Volltext Seite (XML)
824 THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. [December 24, 1885. A. Browne, for P. A. Despaquis (March 31, 1873), gives a method for perfecting enlargements by receiving the image on a ground glass screen, touching up this image, and then exposing the sensitive surface close behind the screen. C. L. van Tenac (July 7, 1873) describes an amusing invention, which projects images at six yards with a magnification of 512,000 times ! He says it is “ a useful object, either for distraction or work.” This “night microscope ” is an arrangement of reflectors and lenses that fits on to the chimney of an ordinary lamp, or two lamps may be used. The enlarged image may be received on a sensitive surface, &c., &c. A large apparatus with mirrors is described by W. F. Humphries, for J. Thom (August 21,1878), which projects enlarged images of opaque objects—pictures, for instance—either direct or reversed, and is used with daylight or artificial light. Zotes. Those who have to tone many prints, and wish to turn them out without much variation in tone, may do well to adopt a plan which we saw in operation at the printing works of the London Stereoscopic Company. An opaque blind hangs so as to screen the eyes of the operator from all direct light, and, moreover, this screen is so placed as to shade about one-third of the slate tank in which is the toning solution. The toning is invariably done by gaslight. In reply to a question, the toner in formed us that it would be impossible to get such a uniform tone by working in daylight, and that when a slate tank is used, the strain on the eyes is far less than if a white dish_were used. At the same works, the Woodbury type process is carried on with very great success, and economy of labour. It has often surprised us that there are so few firms in the country who do large orders by the Woodburytype method. As a curious example of what is possible in the way of instantaneous photography, La Nature reproduces a photo graph of M. Lumiere in which a man is shown in the act of dashing the contents of a pail of water against a wall. The water spray is sharply defined, the exposure having been about one three-hundredth of a second. Photographers’ exaggerations are, as a rule, far behind those which the angler tells on his return from fishing expeditions ; but that photographic amateur who describes the opening of his slide in full daylight, and the subsequent exposure in the camera of the plate, must excuse us if our belief stops at this point, and refuses to follow him as far as the development and the production of good negatives. The good luck which, asarule, attends the photographer when he chances, to find himself in a court of law has deserted a Stockton professional, who was summoned by a lady for the return of money paid into a portrait club, on the ground that the photograph of her husband was not like him. It seems that the portrait in question was a coloured enlargement, and that somehow, in the course of production, a squint was imported into one of the eyes, whereas no squint was apparent in the original. We learn from a report which appeared in the Globe that the verdict was given against the photographer, who was ordered to refund twenty-two shillings, and pay the costs ; but there are one or two points which we should like to see cleared up. We do not understand why the wife proceeded against the photographer and not the husband, unless in deed the wife considered herself specially aggrieved by the imputation that she possessed a squinting husband. It would be interesting to know, too, how the judge decided. Did the husband present himself in the witness box and submit to the scrutiny of His Honour in respect to his alleged obliquity of vision ? What defence also did the photographer make ? Why did not he contend that the camera had done its work well, but that the fault lay with the colourist, whose brush had erred ? Perhaps he did so argue, and if his contention be right, has he not a remedy against the artist 1 But whether this be so or not, a dangerous precedent has been set up ; and if photographers who go in for portraits are expected to please their sitters, the relatives, and their friends in every case, an impossible task is set them. By the way, the Globe, in a comment on the case, sup poses the portrait club to be “ an institution more or less resembling a goose club.” Does our contemporary really imagine there is any analogy, so far as procedure is con cerned, between the two, or is the comparison with malice prejiense ? The Admiralty are progressing. They have just dis covered that photography might be useful—a fact that has long been patent to the military authorities. They have started with the notion that commissioned ships when completely fitted out should be photographed, and they suggest, in a circular sent to the superintendents of the various dockyards, that “ a general broadside view, a view from forward, and a view from aft of each ship should be taken before any vessel leaves a Government fort.” The superintendents are requested to report whether the sug gestion can be conveniently carried out. It is to be hoped that before the superintendents report they will call in the assistance of an expert. We are not aware that any government dockyard possesses what it should possess namely, a photographic staff.
