The photographic news

• Bandzählung: 7.1863
• Erscheinungsdatum: 1863
• 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-id1780948042-186300004
• PURL: http://digital.slub-dresden.de/id1780948042-18630000
• OAI: oai:de:slub-dresden:db:id-1780948042-18630000
• Sammlungen: LDP: Historische Bestände der Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst Leipzig
• Sammlungen: Fotografie
• Strukturtyp: Band

• Digitalisat: SLUB Dresden
• Strukturtyp: Ausgabe

January 2, 1863.] THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. 7 Robert Cousins, artist to the defendant, said that he told the major that he was not a judge of a negative, as he was not a photographer, and the major then went off in a tiff. Major Lister said he should like to ask the artist if there was not a notice up, stating that if the first portrait was not approved of a second would be taken. The witness said that was the case, but the portrait had not been shown the complainant, only the negative. Mr. Tyrwhitt said he thought the complainant had been too hasty in the matter. He did not see, until the positive was taken, how any person could be a judge of a portrait. He thought there was a misunderstanding altogether, and should dismiss the summons. On the same day, at Guildhall, there was another case, with no further photographic interest than that it was a robbery in a photographic establishment. Cash Robbery.— George Bates, a porter, lately in the employ of Mr. Newcombe, of the London School of Photography, 103, Newgate-street, was charged before Aiderman Humphrey with breaking open his master's cash-box, and stealing therefrom £160. Inspector Wilson, of the C division, said the prisoner sur rendered himself at the Vine-street Police-station; and after receiving the usual caution, he was told that the charge against him was for robbing his employer of £160. He then stated that he broke open the cash-box and took away the money, but that while proceeding to Bristol he was robbed of the greater portion of it. He also said he had twice contemplated suicide, but that he could not muster up courage enough to destroy himself. Wm. Joseph Anderton, the manager of Mr. Newcombe’s establishment in Newgate-street, said the prisoner had been in their employ about twelve months, first as porter, and after wards as assistant in preparing the materials for the use of the artist. His wife was also housekeeper in the same establish-’ ment, and lived with the prisoner on the premises. On the night of the 25th of November last he put £150 into the cash box, and put the key on the top of the safe, and when he arrived on the following morning he discovered that £157 19s. 4d. in gold and silver was gone, but that a large amount in notes, cheques, and postage-stamps, had been left behind. The cash-box had been forced, and, as the prisoner absconded very suddenly on that day, suspicion fell upon him. Mr. Martin, the chief clerk, said a warrant was issued from this court on the 27th of November, for the prisoner’s appre hension. Alderman Humphrey asked what had become of the pri soner’s wife ? Witness said sho and her two children had been in the Bow Union ever since the prisoner went away. Aiderman Humphrey asked the prisoner what he had done with all the money ?—The prisoner replied that ho did not wish to answer any questions, as ho admitted he was guilty. Aiderman Humphrey inquired what sort of character the prisoner had previously borne?—Witness said he came from Mr. Greer’s, the cutler, in Newgate-street, with an excellent recommendation. Ho had also held the situation of engine keeper and organ-blower at Christ Church, Newgate-street. The prisoner was remanded. Uhe Muternatioual Cxhibition. REPORT OP THE JURY ON PHOTOGRAPHY AND PHOTOGRAPHIC APPARATUS* EARLY HISTORY OF THE ART. The present [gathering of works in Class XIV. of the International Exhibi tion wilt mark an epoch in the history of photography. For the first time, in the crescent of all the arts and sciences, it is recognized as an inde pendent art. In the London Exhibition of 1851, sun pictures were grouped with philo- sohpical instruments ; in the Paris Exhibition of 1855, with printing and applied design ; so that, in the first, a photographic landscape was supposed to hang in its proper place, behind a sextant or a voltaic battery: in the * The following gentlemen constituted the Jury:—Hugh W. Diamond- M.D., F.S.A., Secretary, London ; A. I. J. Claudet, F.R.S., London, Photo, grapher; Baron Gros, Chairman, France, Senator; Lord Henry Lennox, M.P., Deputy Chairman, London ; C. T. Thompson, London, Official Paoto- grapher, Science and Art Department: assisted by B. Delessert, Fra ice ; Lieut.-Colonel Demanet, Belgium, Member of the Department of Fine Arts of the Royal Academy of Belgium, as Associates. second, among paper-hangings, candlesticks, and childrens’ toys. That era of confusion has now been passed, and photography has obtained a distinct place in the arts—it is admitted to rank as a separate class. As this public reception of photography into the great sisterhood of the arts will close the first period of its existence, and open a new and larger field of endeavour, ibmay be well to recall very briefly a few leading facts of its public history up to the state at which the present report will have to make a more minute and technical record of its efforts. Photography, as a practical art, only dates, as it were, from yesterday, though some of the natural laws through which it works were subject to investigation and speculation in ancient times. Three hundred years before Christ, Euclid appears to have observed the principle of the stereoscope, and Galen, subsequently, in his work « On the Use of the Different Parts of the Human Body,” has fully described the various phenomena which occur when viewing any body with both eyes, and then, alternately, with the right and left. Mr Hunt has traced, with much zeal, in his " Manual of Photography,” the progress of the discoveries of the various minds by which the art has been built up, and describes the researches of Licetus and Kircher, in 1646, on the phosphorescent influence of the sun’s rays. That Petet, in 1722, found that solutions of nitrate of potash and muriate of ammonia crystallized more readily in light than in darkness. In 1777, the illustrious Scheele gave, in the following account, the first philosophical examination of the peculiar changes in the salts of silver, and showed the dissimilar powers of the different rays of light in effecting their change. He says :—“ It is well known that the solution of silver in acid of nitrate poured on a piece of chalk, and exposed to the beams of the sun, becomes black. The light of the sun reflected from a white wall has the same effects, but more slowly. Heat, without light, has no efect on the mixture. Fix a glass prism at the window, and let the refracted sun beams fall on the floor ; in this coloured light put a paper covered with luna cornua, and you will observe that this horn-silver grows sooner black in the violet ray than in any of the other rays.” Senebier repeated and extended similar experiments in 1791. Fischer added to our knowledge in 1795. Count Romford published, in the "Philosophical Transactions” of 1798, “An Inquiry Concerning the Chemical Properties which have been Attributed to Lightbut Mr. Robert Harrop published, in “Nicholson’s Journal,” in 1802, a communication in which he negatived the experiments of Count Romford, and proved that the actions described by him were due to light, and not to heat. In June, 1802, Sir Humphry Davy published, in the “Journal of the Royal Institution,” an “Account of a Method of Copying Paintings upon Glass, and of Making Profiles by the Agency of Light upon Nitrate of Silver.” Sir Humphry Davy had conjointly experimented with Mr. Thomas Wedgwood, considerable success attending their researches, and Sir II Davy concludes with this observation :—“ Nothing but the preventing the unshaded parts of the delineations from being coloured by exposure to the day is wanting to render the process as useful as it is elegaut.” Wedgwood and Davy failed entirely to fix the produced image; and, with the exception of some further contributions to our aid from Drs. Young and Wollaston, no great step was made until 1814, when Joseph Nicephore Niepce made the first per manent successful result. He named his process « Heliography," and in 1827 he presented a paper to the Royal Society on the subject; but as he kept his process then as a secret, it was not received. The memoir was accompanied with several specimens of his success on plated copper and pewter, and were afterwards distributed amongst his friends in London. By the favour of Mr. Joseph Ellis, of Brighton, an opportunity has lately been afforded to closely examine one of these specimens. It is the copy of an engraving produced by the action of light in a camera on a layer of bitumen covering a silvered plate of pewter. It is not altogether in effect unlike a Daguerreotype, but wanting in the unpleasant metallic brilliancy, and having considerably more depth of tone in the shadows, which, it is stated, was produced by a subsequent application of the vapour of iodine. This specimen had been given by Niepce to his landlord, when he resided at Kew, and is so inscribed. The patient and persevering endeavours of Mr Ellis, who is the author of an instructive work, “ The Progress of Photography/’ to procure this specimen, and save it from oblivion, are well worthy of praise. The processes of M. Niepce were afterwards published, and he appeal’s to have entered into a sort of partnership with M. Daguerre, who, in 1824, began a scries of experiments with a view of fixing the pi tures which bad been taken in the camera; but it was not until the 7th of January, 1839, that Daguerre made his communication to the Academy of Sciences of his invention of the process known as the “ Daguerreotype.” Mr. Fox Talbot, of Lacock Abbey, who had experimented since 1833 in photographic researches, on January 30th in the same year, 1839, commu nicated his discovery to the Royal Society of his process for multiplying photographic impressions, and which were then generally known as photo genic drawings. The investigations in France, by M. Daguerre, and of Mr. Fox Talbot, in England, were perfectly independent of each other. The Rev. J. B. Reade, in April, 1839, took pictures of natural historv ’ / means of the solar microscope. Nitrate of silver was employed to sensitize the paper, and a solution of nut-gall washed over just previous to use the paper being used wet, considerable sensitiveness was thereby secured. In the same year, 1839, on the 29th of May, Mr. Mungo Ponton made a comii nication of great importance to the Royal Society of Arts of Seotland, on the use of bichromate of potash. Sir John Herschel also u- 1 gla s p this period, and published several valuable papers on the progregs > < ' made towards the development of photography. It was not until February, 1848, that Mr. Fox Talbot patented A ♦ rcess which, for a long time, bore his name, and which was subsequerily chat ged to that of Calotype. Recording merely the names of Mr. Hunt, Dr. Draper, M. Bec • M. Claudet, M. Bayard, M. Niepce, Mr. Cundell, Dr. Wood, Professor V heat- stone, Sir David Brewster, and others, we come to that of Ar. Archt a, who, in 1851, just before the opening of the Exhibition in that year, published his' collodion process. Although albumen had been extensively used, it never became popular, and, with the exception of Ross and Thompson a, of‘Ed in - burgh, some few in England, M. Martens, M. Ferrire, and a limitled number in France, it did not maintain its position, chiefly from itsgreat want of sen sitiveness, and the greater facilities afforded by collodion. Previous to the Great Exhibition of 1851, it will be recollected that no collodion pictures were publicly exhibited ; and we are exclusively indebted to the late Mr. Frederick Scott Archer for his application of collodion. Although very many details have been perfected, and many labourers have devoted hours in sue- cessful improvements, it must not be forgotten that Archer Rublished hi-