Volltext Seite (XML)
January 9, 1891.] THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. 21 NOTES ON PORTRAITURE. No. II. BY H. P. ROBINSON. I hope I shall not get angry in this paper. There are certain things I feel strongly, and may perhaps state with too much force. In photographic portraiture we are running in a groove, and little effort is made to get out of it. This is, after all, perhaps not to be wondered at when we consider the influence that fashion exercises in almost every detail of our lives. It is therefore of little use to abuse profes sional photographers for not striking out into a fresh path ; they have to get a living, and must supply the demand of their customers. At present fashion demands that every face shall be made to look like polished marble, regardless of life, likeness, expression, texture, or Nature, “ the same with intent to deceive.” But such deception de ceives nobody, for nobody now believes in photographic portraits as likenesses. Such attempt at deception is not far removed from painting the natural face and dyeing the hair, and it does not want an expert to detect the fraud at once. Deception of this kind, therefore, does not answer the end which it had in view; it deceives nobody but the vain victim who thinks that the marble gloss substitute for the bloom of youth is natural to her. Education in art has not advanced far enough to enable these silly people to see that the unnatural retouching of to-day destroys photographs as works of art, and renders them valueless as documentary facts. This excessive polishing is acting an untruth, and should be held in the same detestation as falsehood with the tongue. Even if it were successful, it is well to remember the wise aphorism that tells us that “ those who conceal their age do not conceal their folly.” Not that I would abolish retouching; for in judicious hands it is a valuable aid to a better representation of nature ; but I would have no mercy on the retoucher until he had educated himself into a frame of mind that made him look aghast at his present productions. Of course I speak only of the ignorant retouchers, not more, perhaps, than nine out of every ten, for I know there are some who understand the anatomy of the face—how to respect it, what to do with it, how far to go, and when to let it alone. Then, notwithstanding what I have said about photo graphers having to obey their patrons, I cannot but think that some effort after improvement, or if not improve ment at least some alteration tending towards improve ment, might be made in the styles of portraits. For instance, the ordinary cabinet vignette head is undoubtedly a good style of portrait, very easy to do, though not always well done; very effective; a very good means of eliminating difficulties that may arise from the possible awkwardness of the figure, and for shirking unmanageable composition. But we have had thirty years of it; we have produced them by the million, and they are beginning to be a trifle monotonous. Cannot we add a background ? It is true we are very bad at backgrounds, but cannot we improve? We usually make our portraitsupright: cannot we make them horizontal, for a change ? We usually make our sitters, in a full length, appear to stand on their feet, or, more often and awkwardly, on their toes: cannot we make them stand on their heads? This latter suggestion is not, perhaps, “ within the limits of civilization,” but it partly suggests what I mean. In short, cannot we get up a revolution ? Photographers ought, by this time, to be sufficiently exasperated with the monotony of their work to be ready for anything—even to the extreme extent of putting their portraits out of focus. It is now time, perhaps, to be a little more serious. I recognise that my reader has every excuse here for asking the question, “ What do you recommend? Suggest something, or for ever hold your peace. ” I can not say that I can comply with the request. The some thing new must be evolved by the photographer himself. He must try to be individual, and not rely on imitation. I know there is great difficulty ; I know that the mass of humanity will not make pictures as well as portraits. As I write I receive a bundle of photographs from a photo grapher whose business is in a smoky town in the north of England. He thinks his lighting is in fault, or his mani pulation. Well, they are. But I sorrowfully confess that very little could be done to improve his portraits of such sitters. It is as well to let them have their half-a- crown’s worth and go away satisfied, which, perhaps, they would not do with anything more delicate or better, any thing they were not accustomed to. There were some heads among them that would have made good pictures if properly managed, but not portraits. Even on these cheap cartes the retouching demon had left his scratches ; the old coal miner had lost his wrinkles, and the hallilujah lass smirked under the added grace of puffiness. I have urged the photographer to be individual and strike out lines for himself, yet there is something to be said for the other side—combination; or rather, they should be individual, and yet combine. They may have their own styles and sizes in their general work, and yet combine to push one kind of picture; to make a certain class of picture so fashionable—I am sorry to have to use the dreadful word—that it must be had regardless of trouble to the sitter, or expense. Nothing ever increased the business of the photographer as the carte-de-visite mania. Men who were in the depths of despair suddenly found themselves in the height of prosperity. This continued for some years, until the existence of a good thing induced competition, brought down prices, and vulgarised the style. Perhaps nothing did so much to spoil the business as the attempt to give too much for the money; not so much the giving of a large number for the price charged, as the cramming of the largest possible figure into the small space. The original carte represented a full-length figure justly pro portioned to the space; then half-lengths and head vig nettes were introduced for the purpose of giving a more visible head, and the style got confused. It went on till the heads were made so large that, when putin an album, the end of the nose of a profile and the back of the head were hidden by the opening, and in full-lengths the head touched the top of the mount, and the feet the bottom, so that all proportion was lost, and the sitters looked like a race of giants. If anything as popular should ever be introduced to the fortunate photographer, it will certainly be something very simple. When it comes, it would be well to let well alone, and not improve it off the face of the earth. I cannot help thinking that for general purposes some thing more sketchy than the ordinary heavy looking portrait would find favour with the public. For this the platinum processes seem to offer great advantages. A light-figured background may be so vignetted in a platinum print as to suggest clever sketching with a lead pencil,