Ver:  July 4, 2021

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 otherwise or 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 19^th-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.

 

1857:  L&MPJ Jan. 1, new series vol. I, new issue #1, p. 1:

            [Editorial leader]

            It was our duty, in the last number, to announce a change in the editorial management of this Journal; and it now devolves upon us to inform our readers of an alteration in the title.  In our new career, the name of Manchester will be associated with that of Liverpool on the title page, arrangements being in progress for constituting this Journal the recognised organ of the Manchester Photographic Society.  To be the official organ of so large and flourishing a society as that of Manchester, would be a source of gratification to any Journal; it is more especially flattering to us, as the proposition came entirely unsought.  We hope, in our next, to be able to state that the Manchester Photographic Society, at their meeting on the 7^th inst., have officially ratified the above announcement.

            In another column we give the proceedings of the Liverpool Photographic Society at the annual meeting held December 23^rd, 1856.  Among other important changes then agreed upon was the alteration of the evening of meeting from the first to the third Tuesday in each month; notices of which meetings will in future be duly announced in this Journal.

            The President and Council of the London Photographic Society invited the members and their friends to a Soirée on the 17^th of last month.  By the kind permission of the council of King’s college, obtained we hear through the instrumentality of Professor Delamotte, the large hall of that building, together with the spacious libraries and museum, were placed at the service of the Society on this occasion.  Every exertion had been made by the Secretary (the Rev. J. R. Major), to provide for the amusement as well as comfort of the visitors, and nobly did he uphold the credit which the Society has so well earned on former similar occasions.  Objects of interest were contributed in the most generous manner, and the walls were covered with the finest specimens of the art which have ever been collected together.  The Crystal Palace Company sent a large wagon loaded with the choicest gems from their photographic gallery at Sydenham, amongst which we noticed the monster photographs of Baldus, (from glass negatives, and covering a full-sized sheet of paper,) and that wonderful sea and cloud view of Le Gray, which has conferred more fame upon him than even his own beautiful wax-paper process.  Foremost among the productions of our own countrymen, were Delamotte’s views of Oxford, nearly forty in number, and the latest results of the photogalvanographic Company, Lake Price’s “Don Quixote in his study.”  The Astronomical Society lent the celebrated photographs of the moon taken by Professor Bond, in America.  These, however, had one great fault—being taken on the daguerreotype plate, and afterwards magnified on collodion, the sides were transposed, and consequently their otherwise striking likeness was lost.  By their side, exhibited by Mr. Crookes, was a powerful rival, six inches in diameter, which had been magnified from a small negative taken with Mr. Hartnup’s assistance, by means of the noble equatorial at Liverpool.  The Rev. J. B. Reade exhibited a photographic copy of a drawing of the remarkable lunar crater, Copernicus, made by the Abbé Secchi at the Roman Observatory, and the result of the incessant labour of years.  A photographic copy of the sublime “Last Supper” of Leonardo da Vinci, may be taken as the representative of very many interesting specimens of this priceless application of photography which adorned the walls.  In portraiture, Hennah, of Brighton, stood as usual unrivalled, whilst the same may be said of T. R. Williams’ stereoscopic slides, both paper and daguerreotype.  Messrs. Murray and Heath, of Piccadilly, had a large assortment of stereoscopes, and some beautiful views of Mont Blanc, which seemed to attract universal admiration.  There was one new construction of the stereoscope, which from its originality deserves more than a passing notice; it was exhibited by Mr. Francis [Bedford], Great Russell-street Bloomsbury.  In outward appearance it was a pillar, standing four or five feet high, having one of Wheatstone’s stereoscopes at the upper part, and a lamp shining into the apparatus through a ground glass, on the opposite side to the eye tubes.  Thirty or forty stereoscopic slides were fastened together on an endless band, similar to the cards in a Jacquard loom, and on turning a nut at the side, they were in succession, brought into the field of view.  The only exhibitors of chemicals employed in the practice of photography, that we noticed, were Messrs. Horne and Thornthwaite, of Newgate-street, who displayed some large and splendid specimens of glacial acetic acid, perfectly solid, even in the comparatively warm room:  fine crystals of chloride of gold, upwards of two inches in length, and a magnificent specimen of nitrate of silver, weighing about 400 ounces; this, we understand, was crystallized from about eight gallons of saturated solution; the total quantity of nitrate of silver present being nearly 1500 ounces, and  the value of the metallic silver alone about £250.  This firm also exhibited a very convenient and portable stereoscopic camera, suitable for taking ordinary sized stereoscopic views; the total bulk, including six slides for holding ready prepared plates, being about 10 inches long, by 8 deep and 6 wide.  Another camera, of much interest to the photographer, from its extreme portability and convenience, was also exhibited by Messrs. Horne and Thornthwaite, the manufacturers to the inventory, Captain Fowkes; and although suitable for taking views 12 inches by 10, occupies together with its dark frame and focusing glass, only a space 13 inches long, by 11 wide and 3 deep.  At one table were some powerful compound microscopes which shewed [sic] to what minuteness it was possible to get collodion pictures.  Little spots on the slides, no larger than the head of an ordinary sized pin, were seen, by these instruments, to consist of groups of figures, landscapes, and portraits, as easily recognizable under the high magnifying power as if they had been full sized pictures.  We regret that we could not learn the name of the ingenious photographer who took them.  Among the company Dr. Livingstone, the great African traveller, was decidedly the lion of the evening; we recognized also most persons of eminence either in science or art, whilst the full evening dress of the ladies gave the assembly more the appearance of a fashionable ball room than a scientific conversazione.  The libraries were converted into refreshment rooms for the occasion, and the fare provided up-stairs did equal credit to the Rev. Secretary’s taste, with the mental repast below.  Although we think that the society have good cause to congratulate themselves on the almost perfect gratification which their hospitality afforded to every one present.

            We are sorry to state that complaints have reached us from high quarters that the extracts, which appeared in the November number of this Journal, of the remarkable correspondence between Sir D. Brewster and Professor Wheatstone respecting the stereoscope, together with the leading article in the same Journal, are not sufficiently full or clear to permit of our readers coming to a true knowledge of the points at issue.  We therefore feel it our duty, in justice to both parties, to insert verbatim the entire correspondence as it appeared in The Times.  Four of the letters are given in this number, and the remaining two will appear in our next.

            [The balance of the editorial relates to technical discussions]

 

 1857:  L&MPJ Feb. 1, new series vol. I, new issue #3, p. 26:

GET MISSING WORDS

            The Recent Eclipse of the Moon.  Lunar Photography:  By M.M. Bertsch and Arnauld.

            The following is the account given by M.M. Bertsch and Arnauld of their recent experiments in Lunar Photography:--

            The object glass of 20 inches in diameter and 49 feet focus, by which the lunar image was formed, was mounted equatorially in a garden, and moved on a cast iron platform, supported by masonry of the most solid kind.  The glass, which had not, however, received the last touch from M. Porro, was nevertheless perfectly achromatic, of a very fair polish, and gave a tolerably sharp image.  The sensitive plate was kept at the focus in a holder which moves on four rollers, running along two grooves in the plane of motion of the image.  This arrangement was drawn along, so as to exactly follow this movement, by a clock, the rate of which should, of course, be perfectly uniform and isochronous for at least 10 seconds.

            M. Porro, was doubtful whether, with such a focal length as 49 feet, so feeble a light as that of the moon, diffused over an area of nearly six inches diameter, could impress our sensitive surface strong enough to give a negative in a sufficiently short time.  Consequently he was unwilling either to go to the expense of clock-work movement which should answer all the desired purposes, or arrange the plate-holder as it ought to have been, not on a framework of wood, but on metallic grooves fixed to the stage, and by which means the jerking movement would have been avoided.

            The motive power used in this preliminary experiment was one of an old construction, governed by the usual fan regulator, and the fusee of which was not in proper proportion to the length of the spring.  As the plate could only be moved along by irregular jolts, we were unable, even in ten seconds, to obtain anything but a series of superimposed images, a little way out of the line of the moon’s motion, and consequently indistinct.  On one of our pictures can be seen as many as      images, one over the other at extremely minute distances apart.

            In spire of these serious drawbacks to       sharpness of the image, the experiment has,           affirm, completely succeeded.  In a photograph        point of view, although the motion of          plate across the field only allowed the cent                 rays to act during a very short time, our tr               have given us perfect negatives.  During           continuance of the eclipse we took three pictures, one in 10, another in 15, and the third in         seconds.  All three were successful, and are g          negatives, although developed with pryogal   acid alone, without employing any of the acc   rating agents which science places at          disposal.  The mechanical imperfections which we were unable to overcome, must be remembered; neither the object glass nor plate-holder moving smoothly, but by jolts, and thus causing dust to be raised, some of which has fallen          the sensitive surface and given rise to sta       Allowance will also be made for a tempor    location in a garden in the middle of the night and at a season when the damp made us unable to clean the glasses perfectly.

            If these several causes have made us un       to present to you perfect impressions, and      as we may certainly hope to obtain under be        circumstances, this experiment at least pro      that, with moist collodion, by approaching          it combinations the limit which separa     spontaneous reduction from that brought about by light alone, such an extraordinary sensitiveness can be obtained to so feeble a light     that of the moon as to give a negative sufficiently intense for printing any number of good positives.   

            Our first picture, taken at 10h.  1’ 20”,    only being exposed 20 seconds, is consequently the least indistinct; the next, taken at 11h 30”, was exposed 15 seconds, but the groo     not being parallel to the motion of the mo    the image is drawn out, as it were, which ma     it altogether confused.  The third was ta     at 0h. 41’ 5”, that is to say at the time when     moon had left the earth’s shadow, and sh      this interesting fact that the portion of     moon which was still enveloped in the pen    bra, reflected no chemical rays, although     could only detect a diminution of about one tenth in intensity.

            We have, in conclusion, to thank M.       for the kindness with which he has assisted     and the readiness with which he has modif    his apparatus to suit the requirements of photography.  It will be learned with pleasure,     assured by this preliminary experiment of    power of the means employed, he intends    construct machinery capable of producing   uniform movement, and to place his beaut    object-glass in such favourable circumstances as shall ensure complete success.

 

1857:  L&MPJ Feb. 1, new series vol. I, new issue #3, p. 26:  GET missing letter

            We see from an abstract of a letter from  ?   G.P. Bond, of Harvard Observatory, Cambridge, US., dated Nov. 7, 1856, given in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, that they are preparing, on a large scale, for renewing experiments in lunar photography.

 

1857:  L&MPJ Feb. 1, new series vol. I, new issue #3, p. 28-29:

            Manchester Photographic Society.

            The following is a list of the most important pictures on view at the Exhibition of the above Society, as referred to by the Rev. W. J. Read, M.A., F.R.A.S., in his paper entitled “Visits to the Society’s Collection of Photographs now exhibiting at the Mechanics’ Institution,” read before the members at their monthly meeting, on the 7^th ult., the first portion of which was given in our last number:--

            In No. 6.  Place Napoleon, Louvre, Paris, by H. White [wrongly listed; corrected on p. 46 to, “Thurston Thompson”]—we have an interesting example of the record of a transient scene:  now that the additions to the Louvre are completed, and the scaffolding removed, it would be impossible to reproduce this very lively picture.

            8.  A Shady Pool, H. White, -- is one of the best of its class, and in the middle distance of No. 12 are effects deserving close examination both from photographer and painter.

            13.  Cottages and Figures, H. White,--is peculiarly bright and sunny.

            The pictures numbered from 32 to 37 are among the most interesting in the Exhibition to photographers, being examples of Mr. Barnes’s new method of using dry collodion.  They are certainly very satisfactory specimens of what may be done by it.  The View from Richmond and Pope’s Villa being the very finest in the room. [Corrected on p. 46 to, “being among the finest…”]  This process commends itself to us by the promise of quickness combined with simplicity, the chief drawbacks being the necessity of grinding or roughening the surface of the glass for some little distance all round the edges.  If this be done with fluoric acid there will be little if any difficulty other than is found in the ordinary collodion process.

            In 39 we have a capital study of Clouds, which may well be compared with several pictures in which the skies have been painted in, and with others which have been printed from more than one negative.

            49.  Wharfedale, by Mr. Roger Fenton,--is I fear from its position, often overlooked, whereas it is one of the very finest photographs ever taken.

            58.  William Etty, a portrait, deserves attention at a spirited portrait of a great man.  An engraving has been taken from it upon wood and prefixed to Mr. Etty’s autobiographic sketch of his career, published in the Art-Journal.

            73.  Porte San Sebastiano, at Rome, the small picture at your right hand on entering the room, has a peculiar charm of softness and delicacy, and is very unlike, in tone and general appearance, to the earlier photographs.

            84.  Snow Storm, Paris, is a bold and most effective attempt in a direction not often essayed.  The atmospheric effect just preceding a heavy fall of snow has perhaps never been so truthfully depicted as here.  A photographer misses much who fails to see this picture.

            Messrs. Cundall, Howlett, and Delamotte exhibit a very pleasing series of pictures, numbered collectively 93.  How useful to an artist such a study at that they call Some pleasing page.  How beautifully do those Jersey Rocks stand out as if in relief; and again, how exquisitely are the trees and plants rendered in the last of the series, the Lake in Wales.  This set of pictures well displays the high capabilities of artistic excellence which belong to the old calotype process.

            94-117.  Mr. Mayall exhibits here a frame of twenty-four very striking portraits.  They can hardly be claimed by photography as her own productions, many even of the uncoloured ones bearing evident marks of the stippling brush; but they are certainly remarkable examples of successful portraiture.  It may be a comfort to many a puzzled sitter to perceive that Lord Palmerston has been at a loss to know what to do with his hands.  The most characteristic and best of the series are perhaps those of Mr. Tennyson, Mr. Sims Reeves, and Mr. Albert Smith.

            For some capital examples of untouched portraits we turn with pleasure to Nos. 123, 124, 125, and 126, by Mr. Alfred Brothers, which we should have been glad to have compared with Mr. Mayall’s before painting.  In one of these we recognise the Secretary of the Society.

            131, is an excellent reproduction of David’s great picture, Ney’s Retreat from Moscow, though our proof shews indications of rapid fading.

            135-152, Studies of Flowers, are beautiful representations of a kind in which Mons. Braun stands unrivalled.  The picture of grapes, 147, is perhaps the finest, shewing as it does, the bloom upon the fruit along with its delicate opaline semi-transparency.  M. Braun has been elected as honorary member of our Society.

            153-160.  Burnham Beeches, &c.  Here we have another series of calotype pictures, by Sir William Newton, late President of the London Photographic Society.  His object in these pictures has evidently been to use them merely as sketches, for they are quite short of the usual brightness of calotype.  Some of this deficiency may perhaps be attributed to the manner in which they are printed, namely, by development.  One of the series, I may add, has to myself a peculiar interest, inasmuch as it delineates, however indistinctly, a scene long familiar and for ever endeared to me.

            May I here digress a moment to remark upon the strange familiarity with which a place greets you, even upon a first visit, after you have made acquaintance with its photographic representation.  I was much struck with this when visiting the other day a place the topography of which I had learned only from a few photographs; and many, I dare say, have experienced the same kind of wonder that I did on finding an old friend when I expected a new one.

            174.  Edinburgh, from the Calton Hill, is a highly interesting and beautiful picture, difficult of management, but altogether successful.  Every feature of the scene, yet unobscured by smoke, reveals itself in exquisite perfection, and you almost listen, as you examine the picture, for the busy hum of life to awake upon your ear from the thousands sleeping there.

            The pictures, 178-186, upon the opposite screen, contributed by Mr. Sutton, but not marked as having been taken by him, afford good means of comparing the several processes to which they are due.  Much praise must certainly be given to the printing of these, even though they do not quite endure very close inspection, which discovers the distances in some to be of a very mealy and uneven texture.

            188.  Sea and Clouds, which a careless eye may easily pass over as a strange picture, will be found well to reward a closer inspection.  Look carefully into it and you will be surprised to find there the very glitter of rippling water.

            195.  Three large pictures joined together, and so glazed with gelatine that it is difficult to see them distinctly, give a painful impression of the desolation of the Glaciers, without their vastness.

            198.  Zion sur la Rhone, is perhaps the best result achieved by the albumen process.  It is coldly toned and very highly glazed, but very exquisite in complete rendering of far off detail, and with more of atmospheric distance than such pictures generally have.

            Among Mr. Sedgfield’s series, published some time ago, but less known in this neighbourhood than they deserve, are many beauties.  Look, for instance at 217, Salisbury Cathedral, and 218, Salisbury Cathedral Cloisters.

            In 224 and 225, Photographic Memoranda, Henry Taylor [photographer or subject?],-- we have the botanist at work with a pencil more subtle and more elaborate than ever before illustrated his science.

            The next picture, 226, Pyrenees, is one which it is difficult to leave after once catching sight of the weary length of the winding pass and the pure distant snows.

            From 229 to 257 we have a series of photographic copies of drawings, Siege of Sevastopol, exhibited by Bisson Freres. 

            (To be concluded in our next.) [p. 37-38]

 

1857:  L&MPJ Feb. 15, new series vol. I, new issue #4, p. 35:

            [Editorial leader]

            The photography of the moon is at present occupying very considerable attention among scientific men.  In the last number were mentioned some successful experiments which had been tried during the recent lunar eclipse:  we now lay before our readers an extract from a most interesting letter which Father Secchi, of the Roman Observatory, has recently addressed to the Abbé Moigno relative to the same subject.  Moreover, we hope in our next to present our readers with the results of some experiments which were undertaken about fourteen months ago by ourselves, in conjunction with Mr. Hartnup, at the noble equatoreal [sic] at the Liverpool Observatory, a paper on the subject of Lunar Photography having been read by our Editor before the Royal Society, on Thursday last.  We believe we may with justice take credit to ourselves for having obtained the most rapid photograph of our satellite which has yet been taken:  four seconds being about the time required, under not very favourable circumstances.

            We have already mentioned the general features which distinguish the present Exhibition of the Photographic Society of London, both from the contemporary Exhibitions of other Societies, and from their own former annual collections, and we cannot help thinking that the change is for the worse.  Collodion, doubtless, has very many advantages over every other process, but we think that the absence of the artistically beautiful productions of old well-known paper men, is a loss which the finest collodion pictures fail to supply.  All who had the good fortune to see the perfection to which Turner had brought the Talbotype process in the views which he exhibited two years ago, must regret that the present Exhibition is almost exclusively filled with collodion pictures.  The waxed-paper master of English landscape photography, Roger Fenton, but still finds a steady advocate in Mr. Heisch, some of whose pictures are scarcely distinguishable from collodion.  Fenton’s contributions this year are exclusively collodion, and most admirable they are as examples of how the touch of a master cannot fail to shew itself under circumstances which would have conquered any less skilled and loess artistic photographer.  Let any of our readers imagine himself nearly five hundred miles away from home, working with collodion on plates of the largest size, what would he hope for with a bath which pertinaciously  refused to give anything but foggy and feeble pictures?  Assuredly, in the same way that all the best qualities of a general are brought out in a well-conducted retreat, so these grand and vast expanses of ærial perspective—river, plain, and mountain merging into sky at the far distant horizon—foggy and misty though they be, are a higher tribute to their author’s consummate skill than any success, even the most perfect, could afford.  As Fenton’s Highland Views serve to illustrate one fault or misfortune into which photographers are liable to fall,--too much half tint,--arising either from over-exposure or want of intensity in the collodion:  so Delamotte’s otherwise perfect Oxford Views may be placed at the opposite extremity; they are, with hardly an exception, characterized by a great want of half tone.  All the shadows pass from black to white with but little softening down, and in their abruptness shew unmistakably the employment of a very intense collodion, in a slightly acid bath.  Midway between these two extremes, and approaching as nearly as possible to absolute perfection, are some views of Welsh Scenery by F. Bedford.  Always famed for the high merit of his pictures, this year he has, we think, outshone any of his former productions, and one of them, a view at Bettws-y-Coed, North Wales, should be in the hands of every amateur as a specimen of the height to which it is possible for a truly artistic eye and perfect manipulation to bring this marvelous offspring of applied chemistry.

            At the forthcoming Exhibition of Art Treasure of the United Kingdom, to be held at Manchester this year, it is intended to include first-rate specimens of photography.  Most of our eminent photographers are exerting themselves to contribute something worthy of the occasion; and in order to give it the greatest publicity possible, we have been requested by Professor Delamotte, who has entire control over this department, to insert the following circular, which is at present being forwarded to our first photographic artists:--

                        Exhibition of Art Treasures of the United Kingdom, Manchester, 1857.

                        Photographic Department.

               The committee are desirous that the photographic art should be well represented in the

Forthcoming Exhibition of Art Treasures, and have requested me to make a few inquiries

on the subject.

  The space that can be appropriated will not admit of more than a thousand pictures; it

will therefore be necessary to exclude all that are not of first-rate merit.

   The committee suggest that as complete a series as possible of portraits of eminent men

should be included in the collection.

   I should be glad to hear from you at your early convenience, how far you would be able

to assist in this Exhibition.

                                                I am, yours faithfully,

                                                Philip H. Delamotte

                                                            King’s College, London

As contributions are being zealously prepared in all parts of the country, and the space to be occupied is very limited, it is particularly wished that none but pictures of the very highest excellence in the art, or possessing some special interest, may be offered for exhibition.  It is intended that the pictures shall be hung against a dark crimson back ground, in not more than three horizontal rows, so that no picture shall be in such a position as to render any of its beauties hid, and the contributions of each exhibitor will be placed together.

In our next we shall be able to give information respecting the kind of frames recommended, margin admissible, and where and how photographs are to be sent for exhibition.

Pictures by foreign artists will not be admitted, unless exhibited by persons in this country, as it is only contemplated that the art treasures possessed by our own country should be represented.  Nevertheless, it should be borne in mind by intending exhibitors, that the number of pictures by foreign artists are likely to be considerable, and will represent as accurately as possible the position of the art abroad; and thus an opportunity will be afforded of a true comparison being made between the productions of our own countrymen and those of our continental rivals.  Let us, for the credit of Old England, show that the land which gave birth to the art, does not lack either talent or skill to hold the high position thus acquired.

 

1857:  L&MPJ Feb. 15, new series vol. I, new issue #4, p. 37-38:

            [Manchester Photographic Society Exhibit – list of important works, cont. from p. 29]

            We now give the remaining portion of the remarks of the Rev. J. B. Read [wrongly listed; corrected on p. 46 to “W.J. Reade”] upon the most important of the pictures on view at the Exhibition of the Manchester Photographic Society, as read by him on the 7^th ultimo:--

            This brings us to the entrance of the Manchester Court—a court second to none in the Exhibition.

            The choice ornament of this court, and, indeed, of the whole Exhibition, is 276, a picture of the Pyrenees, taken, I believe, by Mr. Maxwell Lyte, the Photographer redivivus whose early death we were sometime ago prematurely lamenting, and to whom we owe very much.  The picture needs examining to discover its beauties, which reside as much in the execution as in the subject.

            273.  New Pasture Falls, Yorkshire, J. & R. Mudd—affords a rare specimen of transparent water in the falls.

            284.  Fairy Falls, Bishopdale, Yorkshire, J. & R. Mudd,--is another, and perhaps still more successful picture of the same character.

            281.  Heywood Farmyard, Cheshire, J. & R. Mudd,--well exhibits the softness and delicacy of which waxed paper is capable.

            288.  Taking in Ballast, Arthur Neild,--is a not less admirable specimen of a collodion picture, the subject admirably chosen, and well rendered, idealised even in the midst of its reality.

            In 290, Cottages, Bowdon, A. Neild,-- we come again upon a collodion picture (erroneously described as a calotype) of great excellence, and distinguished by the number and natural disposition of the figures it contains.

            297 and 300 are two most effective views of Bolton Abbey, by A. Neild; while the three, 305, 307, 310 of Tintern, by A. Barton, would alone repay a journey thither.

            Of the next series, 325, 326, and 327 by J. & R. Mudd, are most admirable.  Is not that miller’s cottage quite a study?  And how grandly do the colossal dimensions of the Menai Bridge stand out in the next picture; while in 327, formed of two pictures skillfully united, we have a view of Conway Castle, very fine and very far from commonplace.

            346.  Dunhyam, Cheshire, by the same artists,--is an unpretending picture of consummate beauty.  Look along that winding road, and you cannot, I am sure, help admiring it.

            350 and 351.  Houghend Hall, and Clough, J. & R. Mudd,--are beautiful pictures of a spot familiar to the botanists and entomologists of our own neighbourhood.

            352 and 353.  Furness Abbey, &c., by the Society’s Secretary [S. Cottam], are worthy of remark for the hint they give how to make the most of small pictures.  The printed titles may be, to some, an example worth adopting.

            354, Reigate, Surrey, and 359, Peacock Inn, Rowsley, and the other pictures by J. Compton, Jun., are excellent examples of calotype pictures, though none of them deal with subjects of much difficulty.

            In 370, Llanthoris Abbey [corrected on p. 46 to, “Llanthony Abbey”], 372, Tintern Abbey, and 374, The Moat, Raglan Castle, we find marvelous tenderness of treatment, such as no process could give but the waxed-paper, handled by a skilful manipulator and a true artist.  The Moat, 374, and The Gateway, are other pictures of very great beauty; and it is well worth while for a visitor to compare these pictures, by Mr. Sidebotham, with those printed upon copper by Mr. Pretsch, which hang on the side of the lantern room.

            378.  No such place, O. G. Rejlander,--is a curiosity of Photography. Several negatives—six, I believe—have been used, one after another, to produce this strange medley, which does not seem to me to reward the patience and care it must have cost to print it.

            380-392.  We have here another interesting and very pretty Welsh series, by G. Wardley, not so much made of in the printing-frame, perhaps, as might be, but still scarcely inferior, if at all, to some larger pictures of similar scenes.  380 and 362, Conway, are especially beautiful, and deserve careful examination.

            397 contains two interesting bits of Photography by Mr. Sidebotham, from a model of the moon by Mr. Nasmyth; giving a better notion of a telescopic view of the moon’s surface than most drawings.

            409.  This portrait ought to be looked at in comparison with Mr. Barnes’s picture on the first screen.   Though evidently not quite enough exposed, it shews a great advance in rapidity upon any dry collodion with which we have been hitherto acquainted.

            413.  Neuvillier, Alsace.—A fine specimen of the Photo-lithography which a little while ago made its first steps in public, but has for a time been asleep again.  It will probably shew itself a formidable rival ere long to the perfected process of M. Pretsch, for which no better name has yet been found than his own—Photo-galvanography.

            430.  Scarborough Castle, by A. Neild,-- is a very interesting contribution, enabling us to compare Mr. Sutton’s much-vaunted permanent printing with the more  brilliant results of the simpler sun-pictures.

            The four photographs mounted together as 431, are admirable views by Mr. Lavender; especially Turton Tower (pictures of which were asked for, for our illustrations), and Laxey, looking down the glen.

            Mr. Rejlander’s pictures, several of which are scattered through the room, but the greater part collected together between 444 and 457, are, upon the whole, rather admirable as feats in Photography than beautiful as works of art:  yet in 89, Don’t cry, Mamma! And 454, Weston, there is a tenderness and power from which one ought not to withhold high praise.  The true artist in pictures like these is the sitter rather than the photographer.  The Anatomical Study, 446, would be more useful had the light been more confined, so as to throw deeper and better-marked shadows.

            Mr. Roger Fenton’s Crimean series, the best of which complete the contents of this room, have been so long before the public that nothing need be said of them here.  One, No. 491, has been bought, I am told, by an officer now resident in Manchester, who recognised in the foreground his own Crimean tent.  Another instance of a similar kind occurred, when a gentleman ordered a copy of one of the pictures of Birch Church, in which he discovered the tomb-stone of a dear relative.  One other anecdote—A police-officer in charge of the room was discovered, early in the course of the Exhibition, all but in tears before a picture of Bolton Abbey, where he said his father and his mother were interred.

            In the Lantern Room, the chief objects of interest are the Australian portraits and Mr. Pretsch’s pictures, with Mr. M’Lachlan’s series of portraits and stereoscopic pictures from Sydenham, and some positive portraits of mark by Mr. Brothers.

            Baldus’s pictures in this room are below the standard one would expect; there is a woolliness and want of delicacy very far from satisfactory.  In the Swiss Cottage we have boldness and breadth, but none of the pictures of the late inundation are at all remarkable for power.

            587 exhibits a curious adoption of a witticism.  The night effect of the Kilburn Postern is a lesson to many of us, and when we get a proof darker than we wish, we have only to label it, “Effet de nuit.”

            Room 16, from 601 to 684, needs little comment at my hands.  They shew the power of collodion and the skill of Messrs. Bisson Freres, by whom they are contributed.  And I will not presume to take up more of your time by a detailed criticism, which could in no degree add to your appreciation of the pictures.

 

1857:  L&MPJ Feb. 15, new series vol. I, new issue #4, p. 39:

            Remarks on the Photography of the Moon.

            By William Crookes.

            Besides the pictures taken in America—which are almost valueless as moon maps, the sides being reversed in copying from the daguerreotype plates upon which they were originally taken—the moon has been photographed by Professor Phillips, Father Secchi, MM. Bertsch and Arnauld, Messrs. Berry, Forrest and Edwards, of Liverpool, and Mr. Hartnup and myself.  It is interesting and instructive to compare among themselves the means employed and the time occupied in taking the impression on thsee [sic] several occasions.

            Professor Philipps’ telescope has a sidereal focus of 11 feet, and an aperture of 6¼ inches; consequently the brilliancy of the moon’s image at the focus is augmented 26 times over what she appears to the naked eye.  The average time occupied for the collodion plate to receive the impression was about 3 minutes.* (*Athenæum, 1853, page 1131)

            Father Secchi’s telescope having a sidereal focus of 18 times its aperture, the moon’s image was intensified 37·8 times, and the time required for the impression was on an average 6 minutes.** (** Cosmos, Vol. 9, pp. 425 549 [sic])

M. Parro’s glass of 49 feet sidereal focus and 20 inches aperture, gave a moon image

12·3 times brighter than she appears to the naked eye, and the average time of taking the picture was 17 seconds.*** (***Liverpool Photographic Journal, Vol. 1., pp. 34, 72, 138)

            Mr. Hartnup’s telescope being 12½  feet focus and 8 inches aperture, augments the intensity of the moon’s image at its focus 35·1 times.  The time which was required for the photograph of our satellite to be taken, on the occasion of the meeting of the British Association at Liverpool, in 1854, was about 2 minutes; and under the same circumstances I succeeded in obtaining perfect and intense negatives in 4 seconds.  These, however, were taken under very unfavourable circumstances, the temperature being below the freezing point, and the moon at a considerable distance from the meridian, which necessarily caused both a diminution of the light and also a diminished sensitiveness of the collodion film.

            The rapidity with which the above pictures were taken may be better understood by comparing them with those of terrestrial objects under similar circumstances.  According to Herschel **** (****Herschel’s Outline of Astronomy, page 249)—

                        “The actual illumination of the lunar surface is not much superior to that of

weathered sandstone rock in full sunshine.  I have frequently compared the moon setting

behind the grey perpendicular façade of the table mountain, illuminated by the sun just

risen in the opposite quarter of the horizon, when it has been scarcely distinguishable in

brightness from the rock in contact with it.  The sun and moon being nearly at equal

altitudes, and the atmosphere perfectly free from cloud and vapour, its effect is alike on

both luminaries.”

            Thus, by comparing the power of the Liverpool object glass with that of our ordinary camera lens, its focal length being nearly 19 times the aperture, and the moon’s image being copied by its means in 4 seconds, we find that it is equivalent to copying sandstone illuminated by the sun in 4 seconds with a lens 4½  inches focus and a little less than a ¼ inch diaphragm; or with a compound lens having an aperture of one inch, and the same focal length, in a quarter of a second.

            I attribute the greater sensitiveness which I obtained to the excellence of the materials employed; and in the next number I hope to be able to give, along with an abs tract of the Royal Society’s paper, an account of the way in which the whole of these were prepared, sufficiently explicit to place the extraordinary rapidity of action which I obtained, in the power of any one who may take the trouble to follow carefully my instructions.

 

1857:  L&MPJ Feb. 15, new series vol. I, new issue #4, p. 39-40:

            Lunar Photography. 

            By Father Secchi.

            There are several most important scientific questions concerning the present physical constitution of our satellite which photography is destined to solve.  Thus, Lambert believes that the centre of the disk of the full moon is much more luminous than the borders; photography can answer this question in the same way that the thermo-electric multiplier has resolved the question of the greater intensity of the heat rays emanating from the centre of the solar disk.  Moreover, the distribution of light and shade on the surface possesses much interest, and the relation between the reflecting powers of lunar substances and well known terrestrial bodies may lead us to some knowledge of the nature of our satellite.  My researches have led me to think that the lunar surface is similar to the volcanic rocks on the earth.  Photography also shows very well the effect of the solar penumbra on the moon, and perhaps we may have from the same source a solution of the question relative to the atmosphere of our satellite.  You perceive that these questions are on subjects of great scientific interest.

            With respect to the size of the photographic images of the moon, I am enabled to magnify them to six or seven inches in diameter; but I am convinced that to have a good lunar map, it must not be taken at one time.  In the full moon the craters are indiscernible to the eye, on account of their small absolute height, and thus in this phase only a general view of the surface can be seen.  I even think that to get a good picture it will be necessary to employ a daguerreotype plate, as collodion in drying, and even during the operation, is liable to be distorted.  After this general outline has been taken, then by taking the phases one by one, the details can be filled in.  In the last pictures craters of only a few seconds’ diameter are preserved in all their accuracy, their interior cavities being well traced and perfectly black.  Unfortunately the light is extremely faint, and if great sensitiveness is wanted there is much risk of spoiling the picture.  I am not acquainted with the details of the manipulations as practiced in other observatories, but having heard some surprise expressed at the long time employed in taking these pictures, I can say that this was not the fault of the collodion, as in an ordinary camera a picture could be taken with it in a second, and even less.  But it must be borne in mind that in photographic lenses the focal length is at most four or five times the aperture, while in my object glass this focal length is eighteen times the aperture, which very considerably retards the action of the light.  For that reason I have adopted, as a comparison, the time employed to take a terrestial [sic] object with the same glass.  In these experiments it has appeared to me that the focus of the lens for the moon ought to be lengthened more than for terrestial [sic] objects—a fact which will be interesting as bearing upon the constitution of the matter of the moon. – Cosmos

 

1857:  L&MPJ March 1, new series vol. I, new issue #5, p. 45:

            [Editorial leader]

            In this number we have given the promised extracts from the paper on Lunar Photography.  It contains, besides a description of the mechanical arrangements by which the very difficult conditions of the problem were so far satisfied as to leave nothing wanted but corresponding perfection and skill in the chemical part, all the necessary formulæ for the preparation of the collodion and baths, &c., by means of which any person possessing the knowledge and accustomed to the care required in delicate chemical operations may obtain as rapid and satisfactory results.  We do not, however, promise any results over their ordinary average to persons who have such a limited knowledge of the art they practice as to fancy that unfailing success is necessarily attendant on a particular formula; in nine failures out of ten something nearer home is at fault, and the unfortunate solutions are made the scapegoat for the operator’s own unskilfulness.  Such instances as we now allude to can only occur among the merest tyros in the art, and we should have feared insulting out readers by such free expressions of our opinion were it not that the very numerous applications which daily come to hand from all parts of the country for “infallible processes,” &c., make us anxious, Alexander-like, to publicly cut the knot which we confess our inability to untie.  So long as the broad fundamental requirements of the art are complied with, there seems to be very little difference between one process and another in skilful hands.  They are only the tools used in the art, and while the best tools are not only useless, but really dangerous in the hands of children, so it is astonishing how apparently the most imperfect appliances can be forced to yield successful results when a well-skilled operator—one who has, so to speak, honestly served his apprenticeship in the art—brings his long experience and matured judgment to bear upon the subject.  We recommend the above formulæ in the same way that we should recommend our own favourite goose quill—very good and trustworthy, if used with discretion, but only infallible if the operator himself possesses that qualification.  Following the process here given, we have, with a compound lens of Ross and in a good light, taken photographs of persons swinging, boys playing at leap-frog, a ball thrown up in the air, and other rapidly moving objects.

            We doubt if much better photographs of our satellite can be taken in the way here pursued.  The future of lunar photography lies in another direction.  The image must not be received direct on a sensitive plate, and this copy submitted to an after process of magnifying:  defects, quite imperceptible to the naked eye on the small negatives, are expanded into great blotches when magnified.  The magnifying must be conducted simultaneously with the photographing, either by having the eye-piece on the telescope, or better still, by having a proper arrangement of lenses to throw a magnified image of the moon at once on the collodion.  The difficulty of want of light could not be any objection; as, supposing the enlarged image to be equal to those which we have since taken, that would be an increase of area of about twenty times; and consequently 20 x 6 seconds, or two minutes would represent the average time of exposure—a period which, even were it prolonged four or five times, would not be too severe a tax upon a steady and skilful hand and eye.

            We have been favoured by Professor Delamotte with the following particulars respecting the Photographic Department of the Art Treasures Exhibition at Manchester.  All contributions of Photographs must be sent in on or before Monday, the 16^th of March, and intending contributors should communicate without fail with Professor Delamotte, King’s College, London, who will give them such instructions as will enable them to send their Photographs free of carriage to Manchester.

            It is recommended, in framing, that a narrow dead gold bead frame should be used, with a white mount.

            H.R.H. Prince Albert has been pleased to offer a selection from his valuable collection of Photographs.

            Accident prevented us from receiving the President’s address to the Photographic Society of London in time for insertion in our last Journal; we have great pleasure in now laying before our readers the Chief Baryon’s very apposite remarks, and resumé of the year’s progress.  Whilst every word that falls from the lips of such a speaker is pregnant with deep meaning, we cannot help drawing attention more particularly to the last paragraph but one, in which the labours of the year are summed up in very few words, but in a most masterly manner.

            Mr. Hardwich has communicated to the Journal of the Photographic Society of London a very important paper on the preparation of pure nitrate of silver.  As it forms almost a continuation of his former paper on the “Impurities of commercial nitrate of silver,” (an abstract of which was given in the second number of our present series), we have inserted the entire paper.

 

1857:  L&MPJ March 1, new series vol. I, new issue #5, p. 53-55:

            On the Photography of the Moon.*  (*Abstract of a paper read at the Royal Society, Feb. 12^th, 1857)  By William Crookes.

            It was my good fortune in the autumn of the year 1855 to obtain several excellent photographs of the moon by means of the fine equatorial at the Liverpool observatory.  This, together with all the resources of the establishment were placed at my disposal by my kind friend Mr. Hartnup, to whom it is but due to state, that were it not for the invaluable assistance afforded by his sterling advice and steady hand, the results would not have been worth keeping.

            A short account of the instrument and its unique mounting will form an appropriate, and I doubt not, interesting prelude to the photographic process.  The polar axis and telescope together weigh about 5 tons, and whilst all parts are so truly and smoothly fitted that this enormous mass is moved equatorially by means of a small water-mill with such marvelous accuracy, that a star viewed through it appears absolutely stationary, its firmness is such that a hard blow against the side merely produces a scarcely perceptible momentary deflection.  The object glass is 8 inches diameter, and has a sidereal focus of 12·5 feet—the diameter of the moon’s image in this focus being about 1·35 inches.

            The eye-piece was removed, and in its place the body of a small camera was attached, so that the moon’s image would fall on the ground glass or sensitive film in the usual manner.  Much labour had been saved me in finding the true actinic focus, by several gentlemen at Liverpool, who were working for some time on the same subject when the British Association met in that city in 1854.  They found that the object glass had been over corrected for the actinic rays—the plate being required to be placed at a distance of 0·8 of an inch beyond the optical focus:  a few experiments were sufficient to enable me to verify this result.

            During the time above referred to Mr. Hartnup had taken many hundreds of pictures with chemicals recommended by various persons, but had not succeeded in obtaining a good negative at all, and not even a positive with a less exposure than from 30 to 60 seconds.  As I succeeded in obtaining dense negatives in about 4 seconds with the temperature below freezing and the moon at a considerable distance from the meridian, and as I attribute the greater sensitiveness which I obtained to the great purity and good quality of the materials which I employed,-- I think it will be of interest to all photographers if I describe accurately and fully the whole photographic process; previous to which, however, the mechanical arrangements will be explained.

            The clockwork movement was only sufficient to follow the moon approximately when on the meridian, but as the pictures were nearly all taken when the moon was some distance past the meridian, and when consequently the declination and atmospheric refraction were changing rapidly, it was necessary notwithstanding the short time required to take the pictures, to correct for the imperfect motion of the telescope.  This was done by means of a slow motion screws [sic] attached to the right ascension and declination circles, which are each 4 feet diameter.  The finder had an eyepiece of a power of 200 applied to it having crosswires in its field.

            The modus operandi of taking the picture was as follows:--The telescope having been moved until the moon’s image was in the centre of the focusing glass, the water-mill was turned on and the dark slide containing the sensitive collodion plate was substituted for the ground glass.  Mr. Hartnup then took his station at the finder, and, with a tangent rod in each hand, by a steady and continuous movement kept the point of intersection of the cross wires stationary on one spot of the moon’s surface.  When the motion was most perfectly neutralized I uncovered the sensitive plate at a given signal and exposed it, counting the seconds by means of a loud ticking chronometer by my side.  From the ease with which on my first attempt I could keep the crosswires in the finder fixed on one point of the moon by means of the tangent rods, I confidently believe that with the well-tutored hands and consummate skill which guided this noble instrument, the moon’s image was as motionless on the collodion film as it could have been were it a terrestrial object.

            Description of the Photographic Process.

            The glass employed for taking the lunar negatives was that known as extra white colour patent plate; the operation of cleaning the surface, which is one of especial importance, was effected in the following manner:--

            The glasses were dipped into and then well rubbed over with a hot solution of caustic potassa; [sic] then after washing with water they were transferred to hot nitric acid (1 part of strong acid to 3 of water) where they were allowed to remain for about half an hour.

            A piece of soft wash leather was plentifully rinsed, first in a warm dilute solution of carbonate of soda, and afterwards in clean water, and then well wrung until all the superfluous water was removed.  The glass plates were taken from the nitric acid and rinsed in abundance of clean water and then rubbed well on every part with the damp leather.  This removed most of the superficial moisture, and the final drying was effected by means of another piece of wash leather prepared in a similar way but allowed to become perfectly dry.  Just previous to being used the plates, held in a pneumatic plate holder had the last polish given to them by briskly rubbing with a warm piece of fine diaper (which had also been previously washed in soda and water and then well rinsed and dried) until the moisture condensed from the breath evaporated evenly and uniformly, especially guarding against the slightest contact between the surface of the glass and the fingers.

            The plate was now held with its clean side downwards until the collodion was about to be poured on, and every particle of dust, which was easily seen by bringing the source of light, the under surface of the plate, and the eye nearly in the same line, was gently wiped off by passing a warm piece of fine cambric lightly across.  Care was also taken to have the atmosphere of the room as free as possible from floating particles, and the dried collodion usually adhering to the neck of the bottle was scrupulously removed.

            The collodion was poured on and the plate rendered sensitive in the usual manner.  As the temperature both of the equatorial and operating rooms was seldom far from the freezing point, the great diminution of sensitiveness which that circumstance would have occasioned was obviated by having the nitrate of silver bath and the developing solution warmed to about 80° Fahr., and also by slightly warming the plates before using.  The source of light was a fishtail gas burner in the outer room and shining close to the orange glass window of the dark room.

            The operations of developing and fixing were conducted in the usual manner, no particular precations [sic], save such as would suggest themselves to any careful manipulator, being taken.  After fixing, the pictures were well and carefully washed in warm water, dried before a fire, and after scratching the description or name on a corner, varnished.

            The negatives which I thus obtained were exquisitely beautiful, and so minute that I could not obtain paper with a sufficiently fine surface whereon to print copies which would do them justice.  It was evident that they would bear magnifying several diameters and still remain sharply defined.  To effect this, a half-plate combination of lenses, by Ross, was screwed the reverse way into a large sliding camera body, 10 inches high and 11 inches wide, and capable of sliding from 18 inches to 3 feet in length.  At the end, opposite to the lens, was a groove, to admit of a focusing glass, or dark slide, for the sensitive plate.  A smaller camera body was screwed on to the other end of the brass work, having at the end opposite to the lens a sliding box, to hold the small negatives of the moon.  A reflector was placed in front of all, and so arranged as to be capable of moving in altitude on a hinge at the lower part, and thus reflect the diffused light of the sky through the negative and lens, parallel to the axis of the latter.

            Preliminary trials showed me that there was no use in magnifying the small pictures more than twenty times, as beyond this the individual parts began to get confused and indistinct.  This magnifying cannot, however, be effected at once:  in the small negatives the lights and shades are the reverse of what they are in nature, consequently a print on paper there from gives the light had shade correct.  A photographic copy of a negative, however, produces a positive by transmitted light, and a print from this would have the shadows light, and the light parts dark.  Consequently, in magnifying a negative to produce still a negative, an intermediate transmitted positive must first be taken, and this in its turn magnified, when it will give a negative.

            The relative distances between the small negative, the lens, and focusing glass, were so adjusted that an image of the former, enlarged to about two diameters, was thrown upon the latter, care being taken that the light from the sky was reflected parallel through the centres of the negative and lens by means of the mirror.  The aperture of the lens was then stopped down to about half an inch by means of a diaphragm, and the focus most carefully obtained by sliding the body of the large camera in or out.  It was found necessary to verify this by experimental trials at different short distances, on each side of the observed focus, as it was difficult to judge accurately with the eye on the ground glass, owing to the roughness of the latter and the feebleness of the light.

            A picture, or rather many pictures, were now taken, and the one which by transmitted light most truthfully resembled a paper print from the small negatives, was reserved for further magnifying.

            This was effected absolutely in the same manner as the former.  The negative being removed, and the positive being placed in its stead, a further magnifying gave a large-sized negative.

            Although this process seems very simple, it is impossible to estimate the difficulties which I had to overcome before arriving at the beautiful results which I laid before the Society.  The double copying had a tendency to slightly exaggerate the light and shade, and this could only be obviated by exposing the plates for such a time that, with the feeble light at my command, it was verging on decomposition.  Particles of dust, took, seemed most pertinaciously to fix themselves upon the prominent mountains, giving rise to craters where none should be; and even my finished pictures are not perfectly free from these faults, although each negative is the representative of upwards of a hundred failures and a month’s work.

            Preparation of the Materials Used.

            The soluable paper for the collodion was prepared in the following manner:--A mixture was made of                                      sp.  gr.

            Nitrous Acid of commerce       1 · 43             4 fluid ounces

            Nitric acid                                 1 · 37             4 fluid ounces

            Sulphuric acid                           1 · 82             8 fluid ounces

            When the temperature of the mixture had cooled down to 120° Fahr., one sheet of Swedish filtering paper torn up into small pieces was completely immersed in the mixture, and allowed to remain therein for about half an hour.  It was then thrown into a large pail of water, and the paper removed and placed on a sieve under a running tap for about 10 minutes.  It was then washed in very weak solution of ammonia and afterwards in plenty of water and allowed to dry spontaneously in the air.

            The collodion was made with—

            Ether sp. gr. 0·725 (previously freed from acid by rectification from dry

                        Caustic potassa)…………. 5 fluid ounces

            Absolute alcohol ………………... 3 fluid ounces

            Soluble paper, dried at 212°Fahr... 50 grains.

            Pure iodide of cadmium…………. 30 grains.

            The alcohol and ether were mixed together, and then the paper and iodide of cadmium added, they dissolved in a few minutes with a little shaking.  As soon as the solution was complete it was allowed to stand for 24 hours, and then half of the clear supernatant fluid was carefully decanted into a clean, well-stoppered bottle for use.

            The nitrate of silver bath was made by dissolving 1 ounce of crystallized nitrate of silver, perfectly pure and neutral, in 2 ounces of water, then, with constant stirring, adding a solution of 4 grains of iodide of cadmium in 1 ounce of water, and a quarter of an ounce of the above iodized collodion, and then water to make up the volume to 10 ounces.  This was allowed to stand for a few hours at a temperature of 80° Fahr., and then filtered from the undissolved iodide of silver and precipitated paper.  A glass bath was used in preference to gutta percha, and as above stated it was heated to 80° Fahr. when used.

            The developing solution consisted of—

            Pure pyrogallic acid ……………… 8 grains

            Crystallized citric acid …………   16 grains

            Water …………………………….  8 fluid ounces

            Alcohol ………………………….  ½ fluid ounce

            This developing solution is very slow in its action, 15 or 20 minutes being frequently required, but it ultimately produces negatives of great vigour and freedom from stains.

            The fixing solution employed was the ordinary nearly saturated solution of hyposulphite of soda:  and the pictures were varnished with the usual solution of amber in chloroform.

 

1857:  L&MPJ March 15, new series vol. I, new issue #6, p. 66:

            Ad:

            Stereoscopic Photographs of  Devonshire Scenery, &c.

            Now Ready,

            Stereoscopic Views of Exeter Cathedral, Torquay and Neighbourhood, Powderham Park and Castle, Berry Pomeroy Castle, the beautiful fishing Village of Babbicomb , the Marble Rocks, Petit Torre; Meadfoor, Torre Abbey, Village of Barton, Views of the River Erme, including the Old Ivy Bridge and Lower Bridge, Devonport and Keyham Dockyards, Mount Wise, Devonport, Mount Edgecumbe, the Turkish Man of War “Peiki Zaffer,” H.M.S. St. Jean D’Acre.  Also a series of magnificent Landscapes, taken in the Vale of Upton.

            C. Fowler, Brunswick Square, Torquay, Devon.  Price 18s. per doze, or 2s. each.  Devonshire Agent for Mr. Booth’s Stereoscopic Views of Yorkshire and the Lakes of Westmoreland.

 

1857:  L&MPJ April 1, new series vol. I, new issue #7, p. 68:

            Photographs at the Crystal Palace.—

            A numerous collection of photographs, chiefly by French artists, is now exhibited at the Sydenham Palace:  names of the highest rank will be found in the list.  M.M. Bisson Frères, who are considered the greatest publishers of Paris, are represented by several fine specimens, chiefly on architectural subjects.  A large view of Paris, from the quai du Louvre, and various views of the Palais Royal, Place de la Concorde, &c., may be regarded as types of their class; but they have likewise contributed four unusually large photographs of the glaciers of Switzerland.  M. Baldus, of Paris, though less prolific than the M.M. Bisson, is nearly their equal in rank, indeed their three large views of the new pavilions of the Louvre are without precedent for brightness, distinctness, depth of colour, and absence of distortion.  Some of the smaller works, one representing the havoc made by the recent inundations, were exhibited at the late photographic exhibition at Brussels.  So highly are the merits of M. Baldus esteemed in France, that he is at present occupied on a work that will number 1000 subjects, being the entire detail of the new additions to the Louvre, with every ornament of sculpture, moulding, or construction.  M. Blanchere, of Paris, is represented by several copies of French pictures, and some landscape studies on the banks of the Loire; M.M. Perrin and St. Marc by their views on the Rhine; M. Duboscq by gems and microscopic objects photographed by the use of the photo-electric microscope; M. Delessort, by his reproductions of the rare engravings of Marc Antonio; Count Olympe Aguado, by his studies of the trees at Fontainebleau; M. Le Seca, by his photographs after modern pictures of the French school; M. Le Gray, by his well known cloud studies, and his marvelous reproductions of the “Joconde” of Leonardo du Vinci, and a portrait by Raffaelle, and several other works; Mr. Maxwell Lyte, by his passes in the Pyrenees, &c.  Some views of the remarkable antiquities and edifices of Rome have been contributed by Cardinal Wiseman.  The English photographers are likewise represented, and the collection will be much increase after the close of the present month, when a large number of the works now exhibiting in Paris will be transferred to the Sydenham Palace.  Contributions are likewise promised from Dresden, Munich, Milan, Florence, and Venice.  In the same room with the photographs is an object of singular historical interest, namely, the celebrated Waterloo medal of Pistrucci, struck from the original die, which has never been hardened.  That the subject consists of the four allied sovereigns, surrounded by figures representing the mythological war of the giants, is generally known; but as, from various circumstances, impressions of the die have been rarely taken, few persons have seen this exquisite work of art.--Times

 

1857:  L&MPJ May 1, new series vol. I, new issue #9, p. 88:

            The Art Treasures Exhibition at Manchester will be perpetuated by photography more completely, we hope, than the great national one of 1851.  Already we hear that the Manchester Committee have arranged with Messrs. Colnaghi to produce a photographic series of the Exhibition.  We likewise find that his Majesty the Emperor of Austria has conferred upon Mr. Paul Pretsch, inventor of the art of Photo-galvanography, the Grand Gold Medal for Arts and Sciences, in recognition of the artistic perfection of the specimen prints which Mr. Pretsch has submitted to his Majesty.

 

1857:  L&MPJ May 1, new series vol. I, new issue #9, p. 91:

            Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition.

            --The gallery round the north end of the transept will be devoted to the exhibition of a numerous and interesting collection of photographs, arranged by Mr. Delamotte, himself a skilful photographer.  The collection consists of samples of all our best photographers, and includes portraits of many of the most distinguished men of the present day.  Prince Albert is a most liberal contributor to this department.--Times

 

1857:  L&MPJ May 1, new series vol. I, new issue #9, p. 94:

            Ad:

            Yorkshire Stereoscopic Establishment, 61, Market Street, Bradford.

            Now Ready, Ten Views of Bolton Abbey, Woods and Waterfalls, Skipton Castle, Gordale Scar, Malham Cove, &c., &c.  Korkstall [sic; “Kirkstall”] and Furness Abbeys, and several hundred other charming views in Yorkshire.  Price 1s. 6d. each; a liberal allowance to dealers.

            Specimens sent to any address on receipt of Postage Stamps.

 

1857:  L&MPJ May 15, new series vol. I, new issue #10, p. 100-101:

            Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition.—

            Photography will, at this exhibition, prove itself a most efficient auxiliary to art, and it will be applied most extensively as a means of perpetuating and giving publicity to many of the treasures which the building contains.  The executive committee have instructed Mr. Delamotte to take a large number of stereoscopic and photographic views of different portions of the Exhibition, which are to be permitted to be sold in the building, at a scale of prices which will place them within the reach of the humblest visitor.  Messrs. Agnew & Sons, of Manchester, in conjunction with Messrs. Colnaghi, announce the publication of a series of large photographic views of the building and its contents.  Messrs. Caldesi and Montecchi are constantly at work with their cameras in taking copies of numerous works of art, for a grand publication by Messrs. Colnaghi.  Messrs. Day & Son have arranged for the publication of a magnificent work, coloured in their unapproachable style, corresponding in character with “the Industrial Arts of the Nineteenth Century,” with copious text and description of the engravings.  Photographs will be the basis of the coloured engravings, and this work may be said to commence where the photographer ceases.  Correctness of outline will be secured by the camera, and accuracy of colour by the pencil of the artist.--Observer

 

1857:  L&MPJ June 1, new series vol. I, new issue #11, p. 108:

            We purpose visiting the Manchester Art Treasures’ Exhibition in a few days; and while calling the attention of our readers to an article in another page by Σ, we hope to be enabled to give in a future number our own impression of the photographic part of the collection.

            In future it will be our aim to give greater variety to these pages, and, as often as possible, furnish the substance of important papers, instead of printing in extensor, excepting where curtailment might involve obscurity.

 

1857:  L&MPJ June 1, new series vol. I, new issue #11, p. 112-114:

            On Lunar Photography

            By Thomas Grubb, M.R.I.A.  &c.

            “The attempts hitherto made to obtain good photographs of our satellite appear not to have been as successful as could be desired, nor can this be a matter of surprise when the attendant difficulties are considered.

            “The interesting paper of Mr. Crookes on the subject, republished in the last two numbers of the London Photographic Journal [Journal of the Photographic Society of London], gives the details of the modus operandi by which he has produced perhaps the best lunar photographs extant.  This communication will be nearly confined to a consideration of what may be termed the instrumental portion of the subject, or, in other words, the apparatus (in addition to that required for ordinary photography) for obtaining lunar photographs.

            “Before entering upon the more immediate subject of my paper, I would direct the attention of those interested in the science of photography to the apparently anomalous fact, as experienced both by Mr. Crookes and myself in our respective telescopes, that the actinic focus (for the lunar rays) is longer than the visual.  It is generally understood that a compound object glass made as nearly achromatic as possible, will have its actinic focus shorter than the visual, and there has been some discussion on the value of having (or not having) these two foci brought to coincidence, which some practical persons state they effect, by making their combinations a little over-corrected for the visual rays or colours.  I have carefully examined some of these combinations, the works of first-rate English artists, and have been surprised to find them exhibit sings of under-correction of colour, rather than of over, while some view lenses I made for my own use, and well balanced in colour (visually), show no appreciable difference between these foci.

            “Theory certainly appears to indicate a slight (but only slight) over-correction for colour as required to make the chemical and visual foci coincide.  Why then does it happen that Mr. Crookes’ and my own experience indicate the contrary?  It cannot be ascribed to errors either of instruments or of observation, as the telescope is a far more delicate test than an ordinary photographic combination.  That used in Mr. Crookes’ experiments has, I believe, a Munich object-glass of fine performance; and that used by myself is, I apprehend, able to compete with it in quality, and much larger in size, being about 12 1/10 inches in aperture and 20 feet focus.  It is only a few days since I ascertained the facts to be as stated, and I have had no time to theorize upon them; but the whole matter appears well worthy of the attention of those interested in photographic science.

            “To proceed with the more immediate objects of this paper, which are, to contribute such hints as seem to me likely to prove of use to those who are at once in a position and disposed to practice lunar photography, and also to remove an impression which, I fear, Mr. Crookes’ paper is in some measure likely to produce, viz. that none but first-rate instruments, worked by consummate skill or experience, can be made available.  I would also first state, that a little experience will probably show that the uncertain and unsteady state of our atmosphere (that great drawback to ordinary observation with telescopes of large dimensions) is also a bar to the perfection of lunar photography.

            “The thinnest gossamer cloud, or a haze of barely visible vapour in the moon’s region, either of them little interfering with an observation, are both sadly against obtaining a good photograph; while the quivering of the image, caused by currents of air of different densities passing between the object and the instrument, and which often does not preclude the observer from obtaining momentary distinct glances, must seriously mar the sharpness of the photography.  In like manner the leaves of a tree, though rustled by a light breeze, can be distinctly seen for moments by the eye, when to photograph them distinctly *(except instantaneously) would be impracticable.

            “We want, not one or a dozen, but at least 100 different photographs of our satellite, so as to present to our view every available portion of its surface under the effects of (to it) a rising or setting sun; and it is only by seizing on the few and far-between moments of highly favourable atmosphere that we can hope to obtain such a series, sharply defined, at least in this unfavourable climate.  It is therefore desirable that no one who possesses the required appliances should be unnecessarily deterred from the pursuit:  of these appliances I shall shortly speak, in the order of their probable efficiency.

            “A large telescope, either refracting or reflecting, equatorially mounted, and moved by adequate clockwork, is, though by no means necessary, certainly, par excellence, the thing to be desired; but if such be forthcoming, and the clockwork once adjusted to the mean apparent motion of the moon in AR [sic], any attempts (by hand) to make the motion of the telescope more strictly conform to that of the moon (in that direction) are more likely to be injurious than otherwise.

            “The mean difference for 24 hours between the moon’s average and actual motion in AR, I find, from data taken from the Nautical Almanac, to be under 2 minutes, therefore the mean difference for 4 seconds of time (that in which Mr. Crookes took his negatives) is that part of 2 minutes which 4 seconds bears to 24 hours, or say 1/180 of a second of time, or 1/12 of a second of arc.  To express this difference photographically, the resulting indistinctness would be less than that due to the shifting of 1/10000^th of an inch, in an image of the moon of 2 inches diameter.  So far, therefore, it would be as useless as unwise to interfere with the movement for following the moon in AR, if effected by good mechanism, even should the time of exposure be ten-fold that of 4 seconds; conversely, should the time of exposure not much exceed 4 seconds, the displacement of the image, owing to a change of declination of the moon (though the latter be occasionally ten times in amount that of AR), will not sensibly affect the distinctness of an image charged under all ordinary circumstances with a far greater amount of indistinctness arising from atmospheric disturbance.

            “There are intervals, however, when the atmosphere is both clear and also in that state of repose which admits of obtaining results commensurate with the highest perfection of the best instruments; and if it be hereafter found of advantage (a matter which at present seems doubtful_ to take secondary and enlarged images at the first operation, requiring perhaps some minutes’ exposure, then I would recommend the adoption of the following method, instead of hand work, for following the moon in her varying declination.

            “The portion of the apparatus connected with the telescope for containing the dark frame to be made capable of sliding by a small quantity, and acted upon by a screw connected with a small clock movement; this motion to be capable both of adjustment and of being reversed:  the value of the common divisions of the screw once ascertained, would afford data for forming a table, from which, with the assistance of the Nautical Almanac, the required correction for the differing declination N. or S. of the moon could be applied.

            “With such an addition to a really good equatorial, I can see no difficulty in exposing a sensitive surface for minutes with all the accuracy desirable, and such lengthened exposure will no doubt be required where negatives of 6 to 8 inches diameter are attempted.  On the other hand, where a short exposure, say from 4 to 20 seconds only is required, and where it is found necessary to keep both AR and Dec. motions ‘in hand’ by the usual means of Hook’s-joints, handles, or other contrivances, any assistance to be derived from clockwork seems problematic.

            “An equatorial mounting is, however, by no means necessary for photographing the moon’s surface; and where the time of exposure does not exceed 30 seconds, the apparatus devised by Lord Rosse seems admirably suited.  It may be shortly described thus:--On a flat surface attached to the telescope, and parallel to the plane of the image, is attached, a sliding plate, the slide being capable of adjustment to the direction of the moon’s path at the time of operating.  The slide is actuated by a screw moved by clockwork, and having a governor or regulator of peculiar construction which acts equally well in all positions (this, in the instance before us, is necessary); the clockwork being once adjusted requires no change, but the inclination of the slide must be effected by trial for the moon’s path at the time of taking the photograph, the telescope itself remaining firmly clamped.  This apparatus is peculiarly fitted for large telescopes not equatorially mounted, and though a little more troublesome in the management, as requiring constant rectification of the slide to the moon’s path, promises to afford the means of taking photographs of the moon as perfect as those which can be obtained with the aid of the best equatorial arrangements.

            “This communication having already exceeded its intended length, I defer to another, the consideration of some details, including that of obtaining large negatives at the first operation.

            “The few negatives I have as yet taken are only of that size afforded by the direct image formed by the object glass, viz. 2 1/10 inches nearly, and the positive prints from these on the table do not exhibit the sharpness of the negatives:  that portion of the image corresponding with the moon’s bright limb, which would be most affected by any want of perfect uniformity of the motions of the telescope and moon in AR, is in the negatives intensely sharp, even where the exposure lasted for 45 seconds, thus proving the efficiency of the clockwork unassisted.

            “The actinic force varied much on the several nights of operation, 10 seconds giving a full negative in some, others requiring 30 to 40 seconds’ exposure.  The wind was east, the definition middling, and consequently leaving a prospect of obtaining better results in more favourable states of the atmosphere.  The sensitizing bath was new and of fused nitrate; the collodion, ‘Thomas’s’; and it is remarkable, that while the collodion employed gave excellent negatives with good half-tone, of day objects, the negatives of the moon, with all lengths of exposure, have excess of light and shade, thus indicating a greater actinic difference of intensity tan of visual in the dark and light portions of the moon’s surface, and suggesting the necessity of  using a peculiar collodion of low intensity for obtaining the best lunar negatives.”—London Photographic Journal

 

1857:  L&MPJ June 1, new series vol. I, new issue #11, p. 117:

            Exhibition of Art Treasures at Manchester.

            Having paid several very pleasant visits to this Exhibition, it is with no wish to undervalue the extent and beauties of the collection, that we are induced to say we have hitherto returned with a feeling of regret that we have been unable to fix our attention upon specific subjects; we have wandered through saloon after saloon, and thence round the galleries above, and have met with so many and varied distracting objects, that a quiet study of any master-piece has been quite out of the question, and we still long for the time when we can really make a beginning and follow out, as closely as may be, the design of the spirited projectors.  It will hardly come within the providence of this Journal to give any detailed account of the inestimable treasures of all kinds which liberal hands have so plenteously supplied for the edification of our Manchester friends, and the numbers to whom their hospitality will doubtless be extended; a mere reference to the clever articles on the subject, which all branches of the fourth estate are teeming with, shows how perseverance and assiduity have succeeded in bringing together a gallery of art, in all its departments, whether from the easel, the burin, or the chisel—whether they be the works of Venice, Byzantium, or Limoges—whether they be the fragile wares of the ingenious Chinese, or the more homely products of English Ceramic art—whether they be the warriors’ armour, or the peaceful works of the goldsmith—a gallery of these, and a host of other things, such as have never been seen together before.  It may, perhaps, seem strange that with an almost unqualified approval, we should have to couple anything like positive regret, but we think we are not alone in regretting that the great principle suggested by H.R.H. Prince Albert, of a chronological arrangement, has apparently been ignored with respect to the department with which we are chiefly concerned; and we fear Mr. Delamotte has had to work with tied hands, and been unable to carry out what seems to have been the leading idea of the rest of the exhibition.  Where are the early specimens of M. Niepce (from Dr. Brown, of the British Museum,) and those of M. Daguerre?  Where are specimens of the early researches of Sir John Herschel, Mr. Talbot, Mr. Hunt, and our lamented friend, Mr. F. Scott Archer?  the only answer is that of echo, merely reiterating the bootless enquiry.  It may be said that photography is too young to have any old masters; granted:  but remembering the length of art and life’s brevity, we look forward into the dim vistas of a far extending futurity, and the thoughts which arise should certainly awaken a deep interest in all that has gone by in the past though few years of photographic history.  Our extended requirements may savour of “the unsuspected source of enthusiasm,” which a recent writer in the Quarterly alluded to, but when we find the same writer paying a tribute of praise, and saying that “photography is the purveyor of a knowledge of cheap, prompt, and correct facts,” we think we are not at all unreasonable in claiming a higher place in the category of art than has hitherto been allotted to us.  It is a great drawback to the distinctness of this branch of the collection that it should be divided into two moieties, it could surely have been contrived that it might all have been together on one side of the organ; as things are now, few persons will see the whole of it, and a just comparison is next to impossible.  A similar distribution is made of the engravings.  But the present arrangements are defective in another and important point, viz., that the committee have allotted to some six hundred specimens of photographic art, a bare page and a-half of a catalogue of three hundred and twenty-four pages.  We trust that no time will be lost in supplying this want, for until then we are at a loss how to commence such a critical survey of the collection as may enable our readers to compare our thoughts with their own on the subject.  Σ

 

1857:  L&MPJ June 15, new series vol. I, new issue #12, p. 126-127:

            Exhibition of Art Treasures at Manchester.

            The continued want of catalogues, and the apparent absence of systematic arrangement, constrain us rather to generalize in our remarks upon the Photographic portion of this exhibition, and to endeavour to examine the different classes of photography as represented there, instead of proceeding in regular order through the collection.  At the outset we are surprised by a striking omission, viz.:--the non-representation of direct photography, meaning thereby positive and negative pictures on glass or paper as produced in the camera; all that we see here are the result of a subsequent process, and no means are afforded to the photographic student, of tracing the progressive steps by which the results before him have been attained.  In nearly every case it is left to the visitors’ experience to determine whether a pictures is from a collodion or albumen negative, or both, or from waxed paper, or by any of the numerous preservative formulæ, and the original negatives themselves are nowhere visible.  Photographic art may be divided into almost as many classes as the art of painting itself.  We propose to notice some of its divisions.  The department to which professional photographers mostly devote themselves is portraiture, and this class, judging from the large number of touched portraits here exhibited, would seem to be greatly dependent on the painter’s adventitious aid.  In some cases no trace of the original picture is visible, its only use apparently being to secure identity and truth, the visible picture being laid over the other in oil or water color.  Messrs. Caldesi & Co.’s portraits of Md’lle Piccolomini, Sir B. Hall, Signor Mario, and others, are among the best specimens of this class; but, fore the reasons we have alluded to, we consider them rather out of the pale of our criticism.  We swish to see photography untrammeled by the easel, and however beautiful the results may be, we think that colored or stippled photographs should be exhibited as such, and not allowed to shame their more modest fellows by their glaring propinquity.  There are, however, some very pleasing untouched portraits, the names of the artists of which are not known to us.  To these, as to all other omissions, we must again recur.  Some, taken apparently at very short distance with a large lens, appear to us particularly disagreeable.  They are by Mr. Herbert Fry, we believe.  Among them we may mention those of Lord Palmerston and Mr. Gordon Cumming; distortion is painfully visible in these, and as photography cannot flatter, we think at all events possible exaggeration ought to be avoided.  There are a few good vignetted portraits by Mr. Delamotte, Mr. Brothers and other artists, among which we may refer to that of J. Watts, Esq., Mayor of Manchester; we object, however, to the yellow tint of the paper in this case.  In this class also, we may refer to some very interesting pictures of patients in various stages of lunacy, placed in the north gallery.  We entirely disagree with the writer in the Manchester Examiner and Times, who complained of their exhibition, and we think anything which increases our knowledge of the condition of the unhappy beings who are stricken in mind may fairly be counted among the useful agents for the amelioration of that condition.  The next numerous class, namely, landscape photography, is shared with worthy emulation between amateurs and professionals.  Many of the productions of this style are of high artistic excellence, and are fine exponents of the capabilities of the art.  Among these, to Mr. Leverett’s waxed paper pictures 523 and 526, may be awarded the first place, and we can scarcely have anything more exquisite than Messrs. Dolamore and Bullock’s “Hamstead Heath,” and the “Old Mill at Ambleside.”  And as good specimens of the early style of the art Mr. B.B. Turner’s talbotype pictures may be referred to.  One of them called, “Photographic Truth” depicts a country church, both in the position of reality, and also the inverted reflection in a pond, with so much veri-similitude, that the early matin goer must needs beware.  Mr. White’s well known favourites are good specimens of landscape photography.  There is also one of Messrs. Mudd’s best pictures, “A Scene at Trifriw,” so good that we cannot help regretting that no more of theirs are to be found in the collection.  We ought not to pass over the matchless sea and sky pictures by Mr. Le Gray and others.

            This class admits of further subdivision which will bring under our notice architectural photography, in which Messrs. Baldus and Bisson Fréres stand first and foremost.  We next come to the copyists, a class of which every art shews numerous examples, though none so literally as photography, and the very matter of fact character of this class constitutes its chief value; a notable instance of which may be alluded to—the collection of gems of this Exhibition which Messrs. Colnaghi are publishing, which will enable many to possess what would otherwise have been unattainable.  We hope that every care will be taken to use the best possible paper and light for this work, as the specimens we have seen, for instance the copy of Mr. Frost’s picture of Una and the Wood Nymphs, seem rather deficient in these respects.  Of this class the copies of pictures in this year’s exhibition of the Royal Academy by Messrs. Howlett may be cited, and we may here notice the inability of pictorial art critics thoroughly to understand the feeling of photographers.  For example, the Art Journal speaking of the Royal Academy says, of No. 92, “the Photographer,” (there is here a copy of it,) “The deficiency of the picture is that we cannot see a subject of interest sufficient to engage the attention of the photographer.”  We would ask whether painting or photography produces the most artistic picture from the same material however inauspicious, and if photography loses the award we say with the Art Journal, “Photography has done much for art in the smaller works; it is recognisable  everywhere in small landscapes and small figure pictures.”  Then of No. 28, the same critic says:-- “This picture has much the appearance of having been painted from a photograph, but it surpasses photography because the detail of the shaded portions is as perfect as that of the light passage.”  A bad standard of photography was evidently present to the critic’s eye, for who would pronounce as good, a photograph deficient in this respect?  We do not pretend to notice every class into which photography may be divided, but we must not pass over in silence the artists of genre, who are not numerously, though well represented here.  This class delights in subjects of allegory or imagination, and while we are bound to confess our own belief that these subjects are rather beyond the capabilities of photography, we cannot keep back a meed of praise from the works of Balders, Lake Price and Rejlander.  This gentleman will readily understand why we prefer his earlier works, such as, “Don’t Cry, Mamma.”  :Barnaby Happy,” and the “Scholar’s Mate,” &c., to those which he now exhibits.  The best of these is that of the Cherubs from the picture of the “Maddona [sic] del Sisto;” this is done from the life, and though the angels are rather too much “of the earth, earthy,” still there is a fine poetic feeling evident in the composition.  A more ambitious picture is that of  “Youth and Age,”exhibiting extraordinary ingenuity and skill, being printed from some thirty negatives; the picture has many good points, but falls somewhat short of our idea of what allegory, as delineated, ought to be.  As an instance of this is a really artistic view, let us refer to Mr. Maclise’s fine picture of the “Spirit of Chivalry,” rightly placed in a prominent position in the water colour gallery.  The enumeration of this class detains us not long, for after viewing some more of Rejlander’s fancies, and some fine groups of armour and articles of virtu by Balders, and Mr. Price’s “Don Quixote,” we have done.  This last is really a fine composition, and whether we regard the arrangement of the material or the conception of the errant knight, or the praise-worthy points of the photograph, we are bound to contribute our mite to the praise which this work has received.  We wish that its reproduction by the Photo-galvanographic Company could be made to equal the original, which we see here for the first time.  We can only spare space to regret that we still labour under the restrictions referred to in our last.  Σ

 

1857:  L&MPJ July 1, new series vol. I, new issue #13, p. 135-137:

            Exhibition of Art Treasures at Manchester.

            We are now tolerably well used to the connection of electricity with celerity, and the encirclement of the earth by Puck’s girdle has almost ceased to be a figurative expression; but it has been reserved for heliography to suggest a new adjective, which, coupled with speed, gives rise to an idea of something effected during its attainment.  The velocity of electricity is evanescent.  Its flight leaves behind no useful product that is directly traceable to its agency.  But when one speaks of photographic quickness we certainly understand instantaneousness, but should at the same time be disappointed if nothing tangible remained.  We are thus enabled to impress our sensitive plates with any image we please; and the sun at the same time is the most accurate limner in existence; the rapidity of the process being one of its chiefest advantages in portraiture, the features of sitters scarcely being motionless even for a second.  The virtuoso bearing this in mind will doubtless be led to draw comparisons between the curious old miniatures in the gallery with the photographic portraits in their neighbourhood; and, whilst admiring them, will not fail to be surprised with their paucity as compared with the photographic miniatures of the present day.  But we live in an age of progress; everything must be done not only well, but quickly, and our art is a good specimen of the requirements of the age.

            A visitor to this gallery is able, with very little effort of fancy, to call around him, and almost to converse with, most of the celebrities of the present day.  One of the earliest of these is No. 7, Douglas Jerrold, whose marble effigy has also a prominent place in the exhibition.  Poor Jerrold! now gone to his last rest, who almost yesterday was one of our best favourites.  Really, “time works wonders.”  But Mr. H. Watkin’s (not Mr. Fry, as mentioned in our last,) does him, and his other subjects, but scant justice; yet he, perhaps, may favour us some day with some startling reason why he is so fond of exaggeration as to miss the minute detail of the art which otherwise he uses so well.  Among his specimens, are (No. 4), “Our own correspondent,” W. H. Russell; (No. 3) Dr. Winslow, and (No. 6) J. Gilbert, both names “familiar in our mouths as household words;” and Owen Jones (37), he of the Alhambra, and Luke Limner (38), of pictorial notoriety; G. Grote, the historian (24), is to us the best of this series.  He also shows the disagreeable portraits of Lord Palmerston (117), and Lord Brougham (131).    We mean no disrespect to those noblemen, and hope the artist did not.  There are, too, by the same artist, a jaundiced image of Charles Selby (145), of J. R. Planche (144), of the Herald’s College, and of the Mont Blanc-loving Albert Smith (148), who really seems about to tell us his own story of the Swiss who had sold clocks to all the potentates in Christendom.  Mr. Watkins also sends us Mr. Dixon (142), of the Athenum, (he likes photography, and might, we think, well extend his editorial notices of us).  We have also, still speaking of Mr. Watkin’s contributions, Madame Ristori (293), looking very unlike Medea, and Kenny Meadows (294), and the renowned Gordon Cumming (295), and Alexander Dumas (296), both renowned pullers of the long bow.  There is also facetious Judge Haliburton, “Sam Slick” (290), the gallant Sir C. Campbell (412), and the fruit-painting George Lance (413).  The foregoing are all disagreeably yellow, a fault which is, however, not confined to Mr. Watkin’s pictures.  Then Mr. J. Watkin’s has Samuel Warren (No. 58), not to be mistaken even by his Midhurst constituents, in spite of the introduction of flake white; and Mr. Cusack Roney, the railway director (63), the laughter-stirring G. Cruikshank (61), and (62) Lord A. Paget, of her Majesty’s yacht.  We are inclined to place M. Claudet at the top of the list of photographic artists in portraiture; and speaking solely with reference to photography, we think his present contributions bear us out in our view.  He sends the Rev. H. M. Birch, the Prince of Wales’ late tutor (1), Sir H. Stewart (14), W. L. Chance (16), and Carlotta Leclerq (17, 85), Dr. Livingston (42), Lieut. Bellot (44), Dr. Hassall (45), Duke of Cambridge (80), coloured, Sir R. Peel (89), and the Duke of Wellington (90).  Mr. T. R. Williams sends Charles Knight, Sir R. Mayne, and Capt. Baynes (20, 21, and 22(, good early specimens of vignetting, and Lord Brougham (41); (No. 51) Miss Brougham.  (Why are ladies generally represented leaning on chair backs?)  Messrs. Maull and Polybank’s series deserve general commendation.  They range through every department of science, enterprise, and literature.  Among them are T. B. Macaulay (121),. Sir W. Cubitt (123), Dr. Rae (153), Earl of Burlington (161), Sir C. W. Pasley (169), and Mr. F. Tupper (174).  Mr. Lake Price shows a first class portrait of Prince Albert (119), taken for this exhibition, Owen Jones (113), Clarkson Stanfield (114), George Cattermole (116), and (in 138) has made an attempt at being present himself, we wish he had succeeded better.  Mr. Delamotte contributes portraits of the Rev. J. R. Major, the late Secretary of the London Photographic Society (28), and W. Mulready (452).  No. 32, by Mr. Goodman, is a fine picture; it represents Miss Murray, as Lady Placid in Mrs. Inchbold’s fine old play, “Everyone has his faults.”  There is a capital imitation of a crayon head, of the Bishop of Oxford, by Contencin, No. 68.  Mr. Kilburn has not contributed much, but his Mr. Mechi (No. 75), and Prince Oscar (92), and Admiral Lyons (127), are worthy of notice.  Mr. Hannah sends a frame of nine portraits (493), which well sustain his fame.  Mr. Howlett has a few good portraits of favourite painters, J. Chorsley (132), T. Webster (134), W. P. Frith (135), and T. Creswick (136).  Mr. Mayall contributes a large number of his well-known specimens, including the Lord Mayor of London (95), Sir C. Campbell (99), Duke of Cambridge (102), Sir W. Molesworth (477), J. Gibson, R.A. (479), Prince of Prussia (481), A. Tennyson (483), and numerous others.  Messrs. Caldesi’s collection is very fine, of which we may name Miss Swanborough (73), looking uncommonly like a living piece of Dresden China; Signor Mario and Giulia Grisi (887); No. 78, by Locke, is a good specimen of this style; Messrs. Cundall’s soldiers, (104, 105, 106), &c., are excellent; the Bishop of Manchester (29), the Mayor of Manchester (31), and the Town Clerk of Manchester (35), by Mr. Brothers, are worthy of their prominent position, and there are numerous others of merit by other artists.  One picture by Mr. Chadburn, of Liverpool, a portrait of Mr. Mayer, can hardly miss observation; it is a collodion portrait on glass, so much exaggerated and so devoid of definition, that it does not realise to our minds any of the essentials of a good portrait.  Soon after the exhibition opened, we saw another collodion picture, by a Manchester artist, hung in a good position; is it known what has become of this and some others which have been displaced?  Dr. Diamond’s portraits of insane women ought not to be silently passed by, and were they accompanied by some description of their cases, would be of great importance to the student of psychological phenomena.

            We have previously entered our protest against the promiscuous hanging of touched and untouched  photographs, so we have not deemed it requisite to make any distinction among the foregoing, a large proportion of which are indebted to the pencil of the artist as much as to that of Phœbus himself.  It appears from the catalogue, that there are 597 photographs exhibited; of these about 240 are portraits, so that we must be excused if,. Though for the present confining ourselves to them, we have made any inadvertent omissions.  We cannot help thinking that the committee might have communicated a little more information in this catalogue, which is a meager list, and not an enumeration of particulars, as Walker defines.  Σ

 

1857:  L&MPJ July 15, new series vol. I, new issue #14, p. 144-145:

            Exhibition of Art Treasures at Manchester.

            It has always been esteemed a great advantage to the tourist, whether he journey through the beauteous regions of nature, or ramble among the inestimable treasures of art; whether he turn aside to contemplate the ancient reliques of times gone by, or to examine the triumphs of modern engineering skill, that the memory should be assisted by some means within his grasp.  A portfolio of engravings, a wallet of fragments selected by himself (oft-times to the great detriment of the object of his visit), are of themselves great and useful adjuncts to the tablets of memory, on which, with a pen of a writer more or less ready, every one writes to some extent.  These things are not to be valued according to the simple standard of what they will fetch, if offered to competition, but are enhanced in worth by the associations which connect themselves inseparably with the objects or places visited, and which value, somewhat selfishly, can only obtain in the possessor’s own mind.  But when a traveller can by simple chemical appliances reproduce, not only to his own, but to the eyes of every one, the actual scene in which his delight was aroused, and in a great measure excite the same pleasurable feelings in others which he experienced himself, it must be clear that the benefit becomes infinitely less selfish, and its extent is only confined by the limits of reproduction.  Now photography is a combination of these contrivances; the ingenuity of many minds has arranged mean s which, if rightly made use of, can extend our most treasured reminiscences to those around us, and at the same time may increase our own enjoyment.  But the photographer needs warning; it is not sufficient that a subject represented shall be so merely in a matter of fact manner, but its aspect must be favourable.  A painting of Vesuvius, without the usual concomitants of an eruption, as detailed by Pliny, or the picturesque pine tree-like cloud which usually precedes it—a view of Niagara without a rainbow, would b e to many people uninteresting:  it would not certainly sustain our view of the matter, if we presented subjects like these without the accompaniments, simply because when we visited them they were absent.  It is therefore incumbent on our photographic friends that they choose the most favourable conditions of which they can possibly avail themselves, and in this we are only seconding the opinion of a writer in the leader of the last number of this Journal.  This idea is one which will hardly fail to occur to a visitor to this exhibition; for without some conceptions not necessarily suggested by the scenes themselves, many of the artists would have quite fallen short of our standard of excellence.  The department of photography which we propose at this time to notice, commences with the Falls of Niagara (Nos. 110 and 140); these are interesting as the work of an American artist, whose name is not known to us, and still more so as faithful representations of a scene which has long been regarded as one of nature’s most marvelous masterpieces.  We next notice two Alpine scenes, by Martens (112), Glacier du Rhone and (138*) [sic] Monte Rosa; and, viewing pictures of these and similar scenery, we cannot fail to be struck with astonishment at the results obtained.  We have not hitherto been favoured with any account of Alpine photography; but, comparing great things with small, we are sure, from the impediments which beset the less ambitious artist, that the difficulties of these higher regions must be immense.  They are mostly of an altitude which is unattainable in this country.  That of the Finsteraahorn, exhibited by Prince Albert, is an immense height above the level of the sea.  While speaking of the region of everlasting snow, we may mention, as fine specimens of photography, Matterhorn (184), by Mr. De la Motte; Le Mont Cervin (231), Flühlen, with fine cliffs in the background (264), Lucern (272), with a somewhat spotty sky, by Martens; Glaciers (355); (359) and Mer de Gluce, is a fine picture, though somewhat indistinct in parts; (216), Monte Rosahas, an atmospheric effect of distance quite illusive, exhibited by Murray and Heath.  Messrs.  Dolamore and Bullock’s contributions rank amongst the first of their class, both as favourably chosen scenes and excellent specimens of photographic printing, being characterized by a decisive clearness which is not often excelled; and the production of Mr. Bedford bear also the same marks.  Of the former may be mentioned Rydal Fall (179), with capital transparent water; Aber, N. Wales (183); Coast Scene (200); the latter is a capital study for a geologist; (204), a mill, at Ambleside, is an example of photography much more agreeably told than in 258; (207), Stock Ghyll Force, a favourite scene; also (193), on the same stream; (198), a frame containing four landscapes—Hampstead Heath—evidently taken quickly, so that we almost might expect to find images of rabbits emerging from the brake in the foreground of No. 1.  (220) Rydal Church is not so successful, but is interesting, as a spot sacred to the memory of the best of the lake poets.  (217), Lyulph’s Tower—we think a view from the west would have been preferable; (232) Rydal Water, another favourite spot.  (238) Glastonbury Abbey, (245) Ulleswater, (347) Conway Castle, (502) On the Rothay.  By the latter artist are a fine view of Pont Aberglashyn [sic](222), and (284) (286), a Gateway at Canterbury, and (320) the Baptistry of the Cathedral of that city.  (364), (366), and (368), Welsh Landscapes, which for fine definition may be registered as very beautiful specimens; (510) and (514) are other fine views at Canterbury.  There are some good studies of trees, marked T. Bedford [sic], the same artist, we presume.  (226) Fir Trees, (325), Plants (182) Pont du Diable, by Mr. Delamotte, is almost stereoscopic, and this gentleman’s pictures are all to be well spoken of.  There are (188) Lausanne, which we rather suspect of painted clouds, (288) High-street, Oxford, much superior to his stereoscopic views of that city.  The visitor should compare this with No. 138, in the Water Colour Gallery, a drawing by Mr. A. Pugin.  While speaking of Mr. Delamotte, we wish to call attention to his series of Recollections of the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition, of which honourable mention may be made.  If well printed, every local photographer ought to possess a portfolio of these.  Mr. White’s pictures are all good photographs.  We wish we could say as much for his prints, some of which we have noticed to be in a state of deterioration from fading.  He shows a first-rate view of a Watermill (190), The Decoy (190), Studies from Life (178) and (244); also (474), a Tale of the Crimea—these three have all the same back-ground of foliage, which is very good.  In (228) Wooton House, we think he has attempted too much in endeavouring to show the whole precincts of Mr. Evelyn’s house; the print is of an unpleasant colour, not usual with this artist.  Mr. Fenton’s pictures may be identified anywhere; they are almost to be distinguished as well from any other artist’s as a Rembrandt would be in a collection of Claudes or Poussins.  An extensive sweep of scenery such as (187) Reach of the Dee, a characteristic bit of ancient architecture, as (205) Roslin Chapel, a picturesque mill (247), a Waterfall (500), a River’s Bed (508), the Garravalt, (518) a Romantic Bridge—all these are excellent examples of photography on a large scale, and some in which a degree of ingenuity in obtaining a position must have been required.  Mr. Llewellyn sends some very good pictures, and some of them may be very favourably contrasted with others.  This views of Penllergare (371, 512, 516) are much superior to No. 566 of the same by Mr. Knight, and to 305, by Mr. Delamotte.  Mr. Llewellyn’s 177, On the Tees, is a very good study of rocks scattered about in a rapid stream.  We think 365 and 369, On the Wharf and Tenby Bay, must be early attempts of this artist.  The comparisons between the different views of Penllergare will afford good illustrations of our opening remarks.  Σ

 

1857:  L&MPJ Aug. 15, new series vol. I, new issue #16, p. 170:

            Exhibition of Art Treasures at Manchester.

[NOTE:  In transcribing articles concerning photographic copies of other works of art, it is sometimes difficult to ascertain if the artist listed is the photographer or the original artist.  Additionally someone exhibiting an image may not have been the original artist.]

            In our second notice we remarked, respecting the department in which we class the copyists, “that the very matter-of-fact, character of copyist class constitutes its chief value.”  It is not every one that has the taste and knowledge requisite to form a choice collection of paintings, and but to a small minority of those who do possess those essentials, the great cost of works of art places them almost entirely beyond their reach; therein is shown one of the most readily understood attributes of photography:  one may have a Royal Academy Exhibition of one’s own, a portfolio may contain copies, and those not so costly even as engravings, of the best works both of ancient and modern art.—The workers in the fictile arts would have been delighed [sic] to see such copies of their productions as we have in (19) and (33), Luca della Robbia Ware, by C. F. Thompson, and the history of vitreous manufacture might be well told by such pictures as (No. 48), by C. F. Thompson, a crystal cup of great beauty; a gallery of sculpture besides being costly is at the best fragile, and when absolute permanency can be secured for photographs, such pictures as (66), (201) (208) (265), exhibited by the Prince Consort, and (270), exhibited  by Dr. Becker, will be invaluable in this department.  WE have been much gratified in inspecting the numerous copies of paintings in this exhibition; for the most part they are very praiseworthy, and though it might appear to be the most easily practiced branch of the art, there is still much scope for the exercise of taste; the actinic effect of different colours is still but little understood, and we still look forward to a day when each tint shall in its photographic effect be distinguishable from others, just as the arrangement of notes in a piece of music, combined with other arbitrary symbols, conveys to us ideas of their value in time, and even of their sound.  Mr. Howlett is a large contributor in this branch, and we name as good specimens of his (304) The Vision (Rankly), (302) a Cattle Piece, by Lee and Cooper, (298) Home and the Houseless (Faed), the original of which is in this exhibition (saloon E 117).  (451) The Dame’s Absence, is a reproduction of a charming picture by A. Rankley, in this year’s Royal Academy Exhibition. (448) A Dream of the Future, one might almost suppose to be from the life, it represents a young girl about to seek her fortune in the “Great World of London.:  (463)  Guy Fawkes, T. Brook, is from last year’s Royal Academy Exhibition.  (461) is an excellent picture, by H. Moore, in the Portland Gallery.  (462) The Ship Boy’s Letter, Hook.  (464) also by Hook, the original painting in the Royal Academy, is marked by almost photographic minuteness, the subject is a look out for a signal, “Her Union jack is at the Fore.”  (458)  G. Smith’s Photographer, a picture to which we have before referred.  (  ) [sic] The Pic-nic, by H. O’Neil, and (453) The Last Day of the Sale, by the same artist.  Mr. Bingham’s (446) is a good copy of H. Vernet’s Battle of the Alma.  We have numerous copies of engravings, some of them hard to be distinguished from the originals with such precision is every stroke of the graver reproduced, and so nicely the very colour of the ink imitated.  (457) an old print of the renowned Marshall Turrenne, remarkable for the pointlace; it is contributed by the Prince Consort, and (450) a picture of the Dutch school, An Old Woman Spinning, are exact fac-similes, as also are Mrs. Verscholye’s, contained in (455), Le Conseil Paternel, celebrated as the Satin Gown, engraved by Willie; Charles I., Napoleon I., St. Giovanni, and two others, one after L. da Vinci, and one after Raphael.  (443) by Major Penrice, is a capital imitation after Mieris, L’Observateur distrait, and (444) a picture by Brothers, published by the Manchester Society, the Kiosk; in (445) we have a fine copy, by Alinari, of a fresco painting, Il Giudizio Universale.  R. Harmer’s (300 and 460) Studies of Flowers, copies (says the catalogue) from engravings, are very good.  (465 to 476) are copies of drawings, by Raffaelle, &c., by C. T. Thompson, of these we may notice especially, though they are all good as far as the state of originals will permit, (376) Head of Avenging Angel, (379) Passage of the Red Sea, (381) Repulse of Attila, and (470) Dante’s Beatrice.  Dr. Becker’s (572) Lion’s Jaw Bones, are exceedingly interesting because the only specimens of this application of the art to anotomical [sic] purposes.  (524) The Scothard Shield, by Hogarth, is good.  (527 and 528) are copies, by Contencin, of crayon drawings, unexcelled in their way, they are Dr. Newman and Colonel Long.  Then we come to the artists of “character,” first and foremost of whom comes Rejlander with his (65) Two Ways of Life, which we have already spoken of, and (340) What ails Amy, the disorder in question not being well indicated by the accessories, particularly those our of doors, but we presume it to be some phase or other of the “old, old story.”  (203)  (309) Studies Of Game, by Lake Price, can hardly be lauded too much; he is very successful with knights, as in (279, 280 and 310).  But passing by his Temptation (494) we perceive Mr. White’s beautiful sunshine, which we ought to have noticed before.  A lot of Studies of Arabs, Fishermen, Ships, Tents, &c., marked Grundy (212 to 215, 229, 230, 584, to 591), (534) a Savoyard Itinerant Musician.  All these are rather over painted, but otherwise good pictures, both in arrangement and effect.

            Before we quit this branch of our subject we may be permitted to recommend the attention of photographic printers to the beautiful tones of some of the specimens of mezzotint engravings in this exhibition, most of which are within their reach; we may give as examples two by W. M. Turner, (1289) Windmill and Lock.  (1303) Egremont Marine; this last and others by the same artist are to some extent successfully imitated, unintentionally no doubt, by Mr. Le Gray in his sea and cloud pictures.

 

1857:  L&MPJ Sept. 15, new series vol. I, new issue #18, p. 194:

            Exhibition of Art Treasures at Manchester.

            Our readers who may have followed us in our remarks upon the photographic collection of this Exhibition, will perhaps, wish to hear what our opinion is as to the results likely to accrue to the art there from; and though we have considerable diffidence in offering an unfavourable opinion of any portion of the very unique and invaluable collection at all, yet of this portion we can only come to one conclusion, which is decidedly unfavourable; and the only advantage that we can see is that it may be seen from it, as from all similar exhibitions, in what direction our efforts may and ought to be directed, but we are not shwen [sic] in a distinct manner what has really been achieved, nor the manner of its attainment;-- the public are left entirely in the dark as to the nature of the processes used, and the more advanced student is in this department left entirely to his own resources.  We cannot think our Manchester friends—zealous as they have been for the complete exposition of the art of painting,--have been sufficiently desirous of fostering its willing and able handmaid, photography.  It was said, “The space that can be appropriated will not admit of more than a thousand pictures; it will therefore be necessary to exclude all that are not of first-rate merit.”  But it seems to have entirely escaped the directors’ attention that photography has any history at all, and accordingly it is a tale untold.  The photographs here are all of the present day, and are contributed by but a few; they are not classified either as regards chronology or process, nor even in the manner in which we have so inadequately treated the subject.  Then the collection is divided in such a way that a visitor who has seen but one moiety may reasonably conclude he has seen the entire.  One only of the objects of the committee seems to have been effectually carried out, and that only in extent, but not in excellence.  “The committee suggest that as complete a series as possible of portraits of eminent men should be included in the collection.”  A large series is the result of this application; but how many can be said to be first-rate?  We are willing to concede that the committee have had higher and more elaborate aims; but they might surely have succeeded in getting their thousand pictures, and those, too, all of first-rate excellence, and such as would have amply illustrated the history of photography.  More of photographic progress may be seen in our shop windows than here.  The day will, however, come when the art shall be more generally understood, and a collection of photographs shall be better appreciated than now,--the very motives, invention, and execution of painters are criticized,--the materials they use are pretty well known; and, after this exhibition. (such as never was seen before,) we shall have able cognoscenti of the humblest classes ready to declaim upon the comparative merits of all the painters, from Cimabue and Giotto downwards.  Why should not photography be made to contribute its quota to the general knowledge?  Its progress, processes, and products might, we think, have been much more efficiently displayed; now we have only to thank the directors for showing us together what we might have seen at any respectable society’s exhibition, and for doing so in a manner which we think has been excelled.  Still we have derived some pleasure in this department; there are many works which we have named worthy of the utmost praise, and many which give evidence of a praise-worthy, painstaking labour.  And now we must take leave of the Exhibition, hoping that it may not be long before photography has its due.  This depends much on photographers themselves.  Let them bestir themselves.  There is a fine wide field open for them, and room enough for all.  Σ

 

1857:  L&MPJ Dec. 1, new series vol. I, new issue #23, p.257:

            Photography in Palestine.

            The Secretary remarked that Mr. Francis Frith, whose Egyptian views were exhibited before the Society two months ago, when they excited such general interest, was preparing to proceed to Alexandria, with the view of making his way to Palestine and the Nile, where he intended to take a series of views.  It was his intention to have embarked on Saturday, in the Alexandria steamer, which unfortunately had sailed without him, in consequence of the captain having unintentionally misled Mr. Frith as to the hour of her departure.  The whole of his apparatus was on board, and would consequently arrive out before he could reach Alexandria.

            A strong sympathy was expressed for Mr. Frith in the annoying and vexatious dilemma in which he was placed, Mr. Forrest observing that all lovers of photography could not but wish him every success in his important undertaking, as his views of Karnac, Thebes, &c., were the most sublime things of the kind he had ever seen.