1868 THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF
PHOTOGRAPHY
Vol. XV
TRANSCRIPTION CONVENTIONS:
--Italics have been retained from publications, which uses 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.
--Photographer’s (or potential photographer’s) names have been bolded – see also below under “Names”
--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.
--Spelling and typos: Nineteenth-century spellings occasionally differs from currently accepted norms. In addition, British spellings also differ from American usage. Common examples are: “colour” vs. “color”; “centre” vs. “center” and the use of “s” for “z” as in “recognise” vs. “recognize. While great care has been exercised in transcribing the 19th-century journals exactly as printed, “spell check” automatically corrects many of these differences. An attempt has been made to recorrect these automatic changes, but no doubt some have slipped through. As for typographical errors, these have been checked although no doubt some have managed to slip through the editorial process. For matters of consequence, I will be happy to recheck the original sources if need be for specific references.
-- Technical articles: For the most part, articles discussing technical aspects of photography, products, etc. were not transcribed unless they are part of a larger article covering photographs. When technical descriptions are too lengthy to include, that has been noted. Exceptions have been made as the transcriber saw fit.
--Meetings of Societies: Names of officers, members attending or referenced, dates and locations of meetings have been given. The first and/or earliest meetings recorded have been transcribed in full. Beyond those early years, only if the reports are very short or discuss photographs, have the articles been copied in full; if administrative or technical in nature. Although not always possible due to time constraints on borrowed materials, when possible, I have included at least the dates of society meetings and any photographer’s names listed.
-- Related, contemporary journals: e.g., The Art-Journal, cover both photographer as well as painting, drawing, sculpture, etc.. 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, these articles have been included and the names bolded, but the individuals may, in fact, not be photographers.
NAMES:
--All photographer’s names have been bolded for easy location. EXCEPTIONS: While it is likely that people working with photographic equipment and techniques are also photographers some discretion has been used and not all such names have been bolded. Names of honorary members of a photographic society are assumed to be photographers and thus bolded, when in fact, that may not be the case. Names mentioned in connection with meetings of non-photographic societies have not been bolded unless there is a known or suspected photographic association. A computer word search, however, will still enable the researcher to locate any references to specific names.
--Names: Given abbreviations for titles such as “M” for “Monsieur”, etc., it is not always possible to tell if an individual’s first name or title is being abbreviated. Thus, especially with non-English photographers, too much credence should not be put into an initial that could also serve as an abbreviated title.
--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.
NUMBERS:
--Numbers referenced in the various journals can refer to either the photographer’s image number, or an entry number in an exhibition catalog. When the number is obviously is obviously that of the photographer, it is included in the index under the photographer’s name, whereas exhibition numbers are not.
1868: BJP Oct. 9, vol. XV, #440, p. 487:
Our Editorial Table.
Photographic Pictures. By W. S. Laroche*, Birmingham
When, frequently, looking over collections of small—that is, stereos, and carte size—photographic pictures of a genre character, we have sometimes thought that if they had been produced on a large and imposing scale they would have secured for the artist a foremost place in the list of notabilities connected with photography. Produced in a diminutive size, such as that of the carte, one is apt to admire, pass them on, and forget all about them. It is different with a large photograph. We all know that while the posing is alike for both, and the technical difficulties in production scarcely greater in the one case than in the other, there is a tendency even in photographers to attach proportionally more merit to the larger picture. About three years ago we received from Mr. Edge, of Preston, three small pictures, which have been much admired by artists and others to whom we have shown them; but several of these admirers indulged in speculations as to the still greater merit that would have been due to the artist had the charming pictures referred to been of a larger size.
The pictures by Mr. Laroche are only carte size, but they display great fertility of imagination in their composition.
Here are two, for example, designated Going Out and Coming In. In the former we have a staid and portly-looking gentleman drawing on his gloves in the hall, his wife in possession, meanwhile, of the outer door, and with uplifted finger doubtless impressing on him the fact that, as a respectable man, he is expected to keep proper hours. We can easily infer all that occurred during the interval that had elapsed between going out and coming in, from the picture intended to portray the latter. He has been “dining out” with some jolly good fellows, possibly photographers, and he has toasted and been toasted, and has responded and “indulged” so heartily and frequently, that shortly after the brethren had, at last, and doubtless reluctantly, consented to disperse, he finds himself once more inside of his front door, his hat exhibiting the effects of a “crusher,” and himself in the obfusticated condition so aptly described as that in which a man is prepared to light his cigar in a pail of water. His wife is seen in an adjoining room awaiting his return, the clock in the hall showing thee hour to be half-part three. His “better half” looks “in a troubled sea of passion toss’d;” while evidently he, from his expression, may be supposed to be imbued with the sentiment of the old bon vivant, “I care for nobody—no, not I.” We here leave the mated pair to arrange matters in the best way they can.
In A Sight Seen by Burglars in islington, two gentlemen of the jimmy, the crowbar, and the dark lantern, who had previously effected an entrance into a house through the window, are seen making their way out through the main door. In the lobby they had encountered some queer customers; for the proprietor, being an artist, has his hall well stocked with skeletons, men in armour, plaster casts, and even “clay gals” holding their heads in their hands. The “sight” proving too much for the superstitious terror of the burglars, they suddenly drop their booty and hurriedly decamp in the manner indicated.
Family Jars is an amusing picture, showing that a misunderstanding has evidently arisen between Pat and Biddy. The former is endeavouring to squeeze himself through a doorway, while the latter, presenting a bold front, uses all her powers of resistance to prevent his egress. The quantity of crockery that appears to have been displaced and smashed during the struggle should act as a caution to those wedded couples who agree to differ, instead of pulling together, as all husbands and wives of “good report” should do.
In the picture of The Fast Day we have a jovial, burly priest, hastily engaged in thrusting under the table-cloth a portion of the viands in which he had surreptitiously been indulging when disturbed by the appearance of a boy peeping in at the window. Let us hope that the righteous indignation expressed in the countenance of the reverend hypocrite will not expend itself on the head of the offending, inquisitive urchin, who, however, appears as if he were “too many” for the sly ecclesiastic.
We cannot here allude to more of these pictures, which are all of a semi-ludicrous character, well conceived, grouped, and also well photographed.
[*NOTE: William Henry Silvester, a.k.a. “Martin Laroche”. By the time he moved to Birmingham he had changed his name to William Silvester Laroche. He was the brother of Alfred Silvester.]