1853 PHOTOGRAPHIC ART-JOURNAL vol. VI
Ver: Jan. 16, 2007
NOTES:
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.
--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’” the use of “s” for “z” as in “recognise” vs. “recognize; and the use of one “l” instead of “ll” as in “fulfilment”. 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.
--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 useage. 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.
1853: PAJ, July, vol. VI, #1, p. 66:
--In the present number we commence our series of Photographic illustrations, by giving a crystallotype of the moon, taken by Mr. Whipple, from whom we have received the following interesting account.
Mr. Snelling:--Dr. Sir: I am happy to be able to furnish you with crystalotypes of the moon for July number, but have time to write only a few words in relation to my experiments in taking it. My first attempt at daguerreotyping the moon was with a reflecting telescope; the mirror was five feet focus, and seven inches diameter: by putting the prepared plate directly in the focus of the reflector, and giving it an exposure of from 3 to 5 seconds I obtained quite distinct impressions, but owing to the smallness, of the image which was only about 5-8ths of an inch in diameter, and the want of clockwork to regulate the motion of the telescope the results were very far from satisfactory.
Having obtained permission of Professor Bond to use the large Cambridge refractor for that purpose, I renewed my experiments, with high hopes of success, but soon found it no easy matter to obtain a clear, well defined beautiful daguerreotype of the Moon; nothing could be more interesting than its appearance through that magnificent instrument, but to transfer it to the silver plate, to make something tangible of it was quite a different thing. The governor that regulates the motion of the telescope although sufficiently accurate for observing purposes was entirely unsuitable for daguerreotyping; as when the plate is exposed to the moon’s image, if the instrument does not follow exactly, to counteract the earth’s motion; even to the nicety of a hair’s breadth, the beauty of the impression is much injured or entirely spoiled; the governor had a tendency to move the instrument a little too fast, then to fall slightly behind; by closely noticing its motion and by exposing my plate those few seconds it exactly followed between the accelerated and retarded motion, I might obtain one or two perfect proofs in the trial of a dozen plates, other things being right, but a more serious obstacle to my success, was the usual state of the atmosphere in the locality; the sea breeze, the hot and cold air commingling; although its effects were not visible to the eye, but when the moon was viewed through the telescope it had the same appearance as objects when seen through the heated air from a chimney, in a constant tremor, precluding the possibility of successful daguerreotyping; this state of the atmosphere often continued week after week in a greater or less degree, so that an evening of perfect quiet, was hailed with the greatest delight. After oft repeated failures I finally obtained the daguerreotype from which the crystalotypes I send for your Journal were copies: it was taken in March 1851, the object glass only of the telescope was used. It is fifteen inches in diameter, and about twenty three feet focal length; the image it gives of the moon varies but little from three inches, and the prepared plate had an exposure of 13 seconds to its action, the result is before you, I have since succeeded in making several others, at her different phases, equally as good as the one here represented, and I have not the least doubt, that when Prof. Bond applies his Spring Governor, (a remarkable invention of his own, for regulating motion.) instead of the one now in use, so that a plate may be exposed several minutes without danger of bluring from unsteady motion, we shall be able to present as perfect daguerreotypes of the moon ten or fifteen inches in diameter as we have in our possession of three inches; and if we are enabled to obtain a series of well executed large daguerreotypes taken at intervals of a few hours, from the first moment the sunlight strikes one side at the new moon until it again leaves it in darkness on the last quarter: taken as old Sol lights up peak after peak, shining first on this side, then on that, and as these shadows sweep through her immense cavernous valleys, then as the full blaze of the sun penetrates those awfully deep yawning gulfs, I feel that it would conduce more to a perfect knowledge of that remarkable body, than any other means we now have at commend. John A. Whipple