of a handsome dog, is also fine. A Norman doorway in Ludlow Castle, and another in Kilpick Church, as well as some others, also satisfactorily illustrate the excellence of the method, and are in themselves interesting pictures.
As our readers know, we have always recommended this mode of enlargement, feeling well convinced that by its judicious use a sufficient amount of definition could always be secured, whilst, ijn some instances, the sharpness is in no perceptible degree inferior to that of the original. The facility of securing many beautiful results with small apparatus, difficult or impossible with larger instruments, and the temptation to reduce the amount of impedimenta whilst on photographic rambles, are, we think, strong inducements to the amateur to be content with obtaining perfect small negatives, with a view to the subsequent production of large pictures from enlarged negative.
1862: P News, Aug. 22, vol. VI, #207, p. 400:
Critical Notices.
PHOTOGRAPHS OF VARIOUS VIEWS. By Ernest Edwards. London: Published by McLean, Melhuish, and Haes, for the “Amateur Photographic Association.”
The series of photographs before us is a striking illustration of the value of the Amateur Photographic Association, in affording a ready way for the amateur to publish his productions without entering the ranks and competing with professional photographers.
From the catalogue of the Association, we find that Mr. Edwards contributes not less than one hundred and nine negatives, prints from a dozen of which we have before us, and we may add that if the bulk be anything like the sample, which we do not doubt, Mr. Edwards may not only claim a very high position in the amateur ranks, but may ably try conclusions with some of our best professional artists.
The first print which arrests our attention is a view of King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, from a similar point to one we have just noticed above. This is, however, a summer scene, in which the wooded foreground is thick with leaves instead of snow; and although both are excellent photographs, we prefer the effect of the summer picture, the leafy entanglement being highly picturesque; whilst the light, graceful form of the building, seen through and above the trees in the distance, has a very charming effect. There is a fine atmospheric tint in the sky, and the picture is tastefully vignetted. Altogether this pictures is a photographic gem.
“Ryde Pier and Steamer.”—This is an instantaneous picture, and is in no respect inferior to that we have just noticed: it is a fine composition, and is delicate, soft, and transparent.
“Whippingham Church” is a very excellent photograph of the church which Her Majesty has recently rebuilt at Osborne. There is a little under-exposure in the foliage, and this is scarcely, we think, the best view of the building, which is, however, one of which it is somewhat difficult to obtain a suitable position for getting the best effect.
“Netley Abbey, East Window,” is one of the most charming photographs of the series, exquisitely brilliant, and perfect in chiaroscuro, it is at the same time delicate and soft in the extreme; the climbing foliage, almost bridging the chasms in the broken arches, is very beautiful. Some other views of the ruins of this fine old abbey are equally good.
“Anchor Church, Derby,” and “A Cleft in the Rock, Anchor Church,” are two good photographs of natural curiosities, the chief charm in which, pictorially, consists in the beautiful rendering of the mass of luxuriant vegetation with which the rocks are overgrown, creeping plants, and grasses of all kinds, intertwining in fantastic wreaths. These would form fine subjects for the stereoscope, but they scarcely make pictures.
A statue of “Silence,” in the Fitzwilliam Museum, is a charming photograph of a charming piece of sculpture. It is illuminated chiefly by a side light, and in the point of view selected, the camera is directed to the shadowed side of the figure; the attempt is a dangerous one, but the result is very beautiful when it is successful, as it is here. The vignetting is very judiciously managed.
The “Shield of Achilles” is a fine piece of photography, rendering with great delicacy every part of the magnificent design, and doing full justice to the relieve, a task not always easy with a bronze surface.
“The Library, Trinity College,” is a beautifully executed small interior of this magnificent library.
The whole of Mr. Edwards’ pictures are characterized by fine feeling and great delicacy of manipulation. It is only right to add that the printing is uniformly good, the prints are of fine tone, and the vignetting judiciously managed, the whole reflecting great credit on the firm who print for the Association.
1862: P News, Aug. 29, vol. VI, #208, p. 420:
Talk In The Studio [selection]
PHOTOGRAPHIC FESTIVAL.—On Tuesday week Mr. Mayall entertained the whole of the persons employed in his establishments at a magnificent banquet at his residence at Pinner. Meetings of such a kind between the employer and the employed are always interesting, and indicate the existence of that good feeling which they are calculated farther to promote.
BALLOON OBSERVATIONS.—Mr. Glaiser, whose name is known to most of our readers as an accomplished photographer, as well as Superintendent of the Magnetic and Meteorological Departments of the Royal Observatory, at Greenwich, has recently, in company with an experienced aeronant [sic], made several balloon ascents, for the purpose of observing and recording meteorological observations, the result of which will, we believe, be reported at the forthcoming meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, at Cambridge. The Daily Telegraph recording one of these ascents speaks in glowing terms of the exquisite cloud effects seen. It says:--“At about twenty minutes to eight the earth was entirely hidden; and at this time the cloud scenery was of a character to which Mr. Ruskin alone, in his very happiest moments, could have done justice. As the balloon went on its solitary journey, the clouds were breaking up, and in long swathes and folds of a ghostly white, their fragments passed dimly. By an optical illustration which will be easily understood, not the clouds, but the balloon itself, appeared to rise and fall; and suddenly, when it had passed through an aerial valley, a glimpse was caught of the upper plains of the sky. The contrast was marvelous. It was like passing from the obscurity of a churchyard into the glare of a conflagration. Close—so close as almost to seem palpable—clouds of the purest white, rose and fell like waves upon a sea of snow; and far away, over their level range, there was a glory of scarlet and gold, changing every instant, but only to become more varied and intense. In another minute this glorious sight was to be seen no longer.” Would it be impossible to preserve some record of these effects by means of the camera, and has Mr. Glaisher opportunity for bringing photography to bear during these journeys? The results would be interesting.
PHOTOGRAPHY ON MONT BLANC.—We find in the Moniteur an interesting description of an ascent of Mont Blanc, effected on the 11th inst. by M. Bisson, an eminent photographer, who had already performed the feat last year, but was desirous of completing his collection of views. His progress as far as the Grands-Mulets was not marked by any particular incident; he took various views from different points, and then proceeded to the Passage des Echelles, where he and his party crossed the ravines, some 300 feet deep, crawling on horizontal ladders, one by one, on their hands and feet. Their further progress to the Dôme de Goutté was, however, impeded by an unforeseen incident. A bridge of I ce and snow, which had hitherto served as a passage to the grand Plateau, had broken down, and they found a yawning abyss, from 45 to 155 feet in width, before them. No other passage seemed possible, and M. Bisson was on the point of giving up the adventure, when he was hailed by three of his men, who, unperceived, had sought a convenient place, and with their hatchets hewed out a path, by which they had succeeded in gaining the icy crest of the Mont Maudit. They soon descended the rocks on the other side, and threw ropes to their comrades, by which the luggage was hauled up. M. Bisson and the rest of the party followed the new but dangerous path, which brought them two hours sooner to the Grand Plateau. There new difficulties awaited them; they had to hew 800 steps, and ascend the side of the corridor, which, in some places, had an inclination of 50 degrees. On reaching the end of the corridor, they were assailed by an icy-cold wind. On arriving at the summit, after some further labour, M. Bisson found to his regret that the silver of his plates was crystallized, the temperature having suddenly fallen 10 degrees centigrade, although it was exactly noon. At 2 p.m. he descended from the summit, but visited it again on the 14th, and returned to [C]hamounix on the 15th without further accident.—Times
M. DISDERI’S WORK.—The recently issued volume by M. Disderi, ENTITLED “L’Art de la Photographie,” regarding which we have had several enquiries, may be had, we understand, of Messrs. Harvey, Reynolds, and Fowler, of Leeds, who are M. Disderi’s English agents.
1862: P News, Oct. 31, vol. VI, #217, p. 520-521:
Critical Notices [selection]
Instantaneous Views of London. Photographed by Valentine Blanchard. London: Eliot [sic], Aldermanbury.
The task of photographing London under any circumstances has been one fraught with much difficulty, and hence it has happened, that a city comprising more photographers amongst its inhabitants than any city in the world, has been less photographed, probably, than any other large town. Not for want of objects of interest, as every one who knows what noble old buildings are almost hidden in it can testify. The difficulty has consisted in the soot-begrimed colour of its edifices, the murky atmosphere, and the crowded streets, interfering with the work. If there were difficulties in the way of ordinary photography, from these causes, what must have been the difficulties of instantaneous photography, in which the busiest thoroughfares, in their busiest moments, are portrayed? Despite all these difficulties, and the super-added trouble of a very unfavourable summer, Mr. Blanchard has succeeded in producing some of the best and most interesting instantaneous slides which have yet been issued; pictures which are brilliant, despite the smoky atmosphere, well-defined, in spite of the constant and rapid motion, and well-detailed and soft, in spite of the poor light and instantaneous exposure.
Here is “Oxford Street, looking east,” No. 196, an admirably perfect picture from a most telling point of view, forming a most satisfactory composition. Cabs, omnibuses, and pedestrians, in motion, some right in the foreground, all perfectly defined, the one exception being a Hansom cab crossing the field of view, which is slightly blurred. The pace of a pedestrian, even still more in the foreground, was not, however, sufficient to produce a blur, a man wheeling a barrow across the road being perfectly caught with uplifted foot as he proceeds. Here are several views, from different points, of Trafalgar Square, by far the most effective of any we have seen of this noble site. Several views of the Strand, from different points, give an effective idea of this crowded thoroughfare; one with Temple Bar in the distance is especially excellent as a picture, and perfect in its rendering of moving vehicles which are quite in the foreground, whilst the effect of distance, and London atmosphere, are finely rendered. To describe and characterise faithfully every picture before us, would require many columns, but it is sufficient to say, that various views of Westminster, with Westminster Abbey and the Houses of Parliament, of the International Exhibition with its surrounding crowds of people, of St. Martin’s le grand, of the interior of Covent Garden, of the New Cattle Market on market day, of Regent Street, &c., &c., are all equally good. The especial excellence of this series depends on a combination of causes, in reference to all of which, the very best conditions have been carefully studied and secured. The most effective views have been chosen irrespective of the difficulty of obtaining them; the best point of view, and the most telling period of the day for each subject have also been selected; and whilst, in each case, the most effective view of the place has been seized, regard has been had, in most cases, to the production of pictorial effect besides. As pictures, they are brilliant and harmonious, and as accurate portrayals and valuable souvenirs of the daily street life of the busiest metropolis of the world, we have been nothing at all to equal them.
We have amongst the series, a few more of our premiers amours—Mr. Blanchard’s marine and river scenes, which, with their varying effects of water, and shipping, and cloud, to us, possess a charm, that never palls or wearies. Here is “A Study of the Thames, looking to London Bridge, with St. Saviour’s Church in the distance,” not one of the most effective as regards atmospheric effects, but which we commend to the attention of young students of composition, just for the purpose of pointing out how valuable a small sloop in the left hand corner of the picture becomes in completing the composition and balancing the picture. Again, both as a composition, and as a picture of wondrous poetic beauty, let us commend attention to No. 146, “Evening; the Port of London.” The tranquil river illumined with an evening sun; forests of masts in the distance; a brig and various barges in the foreground; and, nearer still, portion of the hull, masts, and cordage of a large vessel looming heavy and black against a sky covered with grand clouds, the edges of which, are gilded by the sun, which is descending behind them. The scene is one which rivets and charms, and is well worth studying.
We have said little about the mechanical qualities of the series, as our attention has been absorbed by higher qualities. But we may remark, that the photography is excellent, and that the results here shown, furnish a recommendation, stronger than any words, of the excellence of the bromo-iodized collodion with which they were taken, and which, from announcements in another column, we see Mr. Blanchard now manufactures for the public, as well as for his own use. The tone and general quality of the prints, is not only uniform, but uniformly good, and, altogether, satisfactory.
1862: P News, Nov. 7, vol. VI, #218, p. 533-534:
Critical Notices.
Stereoscopic Views of the Interior of the International Exhibition. London: The Stereoscopic and Photographic Company, Cheapside and Regent Street, London; and Broadway, New York.
All persons interested in the credit of photography, as well as the Commissioners of the International Exhibition, and the public at large, have reason to be well satisfied that the contract for photographing the interior of the building and the art treasures it contained fell into the hands of the London Stereoscopic Company. Without in any way depreciating the ability of other firms, we question whether one house in a thousand would have brought to bear so much enterprize, ability, and capital upon the work, or have executed it in a style at all comparable with that in which the photographs already issued have been produced. The firm to which we have referred took a large view of the project and made a bold offer; in addition to the fifteen hundred guineas paid down, and the prospective royalty on sales, a further sum of about £500 had to be paid for various advantages, in the shape of space for erections of various kinds, &c. A still further outlay was speedily made, when it was discovered that Dallmeyer’s lenses executed the work better than the equipment of first-rate lenses already in use; these were all laid aside, and a complete outfit of new lenses ordered of Mr. Dallmeyer, costing, we believe, about £300 more. We have always pleasure in recognizing the debt which art owes to enterprise and capital, because it is a debt often ignored and by some utterly denied. We have known some short-sighted and feeble-minded operators in our own art, as in others, regard the interposition of capital--without which, in such a case, nothing could be done—with a grudging jealousy.* (*It would be an interesting task to trace the ramifications of employment created by the spirited management of enterprises of this kind. A staff of not less than fifty extra persons, not photographers at all, have been engaged in the commercial department of the business, as clerks, messengers, young ladies in charge of stalls, &c. To these, in addition to salaries, a commission has been paid on sales beyond an estimated amount. It would be easy to trace the matter further and point out, how in all cases, the judicious interposition of capital, gives an immense impetus to art and commerce, and opens new fields for the employment of labour. Since the above remarks were in type, we have had a striking illustration of the need for diffusing sound and common sense views on such subjects, in the publication of an article in a contemporary, which is astounding in its singular ignorance, of, or antagonism to, the first principles of political economy.—Ed.) We are glad to believe that, bold as was the speculation, there is every reason to regard it as a successful one. The sales have been, we understand, enormous. Mr. England, who was entrusted with the production of the stereoscopic negatives and prints, has alone executed an average of little less than one hundred and fifty gross weekly. Of some of the most popular subjects the negatives have required continually repeating [reprinting?] to secure facilities for rapid production. The number of stereoscopic subjects already photographed, is between two and three hundred, and the number of negatives between two and three thousand. Of the larger prints, of which there are several sizes, we have not any definite statistics, but we apprehend that the demand for these will have been in like proportion.
As to the quality of the photographs produced, the public verdict has been given in the demand for the prints. They comprise a treasury of the choicest gems which the world of art and science could produce, photographed with an amount of skill which could not, we believe, be surpassed. Some of the slides before us are choice gems of photography, as well as exquisite delineations of gems of art. Nothing can exceed the beauty of many of the general views of the nave, transept, and various courts. In the representations of ornamental glass and ceramic wares, the exquisitely delicate rendering of texture is something marvelous, the perfect detail and softness giving an effect of reality to these substances in the stereoscope, which we have hitherto regarded as only possible in stereoscopic transparencies on glass. The grouping of various art products, in some of the slides, has been managed with much judgment, taste, and skill.
The specimens of sculpture here presented, are truly magnificent, and present to the student such a collection as, it is probably it would be impossible to meet with elsewhere. We have rarely felt the stereoscope so valuable, as in its wondrous power of reproducing before our eyes, in the quiet retirement of the study, those exquisite embodiments of beauty. The glorious “Reading Girl” of Magni, which shows how a soul can be enthroned on a marble face; and features, which move not, be instinct with intellect and feeling. The exquisite grace and loveliness of Monti’s Sleep of Sorrow, and Dream of Joy. The sensuous beauty of Marshall Wood’s Daphne, the indescribable and mystic power of Story’s Sybil and Cleopatra, and the varying charms of scores more. We can wonder also on what was based the factitious reputation of the Tinted Venus, which excited so much expectation, and turns out to be such a commonplace undressed young woman; and we can wonder as we examine the poor, meager, hard figure which Hiram Power designates California, whether the, [sic] sculptor has fallen off, or the Greek Slave was less beautiful than we, in common with the rest of the world, believed it to be eleven years ago. In short, we can revisit the Exhibition, and enjoy its beauties without fatigue, and with unalloyed delight. If in no other respect, the Exhibition of 1862 possesses an immense advantage in this respect, over that of 1851, and if every other department of the Exhibition has been characterised by mismanagement, this at least has been free from it. Almost all the subjects we have seen, have been pleasing as pictures, and perfect as photographs.
1862: P News, Nov. 7, vol. VI, #218, p. 534:
Critical Notices.
Rambles About Cheshire. By John H. Underwood.
This is a series of very charming stereoscopic slides, consisting of rustic scenery, farm yards, sylvan nooks, shady avenues, cool meadows, and quiet streams, of a most seductive character. The negatives are, we believe, by the collodio-albumen process, and fully maintain the reputation of that safe and excellent process. The pictures are rich and brilliant, without any hardness, being at the same time harmonious and full of tone.
1862: P News, Nov. 7, vol. VI, #218, p. 534-535:
Critical Notices.
“Bringing Home The May,” Photographed from Nature, and Printed from several Negatives. By H. P. Robinson, Leamington.
We have before us a production which we confidently aver to be the finest composition photograph which has ever been issued, and in reference to which, we should not feel much hesitation in stating our conviction, that it is the finest picture which has ever been obtained by the art of photography; and we speak very deliberately and advisedly when we express this conviction. Having said this much, we feel somewhat at a loss to proceed, because we feel it to be utterly impossible to convey, by criticism or description, anything like a perfect idea, either of the picture itself, or of the impression it produced upon us on seeing it, When sciolists [sic] in art have attacked the art qualities of photographs, and denied the power of photography, we have often, even with some secret misgiving that the attacks were not always unmerited, felt pleasure in doing battle for the art and its products. To all cavilers, in future, we should like to show this picture; and to their scornful enquiry, “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?” we should gladly reply, “Come and see.”
The picture before us is forty inches long by fifteen inches deep, having the general form of a panoramic picture, and is printed from nine negatives. We commence by these mechanical facts in our description, simply because such facts aid a photographer’s preliminary estimate of a photograph; but these are the last thoughts that enter the mind on seeing this picture. There is, on the contrary, such a completeness and symmetry in the section of nature presented, and, moreover, such a sensation of vastness and space, that it scarcely enters the mind to consider whether the canvas containing it extend inches, feet, or yards; it is enough to feel that it constitutes one harmonious whole, neither a fragment, nor the various scattered portions of a picture. Here, at least, there is no “patchwork.”
The subject consists of various groups of figures and landscape. These groups are connected in the composition so as to form one company, all girls, embracing young children and blooming maidenhood, all engaged in bringing home May blossoms, the fragrant wealth of English hedgerows in the advanced spring season, [.] An admirable extract from Spencer, which is appended, will at once initiate the reader into the spirit of the picture:--
“When all is cladde
With pleasaunce; the ground with grasse, the woods
With greene leaves, the bushes with bloosming buds,
The younge folks, now flocken in every where,
To gather May-baskets and smelling brere;
And home they hasten, the postes to dight,
And all the kirk-pillours eare daylight
With hawthorne buds”
Nearly in the centre of the picture is a group of four girls, each laden with hawthorne blossom, the central figure of the group bearing a large burden of the branches upon her head. This is the principal group in the picture, and upon it the eye instinctively rests first, in examining the composition; it is nearest and most prominent, most brilliantly lighted, and best made out. The figures are in full sunshine, and the breadth of light, free from chalkiness, and the broad masses of shadow perfectly sunny effect. The pose of all the figures is easy, natural, and perfectly harmonious with the general action; but the position of the central figure, to which we have referred, is perfect in its simplicity and gracefulness, and might be employed, without altering a line, as a Caryatis in a Grecian temple. To the left of this group is another of two girls, who are tardily bringing up the rear, one of them pausing whilst she shakes from her dress one of those long straggling parasitic plants which cling with such tenacity, and are familiarly known, in some parts of the country as “followers.” To the right of the central group are other two figure, one of whom is stooping and gathering together a large heap of the newly cut hawthorne branches, the other waiting to assist in carrying them. Still further to the right is another group of two little children, who are toddling home in advance of the party.
The background and landscape generally, is, for the most part, thickly wooded; but, through the trees, the eye travels far away over meadows into a charming distance. In the middle distance, immediately behind the groups, a fine tract of open country shelves away, leading the eye into the forest path, divided by rustic railings and a stile from the open. The arrangement of the picture does not leave need for much foreground; but this consists chiefly of some well chosen and well made out wild plants.
It is a May morning and every figure is beautifully tipped with the sunlight, which pervades the picture. But it is early on a May morning, and the atmosphere is filled with the delicate misty vapour which clothes the distant foliage with that delicate and fairy roe of atmosphere, which gives a charm to English landscape scenery, rarely met with elsewhere. If the picture before us be filled with sunlight, it is not less filled with atmosphere. The thick, leafy, spring-like foliage of the background is thus thrown back from the sun-lit figures, which tell the story of the picture.
The first impression which strikes the mind on examining the picture is a conviction of the admirable composition and chiaroscuro, which at once satisfy the eye as masses without distinct reference to forms. The arrangement of lines, and the general contour of the picture is especially pleasing, whilst the effect of light and shadow, the arrangement of light and dark objects, the perfection of gradation, and general breadth of effect is altogether satisfactory. The next impression produced is of the complete harmony and subordination; every thing takes its place admirably, and nothing obtrudes. It is harmonious in sentiment; the landscape is an unquestionable spring landscape; the children and damsels—there is too much of life about them to be perpetually called “figures”—are in the spring of life; the whole picture is prefaced by the feeling of spring-time. There is harmony in the action, purpose, occupation, and pose of each figure, which perfectly connects them as a whole, although divided into separate groups; and there is a feeling of gladness and freshness expressed in every part of the picture. It is harmonious as a composition, harmonious in gradation of tones; there is perfect gradation in the sun-lit and well pronounced foreground objects, and gradation in the distant hazy woods. There are no crude chalky lights, or black heavy shadows, no patch of white sky killing all the other lights in the picture. The masses of May blossom in the bright sunlight are soft and well made out, not mere masses of snow and the sky has a pleasant atmospheric tint which suggests the season.
There is that harmony which renders it difficult to remember that this is a “composition” picture, in the photographers’ technical sense of the word. It is difficult to believe in it as the product of several negatives, each part so thoroughly belongs to the whole and so perfectly accords with the whole. Ruskin, speaking of the test of the true artist, says that his work, or the “imaginative work,” as he calls it, “looks always as if it had been gathered straight from nature; whereas the unimaginative shows its joints and knots, and is visibly composition.” The test is an admirable one and admirably put, and may, with augmented force, be applied to the “composition,” or rather let us call it, as referring to the mechanism, the “combined” pictures of the photographer. it is when this test is applied that the picture before us claims its true position as an imaginative work. We do not see the “knots and joints,” we do not mean the joints in printing, but in working out the conception and composition. Let us add, for the benefit of young photographers who may be tempted to tread in Mr. Robinson’s steps, that a work of this kind cannot be produced from a crude conception. Months before this picture was commenced, we received from the artist a well-drawn sketch, in which the design and composition of the intended picture were fully indicated, these being specifically settled before a negative was taken.
The mechanical portion of the picture is, notwithstanding the difficulties, admirably managed. The printing of nine negatives on a sheet of paper, forty inches long, and requiring, from the commencement to the conclusion, about eight days, is not a light task. But it is admirably executed in all respects, and the general quality and tone of the print are admirable. Of Mr. Robinson’s former compositions, especially the “Holiday,” and “Lady of Shalott,” we spoke freely, and whilst we admired their beauties, we pointed out what we thought to be their faults. We will not be so hardy as to say that this has no faults; but we are bound to say that, at present, we have not seen any. We are conscious that we have given but a very faint idea of our impression of the great beauty and excellence of this picture; but as it will be sent to the next exhibition of the Photographic Society, to be held in January, photographers will be able to supply for themselves what we have failed to convey.