The photographic news

• Bandzählung: 35.1891
• Erscheinungsdatum: 1891
• 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-id1780948042-189100009
• PURL: http://digital.slub-dresden.de/id1780948042-18910000
• OAI: oai:de:slub-dresden:db:id-1780948042-18910000
• Sammlungen: LDP: Historische Bestände der Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst Leipzig
• Sammlungen: Fotografie
• Strukturtyp: Band

• Digitalisat: SLUB Dresden
• Strukturtyp: Ausgabe

and they wish to obtain similar artistic results directly from nature. We must, however, be content to wait for this until a satisfactory process is invented, for it must be allowed, I think, we have not quite got it yet. Another reason for our anxiety shows a little human weakness. We are disgusted when we hear that paralysing phrase, “ a mere photograph! ” Let us admit at once that this is weakness. Should we not rather be proud of our mere photographs ? Is not the exhibition, after all, but an exhibition of mere photographs ? At least no exhibit can be the grander by affecting to imitate some other form of art; the art of making a photograph is none the higher for making it imitate a second-rate sepia drawing. .But there are other photographs at the exhibition which are calling loudly for our attention.—Van der Weyde’s capital Japanese costume group, Mr. Sawyer’s artistic effects on the Tyne, and the excellent works of Mr. Gale and Mr. Edgar Lee. Mr. F. H. Evans gives some ex cellent and well-chosen pictures from Canterbury Cathe dral. No one who has not photographed in a cathedral knows quite what it means. The temper and patience necessary in keeping the authorities—from Dean to verger—in good humour during the long exposures in the dark interior, is a diplomatic exercise of no mean order. Vergers particularly have a rabid, if pious, horror of a tripod stand. Visitors to the cathedral also get in front of the camera, and, although they do not always spoil a long exposure, cause considerable nervous anxiety to the photographer. Mr. Evans told me how long he had to expose a rapid plate in the crypt of Gloucester. I will not hazard a recollection, however, in case I might exag gerate. It is pleasant to note that in photographing architectural objects, the custom of placing the camera directly in front, so as to get a symmetrical picture, is giving way to a more artistic insight, and, consequently, a more desirable result. In mentioning the very artistic results observable in landscape by Mr. Sawyer and others, it should be noticed that these are obtained apparently by perfectly legitimate means. A selection of time and subject, atmospheric effect occurs in its proper place and planes, the choice of the stops used has been judicious, and no sacrifice of sharpness—or, rather, clear definition—is made unnecessarily. That there should be perfectly successful work in landscape, with atmospheric effect, and aerial perspective in the receding planes, at the same time that an agreeable and reasonable amount of definition is given in the foreground, is in itself an em phatic protest against a school of photographers who endeavour to persuade us that an inartistic subject may be rendered acceptable by fuzziness, and by the artists deliberately stultifying themselves in the use of the lens— I mean in putting the subject entirely out of focus. It is, of course, a pity that such a false view of art should obtain at all in the face of the customs and traditions of past centuries, but that men whose tastes and abilities have been shown to be superior to many of their compeers should be induced to stoop to such trifling devices is almost incredible, and greatly to be deplored, in the interest of that art they might do so much to advance. I revert now to the subject of lantern exhibits on the screen, a custom on Monday evenings at Pall Mall, and which will be more honoured in the breach than in the observance if some judicious, not to say ruthless, weeding out does not take place, both in the interest of art and the patience of the visitors. Moreover, to say nothing of artistic proclivities, I look upon it as a downright ab surdity to continually exhibit such monstrous pictures. It is bad enough in Pall Mall, but it is worse in some places, where one is made to look upon—say, a man and woman—a pair of lovers perhaps ten feet high on a donkey fourteen feet long. I cannot admit I enjoy this sort of thing, or find the sentiment of the subject magnified pro portionately. I have never seen an artistic lantern slide yet that would bear enlarging beyond eight feet diameter, and would not have been better much less. Perhaps I feel this the more that I have a weakness for lantern slides. Some people think that it is inartistic ; on the contrary, it is because there is a chance of their being artistic that I like them. At the exhibition in Pall Mall they show some very good ones (especially on the Field Club nights), but I have also seen some execrably bad ones, and it is for that reason I suggest judicious weeding. It, no doubt, interests some amateurs to photograph an ugly building from every conceivable point of view, and perhaps they may take a diabolical pleasure in presenting them suc cessively on the screen, but no purpose is served by it in the interests of art, or of the spectators. Mr. Pecksniff had many diverse views in his office of Salis bury Cathedral, but then it was Salisbury Cathedral. There are many figure compositions in the exhibition that call for notice. Some of these are medalled, I pre sume for some technical excellence that is beyond my ken, as, in an artistic sense, I fail to see their merits. They certainly often show a striving and effort to obtain an artistic result, but this very want of spontaneity is fatal to the success of this ambitious class of work. It would take too long to examine all these individually, and a mere catalogue would serve no useful purpose ; doubt less, however, many of these photographs live in your re collection, especially those that obtained an award. Some works in the exhibition that are not medalled are very excellent indeed. Some of these—notably one silver print—can only have been passed over, I should say, be cause it was a silver print. If I remember lightly, it was a group of children on a cliff, treated with great delicacy and force, and called “Idle Hours,” by Mr. Robert Slingsby. When I look back to the old collodion days, and remember under what difficulties excellent work was done in all parts of the world, it is a matter of surprise and great dissatisfaction to me that the present facilities of operation have not allowed a much greater advance artistically than I find. Now you know when a man has to paint a picture or design, a cartoon, or take a photo graph by the collodion process, his spontaneity is neces sarily handicapped by the continuity and difficulties of the absolute physical work to be done ; and the long breath —Ie longue haleine, as the French say—may be exhausted before he comes to the close of his performance, and we may naturally pardon him something if the attempt sur passed the execution. But in photography—i.e., modern photography—surely this is unpardonable, and one has seriously to reflect whether, after all, this is not our most important lesson—viz., the small advance in genuine art in modern times. Perhaps the fact that photographs being more numerous emphasises the case of pictures being so few. I shall now bring my paper to a close by briefly sum marising my observations, the more desirable because of their necessarily discussive character. Firstly, we have seen, I think, that the best negative may be done ill jus tice to by injudicious printing. Secondly, that obscurity and negation of sharp focus, or reasonable definition, does