Suche löschen...
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
- Lizenz-/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
- Fotografie
- LDP: Historische Bestände der Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst Leipzig
- Strukturtyp
- Band
- Parlamentsperiode
- -
- Wahlperiode
- -
- Bandzählung
- No. 1698, March 20, 1891
- Digitalisat
- SLUB Dresden
- Strukturtyp
- Ausgabe
- Parlamentsperiode
- -
- Wahlperiode
- -
-
Zeitschrift
The photographic news
-
Band
Band 35.1891
-
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 1
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 17
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 37
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 57
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 77
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 97
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 117
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 137
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 157
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 177
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 197
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 217
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 237
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 257
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 277
- Ausgabe Ausgabe -
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 313
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 329
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 345
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 361
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 377
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 393
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 409
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 425
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 441
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 457
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 473
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 489
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 505
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 521
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 537
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 553
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 569
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 585
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 601
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 617
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 633
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 649
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 665
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 681
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 697
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 713
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 729
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 745
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 761
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 777
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 793
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 809
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 825
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 841
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 857
- Ausgabe Ausgabe 873
-
Band
Band 35.1891
-
- Titel
- The photographic news
- Autor
- Links
- Downloads
- Einzelseite als Bild herunterladen (JPG)
-
Volltext Seite (XML)
230 THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. [March 20, 1891. seeing he cannot shift anything, and be an absolute master of pictorial composition besides, to obtain the most desirable point of view, before he ventures to take his picture ; and, as this necessity grows upon him in his progress in art, how few are the pictures he finds really worth taking, and how eclectic he becomes. It will need all his determination and powers of mind not to be discouraged, as in the nature of things, with the practical limitations of photography. He must not be dis couraged, however, and need not be, if he is content to exer cise great patience, and profit by every scrap of study he can get outside the dark room, or that darker place, the gloomy valley of artistic suicide, where, casting all else to the winds, he throws himself on the bosom of nature. I now show two views from Harding in confirmation of the disadvantages of repetition of line in landscape — Plate XIII., 1 and 2. His comments on these are, it is needless to say, relative to modifications in treatment by the painter (shown in Example 2). They, however, serve a useful purpose to the photographer if they demonstrate the dangers and pitfalls he is constantly having put in his way, and exercise his mental powers of how best to obviate these dangers in the field. Harding goes on to say, however, that “ it requires all the vigilance of keen and long-tutored observation to detect the identity of line in things dissimilar which is perpetually insinu ating itself unobserved into the different forms depicted by the painter, to the consequent loss of the proper influence of every object wherever it happens to be, and sometimes to the produc tion of results which are even ridiculous.” For a still stronger confirmation of the principle that one object or one feature of interest must not be placed perpen dicularly over or under another, Harding refers the student to the next illustration, Plate XIV. As it is a view from nature, and composed of objects whose forms would be readily recog nised by those who know, they must, therefore, be strictly true in kind and relation. Not so, however, the figures, except in costume. These are left to the will of the artist, and we can now examine how far the observance of this principle operates to assist him. Take first the leading features, those which come against the sky and strike at the first glance; the church and the two turrets right and left of it, seen over the roofs of the houses, and also the most prominent gables. If the eye be allowed to travel down the surface of the pic ture, it will be found there is no object of remarkable interest under any of them, and that the figures themselves have also been thus arranged in relation to each other, as, for instance, the man and the cart in the distance are placed over the space between the heads of the centre group of figures in the fore ground. It will also be observed that this, the principal group, is made to occupy precisely that portion of the scene which of itself—that is, without aid from extraneous features—would possess no interest; for if a slip were cut out between AA and BB, no object of importance would be removed. Hence, then, this is unquestionably the proper and only place for the prin cipal group. It will also be perceived that these figures are so placed that neither their heads nor their feet are on a level, for what has been said of the principal features is equally true of the sub ordinate, equally applicable, and attended with a like result— the expression of space. It will also be found that these groups, like all the other features constituting the pictorial beauty of the scene, are of different forms and quality. Now, if these principles be true, it should be difficult to make any change in contravention of them without damage by removing any of the figures or objects ; or when applying them, to dis cover if the composition be perfect or not ; then it should be impossible that any change in conformity with them should not make the picture better. Let the student try, for he is not to take these things on trust; conviction of their truth and utility must come from reason and experience. There is no need to follow Harding in his further illustra tions on this subject of composition. Much is, of course, applicable mainly to the painter, but I think most people who have any artistic sympathies will agree with him in some of his concluding paragraphs. He says: “ Beauty in pictorial composition is as superior to individual beauty as a beautiful structure is to any of its parts. The richest collection of materials amount to little more than a confused and useless heap unless arranged in graceful order.” And again : “ Com position is of the highest importance to the artist as the field for the exercise of his talents in combining and arranging his objects so that each may derive an additional charm by associa tion not belonging to it separately. With all this he must include considerations of the light and shade and colour ; for whilst he assigns to each object its proper place to develop a beauty arising from one form operating on another, whilst he places the large in opposition to the small, the dignified against the humble, the near opposed to the remote, the flexible against the rigid, lines suggesting motion and others tranquility, and the perpendicular against the horizontal, he obtains but a part of the beauty derivable from composition if he fail to antici pate and prepare for those effects which he must derive from the aid of light and shade and colour.” In treating of light and shade, Harding says : “ In painting the compound termed light and shade—the ‘chiaroscuro’ of those who prefer a foreign technical term to one supplied by their own language—simply means, when used in reference to an individual object, that relative degree of light and darkness in the colour or colours which causes it to assume the appear ance of having the same external qualities of form that it naturally presents to the eye. When used with reference to a group, or groups of objects, it means their comparative lightness or darkness in relation to the whole picture ; and in this, again, the light is said to be well managed where all the parts, having their proper degree of relief, contribute to the production of a good general result.” I propose to show two or three of his illustrations in reference to this subject, and, without wearying you with his long treatise of general principles, quote only his comments on these pictures, which, however, speak for themselves. Every picture produces a different impression upon us from the difference of light and shade, or what is called its “ effect,” as well as from the difference of subject. All kinds of effects are not suited to every kind of subject ; and of the various ways in which the light and shade may be thrown or distributed at the will of the painter, some effects are, or rather must be, better than others. Let the student examine Plates XX., XXL, and XXII., and he will find that they are precisely the same in composition, alike in manipulation, alike in everything but the light and shade. The difference of their effect upon us arises from neglecting or observing an important principle. Plate XXL differs in sentiment from Plate XX., as well as in light and shade ; and it is a question to be decided by our own feelings whether the repose of evening be more agreeable than sunshine and showers. In each the several important features are displayed with nearly equal effect. In Plate XXL the principal object, the castle, arrests the attention at once, in consequence of it being strongly contrasted with the sky; and although we are here more sensible of its picturesque contour, we yet lose much of the variety of its dif ferent parts in uniform obscurity. On the whole, there is not the same amount of space expressed, because the objects do not generally separate by alternate light and shade, as in Plate XXII., and the trees on the right do not detach from the sky. The monotony which prevails throughout the light and shade would not, however, be felt in colour. There can be no doubt that, of all the three, Plate XXII. is the least satisfactory, and this is clearly owing to the disregard of placing the most conspicuous object in light. The principal light is on an uninteresting and unimportant feature, namely, on the hill on which the, castle stands ; and thus, as there is a light immediately behind the group of trees in the centre of the picture, our attention is drawn to them as well as to the castle, the picturesque form of which is all that we see in feeble con trast with the sky. Thus the castle, though of primary im portance—for without it the subject has little or no interest— is all but lost sight of in the rivalry of what is insignificant. Nor is this all. The light on the water is immediately under the light on the castle hill, and the light on the rock is also under the light in the sky, and the bridge is nearly extinguished. The whole picture wants space and concentration of interest;
- Aktuelle Seite (TXT)
- METS Datei (XML)
- IIIF Manifest (JSON)