The photographic news

• Bandzählung: 13.1869
• Erscheinungsdatum: 1869
• 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-id1780948042-186900000
• PURL: http://digital.slub-dresden.de/id1780948042-18690000
• OAI: oai:de:slub-dresden:db:id-1780948042-18690000
• Sammlungen: LDP: Historische Bestände der Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst Leipzig
• Sammlungen: Fotografie
• Bemerkung: Heft 545 (S. 73-84), Heft 547 (S. 97-108), Heft 589 (S. 599-610) fehlen in der Vorlage. Paginierfehler: Auf Seite 444 folgt Seite 443
• Strukturtyp: Band

• Digitalisat: SLUB Dresden
• Strukturtyp: Ausgabe

May 28, 1869.] THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. 263 before going out, or in some sheltered place when out. I always put two or three drops of glycerine into the collo dion, but this would probably not bo sufficient for the purpose; the question is, whether suficient could be added without prejudice. They should, I imagine, be in a sepa rate plate-box, but that would only necessitate the taking an empty plate-box to put the negatives into. With regard to the camera being level, there is no more necessity lor that in mine, and I imagine in Mr. Whiting’s also, than with the ordinary camera. It is quite separate from the baths.—Believe me, yours very truly, Thomas BAERETT. Mead Vale, Red Hill, May 24th, 1869. WHITING’S PHOTO-CAMERA-LUCIDA. Dear Sir,—Will you allow me to correct one or two mis conceptions contained in Mr. Gulliver’s letter in last week’s News, having reference to the working of the above apparatus ? He there states that when he formerly tried to “ develop by dipping ” he did not succeed, but that by referring to the description of Mr. Barrett’s plan, which was published in the News some years ago, lie found that that gentleman recommends the use of a “ neutral bath,” and “ perhaps,” he (Mr. G.) says, “ it is in this little thing that the whole secret lies.” Now, in reply to this, I beg to say that those who use my apparatus are not tied to any special form of chemicals what ever, and that there is really no “ little thing ” or “ secret ” at all in the case. The ordinary collodion, silver bath, and iron developing solution may be used ; and if these be of a good sample, and are in good condition, and if ordinary care and intelligence be observed in their use, a satisfactory re sult must follow. In regard to 11 coating the plate in the open air,” which he seems to think so very objectionable, I may remark that I have never found any difficulty in doing it. If—which is very seldom the case—I cannot find any friendly “ nook or corner” to do it in, I invariably extemporize one by the use of an umbrella. With this the thing is easily accomplished, and as no travelling photographer is, of course, without one, there need be no difficulty in the matter. Another point to which your correspondent refers is cer tainly a rather curious one: he says the plan “involves” the necessity of the “camera being level,” and he considers this to be a great drawback. Now, it is very annoying to Me that anyone should lay this down as an objection to my plan, for it really is not due to it, and, strangely so, if it was, it would be no objection. As an old photographer, Mr. Gulliver surely must know that for out-door work a camera should always be level, so that if my plan did “ in volve ’’ it, it would be no objection ; but the plan does not “ involve ” it. Why, then, does he say so ? If your readers will kindly refer to the description of my Photo-Camera- Lucida which you did me the honour to publish in the re cent numbers of the News, they will find that the chemical part of the apparatus is entirely separate and distinct from the camera or exposing part, and that, consequently, the latter can be placed anywhere with as much facility as any other. Mr. Gulliver admits having read this description with “ much interest,” and I am naturally puzzled to account for his bringing this forward as an objection.—lam, dear sir, yours obliged, Wm. Whitinq. May 25th, 1869. Source ok Art Claims.—The difficulty of admitting the art position of photography arises not so much from any defect in the actual process, or in tho results which it produces, as from the fact that but few photographers have taken the trouble to learn even the most elementary laws which govern all arts alike.— Nelson K. Ch etrill. Ualk h the Studio. “Light Dues.”—Photographers’ charges.—Punch. India-Rubber Funnels.—Our esteemed correspondent “ Ennel," who is well-known to photographers for his fertility in devices for facilitating manipulation, recently sent us an india-rubber funnel of a very simple and convenient character. It is manufactured from thin sheet india-rubber (not vulcanized) the example in question having been made from tho material of an old tobacco pouch. The conical cup is made by cutting a piece ot tho sheet to the proper shape, and cementing the edges together; tho tube is made separately, an 1 cemented to tho bottom of the cup. It has tho advantage of being light, flexible, inexpensive, and convenient. The Photographer and the Princess.—Tho Hungarian Lloyd is responsible for the following anecdote A short time since the eldest daughter of Princess Frederick Charles of Prussia, aged 14, and the daughter of the Crown Princess, aged 9, were waiting in a photographer’s studio to have their portraits taken. The photographer, having for a moment for gotten the rank of his sitters, addressed the elder princess as “ gnadiges Fraulein,” the common appellation in German of all unmarried ladies. He was immediately corrected by the re mark, “ People generally call me ‘ Your Royal Highness.’ ” The offender’s excuses were interrupted by the little cousin, who exclaimed, “ That doesn’t matter the least; you can call me as you please. I had rather you called me ‘ Fat Lotty ’ {dicke Lotte"); my father always calls me so.” Collodion for Protecting Silver Wares.—The Me chanics' Magazine describes the use of collodion as a means of protecting silver ware from atmospheric action. As collodion is permeable to moisture, we should scarcely have expected the protection to be as good as that of a resinous varnish. “ Tho loss of silver,” it says, “which results from the impregna tion of our atmosphere with sulphur compounds, especially whore gas is burned, is very great. It has been said that many thousands of pounds’ worth go down our sewers annually in the form of dirt from plate cleaning, and the loss of one large house on Cornhill from this source has been described to us as serious. Silversmiths may, then, thank one of their confra ternity—Herr Strolberger, of Munich—for a happy thought. He seems to have tried various plans to save his silver if pos sible. He covered his goods with a clear white varnish, but found that it soon turned yellow in the window, and spoilt the look of his wares. Then he tried water glass (solution of silicate of potash), but this did not answer. Ho tried some other solutions, to no purpose. But at last be hit upon the ex pedient of doing his goods over with a thin coating of collodion, which he finds to answer perfectly. No more loss of silver, and no longer incessant labour in keeping it clean. The plan he adopts is this-.— He first warms the articles to bo coated, and then pays them carefully over with a thinnish collodion diluted with alcohol, using a wide, soft brush for tho purpose. Generally, ho says, it is not advisable to do them over more than once. Silver goods, he tells us, protected in this way, have been exposed in his window more than a year, and are as bright as ever, while otheis unprotected have become perfectly black in a few months.” Alleged Improper Registration of Copyright.—In the case tho Queen v. Walker, Mr. Underdown said that on tho last day of last term he moved on behalf of the defendant Walker, who was undergoing a sentence of imprisonment for pirating certain works of art, the property of Mr. Graves, with a viewtoupsettingtheconviction,butthe Court refused the applica tion on thegronnd that Walker was not a person aggrieved within tho meaning of the Copyright Act. He now asked to be allowed to renew his application, on the ground that the case of “ Chappel v. Purday,” upon which the Court based its decision, was erroneously reported in the law report referred to at the time, but which was correctly reported in another work, and which stated that a person aggrieved ought not to be compared to persons who simply claimed a title in the work of art. The Court said that in consequence of tho confusion in the cases as reported, the learned counsel might take a rule nisi. Rule nisi granted.