Volltext Seite (XML)
THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. EDITED BY T- C. EIEPWORTEI, F.C.S Vol. XXXV. No. 1715.—July 17, 1891. CONTENTS. PAGE Painters at Fault 505 New Zincographic Process. By August and Louis Lumire 506 The Photographic Convention 507 Some new Addition Compounds of "Thiocarbamide" which Afford Evidence of its Constitution. By J. Emerson Reynolds 508 The Photographic Work of Herschel and Fox Talbot. By William Lang, Jun., F.C.S 509 The Diazotype Process of Photographic Dyeing and Printing. By John Carbutt 511 I PAGE Notes 512 Archteological Photography 513 Preliminary, Secondary, and Supplemental Lighting. By Dr. J. M. Eder 513 Proposed International Standards. By Leon Warnerke 515 Recent Developments in Printing Processes. By C. H. Bothamley, F.C.S 516 The Cult of Indistinctness. By W. E. Debenham 517 Patent Intelligence 519 Proceedings of Societies 519 Answers to Correspondents 520 Norman Lockyer, ture delivered Is , F.R.S., who, in the course of a lec- PAINTERS AT EAULT. ture delivered last month at Bedford College, on the and never can be any art at all. That they make use It has for a long time been the fate of photographers to be hardly spoken of by a certain section of the artis- of a mechanical contrivance to produce their pictures, and the results cannot be otherwise than mechanical. Photography, in fact, represented everything in an unnatural manner, and those alone who possessed artis tic genius and training were competent to look down from their high pedestal and point out that this was the case. In the meantime, if the poor photographer Most of us experience a lively satisfaction, although we may not care to give it visible expression, when there comes under our notice a case in which the biter is bitten, or when the cutting edge of the diamond meets with some sharper crystalline angle and is itself cut. More particularly is this the case when some self-constituted judge of the actions of another, who has been in the habit of laying down the law and admon ishing right and left, is himself caught tripping, and is found to be guilty of some of the very faults which he was so fond of looking for and correcting when com mitted by others. endeavoured to retaliate, and to suggest that such and such a picture exhibited faulty drawing, or could not in some other way be true to nature, he was promptly sat upon as one who knew nothing about the matter. And yet all the time that photographer could prove by his published works that he knew well enough the rules of composition, and that he possessed artistic faculties and knew how to make practical use of them. Many photographers, therefore, will be inclined to chuckle when they learn that “ a Daniel has come to judgment,” to tell some of these detractors of photo graphic work that they themselves are constantly guilty of offences of commission and omission against truth and nature which it would be impossible for any photographer to commit, and which, moreover, might often be avoided if the power to use a camera had been acquired. The Daniel to whom we allude is Mr. J. be impossible in a camera-made picture, and here at least the artist can seek help, as so many of them wisely do, from the revelations of photography. “ Neglect of this same law is also to be found,” we learn, “in very many pictures in which we get the reflection of the sun or moon in water,” and although certain pictures in the Academy are commended for the admirable way in which such reflections are rendered, one is held up to scornful reproach as a something I which is absolutely opposed to physical law. Next we are told of an instance of artistic bungling that occurred some years ago in which, curiously enough, the artist was led into error from too closely copying a photograph; but we are happy to learn that the fault did not prevent the picture being hung at the Academy. It seems that a book had been published in Erance, and republished here as a translation, in which there appeared an admirable coloured picture of a soap- bubble. This was copied from a photograph taken in the laboratory in the College de France, a place of subject of “ Physical Science for Artists,” took occa sion to point out, while advocating the immense im portance of a scientific training to artists, the lamentable mistakes commonly made by them for want of such । training. Be did not indulge in vague generalisations, but gave as examples of the errors adverted to certain pictures now hung at the Academy exhibition and other galleries. Commencing with the importance to the artist of a knowledge of light—without which there could be neither art nor artists—he showed how many painters disregarded altogether the well-known rule that when • light falls upon a body and is reflected, the angle of of water, and the lecturer pointed out that many pic tures, both in the Academy and at the Now Gallery, transgressed this well-known law by making reflected objects apparent when they could not possibly be visible, and vice versa. It is obvious that such a fault would iv vummuJ prm-- • -vu occuul ui ule arus- reflection must be equal to the angle of incidence, tic world, and to be told that in their work there is not Reflection in landscape mostly comes from the surface