Volltext Seite (XML)
May 2, 1862.] THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. 211 manc nting» esses a only iave can, sian an lity, heir ite," ■es: ed witl t is not appetr ve becl onvinc I of 0® Iio, lite , “Oh! alum ery on stable; tins ' tin' and have Heal tiou i e Lor as not earing Id pro; s/umlJ uerf^ oiling of the eis, i* cause , for • unge- ; plio- int is onilnii tribes iuity, I "artu , But iness othi y. n tn tude. certain le most ors an! e Pop® nister i, pugi; ernite- nens d • out al in ii l reator) tumbll n ever) be it n. suri •ith tin id lutt too faithfully the individuality, and because too many indivi dualities are nothing but caricatures of mankind. No doubt a clever painter might be able to represent the same individuals in such a manner that they would all appear gifted with the mien appropriate to their mind, rank, and station : the noble man aristocratic in his bearing, the legislator exhibiting the mind of a Solon, the bishop venerable and dignified, the clergy man evangelical and modest, the Russian prince noble and elegant, the banker important and grand, the writer full of thought and inspiration. Photography represents people as they are; and painting, as they ought to be, or as they would like to bo. The last may be more agreeable to the persons represented ; but the first is more satisfactory to those who want the truth, and do not care for the fiction of poetical treatment. In description there is nothing like good, plain, and intelligible prose. For truth there is nothing like a mirror: and is there anything more resembling a minor than the camera of the photographer ? Ask a mother, whoso son is travelling in distant lands and seas, which likeness she prefers—the “ carte de visile," or the painted portrait of her dear boy? She may be proud of the latter in its splendid frame, and in showing it to her friends she Way exclaim, “Don’t ho look handsome! what an agreeable md distinguished expression!” But depend upon it, when alone, that mother, with tears in her eyes, will bo thinking of her son: she will look for him, not on the wall of the drawing- "oom, but in that eler/aiitly bound album containing some thirty or "so-called likenesses," and, in her case, very justly so for among them sho finds the real and truthful image of nerabsent son. With what rapture at the end of twelve months Mil she open a letter from the young man containing another ' c Mede visits” taken at Calcutta, Hong Kong, or New West- minster, showing him with a grown beard, in his new garb adapted to the country, looking full of health and spirits! Imagine, on the other hand, the pleasure of the sou when, in return, his beloved mother has enclosed him in a letter her own “ carte de visite" and, perhaps, that of an equally dear sister. I can guess what will be the first and irresistible impulse of his heart : in transport ho will press these precious “cartes de visile" to his lips! And thou, cold sarcastic critic, hast no other name for photography than caricature? “Mais vous n’Stcs done qu’un burbare!" Have you ever understood what is photography? Have you studied the beautiful and unerring principles upon which it is based ? If you had, the most imperfect photographic production would be a source pf admiration to you. The great Newton him self would have been in ecstasy had he had the good fortune to witness such an unexpected result of some magic property un- »uown to him of that light he had profoundly investigated 'wring his life, and the principles of which he had so success- "tlly unfolded. We see the forms of all the works of creation by the light they Ttlect. The rays being refracted through a lens that nature Placed in front of that wonderful instrument called the “f afom on the delicate membrane of the retina the image olsi, external objects. The cye, in reality, is a camera letv Ta and photography is nothing else ; the only difference muyyen the two is, that in the eye each separate ray com- vprAsates on *' 10 retina the particular colour belonging to it, c 1 sin the photographic camera only one ray, called the actinic, imactupon the photographic surface ; consequently, the retinal I "80 lias all the colours of nature, and the photographic imago 0 no colour, being only like a mezzotint engraving. In every noar respect the result is the same, the forms, proportion, and iesP estive in the camera being as perfect as those depicted on Now the science of optics teaches us how to construct lenses ppoducing an image as perfect as that formed by the lens of the 'yc. If so, why should a photographic picture be distorted more nan the natural one ? Therefore, let the photographer procure perfect lens, and, if he knows how to use it, he will produce a representation of objects in their exact forms. With such a lens, in" operating upon a very highly sensitive preparation, he will I/ 4010 t take a portrait in a fow seconds, and, in truth, even " antaneously, catching the fleeting expression of the moment, here Ia’L 16 has the skill and taste to light his model artis- ouiv f<’.r o Place it 1U a natural and becoming position, waiting be will pposutita leand pleasing expression of the countenance, trawiproducgrnota caricature, but the most satisfactory por‘ no hiesitation in Notwithstanding the remarks of our critic, the features of women can be photographed as successfully as those of men. Of course, in bad photographs, out of focus and improperly lighted, the strongly marked and hard outlines of men may, without losing all their character, bear a greater amount of defects than the delicate forms of youth and gracefulness. But the apparatus, chemical manipulation, and artistic arrange ment which are capable of producing a perfect photograph of men, will do ample justice to the most refined and beautiful features which may grace the other sex. In fact, photography, which can represent the cylindrical curve of a marble column, or the roundness of an ivory ball, only by means of an almost imperceptible gradation of tint, can also by the same means delineate the softness of youth and grace with a perfection which no painter is able to approach by the most delicate touches of his brush. We have to consider photography as any other art—in its capabilities of perfection, and not as the performance of those who do not understand it. Would it not be the height of ab surdity to condemn music because all the day long we hear shrieking songs and the horrid whistling of ragamuffins, as to condemn photography because at every corner we see dis gusting photographs ? Music out of tune is as intolerable as photographs out of focus. But wo must submit to the annoy ance to which we are exposed, not only in our walks, but in the drawing-room, whore, after having been treated with the sight of the elegantly bound album of “cartes de visits," we are invited to listen in silence to the screaming song of the young lady of the house with an accompaniment upon her piano out of tune. If so many desire to be musicians, why not as many desire to be photographers, when to be so they have only to buy any instrument ? If we wish to hear good music, we go to the opera and the concert-room; and if we want to have and to see good photo graphs, let us go' to some respectable gallery, and not to the “ dusky abode ” of some miserable charlatan. Probably there are in London photographic establishments fit to receive good company, where the art is practised with skill and taste, and where correct and pleasing portraits are exhibited. Our critic has adopted another course, if we may judge from the following description he has given of his photographic trip:—“ Which of us is so fortunate as not to be able to recall sufferings in the inferno of some eminent photographer ?—to recol lect how, while waiting our turn to pass into the dusky abodes beyond, we surveyed, in all the misery of protmeted antitipatian, the shadowy forms of those who had before passed under the opera tion, searching, like bereaved relatives in a Mosque, for the disfi gured appearance of a friend." Certainly the writer must be pitied ; but has he not richly deserved his fate, if, wishing to have his portrait enshrined in his friend’s album, he has selected for the operation such a strange place as the inferno of a photographer ? How can we explain his bad fortune ? except by supposing that, having only the Sunday for leisure time, he has been obliged to choose, among tire numerous suburban anti-sabbata- rian “artists,” an eminent photographer of Wapping, to portray his features by his painful process, and while waiting far his turn in his dusky ahode, he has seen the portraits of some fair creatures as vulgar as clowns at Bartlmy fair I—almost all having a cast in the eye, others having an unmeaning grin, or a silly smile, or a surly, frown; one of the young ladies looking saucy, another melan choly, and another having that dangerous look that Petruchio him self would not dare to marry her. Perhaps, after all, if the critic has got a bad photograph, ho has been a most fortunate man, and may be congratulated about his Sunday photographic trip. I am sure he did not leave his heart in the dusky abode of Wapping, in looking at the por traits of the fair creatures exhibited in the “ saloon ” of the artist. At the same time, wishing a lucky chance to all “fair creatures,” we warn them, if they wish to be married, never to risk themselves in any dusky abode, or to visit the inferno of the eminent photographer in which our critic hud to endure such dreadful sufferings. 107, Regent Street, 'doth March, 1862. FESTIVAL AT M. VOIGTLANDER AND SON’S ESTABLISHMENT. We extract the following interesting account of a festival at the establishment of M. Voigtlander and Son, from the Deutche Reichs Zeitung of February 26th :—