Volltext Seite (XML)
736 THE PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS. [OcTOBER 23, 1891. Hotes. The editor of the Photo-Gazelte has written to us commenting upon what we said in a recent leading article with reference to a certain photograph which purported to have been taken with the telescopic objective of M. Jaret. We pointed out that the picture in question bore distinct evidence that it had been taken close to the object, and not from a distant point. The Editor of the Photo Gazette courteously admits that we are right. He tells us that the picture was published in his absence, and that directly he found out the mistake he issued a circular to his correspondents explaining the matter, and promising a picture really taken with the new apparatus at an early date. This circular we never received, or, of course, we should not have called attention to the circumstance, which he naturally deplores. In Mr. Jerrold’s biography of Gustave Dore, there is an amusing account of the manner in which the artist dispersed a crowd of onlookers who had gathered round the camera when his friend Dalloz was trying to take a photograph in the streets of Verona. After Dor had gesticulated and threatened the idlers until he was tired he bethought him of another plan, which he proceeded without delay to put into practice. He took off his coat, threw it on the ground, and, assuming an expression of the deepest woe, held his cap to the crowd for charity. The people thereupon seemed to remember that they had an important appoint ment elsewhere, and hurried off as quickly as could be wished. The photographer was then left to do his work in peace. This anecdote is worth remembering as suggesting a way of escape from an annoyance which is by no means confined to the city of Verona. Londoners are happily so used to the sight of a camera-bearer that they do not care to pause on their way as he exposes a plate. Most of them know “how it’s done." But in country districts it is different, and a small crowd quickly collects to watch the operations, and make personal remarks. If they remain silent they will generally endeavour to be in the picture at all hazards; but what possible pleasure there can be in figuring in a photograph which they will never see is a mystery which has always remained unexplained. “ Can Photography Lie ? ’’ was the question asked in large letters on the contents sheet of Tit-Bits last week. Being jealous of the reputation of our beloved art, we purchased a copy of the paper in order to see whether it was charged with mendacity, or held to be guiltless of that sin. We cannot say that there was much to learn from the article to which this question formed the title. It told how exaggeration was begotten by the abuse of short focus lenses, and for this reason the reader was cautioned to take house agents’ photographic productions cum cjrano. But the writer was decidedly out of his depth when he described composite photography as being “accomplished by cutting out different parts of several photographs, arranging them together, and re-photographing them. ” Amateurs who are ambitious in the direction of taking photographs from a balloon may like to know that a balloon is not absolutely indispensable for such photographs. Some time ago a photographic kite was devised by M. Arthur Batut, but the invention had defects which pre vented it coming into use. M. Wenz, of Rheims, has now brought out an improvement of M. Batut’s idea, and with it has obtained very good results. The shape of the kite is that of a quadrilateral of two isosceles triangles base to base, the larger undermost; and the camera—made of wood and cardboard, with aluminium mountings, for the sake of lightness—is fastened to the back of the kite. The exposure is made by a cord attached to the camera. Whether the result is worth the trouble involved is open to question. Photography, according to a French lady who has written ajbook recording her impressions of Ireland, is rapidly spoiling that picturesque show-place, the Giants’ Causeway. The lady bitterly complains of the vulgar herd of tourist visitors, not because they are vulgar, but because they will stand and be photographed there, and, in some cases, leave mementoes of themselves behind in the shape of photographs which are exhibited in the windows. We must confess to a lurking sympathy with this lady. Not only the Giants’ Causeway, but many other romantic spots, are rapidly being vulgarised by photographs which, other wise admirable, are spoilt by the introduction of inappro priate and too often ungainly figures. Why, when we buy a photograph of some lovely bit of scenery, should we also be compelled to purchase the portraits of the Smiths and the Jones’s who are “doing” the district? If a figure be necessary, let it be the figure of a native, whose garments would at least be in harmony with the surroundings. One of the many curious revelations of photography is that which first made known to the relatives of Emerson the approach of the mental disorder which marked the essayist’s later days. When the decay of his mental faculties was not suspected, he went with some of his relatives to be photographed. There was nothing notice able in his manner, but when he directed his gaze steadily at the object selected by the operator, the features relaxed very peculiarly, and the expression of the eyes and mouth, says the narrator of this curious experience, was strongly irrational, if the word can be used in such a connection. The relatives who were accustomed to his features and their expression saw in the negatives what they could not see in the original, and they determined to have no prints made from them; so the visit was paid for, but the negatives destroyed. It was noticed that, as Emerson left the studio, his eyes were bent steadily on the floor, and he smiled continually. In a very short time it was known that his mind had given way. It almost seems as if the maxim of a daily paper was: When hard up for a novelty, try photography. Photo graphing a bullet in its flight through the air must now take a humble seat. The place of honour has been assigned to an apparatus invented in Vienna “for taking photographs in a rifle, the apparatus closing of itself every time a shot is fired.” The photograph, we are further informed, “will show the object aimed at in a circular picture, in the centre of which the shot must have fallen.” If this be really true, the apparatus is more wonderful than ever the inventor imagines. When a gun is pointed at a distant object, allow ance must be made for windage and for the trajectory curve; while, therefore, the bullet may hit the target, the rifle may be pointed at quite a different object. If, under these circumstances, a photograph is taken of a target, this diminutive camera must possess the unique quality of looking round the corner.