The photographic news

• Bandzählung: 6.1862
• Erscheinungsdatum: 1862
• Sprache: Englisch
• Signatur: F 135
• Vorlage: Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst Leipzig
• Digitalisat: Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst Leipzig
• Digitalisat: SLUB Dresden
• Rechtehinweis: Public Domain Mark 1.0
• URN: urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-db-id1780948042-186200003
• PURL: http://digital.slub-dresden.de/id1780948042-18620000
• OAI: oai:de:slub-dresden:db:id-1780948042-18620000
• Sammlungen: LDP: Historische Bestände der Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst Leipzig
• Sammlungen: Fotografie
• Bemerkung: Seite 1-72 fehlen in der Vorlage. Vorlagebedingter Textverlust.
• Strukturtyp: Band

• Digitalisat: SLUB Dresden
• Strukturtyp: Ausgabe

•October 10,1862.] THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. 487 Scientifir Gossip. See Pirorognarmo News, vol. iv. p. 374, and 38S. Solar Phenomena—The Red Protuberances—Magnetic and Auroral Hypotheses. Of late years the constitution of the sun has attracted con siderable attention. Observers and speculators on its various phenomena were not wanting at any time, but the recent spectrum discoveries of Bunsen and Kirchhoff have endowed the subject with increased interest. To a photographer our central orb must always possess great attractions, both because it is the fons et origo of his art, and also because photography is peculiarly adapted to discover its hidden secrets. All our readers must remember the wonderful dis closures made by the camera on the occasion of the last great solar eclipse. The existence of the red protuberances, The President remarked, that the plan to which Professor Emerson had referred was adopted by Professor Dove, in a microscopic photometer he had contrived. Mr. Osborne said, he thought that the absence of fine lines, to which Professor Emerson referred, as the result of imperfect focussing, was rather due to the photographic negative, in which the finest lines were sometimes filled up with the deposit of silver. After a few more words from Mr. M. Lyte and others, tho discussion terminated. On the subject of Mr. Osborne’s paper, and the discussion which followed, Colonel James has addressed the following letter to the Times: Sir,—In the report of the proceedings of the Chemical Section of the British Association, which appeared in the Times of yesterday, Mr. J. W. Osborne’s account of tho process invented by him at Melbourne, Australia, is given, and which he has named photo-lithography. “ In the course of subsequent discussion,” tho report says, “ it was elicited that one of the principal claims to novelty in volved, was the fact that Mr. Osborne’s process was tho first in which the image on tho stone was effected by means of a transfer. The process of Colonel Sir Henry James, used at Southampton for the reproduction of Ordnance maps, was analogous to it in this respect, but was first used six months subsequently to the process of Mr. Osborne.” The inference which may be drawn from this is that I have adopted Mr. Osborne’s process, or something very analogous to it, without any acknowledgment. If Mr. Osborne had only stated that my discovery had been made independently, and without any knowledge of the result of his labours, it would be unnecessary for me to address you on this subject, but the facts are, that an account of the process adopted by me is given in my report to Parliament for 1859, with the copy of a small deed printed by it; that Mr. Osborne, in a letter dated Melbourne, IGth January, 18C0, which is printed in the Photographic Journal of April, I860, says, “ A positive is printed from this negative upon a sheet of paper so prepared, that the image can be transferred to stone,” but ho gives no information as to what the nature of the preparation is; and, in fact, ho appears to have studiously avoided divulging the nature of his process in England, that he might bo able to take out a patent for it, and only made it known when he found we had anticipated him. I have been most anxious to do full justice to Mr. Osborne, as you will see by reference to the fifth page of the preface to the small work on photo-zincography, &c., which has been just published by Messrs. Longman, and of which I send you a copy.—I am, sir, your obedient servant, Henry James, Colonel Royal Engineers. Ordnance Survey-office, Southampton, October 1, 1862. Without entering into the question of priority here, we may remark that Mr. Osborne made no intimation whatever to the effect that Colonel James’s process was derived from his; but simply said, in answer to Mr. Wyld’s question, that his own process was patented prior to the publication of that of Colonel James. Regarding the priority of publica tion we believe there is a doubt. We shall probably recur to this subject again. the contraction of the transfer in drying, after the hot-water soaking, Mr. Osborne stated, that on one occasion the Surveyor-General, desirous of testing the process, unknown to him (Mr. Osborne), had a copy of a plan, which had been reproduced on the same scale as the original, printed from the stone on to tracing paper. This photo-lithographic wpy, on tracing paper, was then laid on the original draw ing, when it was found that the copy was absolutely coin cident with the original. The chief thing to be observed was, that all the transfers to be joined should be printed on paper cut from the same way of the sheet, otherwise the con traction in drying would be unequal, and a perfect junction impossible. Mr. Maxwell Lyte asked Mr. Osborne if his discovery was prior to that of M. Poitevin ? Mr. Osborne said it was not. Mr. G. Wharton Simpson said, if he had rightly under stood Mr. Osborne, the discovery claimed was not the origin of photo-lithography itself, but of producing the photo graphic image upon the lithographic stone by means of a transfer, by which all the difficulties, inconvenience, and im perfection of photographing direct upon the stone was •voided. Mr. Osborne said the transfer was, in truth, the important part of his process, and that, by its means, other important advantages were secured, such as the impressing the image directly upon the stone itself, and incorporating it with the •tone, as in the usual lithographic process. In M. Poitevin’s, and some other processes, there was a layer of albumen, or gelatine, &c., between the image and the stone, and this layer quickly wore or broke away in printing, and left the Stone useless. When he first read a description of the pro- Cess in Melbourne, he had entered into an examination of M. Poitevin’s process, amongst others, and had pointed out "here they failed. That paper had been reproduced in at least three of the English photographic journals,* so that he need not enter further into the question. Mr. James Wyld, M.P., asked Mr. Osborne if his process "ere not, in many respects, similar to that of Colonel James, •nd which of the two were discovered, or published, first ? Mr. Osborne said, that the two processes were in most Tespects analogous. Colonel James worked on zinc, to which a Certain grain was imparted to make it bite, and he used gum with the chromic salt. He (Mr. Osborne) used the lithographic stone, and gelatine, and albumen; and, he believed, the advantage was decided in favour of the latter. Kegarding the question of priority, his process was worked, and published, six months prior to that of Colonel James. The latter was published in March, 1860, whilst his (Mr. Osborne's) was patented in September, 1859. Professor E. Emerson asked what method of focussing Mr. sborne adopted ? Mr. Osborne said he focussed on a ground glass, with a Tagnifier. He was not, however, quite satisfied with the Fesult, as the ground glass was too coarse, and there was an APpreciable distance which the lens might be moved without MV apparent change in the sharpness of the image. He believed, moreover, that a better lens still might be pro- Lticed, and had been consulting with Mr. Dallmeyer, as to , he making of a combination, in which the grinding would ’? e fated by the method employed for astronomical object Elasses. Mr. M. Lyte said he had found that a collodionized plate P "nged in tho bath for a second or two, anil then washed dried, made a very good focussing glass, when a mag- "ier had to be applied, as the texture of the ground glass p thus got rid of. 1 rofessor Emerson said that plain glass was better still. 1 used, plain glass with a few diamond scratches on it, exl°3 which to focus the magnifier. Although the specimens sti 1 ed were very perfect, perhaps the finest he had seen; fe he thought, by absolutely correct focussing, more per results might be obtained.