FRANCIS BEDFORD and WILLIAM BEDFORD

 

FRANCIS BEDFORD (1816-1894) and WILLIAM BEDFORD (1846-1893)

[This bibliography, first posted here in 2012, has been revised, expanded, and re-posted in 2017. The bibliography has been pulled out of my “Bibliography 1839-1869 Project” by using the keyword search function in a Microsoft Word file of more than 50,000 references; to which I have added some materials from some other database projects, plus some searches for materials extending beyond the chronological time period of this database. Simply sitting down and reading through these files in chronological order will provide an immediate, detailed, and nuanced look at these two photographers; providing information about the evolution of their practices, the types of materials and tools they developed and used, the growth of the discipline of photography and their impacts upon that discipline as they worked within it. One can trace the aesthetic constraints they worked within and against, their interactions with their colleagues, the arc of their careers, the fluctuations of their reputations, the impacts of the relevant institutions and organizations, and even, in some measure, the cultural-political background of the era they lived through. One can even infer, through the detailed presentation of their decisions and actions and the responses of their colleagues, something of the personalities and even the character of these two exceptional men. WSJ]

Francis Bedford, born in 1816, was the first son of the noted architect Francis Octavius Bedford, and he studied both architecture and lithography as a young man. He exhibited a drawing or painting of some architectural feature, such as “New Church at Turnstall,” (1833), “In Westminster Abbey,” (1846), “Canterbury Cathedral,” (1847) “Magdalen Tower, Oxford,” (1848), “York Minster,” (1849), etc., in the annual exhibitions of the Royal Academy at least nine times between 1833 and 1849. By the 1850s he had established himself as a lithographer skilled in illustrating books specializing in architectural subjects and he became widely regarded as a master in the chromolithographic process. Bedford began to photograph as an amateur sometime around 1852, with the intent to aid himself in his lithographic work. His book, The Treasury of Ornamental Art, has been described as “probably the first important English work where photography was called into play to assist the draughtsman.” But Bedford also began to pursue the creative aspects of photography as well. The 1850s was a period of enormous growth for photography in England. Frederick Scott Archer had just perfected the wet-collodion process and photography, though still difficult to use, suddenly became both more accessible and far more useful in a wide variety of ways. Archaeologists, anthropologists, botanists, geologists, art and architectural historians, scientists and learned men of every stripe were realizing that photography not only facilitated their studies, but that accurate, exact, and exactly duplicatable visual records made it possible to expand the dimensions of their respective disciplines beyond levels impossible to reach before photography’s invention. Much of the leading research in chemistry and physics was being done by photographic scientists. Thus even conservative minds that could not decide whether photography was an art or merely a craft had to acknowledge that it certainly was a useful tool in the spread or diffusion of “useful knowledge” throughout the country, and agree in the role, both physically and metaphorically, that photographs played in support of the aims and needs of that generation.
The Great Industrial Exhibition held at the Crystal Palace in 1851, though considered a huge success, seems to have triggered a perception in England that it was in danger of losing its preeminent position as the greatest industrialized nation in the world. Driven by Prince Albert, and through the venue of the newly formed Society of Arts, a massive effort to improve the scientific, industrial, and artistic knowledge of the citizenry of Great Britain was launched in the 1850s. The Royal Society of London formed the armature that tied the local and regional organizations to a centralized national level institution that could provide communications and other links across the existing divisions of class, education and culture. The Society offered organizational guidelines, provided discounts for book purchases for club libraries, provided knowledgeable lecturers on a wide range of topics, and toured traveling exhibitions useful for publicity and fund-raising projects.
Photography, widely described as one of the keystone scientific/artistic inventions that defined the modern age, provided one very powerful tool in this program. The medium, combining attributes of both art and science, still held an undeniable glamour, and was one of the most accessible and approachable of the new technological marvels. And photography played an extremely important early role in the activities of this new Society and in its educational mission. The Society sponsored the first hugely publicized and highly popular photographic exhibition in England. And the Society then became the parent organization for the Photographic Society, (later called the London Photographic Society and later still the Royal Photographic Society). The Photographic Society’s first exhibition displayed 1500 prints by many photographers; and this exhibition became a popular annual event. In addition to the large annual exhibitions in London, the Society of Arts also organized exhibitions of several hundred photographs which it traveled to many of the organizations of the Union, which, in turn, used these as a catalyst to organize lectures, or for fundraising soirees and fetes for the scores of Mechanic’s institutions and other adult educational organizations around Great Britain –and occasionally around the world.
Prince Albert and Queen Victoria played a leading role in fostering England’s arts, sciences and manufactures with their patronage and they supported the fledgling art/science of photography by purchasing creative photographs for their extensive art collections, by lending their public support to the newly formed Photographic Society, and by allowing access for selected photographers to their public lives. In 1854 Queen Victoria and Prince Albert commissioned Bedford to photograph art objects in the Royal Collection, an extensive task that Bedford performed admirably. Bedford exhibited some of these prints in the first exhibition of the Photographic Society, held in 1854. Bedford, who had taken up photography as a tool for accurate rendering of objects, soon began to investigate its creative aspects, and this led him to taking landscape views, as was then common practice for British amateurs. In the second exhibition in 1855, Bedford exhibited “many views from Yorkshire, bright and sparkling bits most of them, which we are only sorry to find so small.” This was followed by “The Choir, Canterbury Cathedral,” in the 1856 exhibition; and then by many well-regarded architectural and landscape views almost every year for the next thirty-odd years. Francis Bedford used the wet plate process throughout his entire career, well after various dry plate processes were available to photographers.
Queen Victoria purchased several of Bedford’s photographic landscapes from the Photographic Society exhibitions. Then in 1857 the Queen commissioned Bedford to secretly travel as her agent to Prince Albert’s birthplace in Coburg, Bavaria, to make a group of some sixty views as a surprise birthday present for the Prince Consort. Documents make it clear that Bedford was treated throughout this event as a favored guest, affiliated with the most powerful monarch in the world, and not as commercial tradesman performing a task. At this time Bedford also photographed the important “Art Treasures Exhibition” in Manchester to provide sources for his chromolithograph illustrations for Treasures of the United Kingdom, published in 1858. This entire project had been fostered by Prince Albert as part of his ongoing support for contemporary arts and crafts practice in England. Bedford’s social status as a gentleman in Victorian England defined the range of opportunities available to him, and along with his undoubted talent and drive, structured the expansion and development of his career as he transitioned, as had a number of his contemporaries, from an amateur into a professional photographer; earning his living and eventually building a business empire that made him into a wealthy man.
By 1857 Bedford was being mentioned by various critics as one of the premier landscape photographers in England, a reputation he maintained throughout his lifetime. In 1859 Bedford traveled through North Wales making landscape photographs and stereo views, which he released commercially in the spring of 1860 through the publisher Catherall and Prichard, of Chester. “…The series of the latter is large, and comprehends a considerable number of the leading objects which excite the wonder and admiration of tourists, and have been the special delights of artists time out of mind. The photographs are of good size, and it is scarcely requisite to say, are of the highest possible merit, — the name of Mr. Bedford will sufficiently guarantee their excellence. …The stereoscopic views are certainly among the best that have been produced, supplying a rich intellectual feast: to us they have given enjoyment of the rarest character — and so they may to our readers, for they are attainable at small cost. We name them at random, but they are all of famous places — Pont Aberglaslyn, Capel Curig, Llyn Ogwen, Bettys-y-coed, Beddgelert, Pont-y-gilli, Trefriew, Llanberis, Pen Llyn, with views also of the Britannia Bridge, Carnarvon Castle, &c.” (Art Journal, Apr. 1860). “When Francis Bedford, that prince of the early landscape photographers, began, in 1858, under the auspices of a Chester firm of publishers, to do for large districts what the local photographers had hitherto done for their own little domains, he soon found that first-rate pictorial work had little commercial value. He began with Wales, and afterwards annexed other regions. His work at that time consisted almost entirely of stereoscopic slides, and the imperative demand of the travelling public was that they should be “clear,” and this great artist had to manufacture the article to order. Every item of the view, from the stones in the near church or chapel to the distant mountains, had not only to have all the boldness and definition to be obtained in the clearest weather, but had to be helped by those subtle devices of which he was a master. Besides the stereoscopic slides—it would be difficult to convey to the modern photographer any idea of the immense number sold in those primitive days— Bedford occasionally made larger pictures to suit his own cultivated taste, which were the delight of our exhibitions, but had no interest for the general public, who at that time were sufficiently satisfied with the miracle of definition photography continued to present to their still wondering senses, and who had no eyes for higher qualities. I mention these pictures to show that the fault lay not in the artist, but in his patrons. Although the work manufactured for the tourist had to be suited to the bad taste of the buyers, it was always the best of its kind. The best points of even poor subjects were selected with curious skill; there were few figures admitted in those days of long exposure, but when they were allowed to appear they were in the right place, admirably posed; they were always the addition wanted to make a picture, not the accidental crowd of figures in the wrong place that instantaneous exposures usually present to us.” H. P. Robinson, Photographic News (July 5, 1895) Bedford continued making views throughout the British Isles into the early 1860s. In 1862 Bedford’s strong position with the Royal Family was demonstrated again when he was “one of only eight gentlemen” invited to join the Prince of Wales (the future king of England) on a four-month tour of the Near East. Bedford made about 210 views on this trip. The trip was followed avidly by the British press and Bedford and a number of his photographs were published (in woodcut form) in the London Illustrated News and elsewhere throughout 1862 and later. Bedford also had a one-man exhibition (Still a fairly unusual event at the time.) upon returning to London, and also published the photographs, first in serial form, then as an album of original prints. The immense prestige garnered by Bedford through these activities buttressed his reputation as one of the leading landscape photographers of the day, both within the photographic community and in the minds of the general populace as Bedford became one of the handful of photographers who’s name was widely recognized outside of the photographic community. This tour also placed his family company on a solid financial footing for the remainder of the century.
Francis returned from the Near Eastern tour to again begin photographing landscape views in England, focusing his interest in the south-west of England and the West Midlands, while going again and again to his favorite sites in North Wales and Devonshire, which he photographed almost annually from 1863 until at least 1884.
Throughout the 1860s the many large national or international exhibitions, (Some displaying thousands of photographs and seen by scores of thousands of visitors.) provided a major venue for photographers. Bedford diligently participated in the annual Photographic Society exhibitions, the Edinburgh Photographic Society exhibitions, the international expositions in London in 1862 and in Paris in 1867, and in many other regional exhibitions in Great Britain and in Europe, almost always winning awards and the usual degree of high praise or his landscapes. After Roger Fenton retired from photography in the early 1862; his mantle as the leading landscape photographer was taken up by Bedford. By 1865 “Bedford” is one of a handful of names that is routinely used by critics or writers as an example to denote high-quality and creative landscape views in photography. And, as the British were believed to excel in the genre of landscape views, this made him considered to be one of the best and certainly one of the best-known photographers of the day.
Francis Bedford was elected to the London Photographic Society (now the Royal Photographic Society) and then elected a member of Council to that organization in 1857. In 1861 he was elected Vice President of the Photographic Society, a position of great prestige. He was active in that organization, periodically serving as an officer on the Council or as a Vice-President off and on for the next thirty years. For example, during 1867, Francis Bedford, serving as a Vice-President, chaired two of the monthly meetings, provided the negative for the annual “presentation print” which was distributed to the membership, and participated in the annual exhibition. In December he resigned from the Vice-Presidency (Possibly because it was a rotating position, or possibly because his son William was elected to the Council that year.) But by 1876 Francis is back on the Council again. This is the year when William seems to blossom, winning a great deal of praise for his landscape views in the annual exhibition, including the statement that his work “…shows that the mantle of the father has fallen upon the son.” In 1878 both father and son were still active participants in the Society, the son, on the Council again, organizing many of the tasks of that group, and the father again elected to a Vice-Presidency to fill a sudden vacancy in the organization. Both Francis and his son William were still displaying landscape views in the annual exhibition in 1878, but by the late 1870s, with Francis reaching into his sixties and having achieved universal acclaim, the weight of the activity seems to have shifted from the father to the son. Both Francis and William Bedford had also been members in the North London Photographic Association, and equally active in both organizations during the 1860s. Francis also contributed liberally to local photographic societies exhibitions and events throughout the United Kingdom during these years. “From this time until 1884, [Francis was 68 years old.] when he relinquished his business to his son William, he went annually to the country to take fresh negatives, chiefly in North Wales and Devonshire. He had two children, Arthur, who died in 1867, and William, who died in 1893, and whose departure and merits are still fresh in all our memories. The wife of Francis Bedford died in 1888; this was a great blow to him, and long preyed upon his mind. He was extremely painstaking in his work. Once he waited at Lynmouth for a fortnight to get a required satisfactory pictorial effect at the time of high tide. He had certain standards of his own, and when either negatives or prints did not come up to those standards, he destroyed them ruthlessly. He was a great hater of crowds, disliked photographing even in small villages; he preferred solitude, and loved the mountain and the moor in their wildest aspects; he said that in the midst of such scenes he looked up from nature to nature’s God. He was also partial to quiet scenes in country lanes. He was never of strong constitution, and many in his place would have given up work earlier; however, he did not do much actual hard work himself, but he directed everything. He was of a retiring disposition, exceedingly courteous in his manner, he was also considerate and kindly to those who worked under him. He was slow to make friends, but when he made one the friendship was true and lasting. He was pure in thought and speech, and retained all his mental faculties until the last moment.” William Bedford, who had also been photographing landscapes from at least the early 1860s, actively assumed the operations of the family business and continued making many of the architectural views and landscapes of British scenery. Tragically, William Bedford died of typhoid fever in 1893, preceding his father by about eighteen months. Francis Bedford died in 1894, leaving a will worth £18,000, which has the equilivent value of between 13 million and 20 million pounds today.

BEDFORD, WILLIAM. (1846-1893)

William, the son of Francis Bedford, learned landscape photography from his father as he was also trained in the practical aspects of running a very successful business. He improved upon these skills by studying the science of photography at King’s College at London University. That training would have placed a heavy emphasis on chemistry, with  additional training in optics and physics. By the early 1870s William’s abilities as a photographer were winning him widespread recognition. A critic’s 1871 comments are typical of the response to his photographs. ”A series of charming landscapes with well-known characteristics are at once recognized as those of Mr. Bedford; and on examination are found to bear the name, not of Francis Bedford, but of William Bedford: a pleasant fact, suggesting how admirably and perfectly the son preserves the specific excellence by which the works of the father have attained such a high and lasting reputation.” William was an excellent photographer, and he extended the high reputation of the Bedford firm through the 1870’s and into the 1890s. William gradually became more active in the social scene as his father grew older and more retiring and he continued to participate in the increasing number of exhibitions and professional photographic organizations. In 1874 a critic, describing the current state of the art, stated that “Photographic Societies have not undergone much change during the year. None having an active existence have gone out during the year, and no new ones have been initiated. All which have survived their youth appear to be healthy and active. The Photographic Society of London, after some years of struggle, having attained again a flourishing and successful position, is at this moment threatened with some trifling internal commotion, probably of the kind which, in vigorous physical constitutions, is occasionally styled a “healthy eruption,” possibly wholesome, rarely pleasant. Some further effort has been made by a few earnest working photographers to establish a Benevolent Society, for the benefit of the unfortunate and needy amongst their body, with, we hope, a prospect of a successful issue.” Both Francis and William Bedford helped provide some stabilizing influence during a tumultuous period that was in fact more than “some trifling internal commotion,” of the most senior photographic society in existence; and within a decade William would be responding to the radically altered circumstances as thousands of new amateur photographers took up the medium during the 1880s. William continually experimented with improving the processes and techniques of the still-evolving medium, and as he frequently published articles on his discoveries, in time he came to be regarded an expert on the new gelatine processes which were again revolutionizing photographic practice. “As a careful, painstaking experimentalist Mr. Bedford had few equals, and when in his own singularly modest way he expressed an opinion on processes or methods based on his own investigations, it was felt by those who listened to him, with that deference which invariably attended his utterance, that they might be accepted as conclusive.” As the flood of amateurs expanded the field in the 1880s William became increasingly active in the many newly formed organizations. “Mr. Bedford was a man who was universally esteemed, and was foremost in every good work appertaining to the welfare of photographers and the advancement of photography. For several years he was the Chairman of the Council of the Photographers’ Benevolent Association; and with what honesty of purpose and assiduity he threw himself into the work of ameliorating the condition of his less fortunate brethren only those know who were associated with him in this beneficent institution, from which no worthy applicant for assistance has ever been sent away empty. He was an active member of several Societies, including the Photographic Society of Great Britain, of which he has for several years been elected a member of the Council; the Photographic Club, of which he was a Trustee; the London and Provincial [Photographic Society]: an honorary member of the North London [Photographic] Society; and one of the active promoters of the Affiliation Scheme in connexion with the P.S.G.B.” [Photographic Society of Great Britain.] The reference is to the Photographic Convention of the United Kingdom, a coordinating organization attempting to provide resources and training materials to the flood of newer organizations. But at the height of this activity, William, who had “for some time had not enjoyed robust health,” caught typhoid fever and suddenly died on January 13, 1893.

PORTFOLIO OF VIEWS

Francis Bedford exhibited his landscapes and architectural studies in the various annual exhibitions and by 1857 he was considered by critics to be one of the best landscape photographers in England. In 1859 Bedford traveled through North Wales making landscape photographs and stereo views, which he released commercially in the spring of 1860 through the publisher Catherall and Prichard, of Chester. Bedford focused his interest in the south-west of England and the West Midlands, going again and again to his favorite sites in North Wales and Devonshire, which he photographed almost annually until at least 1884. These stereo views were issued in series , “North Wales Illustrated Series,” “Devonshire Illustrated Series,” etc., throughout his lifetime, and in some cases these series consisted of two to three hundred images. As new images were added or replaced older images in these series, all attributed dates are approximate.

NORTH WALES ILLUSTRATED

DEVONSHIRE ILLUSTRATED SERIES

GLOUCESTERSHIRE, ETC.

HEREFORDSHIRE ILLUSTRATED SERIES

MONMOUTHSHIRE ILLUSTRATED SERIES

WARWICKSHIRE ILLUSTRATED SERIES

WORCESTERSHIRE VIEWS.

THE HOLY LAND, EGYPT, CONSTANINOPLE, ATHENS, ETC., ETC.
[From the book Bedford, Francis. The Holy Land, Egypt, Constantinople, Athens, etc, etc. A series of forty-eight photographs taken by Francis Bedford for H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East, in which, by command, he accompanied his Royal Highness, with descriptive letterpress and interp. by W. M. Thomson. London: Day & Son, 1866. 2 vol. 48 I. of plates. 48 b & w. ]

 

FRANCIS BEDFORD BIBLIOGRAPHY, by William S. Johnson. (Please credit the blog if you use this bibliography.

COLLECTIONS

The Francis Bedford collection (purchased by the Birmingham (England) Public Libraries in 1985) consists of more than 2700 glass negatives and almost 2050 prints, and the manuscript catalogue of his negatives. In 2011 the Birmingham Library and Archive Services purchased an additional collection of 172 photographs from the ‘Tour in the East’ made in 1862 by the Prince of Wales, (the late Edward VII), which covered Athens, Corfu, Constantinople, Tripoli, Egypt, Syria and the Holy Land. Bedford’s photographs are also held in the National Maritime Museum, London, the George Eastman House, Rochester, NY, and in many art museums and galleries.

BOOKS

Bedford, Francis. A Chart Illustrating the Architecture of Westminster Abbey. London: W. W. Robinson. [1840?] 1 sheet: chiefly ill.; 56 x 44 cm., folded to 20 x 15 cm. [The illustrations are drawn and lithographed by F. Bedford, Jun. and printed by Day & Haghe. Linen back folded chart which opens into 9 sections depicting the architecture of Westminster Abbey. Views and details of Westminster Abbey on tinted bisque background with gothic frame, black letter with red initials.] [Getty Research Institute]

Monkhouse, W. and Francis Bedford. The Churches of York; by W. Monkhouse and F. Bedford, junr; with historical and architectural notes by the Rev. Joshua Fawcett. York: H. Smith, 1843. 3 pp. 43 I. of plates. 48 b & w.

Bedford, Francis. Sketches of York. York, England: H. Smith, 1843. n. p.

The churches of York, by W. Monkhouse and F. Bedford, junr., with historical and architectural notes by Joshua Fawcett. York [Eng.] H. Smith [1843] viii, [48] p. plates, plans. 38 cm. [Univ. of California]

Bedford, Francis. A Chart of Anglican Church Architecture: Arranged chronologically with examples of the different styles. “5th ed.” York: R. Sunter, 1844. n. p., folded pp. illus.

An historical and descriptive guide to York cathedral and its antiquities by Geo. Ayliffe Poole, M.A., Vicar of Welford, and J.W. Hugall, Esq., architect; with a history and description of the Minster Organ. York: Published by R. Sunter, Stonegate, [1850] [2], xiii, [1], 213, [1] p., [37] leaves of plates: ill.; 29 cm. [Tinted lithography by Francis Bedford; after J. Sutcliffe and Adolphus H. Cates. Lithographs printed by Day & Haghe and Standidge & Co. Added lithographed title page: Series of views plates of detail and antiquities from the Cathedral Church of Saint Peter at York, drawn on stone by F. Bedford. York: Robert Sunter, MDCCCL. [Univ. of California, Yale]

Wyatt, Matthew Digby, Sir. Industrial Arts of the Nineteenth Century at the Great Exhibition. London: Day & son, 1851-1853. n. p. illus. [158 of the colored lithographic illustrations for this work were created by Bedford.]

Bedford, Francis. The Architecture of York Cathedral, Arranged chronologically. York: W. Hargrove, Oxford: J. W. Parker, London: Hamilton Adams & Co., 1845. n. p., folded pp. illus.

Lamb, Edward Buckton. Studies of ancient domestic architecture, principally selected from original drawings in the collection of the late Sir William Burrell, bart., with some brief observations on the application of ancient architecture to the pictorial composition of modern edifices. London, John Weale, 1846. viii, 30 p., 1 leaf. 20 plates (incl. front.) 38 cm. [Princeton Univ.]

Examples of Ornament. Selected chiefly from Works of Art in the British Museum, Museum of Economic Geology, the Museum of Ornamental Art in Marlborough House, and the new Crystal Palace. Drawn from Original Sources, by Francis Bedford… and edited by Joseph Cundall. London: Bell & Daldy, 1855. 7 pp. 24 I. of plates, illus. [“Consisting of a Series of 220 Illustrations (69 of which are richly coloured), classified according to Styles, and chronologically arranged: commencing with the Egyptian and Assyrian, and continued… These Illustrations have been selected by Joseph Cundall from existing specimens, and drawn by Francis Bedford, Thomas Scott, Thomas MacQuaid, and Henry O’Neill.”]

Views of the Crystal Palace and Park, Sydenham. From Drawings by eminent Artists, and Photographs by P. H. Delamotte. With a Title-page, and Literary Notices by M. Digby Wyatt. Lithographed, Printed and Published by Day & Son, London, 1855. [“…How easy it would have been for the artists who have otherwise so well done their work, Messrs. Delamotte, Bedford, &c, to have enlivened their subjects with a few figures of the respective nations of antiquity, …”]

Jones, Owen. The Grammar of Ornament… Illus. by examples from various styles of ornament. One hundred…plates, drawn on stone by Francis Bedford, and printed in colours by Day and Son. London: Day & Son, 1856. pp. 100 I. of plates. [Essays on the ornament of the Renaissance and the Italian periods by M. D. Wyatt, etc.]

Bedford, Francis, junr. Examples of ancient doorways and windows, arranged to illustrate the different styles of church architecture from the Conquest to the Reformation, from existing examples. London: John Weale, [1856] 1 folded sheet: ill.; 43 x 32 cm., folded to 15 x 12 cm. [Sheet divided into 9 sections and mounted on cloth. Bound in red bookcloth, stamped in blind and gilt.] [Getty Research Institute]

The Photographic Album for the year 1856; being contributions from the members of the Photographic Club. Printed for the Members of the Photographic Club by Charles Whittingham, London, 1856. [(This is the second album produced by the Photographic Exchange Club; the first, published in 1855, consisted of 43 photos by 23 members. Bedford was not in the first publication.) “A folio volume of fifty photographs by fifty different hands, and those of eminence, to which Mr. Whittingham, of Chiswick, has attached fifty pages of letterpress of corresponding beauty. The volume is a present to her Majesty, and is one of fifty-two copies of a series of photographs made by members of the Photographic Club — a newly-established club akin to the old Etching Club, and instituted to advance and record the progress of the art of photography. This is their first volume, [Not true.] and most wonderfully does it exhibit the progress which photography has made in England during the past year. Each of the fifty members sends fifty-two impressions of what he considers to be his best photograph with a description of the process used in obtaining it. Fifty copies are distributed among the fifty; the fifty-first is offered to her Majesty, and the fifty-second presented to the British Museum. Very wonderful, indeed, are some of the photographs in this very beautiful volume. We would especially point out as perfect in their truth to nature and adherence to art Mr. Batson’s “Babblecombe Bay,” Mr. Henry Taylor’s “Lane Scene,” Mr. Llewellyn’s “Angler,” Mr. Bedford’s “Flowers,” Mr. Delamotte’s “Innocence,” Dr. Diamond’s “Interior of Holyrood,” Mr. Henry Pollock’s “Winsor Castle,” Mr. Mackinlay’s “Bedlham Castle,” Mr. White’s “Garden Chair,” and Mr. John Stewart’s appropriate vignette to the volume — the portrait of Sir John Herschel.”]

The Photographic Album for the Year 1857. Being Contributions from the Members of the Photographic Club. Printed for the Members of the Photographic Club by Charles Whittingham, London, 1857. (It may be that it was not actually published until 1861) [(This is the third album produced by the Photographic Club. With 39 original photographs by 39 photographers, including “At Pont y pair, Bettws-y-Coed, North Wales,” by Francis Bedford.
“An angry brook, it sweeps the glade,
Brawls over rock & wild cascade,
And foaming brown with double force,
Hurries its waters on their course.” W. Scott.
“Taken on Collodion (wet), in the middle of June, 1856; weather bright sunny day, very hot; Exposure one minute; developed with one grain solution Pyrogallic Acid.” “Lens by Ross; focal length fifteen inches; diameter three inches; Diaphragm three eighths of an inch.” “Printed on albumenized paper coloured with gold.”]

The Sunbeam: A Photographic Magazine, No. 1, edited by Philip H. DelaMotte. Chapman & Hall, 1857. [4 original photographs, 1 each by F. Bedford, Sir Jocelyn Coghill, P. H. DelaMotte, and J. D. Llewellyn.]

Bedford, Francis. The Treasury of Ornamental Art. Illustrations of objects of art and virtu, photographed from the originals and drawn on stone by F. Bedford, with descriptive notices by Sir John C. Robinson. London: Day & Son, 1857. 145 pp. 70 I. of plates, illus. [“The greater number of the objects … illustrated are to be found at Marlborough house.”-p. [3-4]
Title within ornamental border in colors.] [Getty Research Institute.]

Waring, J. B., ed. Art Treasures of the United Kingdom; from the Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester. Chromo-lithographed by F. Bedford. The drawings on wood by R. Dudley, with essays by O. Jones, M. D. Wyatt, A. W. Franks, J. B. Waring, J. C. Robinson, C. Scharf Jun. London: s. n., 1858. n. p. illus.

The Sunbeam: A Book of Photographs from Nature, edited by Philip H. DelaMotte, F. S. A. London: Chapman & Hall, 1859. [18 original photographs by Francis Bedford (4), Sir Jocelyn Coghill (1), Lebbus Colls (2), Joseph Cundall (2), P. H. DelaMotte (1), Dr. Holden (1), J. D. Llewellyn (2), Phoebus [Pickersgill?] (2), Henry Taylor (1), George W. Wilson (1), Thomas Wilson (1).]

Bedford, Francis. A Guide to Warwick, Kenilworth, Stratford-on-Avon, Coventry and the various places of interest in the neighborhood. Warwick: H. T. Cooke & Son, n. d. 142 pp.

Gems of Photographic Art. Photo-Pictures Selected from the Universal Series by Francis Frith. Reigate: Printed and published by Francis Frith, 1862. 1 pp. 20 I. of plates. 20 b & w. [Title page and twenty original photographs. Six by F. Bedford, two by T. Eaton, one by R. Fenton, five by F. Frith, one by Meteyard, five by A. Rosling. (Variants, with different prints, may exist)]

Howitt, William & Mary Howitt. Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain… The photographic illustrations by Bedford, Sedgfield, Wilson, Fenton, and others. London: Alfred W. Bennett, 1862. viii, 228 pp. 27 b & w. [Original photos.]

Photographic Pictures made by Mr. Francis Bedford during the Tour in the East, in which, by command, he accompanied H. M. H. the Prince of Wales. London: Day & Son, 1863.3 vol. 172 b & w. [No. 1, “Egypt,” 48 b & w; No. 2, “The Holy Land and Syria,” 76 b & w; No. 3, “Constantinople, the Mediterranean & Athens,” 48 b & w.]

History of the Recent Discoveries at Cyrene, made during an expedition to the Cyrenaica in 1860 – 61 under the auspices of Her Majesty’s Government by Capt. R. Murdock Smith and Commander E. A. Porcher. London: Day & Son, 1864. n. p. 16 b & w. illus. [Sixteen original photographs by Francis Bedford and lithographs.]

Howitt, William and Mary Howitt. The Wye: Its Ruined Abbeys and Castles; Extracted from “The Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain” by Wm. & M. Howitt. The photographic Illustrations by Bedford and Sedgfield. London: Alfred W. Bennett, 1863. n. p. 6 b & w. [Four original photographs by Francis Bedford, two by Russell Sedgfield.]

Howitt, William and Mary Howitt. The Ruined Castles of North Wales; With photographic illustrations by Bedford, Sedgfield, Thompson, Wilson, Fenton, and others. (2nd Series) London: Alfred W. Bennett, 1864. n. p. [“…. In each volume we have some five-and-twenty exquisite photographs of venerable piles, whose names are as household words upon our lips; and each subject is made the theme of from ten to twenty pages of well-told history and description. Some of these pictures are so artistic that they almost shake our faith in the assertion that photographs are not suggestive. We may especially notice, for example, the view of “Kenilworth Castle from the Brook,” which forms the frontispiece to the second volume, the view of “Holy Cross Abbey” in the same volume (with its sky “sunned down,” as photographers call it), and one or two little “vignetted ” head and tail pieces….”]

Newton, Sir Charles Thomas. Travels and Discoveries in the Levant. London: Day & Son, 1865. 2 vol. 10 illus. [Ten photo-lithographs by Francis Bedford, after drawings by Lady Newton.]

Mott, Augusta. The Stones of Palestine; Notes of a Ramble through the Holy Land… Illus. with photographs by F. Bedford. London: Seeley, Jackson & Halliday, 1865. viii, 88 pp. 12 b & w. [Original photographs.]

Bedford, Francis. The Holy Land, Egypt, Constantinople, Athens, etc, etc. A series of forty-eight photographs taken by Francis Bedford for H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East, in which, by command, he accompanied his Royal Highness, with descriptive letterpress and interp. by W. M. Thomson. London: Day & Son, 1866. 2 vol. 48 I. of plates. 48 b & w. [Volume one contains viii, 99 pages of text. Volume two consists of 48 original photographs.]

Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid. By Professor C. Piazzi Smyth, Astronomer Royal for Scotland. Alexander Stratum and Co., London. 1864. 400 pp. 1 b & w. [“The frontispiece is a reduction from the excellent original photograph of Mr. Francis Bedford, representing a good view of the Great Pyramid of Jizeh…”]

Bedford, Francis. Catalogue of an Entirely New Series of Photographs of Warwick, Guy’s Cliffe, Kenilworth Castle, Leamington, Coventry, Stoneleigh, Stratford-on-Avon, Etc Cooke, 18??. 8 pp.

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of Beddgelest, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868]. 10 I. of plates. 10 b & w. [10 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of Bettws y Coed, by Francis Bedford. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868]. 12 I. of plates. 12 b & w. [12 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos. UCLA Library.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of Bristol and Clifton, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1865?]. 16 I. of plates. 16 b & w. [16 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos. Another edition, 10 b & w.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of Chester, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868]. 10 I. of plates. 10 b & w. [10 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of Devonshire, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868], 20 I. of plates. 20 b & w. [20 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of Exeter, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868]. 10 I. of plates. 10 b & w. [10 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of llfracombe, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868]. 10 I. of plates. 10 b & w. illus. [10 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of North Devonshire, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868]. 15 I. of plates. 15 b & w. [15 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of North Wales, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1864]. 30 I. of plates. 30 b & w. [30 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of South Devon, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868].15 I. of plates. 15 b & w. [15 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, on Stratford-on-Avon and Neighborhood, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868]. 101, of plates. 10 b&w. [10 mounted prints, about 4″x4″. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views, of Tenby and Neighborhood, by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour of the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1867]. 17 1. of plates. 17 b&w. [17 mounted prints. Title page, but no texts with the photos.]

Bedford, Francis. Pictorial Illustrations of Torquay and Its Neighborhood. Chester: Catherall & Pritchard, n. d. [ca. 186-?]. 26 pp. 30 b & w. [30 original photographs. Scenery and views.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views of Torquay. No. 2. Chester: Catherall & Pritchard, n. d. [ca. 186-?].?? pp.?? b & w. [ At least 63 original photographs. Scenery and views.]

Bedford, Francis. Photographic Views of Warwickshire; by Francis Bedford. Photographer to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales during the tour in the East. Chester: Catherall & Prichard, n. d. [ca. 1868],16 I. of plates. 16 b & w. [16 photographs, each plate bearing a title plus a number. The numbers run from 591 to 657, but with gaps in the numbering. Photos about 4″x6″. Views, with people.]

PERIODICALS

 (Revised and updated February 2017. This bibliography contains references acquired through a fairly rigorous search through many American and British periodicals published before 1870. Thereafter, it contains a more random sampling of references from materials I happened to have on hand from other projects. Both Francis and William Bedford were active in photographic circles until the mid 1890s.)

1854

“The Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ART JOURNAL 6:2 (Feb. 1854): 48-50. [(First exhibition of the Photographic Society, with 1500 photographs on display.) “At the rooms of the Society of British Artists in Suffolk Street, there was opened on Tuesday the 3rd of January, a novel exhibition. In many respects it was worthy of especial note; it was a fine example of the value of every abstract discovery in science: it was singular, as it exhibited remarkable progress, made in an art by non-scientific men, every stage of which involved the most refined physical and chemical principles. It was of great interest, as showing the value of photography to the artist, to the traveller, the historian, the antiquarian, and the naturalist: to all, indeed, the exhibition appears to display points of the utmost importance. We purpose, therefore, to devote an article to the consideration of this, the first exhibition of the Photographic Society. It is pleasing to commence our task by recording the interest taken by our Most Gracious Queen in the progress of everything which has any tendency to exalt the character of the people over whom she reigns. Upon the formation of the Photographic Society, her Majesty and Prince Albert became its patrons; and on the morning previously to the opening of the Exhibition, these illustrious personages paid a visit to the Gallery, and spent a considerable time in examining the numerous specimens exhibited. The Queen and Prince were received by Sir Charles Eastlake, President; Professor Wheatstone, Vice-President; Mr. Roger Fenton, the Honorary Secretary; and Mr. Fry, Mr. Berger, Mr. Rosling, Dr. Diamond, and Professor Robert Hunt, members of council, with Mr. Henfrey, the editor of the Journal, and Mr. Williams, the Assistant-Secretary. Both her Majesty and the Prince have for a long period taken the utmost interest in the Art; and their expressions of delight at the productions now brought together, cannot but have the most important influence on the yet greater advance of photography. Nearly 1,500 pictures, illustrating, with a few unimportant exceptions, every variety of the photographic Art, are now exhibited. It is, of course, impossible, and if practicable, it would be useless to examine so many productions in detail. To the inexperienced, it may also appear that, since every picture is drawn by the same agent — the sunbeam, in the same instrument — the camera obscura, they must have the same general character, and therefore admit not of any critical remarks as to their artistic value. Such is not, however, the case. The productions of the painter are not more varied than those of the photographer; and it is a curious and interesting study to examine the subjects selected for photographic view, and to trace in these, as we would in an artist’s picture, the peculiar bent of the mind. To select a few examples: — Sir William Newton delights in the picturesque features of the Burnham beeches, and studies to produce a general harmony and breadth of effect, rather than to secure the minute details in which many of his photographic brethren delight. The Count de Montizon is a student of natural history; and in some fifty pictures which he exhibits, we have examples of the zoological collection in the Regent’s Park. These are curious evidences of the sensibility of the collodion process which the count employs: lions, tigers, bears, birds, and fish are caught, as it were, in their most familiar moods, and are here represented with a truthfulness which but few artists could approach with the pencil. The Viscount Vigier delights in nature’s grander moods, — the mountain gorge, the foaming torrents, the beetling rocks, and the everlasting snows, are the subjects which he labours to secure upon his photographic tablets. The views in the Pyrenees, now exhibited, prove how completely he has succeeded in securing the bold features of alpine scenery, with all its depths of shadow and its savage grandeur. Nothing more successful than these photographs of the Viscount Vigier have yet been produced. Mr. Turner leads us amidst the ruins of the English abbeys; he delights in ivy-clad walls, broken arches, or mouldering columns; his pictures are purely, essentially English; when he leaves the ruined fanes hallowed by ancient memories, he wanders into the quiet nooks of our island, and with a poet’s eye selects such scenes as “wavering woods, and villages, and streams.” Mr. Delamotte displays a natural feeling somewhat akin to this; his quiet pictures of the “Old Well,” “Alnwick Castle,” “Brinkburn Priory,” and the “River Coquet,” show him to be one of those “who lonely loves To seek the distant hills, and there converse With Nature.” Exquisitely curious as are the details in the views of the Crystal Palace at Sydenham, and in Mr. Delamotte’s copies of Irish Antiquities, they bear no comparison as pictures with those little scraps from nature which he exhibits. Mr. Hugh Owen, with the eye of an artist, selects bits out of the tangled forest, the “Path of the Torrent,” or the depths of the glen, which must prove treasures to a landscape-painter. Mr. Rosling is amongst Photographers what Crabbe was amongst poets, one who delights, in all the minute details of the most homely scenes, who, if he ventures far from home, seeks “villages embosom’d soft in trees. And spiry towns by surging columns mark’d Of household smoke.’ The delight in details is shown by the really wonderful microscopic reproductions of the Illustrated London News which this gentleman exhibits. It has been, from time to time, said that in all Photographic productions the veil of air through which all nature is seen, is wanting. In most of them this is the case, but there are two striking exceptions in this collection; a view of St. Paul’s by Mr. Rosling, and “The Garden Terrace,” by Mr. Roger Fenton. In these little pictures the gradation of tone is as perfect as in any sun pictures which we have seen, and the gradual fading off of the outlines of the objects as they are respectively more and more distant from the eye, yet still retaining their distinctness, is beautifully artistic and at the same time natural. The productions of Mr. Fenton are more varied than those of any other exhibitor. His pictures of the works at the suspension bridge at Kief, now in the process of construction by Mr. Vignolles, for the Emperor of Russia, mark the stages of progress, and thus the camera of the photographer is made to act the part of a clerk of works and record the mechanical achievements of every day. This is by no means an unimportant application of Photography; the engineer or the architect can receive from day to day, the most accurate information respecting works which he may have in the process of construction hundreds of miles apart, and thus be saved the labour of constant personal inspection. Mr. Fenton’s Russian tour has enabled him to enrich his portfolio with numerous views of the monasteries, churches, &c, of the Russian capitals. Many of these are exhibited, and then he gives us homely views, selected with an artist’s eye, and manipulated with great skill, together with portraits of considerable merit. Although some of Mr. Fenton’s productions are obtained by the collodion process, the greater number are the result of wax paper, in which process this gentleman, the secretary of the society, is one of the most successful operators in this country. Messrs. Ross and Thomson continue to familiarise us with Scotch scenery. There is “the copse-wood gray That waved and wept on Loch Acliray, And ruiugled with the pine-trees blue Of the bold cliffs of Ben-venue.” We have on former occasions had to commend the productions of these artists, and the fine character of the specimens on the walls of the gallery in Suffolk Street causes us to regret that there are not a larger number of such scenes, as their Loch Acliray, and Loch Katrine, so nearly realising Sir W. Scott’s description of those lakes and their enclosing “mountains, which like giants stand, To sentinel enchanted land.” We might in this manner gather into groups the especial subjects now exhibited, each group bearing the well-marked impress of the mind of the photographer. The art is purely mechanical, and the results are obtained by means of a philosophical instrument, which has no power to alter its conditions. That which external nature presents the camera-obscura represents, therefore the varied character to which we allude is dependent, mainly, on the selection made. We say mainly dependent, because the photographic manipulator has it in his power, in the process of printing his pictures, to secure certain effects, which add more or less of the pictorial character to the result. A few years since, and a period of twenty minutes was required to obtain upon the most sensitive tablet then known a view of a building. How greatly does the sensibility of our preparations now exceed this. Here we have Mr. Dillwyn Llewellyn presenting us with a view of a Welsh sea-coast, and the waves of the restless ocean have been caught ere yet the crest could fall, the hollow ascend to become the crest, or the breaker cast its foam upon the shore. Dr. Becker, librarian to the Prince Albert, has also, since the opening of the exhibition, contributed a picture in which the fleeting, and ever-varying clouds are painted, by their own radiations, in singular truth. The improvement in sensibility is particularly shown however in the portraits of the insane by Dr. Diamond. The rapidity of operation is shown by the life which is in every countenance. The physiognomy of the affliction is truthfully preserved, and all the phases of excitement or melancholy rigidly preserved. High medical testimony assures us that these portraits are of the highest value in the study of that most severe of human afflictions, the deprivation of reason. The portraits by Mr. Berger are equally remarkable for the evident rapidity with which they have been taken, and for the artistic tone which is given to many of them. Two of these portraits, in particular, struck us as proving the correctness of Raffaelle, and his boldness. It is not possible that we can particularise the respective excellences of the numerous exhibitors. The portraits by Mr. Hennah, by Mr. Home, and Mr. James Tunny are especially deserving of notice. To the daguerreotype productions of Mr. Claudet, Mr. Beard, and Mr. Mayall we need scarcely devote a line; their various excellences are already too well known to the public. There are many pictures, subsequently coloured by the artists’ hand, of great merit, but as being coloured they are removed, as it were, from the domain of the photographer. Yet, not entirely so, since we have here examples of colouring upon photographic portraits by the artists already named, and also by Mr. Laroche, equal in nearly all respects to the first-class ivory miniatures, but which are produced at about one-tenth their cost. The value of photography to the traveller who desires to secure faithful resemblances of the lands he may visit, and to the “Home-keeping Wit,” who still wishes to know something of the aspects of other climes, is here most strikingly shown. We have an extensive series of views from Egypt — the Vocal Memnon, the Sphinx, the Pyramids, the temples of Isis and Dendera, and numerous other photographs by Mr. Bird, make us acquainted with all the peculiarities of the architecture of the land of the Pharaohs. Mr. Tenison brings us acquainted with Seville and Toledo, while Mr. Clifford shows us Segovia, with its modern houses and its ancient aqueduct, Salamanca, and other Spanish scenes. M. Baldus exhibits several most interesting photographs of scenes hallowed by historical associations, amongst others the amphitheatre at Nimes, is on many accounts a remarkable production. This picture is by far the largest in the room, and certainly one of the largest photographs which has yet been executed. The positive now exhibited is copied from three negatives; that is, three views have been taken in the first place, by moving the camera-obscura round as it were upon a centre, so as to embrace a fresh portion of the ruins each time. These three negatives being fixed are united with much care, and the positive taken by one exposure. In this case the joining has been so skillfully contrived, that it is scarcely possible to detect the points of union. The study of natural history cannot but be greatly aided by the publication of such photographic copies of objects as those produced by the MM Bisson. We learn that in the production of these, every assistance is rendered by the French government, and in this way it is contemplated to publish all the choice specimens of the Museum of the Jardin des Plantes, and other Parisian collections. Since this was written, a set of prints from steel plates, etched by Niepce’s bituminous process, have been received, and show still an extension of photography in the aid of art and science. The portraits of the Zulu Kaffirs, by Mr. Henneman, prove the value of the art to the ethnologist, since the physiognomy of races may be in this way most faithfully preserved. Under this section, the microscopic objects photographed by the Rev. W. I. Kingsley, and those by Mr. F. Delves require notice; those by the latter gentlemen are, as it appears to us, the most remarkable productions of this class which have yet obtained. Mr. Kingsley’s pictures are the largest in point of size, but they want that clearness and definition, that evidence of space penetration which strikingly distinguishes the works of Mr. Delves. Amongst the objects of purely scientific interest, the impressions of the spectrum by Mr. Crooke, showing the Fraunhofer lines, and some j copies of the images produced in crystals by polarised light will attract most attention. The practical value of these is to j show the advantages of the bromide of silver over the iodide in all cases where we desire to copy objects, such as foliage, in which green and yellow surfaces prevail. These are not new facts, as they were pointed out by Sir John Herschel in 1840, and particularly examined by Mr. Robert Hunt in his “Researches on Light,” in which volume is also given a drawing of the fixed lines of the chemical spectrum. The photographs of Mr. Stokes’ charming little bits of nature, those of Mr. Waring, of Sir Thomas Wilson, and numerous others, as illustrating interesting photographic phenomena, would, did our space permit, claim some observations. Any one examining the collodion pictures executed by Mr. C. T. Thompson, and those by Mr. F. Bedford, cannot but be struck with the wonderful detail and correctness of every part. The finest chasings in silver, carvings in ivory, and copies of the antique furniture which was exhibited last year at Gore House show the variety of purposes to which the art can be, and is now being, applied. There are several specimens of much historical interest exhibited, such as the first collodion portrait by Mr. P. W. Fry, and the earliest application of the protonitrate of iron by Dr. Diamond. Of actual novelties in the Art, there are none; the linotype, or pictures stained on linen, scarcely deserving the name, and its utility being very doubtful. The examples of photo-lithography, and of Mr. Talbot’s etchings on steel we have already given a full description in former numbers. Auguring from this, the first exhibition of the Photographic Society, which has only been in existence one year — and that a year remarkable for its paucity of sunshine — the very element upon which the success of photography depends; we may expect great advances in another year. As a word of advice to all who are interested in the art, we would say in conclusion, rest not satisfied with the agents you are now employing, or the mode of manipulation you follow, try other agents and new methods.”]

“Fine Arts. New Publications.” ATHENAEUM no. 1392 (Jan. 20, 1855): 817-818. [“…A View of the Church of St. John, Bedminster, Bristol. By F. Bedford. Lithographed by Day &Son. A neat lithograph, carefully executed; but wanting a little more depth in the shadows.” (p. 818)]

1855.

“Photographic Society.” ATHENAEUM no. 1421 (Jan. 20, 1855): 86. [“If universal Art progressed as fast as this small scientific branch of it, we might soon look for new Phidiases and new Raphaels. The second, annual Exhibition is now open in Pall Mall, and presents evidences of great improvement. The portraits are broader and clearer and the compositions more artistic. The views from Nature are wider and more varied; animal life is well represented, and still life is most successfully handled. We have scenes, not copied, but literally brought away bodily, by solar enchantment, from Normandy and Venice, Stamboul and Egypt. Last year the photographists seemed all experimenting, timid, uncertain; this year they aim at artistic effects, and seem always trying to form pictures and not sketches. Water still seems to defy the rulers of the sun, while air is more and more enchained to their service. In one view of York Minster, seen from the walls of the city, the wind seems blowing and the sky rocking past; but the water remains turbid, foggy or metallic, — its transparency is lost, and it remains solid, vague and earthy. This fresh element we hope, however, will be annexed to the territory of Photography by the time of the next Exhibition. We do not say that there are no ink-blot pictures and no skies with unfavourable eruptions, for many varieties of cutaneous disease still torture the children of the sun. In skies Mr. Sherlock has made some fresh conquests, arresting the most fleeting vapours. With such lessons for the landscape artist, no such mistake of cloud regions as Mr. Ruskin points out in living painting will henceforth be tolerated. Perhaps, like young painters, the photographists are too intent at present on the mechanism of their art to attend to its highest capabilities, and too uncertain of the extent of their powers to acknowledge its proper limitations. A debateable ground still lies between the high artist and the artistic mechanician, and its boundaries are not yet defined. How far the two professions may mingle is uncertain; that they cannot exchange vocations is evident. A bad artist may, however, make a good photographist; and so two arts will be benefited. A bad photographist turning painter may find means to rival the sunshine of Cuyp without even the aid of sunlight. For artistic reference we might advise photographists always to make a note of the hour, day and month, of their studies: this would verify their truth, and greatly increase the professional value of their specimens. One feature of this year‘s Exhibition are the excellent copies of prints, alti-rilievi, vases, drawings and etchings. It is rather as thus superseding engraving than painting that any fear need be felt of Photography by those who are fed by Art. Instantaneous and perfect copies of pictures make the slow labour of the engraver comparatively useless, except in the higher branches of his art. In colour we see no great progress, — nor does it seem likely that anything but the light and shade and composition of nature will be caught by even those wonderful spells that force the sun to do our bidding. Stonework is copied to perfection, tree trunks with equal success, — but smaller twigs are apt to turn into dark wires or feathery nothings. Water is a failure, skies are uncertain, and grass remains microscopic and confused. To Mr. Sherlock’s studies we must decidedly give the preference, as superior to either the English, French or German specimens. His rustic studies, a Country Girl (No. 144) and Boy peeling Turnips (253), are admirable, both for lucidness, detail and composition. In still life, the Chinese Card-rack (286) and Shields (293), by Mr. F. Bedford, are so bossy that they compel us to appeal to touch to verify or refute our sight. In ambitious attempts at higher art, Mr. L. Price stands almost alone. His Ginerra (387), with a better-chosen model, would have been a beautiful and original illustration of the well-known subject. Mr. Cundall, in his Stepping Stones over the Wharf, Bolton Abbey (416), has given us a Wordsworth scene, — but failed, as usual, with the water. Trees (19) Mr. H. Owen stands foremost for detail and perfection of clearness. This science is the free trade of Art; and every one may now be an artist in his spare moments without toiling for years over laborious mechanism. Its charm is, that the simplest student may become a discoverer, and that his results may be always greater than he had expected. The most evanescent moments of life may be arrested, and only indifference or prejudice can now excuse those who refrain from obtaining portraits of parents and friends, who, perhaps, in a few days may be removed by death. Historical events will now be recorded with indisputable accuracy, and we shall no longer have to depend alone upon the verbal reports of ignorance or animosity. Photography may be to Art what printing was to literature. It will widen, but perhaps not deepen, our national love of nature. All conversant with that pleasant book of Miss Howitt’s ‘The Art-Student‘ will be glad to see, in this Exhibition, copies of Kaulbach’s Cartoons, described by her when at Munich.”]

“The Second Exhibition of the London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 8:2 (Feb. 1855): 62-63. [“London, January 12, 1855. To the Editor of the Photographic and Fine Art Journal: Dear Sir, — Knowing that the proceedings of the London Photographic Society are of interest to you, I send a short notice of their second annual Exhibition. Yesterday Prince Albert paid a visit to the Gallery, and this morning the members of the Society and their friends were invited to a private view. It will be at once admitted that this is the best exhibition of photographs we have yet had. The progress of the Art, though slow, is sure and steady, and we see many difficulties which were, once thought almost insurmountable, yielding to the care and increased knowledge of the operator. We are not a whit afraid that even in its ultimate success photography will ever interfere with the artist, any further than to stimulate him to a more truthful appreciation of nature. We know that the small fry of miniature painters have been nearly swept away by the daguerreotype and the photograph, but that is simply because, their art was so bad — Richmond and Thorburn, and Watts and Hayten drew as many heads year by year as ever they did, and although we can admit that a good photograph is better than a bad picture, we must allow that there is and ever must be an immeasurable distance — a broad gulf that can never be crossed — between the best photograph and the work of a true painter, An artist of great repute was by our side as we looked at one of Mr. Llewellyn’s photographs, appropriately called “Summers Evening.” “This is like summer,” said the artist; “the effect is as like many of his drawings as possible,” and in truth it is a most poetical little bit — certainly the nearest approach to a fine work of art. Mr. Llewellyn has many other subjects, nearly as good. He seems to delight in the picturesque, and chooses his subject with an artist’s eye. His instantaneous views are more wonderful than beautiful; but who does not look with interest at the ripple of the sea — the surf beating on the shore, the cloud-bank in the heaven, all pictured by this magic art, with a truth no mortal hand could ever imitate. Perhaps the most successful exhibitor — certainly the most prolific — is the Honorary Secretary of the Society, Mr. Roger Fenton. The fruits of his Tour in Yorkshire are for the most part exquisite. The “Valley of the Wharze,” is on the whole, the best landscape with distance that we are acquainted with, and shows how far the collodion process may be carried. The advocates of the paper negatives have always claimed a preference for their process in distant views, but this picture has certainly never been equalled. Mr. Fenton seems to have been very fortunate in the weather and the time of year during his stay at Rivaulx Abbey. The large picture of the Abbey taken from the north end is a singular, and at the same time a very beautiful example of what may be accomplished with the sun nearly in front of the camera. Several little road-side and cottage bits near Rivaulx are charming compositions and excellent photographs. Mr. Lake Price, the well-known artist, has contributed four pictures, which demand some attention. They are large and very imposing at first sight; one, the “Baron’s Welcome” is very like a drawing by Chattermole. The figures, clothed in armor, are ranged “dramatically” round a table, and there are plenty of ancient old weapons and quaint jugs to help make up the picture, but it will hardly bear examination. The attendants are more like stuffed figures than real men, and there is not an expression to be found in any one of their faces. This is precisely an illustration of our remark that a good photograph is immeasurably distant from a fine work of art. Mr. Lake Price’s “Retour de Chasse” is his best photograph, because it is his least ambitious — the dead game and the gold and silver are well grouped, and the effect is much more pleasing than in the semi-theatrical subjects. We hear that Mr. Price is almost a novice in photography, if so, we must compliment him on his ready proficiency in the art, but we cannot refrain from asking him to light his pictures from the side more than the direct top. Mr. B. Turner. — Six well-chosen and well photographed pictures, show this gentleman’s excellence both as an artist and a manipulator. There are no other Talbotypes in the room to equal his. We like the size and style of his pictures: they are hold and vigorous, yet not wanting in detail. Mr. Phillip Delamotte, the photographer to the Crystal Palace, exhibits his two large views of the interior of that immense structure. The picture of the completed Palace is perhaps the grandest work of photography yet accomplished in England. It is a wonder to see with what precision the details of every part are given. One recognizes the face of the policeman, and can tell the geraniums from the nasturtiums, and yet at the same time one sees the whole height and nearly the whole length of the building. Some of the views in the Alhambra and Renaissance Court are as beautiful as we could wish for. Mr. Delamotte has likewise been on a visit to the Yorkshire Abbey, and has brought home charming views. He as well as Mr. Cundall, who was with him, seems to have devoted his attention especially to the buildings, and we have consequently a series of pictures of Fountains Abbey, Rivaulx, Kirkeshall and Bolton, which are highly interesting, Mr. Delamotte’s Fountains Hall, Echo Rock, and interior of the choir of Rivaulx, are his best productions. Mr. Cundall’s are his interiors of the choir and chapter — exterior of the Refrectory at Fountains, and his interior of Rivaulx, There are likewise views of Hastings by Mr. Cundall that are very good. Mr. Bedford also exhibited many views from Yorkshire, bright and sparkling bits most of them, which we are only sorry to find so small. Mr. Bedford seems to be a most careful manipulator. We scarcely discover a flaw or a fault in any of his pictures, and he is equally successful in his views from nature and his copies of pictures and still life. Mr. Thurston Thompson has been commissioned by H. R. H. Prince Albert, to copy the drawings of Raffaelle in the Royal possession. The specimens exhibited show how well qualified Mr. Thompson is for the task he has undertaken. No one but a photographer would understand the great difficulty of copying the drawings the size of the original. The photographs are perfect, the lines are clear to the very edge, and the very best possible result has been attained by Mr. Thompson’s skill. By what other process could such perfection have been arrived at? The Rev. Mr. Kingley’s microscopic views of insects are excellently photographed, and will no doubt be attractive to naturalists. Mr. Taylor’s country pictures are extremely well chosen, and are both bright and effective. Several photographs by Mr. Sherlock are worth especial commendation — witness the “Boy peeling a turnip,” the “Girl’s head,” of an unusually large size, and “still life.” Mr. Robertson contributes some of his well known views of Constantinople; Mr. Hugh Owen some charming studies of trees and a few pictures from Spain, which hardly increase his reputation. Besson, freres send a few excellent pictures, views of Paris; Mr. Russell Ledgfield many capital bits of Cathedrals and country architecture, and Mr. George Barker several good groups and full length figures from life. In portraits Mr. Hesinah, as usual, bears the palm, but we see no great progress in this branch. Mr. Claudet, Mr. Kilburn, Mr. Elliott and Mr. Williams each contribute a stand of daguerreotype stereoscopic pictures, all of them in our mind, though wonderful, very much resembling Madame Tassand’s exhibition.”]

“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL 17:3 (Mar. 1, 1855): 99. [Book review. Views of the Crystal Palace and Park, Sydenham. From Drawings by eminent Artists, and Photographs by P. H. Delamotte. With a Title-page, and Literary Notices by M. Digby Wyatt. Lithographed, Printed and Published by Day & Son, London. “Of all attempts which have hitherto been made to set forth, by means of pictures, the wonders of the existing Crystal Palace, this is, beyond measure, the best. Such commendation is, however, but comparative, and does not justice to the work before us; we will say then it is a very beautiful volume in its illustrations, and highly instructive in the letter-press descriptions which Mr. Wyatt has introduced. The principal subjects, or, at least, those which will interest most, are the views of the Courts: they are drawn with exceeding delicacy and with strict attention to detail; and, being printed in two or three tints, are thus rendered very effective: but why not print all in colours (where such are necessary to the complete elucidation of the architecture) as two of the Courts — the Pompeian and the Italian — are printed? And why destroy the illusion of past ages by the introduction of tall ladies in shawls and mantillas, and tall gentlemen in frock-coats, Oxonians, Chesterfields, and “registered paletots?” These may do very well at Sydenham, because they are parts of the living and breathing world all around; but in the silent though eloquent picture, they seem to us a mockery: here they appear intruders upon the solemn grandeur of ancient Egypt — the very sphynxes look outraged at their presence — and amid the restored magnificence of Assyrian pomp. In the Roman Court these interlopers have been judiciously kept almost out of sight; there is little here to disturb the dream of enchantment that rises up from arch and column, and graceful sculptures. How easy it would have been for the artists who have otherwise so well done their work, Messrs. Delamotte, Bedford, &c, to have enlivened their subjects with a few figures of the respective nations of antiquity, which they might readily have procured from authentic sources: Egypt, Nineveh, Greece, Rome, and the medieval ages, would then have stood before us in their own proper persons, and not as they now do, denationalised by obtrusive introductions, .Such are the only exceptions we take to this tastefully illustrated publication.”]

“Advertisements.” NOTES AND QUERIES 11:290 (May 19, 1855): front cover. [Interesting and Valuable Collection of Photographic Pictures, by English, French, German and Italian Photographers, partly from the late Exhibition of the Photographic Society in Pall Mall. Southgate & Barrett will sell by Auction, in their Rooms, 22 Fleet Street, on Wednesday Evening May 23, an Important Collection of several hundred photographs, by the most eminent Photographers; including Pictures by Fenton, Delamotte, Owen, Bedford, Cundall, Baldus, Le Gray, Bisson, Bilordeaux, Le Secq, Ferrier, Macpherson, Anderson, Martens, Negre, Shaw, Colls, Buckle, Sutton, Sedgfield. Many of the more important specimens are in Gilt Bend Frames. May be viewed two days prior to the Sale. Catalogues will be forwarded on receipt of Two Postage Stamps.”]

“Fine Arts.” ATHENAEUM no. 1459 (Oct. 13, 1855): 1190-1191. [Book review. Examples of Ornament. Drawn, from original sources, by F. Bedford, T. Scott, T. Macquoid, and H. O’Neill. Edited by Joseph Cundall. Bell &. Daldy. “This beautiful and tasteful book is an album of ornament too brief and too discursive to be complete. What it does give, however, which is but a leaf for a tree, is faithfully rendered, carefully drawn, and truthfully elaborated. The Sydenham Palace seems at the bottom of the design, and the whole is an illustration of the long retrospect which Art loves to take when it prefers the contemplation of a certain and glorious past to that of an uncertain and perhaps inglorious future….” “…In twenty-four sections the Editor gives us all the great posting-houses where Art has at various times stopped to breathe and change horses. Eng land has not been neglected in Art’s journey, for she stayed once to bait at the English Cathedral. The examples of ornament contained in the volume have been copied from specimens at the British Museum, the Museum of Economic Geology, the Marlborough House Museum, and the Fine Arts Courts in the new Crystal Palace, — and are intended to serve as an outline of the history of Ornament. They are also judiciously arranged in chronolo gical order, or at least as far as can be done according to the limitations of ethnology. We have the Egyptian, Assyrian, Grecian, Etruscan, Ro man, Byzantine, Saracenic, Gothic, Italian, Elizabethan, Renaissance, CinqucCento, Indian, and Persian….”]

“Advertisements: Examples of Ornament.” NOTES AND QUERIES 12:315 (Nov. 10, 1855): inside front cover. [“Just published, handsomely printed, in Imperial Quarto, price 2l.2s. Examples of Ornament in Every Style. Consisting of a Series of 220 Illustrations (69 of which are richly coloured), classified according to Styles, and chronologically arranged: commencing with the Egyptian and Assyrian, and continued… These Illustrations have been selected by Joseph Cundall from existing specimens, and drawn by Francis Bedford, Thomas Scott, Thomas MacQuoid, and Henry O’Neill. London: Bell and Daldy, 186. Fleet Street.”]

1856

“The Photographic Society’s Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:779 (Sat., Jan. 12, 1856): 42. [“The Third Annual Exhibition of the Photographic Society was opened to public view on the 7th inst. The private view, on the 5th, was honoured by the presence of her Majesty, H.R.H. Prince Albert, and the Princess Alice. The collection, numbering some 600 specimens, fully represents the capabilities of the art in its various and increasing applications, and displays a marked advance upon the Exhibition of last year. The progress of the art is most conspicuous in the better artistic treatment of subjects, due, probably, to the greater facility and certainty of manipulation gradually attained to. In the infancy of the art mechanical difficulties to be overcome in obtaining a tolerably perfect picture were so great, that the photographer could give but little consideration to the aesthetics of his art. With the result, however harsh and uncouth in treatment, he was satisfied, although the composition might be bad in every respect, and the point; of view ill selected. But since artists have occupied themselves with this powerful auxiliary to pictorial art, they have brought their peculiar technical knowledge to bear upon the subjects represented, and the critic is called upon to pronounce upon photographs as he would upon a gallery of water-colour drawings. Those who regard photography only as a mechanical art should compare views of the same landscape or view taken by different photographers, and they will soon recognize that the individuality of the operator is as much a part of a photograph as the picture is of the individuality of the painter. What a delicate perception of the beautiful in nature is displayed in the landscapes of Knight, Cundall, Shadbolt, Holden, Llewelyn, Delamotte, H. Taylor. and others whose productions proclaim them artists as much as if they were members of the Water-Colour Societies! Each has his favourite tone of colour, which of itself is frequently sufficient to proclaim the artist at a first glance. One revels in sepia, another in bistre, another in Indian-ink. No less indicative of the artist is the choice of subject. One haunts the tangled copse; others the shady glen, the mill-stream, the loch, the moor, the rural lane, the quaint cottage or mouldering ruin; another, more soaring in his imagination, mounts the castle-tower to depict the panorama beneath his feet. In the architectural subjects this individuality of treatment is still more striking and remarkable, because at first sight there would appear to be much less scope for it: but how widely different are the architectural views by Bedford, Newton, Bolton, Trout, Holden, Delamore, and Bullock! and is not this difference the artist’s individuality? Therefore, since the manipulation of the art, how-ever delicate it may be, is no longer an impediment to the highest perfection of which photography is capable, we may fairly pronounce upon the works submitted to examination according to the canons of art.

[Advertisement.] ATHENAEUM no. 1473 (Jan. 19, 1856): 61. [“The Grammar of Ornament. By Owen Jones. Being a Series of Three Thousand Examples, from curious Styles, exhibiting the Fundamental Principles which appear to reign in the composition of Ornament of every period. One Hundred Imperial Folio Plates. Drawn on Stone by F. Bedford. Printed in Colours BY Day & Son. To be published in Twenty-five Numbers of Four Plates each, price10s. The First Number will appear on the 1st of February, and the subsequent Numbers be continued Fortnightly…” “…Published by Day & Son, Lithographers to the Queen, 6, Gate-street, Lincoln’s Inn-fields.”]

”The Photographic Society’s Exhibition. (Second Notice.)” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:780 (Sat., Jan. 19, 1856): 74. [(3rd Annual Exhibition.) “Architectural subjects would, to the ordinary observer, appear to present the fewest difficulties and the greatest uniformity of treatment by the photographer. The pictorial aspect of a stone wall or tower would seem unchangeable; and so, perhaps, it would be were there no such thing as chiaroscuro. The artist-photographer, however, knows that in sunshine the play of light and shade, constantly varying, imparts to the simplest object a Protean character, and the picturesque may be found better in the morning or in the evening, and he will carefully watch for the fit hour. In the studies under notice we see that one artist affects extreme sharpness of outline, as in “Rivaulx Abbey” (No. 284), and in “West Front of Peterborough Cathedral” (No. 335). Another studies boldness and breadth, as in “Canterbury Cathedral” (No. 36), by V. A. Prout, whose productions constantly remind us of the drawings of his illustrious namesake. In this section of the art the works of Mr. Bedford appear to us most completely to satisfy the requirements of art. It is scarcely possible to conceive anything more beautiful than this artist’s views of Canterbury Cathedral (Nos. 152, 183, 203, and especially Nos. 467 and 499). We are inclined to place Mr. Bedford first in the rank of artist-photographers. In the selection and treatment of subjects his taste is always refined, and their execution, especially in colour, unexceptionable. We may refer for confirmation of our opinion to his “Studies from the Studio” (No. 128) and “More Gleanings from my Portfolio” (No. 356)….”]

Hunt, Robert. “Photographic Exhibitions.” ART JOURNAL 18:2 (Feb. 1856): 49-50. [“The Photographic Society has during the month opened its third Exhibition. Fenton’s Crimean photographs (noticed Art-Journal, October) are now exhibited in Pall-Mall; and Robertson’s photographs, taken after the fall of Sebastopol, are to be seen in Regent Street. The fact, that three exhibitions of sun-drawn pictures are open in the metropolis at the same time, sufficiently proves the growing interest in this beautiful art. The present appears a favourable opportunity for examining the state and prospects of photography — and, with these public exhibitions to refer to,we shall find no difficulty in directing attention to illustrative examples of each point with which we shall have to deal. During the last year or two, there have not been any considerable advances in the science of photography, but the art has been greatly improved. When the discoveries of Daguerre and Talbot were first published to the world, several experimental philosophers seized upon the subject, and their industrious researches were soon rewarded by the development of new and unexpected truths. These directed the way to secure improved sensibility in the photographic agents, and pictures were in a little time produced, in a few seconds, superior in all respects to those which formerly required, often, nearly an hour for their development. Herschel, for example, was the first to point attention to the importance of organic bodies in combination with the salts of silver. He showed that the equilibrium was more readily overturned, and the system of chemical decomposition more rapidly carried forward, when the metallic salt was associated with some of those carbon compounds, which especially possess the power of removing oxygen from substances with which it is associated. A knowledge of this fact led to the use of gallic acid as an accelerating agent, and, although unfortunately the steps are wanting, and we are prevented from tracing the progress of the discovery, we find photographers advancing from the use of paper, to the employment of gelatine and albumen, and eventually to the introduction of that important agent, collodion. Collodion proved so distinguishingly an accelerating power in photography, that almost every other preparation has given way before it. In proof of this the present Photographic Exhibition numbers 606 frames of photographs of various kinds. Of these there are of pictures by the Waxed paper process 64. The Calotype 78. The Daguerreotype 3. The Collodion 461. Total 600. This large majority of collodion pictures is, we believe, mainly referable to the remarkable facility of the process. The preparations required can be purchased ready for use — and it is almost impossible for the veriest amateur to fail of obtaining a picture. We are rather disposed to think that the discovery of the collodion process has had an injurious tendency in stopping enquiry. The pictures obtained are generally so excellent, that little is desired by the photographer beyond the means of ensuring the permanence of his productions. We have had numerous valuable suggestions for the improvement of the collodion process, many of which have been adopted, but no one appears to attempt an advance beyond this. There is no reason why other agents possessing all the advantages of collodion, and some which are yet a desideratum, should not be discovered. It is with some regret that we visited the three exhibitions of the Photographic Society, without discovering, with one exception, any evidence of the study of photography as a science. Amongst the members of the Photographic Society we see the names of men eminent in their especial departments of science; and there are others who, although young, have given evidence of their powers to carry forward original research. Why is it, then, that the exhibition is almost without examples of experimental enquiry? Why is it that the Photographic Journal gives no evidence of the progress of scientific investigation? To produce a picture, the process being given, is excessively easy; any one with industry may succeed in this and even excel; to enquire into the physical and chemical phenomena concerned in the production, is a task demanding much higher powers. There are, however, two frames in the exhibition illustrating — one, the action of the hydrosulphide of ammonia, and the other of the permanganate of potash on finished photographs, which are excellent examples of one line of enquiry. These are by Mr. F. Hardwick, who has carefully investigated many points in the chemistry of photography, and he, in these examples, seeks an elucidation of the conditions under which photographs are found to give way j these demand a careful study. We have on a former occasion devoted an article to the subject of the fading of photographs, and we still hold to our opinion, that a sun-drawn picture may be rendered absolutely unfading under any of the ordinary atmospheric influences, proper care being taken in the manipulation. So much for the condition of photographic science. Now let us look at the art. The third exhibition of the Photographic Society is an exceedingly satisfactory one. We miss the productions of some well-known photographers, but they are replaced by others, differing from the older hands in style, but in no respect inferior to them in general effect. We conceive there is more harmony — more delicacy — throughout the pictures than formerly. The printing processes have been more carefully attended to, and we have less of that hard contrast, of intense shadows with high lights, than formerly. We also see that the art of photography has had the advantage of leading its students to look at nature with a more careful eye than was their wont. The results of the camera obscura have not always been found to be quite agreeable; sometimes the sunshine, or rather the effects, upon the landscape, were offensively brought forward, and violent results not unfrequently marked the photographer’s studies. These defects, however, our more advanced photographic artists have learned to avoid. They now select natural objects under their more favourable aspects; they look at nature with an eye to the impression which her illuminated surface will make on the chemically prepared tablet; and they select those conditions of light and shadow which give a pleasing photographic result. Some of the landscapes, especially those by J. Knight (497, 502), several by J. D. Llewelyn (504, 511, 411, 443, &c.); T. W. Ramsden’s scenes in Yorkshire (533, 545); F. Scott Archer’s views (61, 62); those by W. Pumphrey (127, &c.); the delightful little bits of nature by G. Shadbolt (34, 57, and 58) will, upon careful examination fully confirm our remarks. “Inhaling the Breeze” (58) “breathing from the meadows, As the west wind bows down the long green grass, And the light clouds pass as they were wont to pass, Long time ago”- —  by Mr. Shadbolt, possesses to us an inexpressible charm; there is a quiet poetry, and a fullness of light about the picture which is magical; it is like a picture by Turner, we can almost feel the west wind soft and balmy. Pre-Raphaelites might study this and some other photographs, and learn how the sun paints, disclosing every minute line on trunk and leaf — yet blending all into one — light melting by undulations into shadow, and shade brightening into sunny glow, like the illumination on summer seas. For minute and yet distinct detail of a peculiar kind, charming in its general effect, we would name (557) Ferns and Brambles, by H. White. In one picture by Mr. Archer, and in Bantry Bay (14) by T. Cadby Ponting, we have natural clouds, but we think we have seen more delicate and beautiful copies of “Cloudland” than those. How valuable to the artist would a good series of photographic cloud studies be, since few know how to paint them! There are many fine examples of “Ruined fanes, relics of hood and cowl devotion,” of crumbling castles and tottering mansions, which show the manner in which Time’s effacing fingers produce disintegration of the solid stone. The weather-worn fragment is depicted with every scar upon its face, every channel which the rain drops and the wind has worn. Scenes from Kenilworth (45, 46), Dolamor and Bullock; Ludlow Castle (10), Rev. H. Holder; several portions of Windsor Castle, by A. F. Melhuish; The Choir, Canterbury Cathedral (183), F. Bedford; and some similar productions by V. A. Prout, are excellent studies. Few men could paint as the sun paints; it is not to be desired that they should do so, since the expenditure of time in producing all this wonderful detail would swallow up too much of a man’s life, and it would, we fear, as a final result, produce marvellous mechanism, to the sacrifice of mind. Photography has its uses, — we fear we see its evils, or abuses, in the way in which some of our artists employ the photographic copy of nature, instead of looking at nature with their own eyes, and, mentally fixing some of the ever-varying images which are drawn upon the tablets of those wonderful stereoscopic cameras, the human eyes. Yet many are the lessons, if read aright, which are taught by photography. O. G. Rejlander and Lake Price contribute several artistic studies of a far more ambitious kind than we have hitherto seen. They are all wonderfully clever, but after all they are but the images of actors posed for the occasion; they all want life, expression, passion. Passion they have none, and yet these pictures tell a pleasing tale. The three Subjects (4), by Rejlander, are exceedingly well treated. The Breakfast Table, by Lake Price, is a pretty comfortable English interior, in which all is happiness and peace; let us hope it is the artist’s home. The Wolsey — Charles Kean — (135), by the same photographer, is an exquisite portrait and a fine picture. The Monk (150), also by Mr. Lake Price, and its accompanying studies, are good in their way, but they are dramatic representations; and this applies yet more forcibly to the Scene in the Tower (139), in which the murder of the young princes is the subject. We doubt the propriety of attempting to rival the historical painter. We believe, indeed, that such pictures as those will have a tendency to lower the appreciation of Art in the eyes of the public, and unfit them for receiving the full impression intended by, or of seeing the beauties of, the artist’s production. We do not mean to disparage the works of Mr. Price or of Mr. Rejlander, they are excellent of their kind, but our love of High Art leads us to desire not to see too many of this class of subjects. J. Watson & Co. exhibit an Academic Study (227), and the Broken String (259), which must also be regarded as an artist’s study, and both possess very great merit as such. We have in this Exhibition numerous examples of the applications of the photographic art. A Frame containing four subjects of Cuneiform Inscriptions (201), by Roger Fenton, which are copies of the natural size of clay tablets brought from Nineveh, are wonderfully exact. It would be an almost endless labour to draw these relics of Assyrian story by hand — and here we have every character, by one impulse, faithfully depicted in a few seconds. We have Hindoo Antiquities and Egyptian Bas-relief (210) as other examples of the same class. One of the Engraved pages from the German Edition of the Ars Moriendi, Black Book, date about 1470 (198), Mrs. L. Leigh Sotheby, furnishes another example of important applications of the photographic art. There has been some discussion on the question of copying valuable records, manuscript and printed books. We have seen examples sufficiently numerous to convince us that any of those things cau, under almost any conditions, be faithfully copied by the collodion process. Dr. Diamond has shown the antiquary how excellently well coins can be copied, in the Tray of Admiral Smyth’s Roman Coins (434); and C. Thurston Thompson exhibits the application of the art in copying enamels (585, 594), Art-manufactures (597), and furniture (603). Portraits are numerous, and many of them excellent; we hesitate to particularise, but we must mention Mr. Fenton’s Prince Napoleon (213), and Sir Colin Campbell (195), and Mr. Mayall’s portraits of Sidney Herbert (337); Lord John Russell (338); the late Sir William Molesworth (339); Sir George Grey (371); the Earl of Aberdeen (372), and Sir Cornwall Lewis (373). Thus our heroes and statesmen, as they lived and looked, are preserved to us, and their lineaments handed down to future ages. We think we have said enough to prove that the present exhibition of the Photographic Society is well worthy of close examination. Of the Crimean photographs of Mr. Roger Fenton we have already spoken (Art Journal, October, 1855). Mr. Robertson, chief engraver to the Imperial Mint, Constantinople, has produced an interesting series of views taken in the Crimea after the fall of Sebastopol, which are exhibiting at Mr. Kilburn’s, 222, Regent Street, The sad tale of destruction is here told with strange exactness. The Redan with the breach where the great struggle took place; the Malakoff Tower and Battery, and other celebrated scenes of “bloody strife,” are brought home to us, with fascines and gabions, in confusion thrown, in a manner which no artist could realise. We were especially struck with the Barrack Battery, showing the mantelettes for protecting the Russian gunners. Here, we see the excellent engineering of the Russians; and we learn to appreciate the value of these rope protections (mantelettes) for the gunners from the rifle-balls: these we have heard a competent authority declare to be the crowning invention of the war. Sebastopol and Balaklava, with all the strange confusion which distinguishes both, are before the beholder. The curious may find everything here to gratify them. The locality of each heroic or sad event is chronicled. The geologist may study the rocks of the Crimea without crossing the sea; and the architect the buildings which decorated this fine city. The trenches, the tents, the huts, are respectively represented; and — ” last scene of all this sad eventful tragedy” — we have the English Burial Ground on Cathcart Hill, with the monuments of the brave men who sleep in the embraces of death, but whose memoirs are dear to the country of their birth, where their names will live and kindle heroic life in the souls of those who must preserve the high character of the Briton for courage and honour. Photography has achieved wonders. Let any one visit each of the three exhibitions which we have named, and we feel conscious they will leave them with a full conviction that the Art which has achieved the end of the enchanter’s mirror, and preserved for us, and shown to us, shadows which cannot fade, of persons and of things which are lost us, or at a distance from us, must produce yet greater triumphs with each recurring year. The sun, which gives light and colour, has answered the call of the evocator, and become the painter of the objects which it illuminates. In obedience to the bidding of the philosopher it will give us yet more truthfulness, and show us still nearer approaches to life. R. H.”]

“Town and Table Talk on Literature, Art, &c.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:797 (Sat., May 3, 1856): 475. [“…The biographers describe in very enthusiastic language the beauties of a folio volume of fifty photographs by fifty different hands, and those of eminence, to which Mr. Whittingham, of Chiswick, has attached fifty pages of letterpress of corresponding beauty. The volume is a present to her Majesty, and is one of fifty-two copies of a series of photographs made by members of the Photographic Club — a newly-established club akin to the old Etching Club, and instituted to advance and record the progress of the art of photography. This is their first volume, and most wonderfully does it exhibit the progress which photography has made in England during the past year. Each of the fifty members sends fifty-two impressions of what he considers to be his best photograph with a description of the process used in obtaining it. Fifty copies are distributed among the fifty; the fifty-first is offered to her Majesty, and the fifty-second presented to the British Museum. Very wonderful, indeed, are some of the photographs in this very beautiful volume. We would especially point out as perfect in their truth to nature and adherence to art Mr. Batson’s “Babblecombe bay,” Mr. Henry Taylor’s “Lane Scene,” Mr. Llewellyn’s “Angler,” Mr. Bedford’s “Flowers,” Mr. Delamotte’s “Innocence,” Dr. Diamond’s “Interior of Holyrood,” Mr. Henry Pollock’s “Winsor Castle,” Mr. Mackinlay’s “Bedlham Castle,” Mr. White’s “Garden Chair,” and Mr. John Stewart’s appropriate vignette to the volume — the portrait of Sir John Herschel.”]

“Photographic Societies. Norwich Photographic Society.” JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF LONDON 3:49 (Dec. 22, 1856): 184. [“At the usual monthly meeting held in the Council Chamber on Friday the 5th instant, the president in the chair, three new members were elected. Owing to the absence of Mr. Edwards, who, it was expected, would have read a paper on dry collodion, the proceedings of the meeting were confined to the inspection of several photographs, amongst which some by Mr. Stewart were much admired — more especially some snow scenes taken during the week, which were exceedingly fine. The Society’s exhibition is now open. Nearly 600 photographs are exhibited; all, except about ten or twelve, by British artists — amongst whom are Fenton, White, Sherlock, Cundall, Howlett, Bedford, Turner, Dr. Diamond, and many others of celebrity.”]

1857

[Advertisement.] “Publications.” ATHENAEUM no. 1527 (Jan. 3, 1857): 135. [“This day in a handsome cover.price13s. Part I of The Sunbeam: a Photographic Magazine. Edited by Philip Delamotte, Professor of Drawing. King‘s College. Content: The Woods at Penllegare. Photographed by J. D. Llewelyn, Esq.
The Tournament Court in the Castle of Heidelberg. By Sir Jocelyn Coghill, Bart.
Magdalen College, Oxford, from the Cherwell. By Philip H. DelaMotte, F.S.A.
The Baptistey. Canterbury Cathedral. By James Bedford, Esq.
The Photographs are printed in the best manner, mounted on Cardboard, accompanied by Descriptive Letterpress.
*** Part II, will be ready on March 31.”]

“The Photographic Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:840 (Sat., Jan. 17, 1857): 41. [“…Mr. Bedford has sent but few contributions this year, but, as usual, they are among the best in the room. There are qualities in his views 350, 356, 360, which we never saw surpassed. The wet, glassy look of the stones, the reality of the tumbling water, &c., are all exact transcripts of nature. Many of the photographers may take a hint from the very beautiful way in which Mr. Bedford always prints his pictures.”]

“The Photographic Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:841 (Sat., Jan. 24, 1857): 61. [“Continued from p. 41.” “…Faed’s… Nor can we say much for his landscapes or views of buildings. We see that he and Mr. Harrall have both taken very indifferent “Views of the Baptistry at Canterbury Cathedral,” which was so extremely well done by Mr. Bedford a year ago. Surely their ought to be a delicacy among photographers which should prevent them from taking a particular view selected by another…”]

“Photographic Exhibition.” ART JOURNAL 19:2 (Feb. 1, 1857): 40. [“The Photographic Society has opened its fourth Annual Exhibition; and it is a thing to see, and to talk of after it has been seen. The sun has been made to work after an admirable style, and to tell us many remarkable truths. There we find certain chemical ingredients spread upon paper, developing, under solar influence, into artistic studies, — into regions of cloud-land, — and into water, trees, and rocks. We have wonderful light and shadow, and we can but marvel at the beautiful gradations of tone which this etherial painter has produced. We rejoice in the progress of this delightful Art; and we perceive that the photographer has a power at his command, which will, if tempered with due care, produce yet greater wonders. There are many shortcomings here, and in the friendliest spirit we call attention to them, hoping that they may cease to appear in the next Exhibition. Any man can now take a camera-obscura, and he can, with but little trouble, learn to cover a glass plate with iodized collodion, render it sensitive, and place it in his dark box. He may obtain an image, or images, of external nature; but it does not follow that he will secure a picture. There are many photographs in this Exhibition which are anything but well-chosen subjects, and which have been obtained under badly-selected aspects. There are another class which must be regarded as only accidentally good. We say accidentally good because we see a great want of uniformity in the productions from the same photographer. We think we could point to some pictures, which are the picked result of some twenty trials upon the same object. This should not be; nor need it be if the photographer will patiently study the physics and the chemistry of the agents with which he works. There are many charming pictures, showing peculiar atmospheric effects. We look at those with great pleasure, but with some doubt. It would be most instructive if the photographer would give a clear description of the true atmospheric effect which produced the photographic effects to which we refer. Beautiful as are some of skies, with their heavy and their illuminated clouds — pleasing as are some of the mist-like valleys, and the vapour-capped mountains, — we desire to be assured that the photograph is a true representation of the natural condition of the air and earth at the time the photograph was taken. We cease to value a photographic picture if it is not true. Are the fleecy clouds on the blue empyrean faithfully transferred to the sensitive tablet? Are we not deceived? Did not dull masses of rain-cloud float over the blue of heaven? Were not the heavy cumuli coloured with the golden and the rosy rays of morning, or of evening, when those pictures were taken? Was not nature very bright when the photograph indicates obscurity? Did not a glorious sun flood those hills with yellow light which look so poetically obscure? We know this to be the case with some of the photographs: may it not be more commonly the case than is generally imagined? Again, much has been said about the fading of photographs. It is a sad thing to see so many pictures in this Exhibition which must of necessity fade. This is the more lamentable since we know that a little more care would have rendered them quite permanent. There is no mistake upon this point. The presence of sulphur-salts in the paper is evident, and they are only to be secured now by thoroughly washing and re-mounting them. The committee having charge of the Exhibition would do wisely to reject such photographs as these, for it is most damaging to the Art to find its productions fading out like a shadow. With the Photographic Exhibition it is not necessary to speak of individual works as we would of the productions of the painters. The cases are not parallel: the painter employs, or should employ, eye and hand, governed by a presiding mind, the photographer uses a machine, and requires a little judgment. The artist works from within to that which is without; the photographer employs external agents to do his bidding. A few alone require especial notice. Mr. Rejlander comes with a new and extensive series of compositions, many of them being remarkably clever. We feel, however, in looking at productions of this class, that we are looking at portraits of actors — excellent in their way, but still actors. “Grief and Sorrow,”‘ ” Don’t cry, Mamma! do not impress us with any feelings of sympathy from this want of reality. Many of these studies of Mr. Rejlander are excellent; but they cannot be regarded as works of Art, and, indeed, we should be sorry to see such productions taking place amongst us as works of Art. Mr. Fenton has, as usual, many very beautiful landscapes and truth-telling pictures of time-honoured piles. Mr. Cundall’s portraits of “Crimean Heroes” are a fine and interesting series of portraits; and the portraits of living celebrities — George Cruikshank and Hobson, Professor Owen and Bell, Samuel Warren, Rowland Hill, and others, will command attention. Mr. C. T. Thompson’s copies of prints and drawings, Dr. Diamond’s Portraits of the Insane, Mr. Robertson’s Views of Malta, Mr. Backhouse’s Swiss Scenes, Dr. Braun’s Views of Home, Rev. Mr. Holden’s Old Buildings, are especially commendable for their respective excellences. Mr. De la Motte has been very happy in his Oxford Scenes. Mr. Rosling has produced capital pictures, with more force than usual. Mr. F. Bedford, Mr. Llewellyn, Mr. Gastineau, Dr. Percy, Mr. Spiller, and numerous other well-known ”children of the sun,” have been successful in catching some of the beautiful effects of illumination which give a poetry to nature.”]

“The Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 10:2 (Feb. 1857): 51. [“From the Illustrated London News.” “We are disappointed in the Fourth Exhibition of the Photographic Society. Whether the great Sun, to whom Photographers bow down, has behaved unkindly to his worshipers during the past year, or whether the hot enthusiasm of the professionals and amateurs has begun to cool, we are unable to decide, but certain it is that, looking at the evidence before us, this new art has not progressed in England one step since our visit to the Water-Color Gallery at this time last year. We miss, too, the names of many of the old exhibitors. What have Mr. Lake Price, Mr. Henry Leverett or Mr. Hennah been doing that they cannot contribute a single picture? Even the venerable Knight, Sir W. Newton, who rejoices in pictures “out of focus,” has not sent his portraits of trees; nor has Mr. Claudet added his usual colored stereoscopic pictures of fair Indies. To make amends, however, that Crimean hero, Mr. Fenton, covers the walls with large, bold, and well-chosen pictures from Scotland and the north of England; but we regret to say that, as photographs, we consider them to be far inferior to his pictures of “Bolten” and “Rievaulx Abbey,” exhibited two years since — one of which we have engraved. It was suggested to us that his pictures this year look as if a thin sheet of gauze were laid over them, so faint is the general effect, and so wanting are they in that vigor which every good photograph from nature should possess. Of Mr. Fenton’s contributions we like best his 102, 115; but we have not a word to say for such flat and unprofitable things as 156, 420, 306. Mr. Henry White, too, usually a most careful and successful practitioner of the art, has this year failed in impressing us with any favorable sensation. His pictures are much less brilliant than usual. Some of the subjects are too commonplace and ill chosen, such as No. 633; but we cannot pass by Nos. 319 and 617 without drawing attention to the foliage of the clematis, the honeysuckle, and rose, which is here better rendered than in any picture we have before noticed. Mr. Philip Delamotte sends this year a series of beautiful little views of Oxford. One of the chief recommendation of Mr. Delamotte’s works is that his points of view are always well selected, he seems to possess an educated eye that at once rejects those combinations which are so painful to men of taste, but which never give one moment’s uneasiness to those photographers who rejoice in the minute detail to be found in brick walls, or in the excellent portraits of individuals who are seen standing in the foreground in various attitudes much more natural than artistic, and who are always staring vigorously at the camera. Whenever Mr. Delamotte introduces figures it is with propriety, and as an aid to the general effect; but we notice that he very rarely has recourse to this assistance, and we can readily imagine that it is from the great difficulty he finds in getting people in easy attitudes. The moment a man is asked to stand still that he may be included in a picture he almost invariably assumes some ungainly and constrained position, and all ease seems to have forsaken him; directly he is told that he may move he becomes himself again. We recommend this curious fact to the notice of psychologists, and if they can tell photographers how to get over the difficulty they will do a great service. On one of the screens is a large frame containing some twenty or more stereoscopic views of the Colleges at Oxford, by Mr. Delamotte, which are undoubtedly the prettiest things of the kind ever done. Mr. Thurston Thompson’s copies of drawings by Raphael and Holbein are perhaps the most valuable reproductions ever effected by photography — no other art can give such exact copies as these are — to every intent they are equal to the originals; and when we see how beautiful Mr. Thompson has done his work — and there is nothing in photography more difficult — we do not wonder that he is afforded access to the Royal Collection, the Louvre, and the Oxford Museum. His copy of the large enamel by Leonard Limousin, in the Louvre, is very find. [sic fine.] It is taken on several different negatives, and he has managed to print from them, and join them in such a way that a casual observer would imagine the whole was printed from one glass. Mr. Llewlyn’s pictures this year are not so good as usual. They have the same fault as Mr. Fenton’s. They are not bright and sparkling as we are accustomed to see his landscapes. His best is a “Gipsy Encampment” — a pleasing photograph; but the truthful art tells us they are not real gipsies. He exhibits a little picture; “The Forest Scene” (582), by the oxyimel process, which is a perfect gem. Messrs. Bullock and Delamore’s large pictures are some of them very excellent; especially the “Views of Rydal Water” I (237, 239, and 247); but then “Wells Cathedral” and “Glastonbury Abbey” are not up to the mark. Mr. Bedford has sent but few contributions this year; but as usual, they are among the best in the room. There are qualities in his views 350, 356, 360, which we never saw surpassed, The wet, glassy look of the stones, the reality of the tumbling water, &c., are all exact transcripts of nature. Many of the photographers may take a hint from the very beautiful way in which Mr. Bedford always prints his pictures.”]

“New Publications.” ATHENAEUM no. 1529 (Feb. 14, 1857): 218. [“Book review: The Sunbeam: A Photographic Magazine, edited by Philip H. DelaMotte. no. 1. (Chapman & Hall). 4 illus, by J. D. Llewellyn, Sir Jocelyn Coghill, P. H. DelaMotte, and F. Bedford. “The first number of this magazine contains four illustrations: — -‘The Woods at Penllegare,’ by Llewellyn; ‘The Tournament Court in the Castle of Heidelberg,’ by Sir Jocelyn Coghill; ‘Magdalen College, from the Cherwell,’ by P. H. DelaMotte; and ‘The Baptistry, Canterbury Cathedral,‘ by J. [sic F.] Bedford. Imperfect in parts, dun, black, spotty, blotted, or in some way halt and lame, each of these photographs has some peculiar beauty and witchery of its own. In the woods we see effects quite unattempted yet in Art. A rude tramway through a covert, the rails dark against the light road, the strong mottled boughs stretching out like the defiant arms and weapons of the wood giants, the mailed trunks, scaled like snakes’ backs, the slender rods of the ivy, the fret and tangle of the paths, and the leafless rigging of the lesser boughs, delight us like a poem. — Then comes Heidelberg, sweet ruin of the Neckar, the old home of the Palatine, where the wind murmurs dirges through the rents and rifts that Time’s blows, which no one can parry, have made. This is the Tournament Court of Philip the Sincere — rare title of kings, or for that matter, dukes. Look at the gaping hollows now under the grated windows, the roofless tower, the displaced pediment, the unthroned gable. No longer we hear bray of trump and clang of horse, but instead readings of the Red Book and loud execrations of German hotels. To the view of Magdalen College, a view of quiet picture, Mr. DelaMotte has appended a portion of a late review of ours, and quoted it as an extract from Shaw’s ‘Arms of the Colleges of Oxford’! — The Baptistry is the best view in the book. It is a strange erection, of nobody knows what use. It has a cupola roof, and is usually called the Bell Jesus, from a tradition of its having been erected in memory of an old cathedral bell of the same size lost at sea on its way home from a foreign foundry. Thick bushes of ivy brow it over and shade its toothed open arches and blocked-up windows. It stands in a garden, where tall, melancholy flowers, sadly gay, flout the old arches and the storied panes. The trees press against it with their rough boughs; and nature seems, in fact, as if trying to grow over and extinguish the dead mass of old religion and old art. Young, fresh, parvenu nature, with its wealth of leaves and grass, is eminently reforming and progressive, and does not like the stolid toryism of old abbeys and old keeps.”]

“The Photographic Exhibition.” JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF LONDON 3:51 (Feb. 21, 1857): 213-217. [“…The Welsh views of Mr. F. Bedford are most choice. ‘Aberglaslyn’ is one of the best; and to rival him comes Mr. Gething with his ‘Seven small Views in Wales.’ Mr. H. White’s ‘Cornfield’ is the whole book of Ruth in miniature. The eyes revel in the receding corn-stooks, those triumphal trophies of autumn, and in the broad vale of the covert in the background, so leafy, and suggestive of song and united melody….”]

“Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 10:3 (Mar. 1857): 71-72. [“From the London Art-Journal.” (4th Annual Exhibition of the Photographic Society.) “The Photographic Society has opened its fourth Annual Exhibition; and it is a thing to see, and to talk of after it has been seen. The sun has been made to work after an admirable style, and to tell us many remarkable truths. There we find certain chemical ingredients spread upon paper, developing, under solar influence, into artistic studies, — into regions of cloud-land, — and into water, trees, and rocks. We have wonderful light and shadow, and we can but marvel at the beautiful gradations of tone which this ethereal painter has produced. We rejoice in the progress of this delightful Art, and we perceive that the photographer has a power at his command, which will, if tempered with due care, produce yet greater wonders. There are many short-comings here, and in the friendliest spirit we call attention to them, hoping that they may cease to appear in the next Exhibition. Any man can now take a camera-obscura, and he can, with but little trouble, learn to cover a glass plate with iodized collodion, render it sensitive, and place it in his dark box, He may obtain an image, or images, of external nature; but it does not follow that he will secure a picture. There are many photographs in this Exhibition which are anything but well-chosen subjects, and which have been obtained under badly-selected aspects. There are another class which must be regarded as only accidentally good. We say accidentally good because we see a great want of uniformity in the productions from the same photographer. We think we could point to some pictures, which are the picked result of some twenty trials upon the same object. This should not be; nor need it be if the photographer will patiently study the physics and the chemistry of the agents with which he works. There are many charming pictures, showing peculiar atmospheric effects. We look at those with great pleasure, but with some doubt. It would be most instructive if the photographer would give a clear description of the true atmospheric effect which produced the photographic effects to which we refer. Beautiful as are some of the skies, with their heavy and their illumined clouds — pleasing as some of the mist-like valleys, and the vapor-capped mountains, — we desire to be assured that the photograph is a true representation of the natural condition of the air and earth at the time the photograph was taken. We refuse to value a photographic picture if it is [sic not] true. Are the fleecy clouds on the blue empyrean faithfully transferred to the sensitive tablet? Are we not deceived? Did not dull masses of rain-cloud float over the blue of heaven? Were not the heavy cumuli colored with the golden and the rosy rays of morning, or evening, when those pictures were taken? Was not nature very bright when the photograph indicates obscurity? Did not a glorious sun flood those hills with yellow light which looks so poetically obscure? We know this to be the case with some of the photographs: may it not be more commonly the case than is generally imagined? Again, much has been said about the fading of photographs. It is a sad thing to see so many pictures in this Exhibition which must of necessity fade. This is the more lamentable since we know that a little more care would have rendered them quite permanent. There is no mistake upon this point. The presence of sulphur-salts in the paper is evident, and they are only to be secured now by thoroughly washing and remounting them. The committee having charge of the Exhibition would do wisely to reject such photographs as these, for it is most damaging to the Art to find its productions fading out like a shadow. With the Photographic Exhibition it is not necessary to speak of individual works as we would of the productions of the painters. The cases are not parallel: the painter employs, or should employ, eye and hand governed by a presiding mind, the photographer uses a machine, and requires a little judgment. The artist works from within to that which is without; the photographer employs external agents to do his bidding. A few alone require especial notice. Mr. Rejlander comes with a new and extensive series of compositions, many of them being remarkably clever. We feel, however, in looking at productions of this class, that we are looking at portraits of actors — excellent in their way, but still actors. “Grief and Sorrow,” “Dont cry Mamma,” do not impress us with any feelings of sympathy from this want of reality. Many of these studies of Mr. Rejlander are excellent; but they cannot be regarded as works of Art, and, indeed, we should be sorry to see such productions taking place amongst us as works of Art. Mr. Fenton has, as usual, many very beautiful landscapes and truth-telling pictures of time humored [sic honored] piles. Mr. Cundall’s portraits of “Crimean Heroes” are a good and interesting series of portraits; and the portraits of living celebrities — George Cruikshank and Robson, Professor Owen and Bell, Samuel Warren, Rowland Hill, and others, will command attention. Mr. C. T. Thompson’s copies of prints and drawings, Dr. Diamond’s portraits of the Insane, Mr. Robertson’s Views of Malta, Mr. Backhouse’s Swiss Scenes, Dr. Braun’s Views of Rome, Rev. Mr. Holden’s Old Buildings, are especially commendable for their respective excellencies. Mr. De la Motte has been very happy in his Oxford Scenes. Mr. Rosling has produced capital pictures, with more force than usual. Mr. F. Bedford. Mr. Llewellyn, Mr. Gastineau, Dr. Percy, Mr. Spiller, and numerous other well-known “children of the sun,” have been successful in catching some of the beautiful effects of illumination which give a poetry to nature.”]

“Note.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 3:52. (Mar. 21, 1857): 232. [“The first Number of the long-promised Sun Beam, edited by Professor Delamotte, has lately reached us, with which we are much pleased. The letter-press and the whole getting-up are in admirable taste; and the names of the contributors to this Number (comprising Mr. Llewelyn, Sir Jocelyn Coghill, Mr. Bedford, and Professor Delamotte himself) are a guarantee that the pictures are the best of their class. Comparison would be unfair where each picture illustrates a peculiar and separate style and subject, but we think that no judge of photography would grudge the price, if no more were contained within the wrapper than Mr. Bedford’s perfect picture of the Baptistery at Canterbury.”]

[“Advertisement.”] ATHENAEUM no. 1536 (Apr. 4, 1857): 423. [“Photography. — Now on Sale, an extensive assortment of the finest English and Foreign Photographs, by Taylor, Bedford, Delamore, and Bullock: Bisson, Bilordeaux, Balders,and other eminent artists; consisting of Views of Cathedrals, Buildings, Architectural Details, Statuary, Landscapes, &. &. Le Gray’s wonderful Photographs of the Sea and clouds. A varied Collection of stereoscopic slides of English, Scotch, French, German, Italian, and Swiss Scenery, Figure Subjects and Statuary, &. A newly invented and improved Stereoscope. — – H. Hering (late Hering & Remington), Photographer, Printseller, and Publisher, 137, Regent-street, London.”]

“Fine Arts.” ATHENAEUM no. 1536 (Apr. 4, 1857): 441-442. [Book review. The Grammar of Ornament. By Owen Jones. Illustrated by Examples from Various Styles of Ornament. One Hundred Folio Plates, drawn on Stone by F. Bedford, and printed in Colours by Day &Son. (Day &Sons.) “’The Grammar of Ornament’ is beautiful enough to be the horn-book of angels. From the blue marks on the skull of the bygone savage to all the designs treasured in the head of Mr. Owen Jones himself — still well and hearty — we have records in this volume. Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, Roman, Byzantine, Arabian, Persian, Hindoo, Chinese, Celtic, Italian: — he extracts glories from them all, and ends by original designs, based on the severest truth of nature. The wild bramble leaf, the chestnut’s fan, the honeysuckle‘s ringlets, all teach us to invent, to re-arrange, and not to copy. Mr. Owen Jones wishes to be the lawgiver of ornamental Art, — – and we see no reason why he should not be…”]

“Miscellanea. The Archer Testimonial.” CHEMIST: A MONTHLY JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL & PHYSICAL SCIENCE n. s. 4:45 (June 1857): 572-576. [”…The above circular states the case so ably, that we have thought that we could not do better than insert it here. We have now earnestly to call upon our readers to subscribe liberally to this fund. The readers of The Chemist constitute a very large body of the most eminent men of science in the kingdom, as well as of the largest manufacturers — men who can well afford to contribute handsomely towards a provision for the unprovided wife and children of a departed brother; and we call upon them to come forward, and show by their subscriptions that the bereaved family of a man who had the nobleness of mind to bestow on the world the great discovery by which, had he patented it, he must speedily have realised a handsome fortune, may safely be left to the generous care of those who follow science, whether as a profession or as applied to the arts. Let every one give according to his ability, and at once…” “…. As a tribute of respect to departed worth, and of deep sympathy with the cause of the fatherless and widow, the following gentlemen have undertaken the duties of a committee, to receive subscriptions, and carry, out in its fullest integrity, the object of this testimonial. Committee. — Herbert Ingram, Esq., M.P.; Dr. John Diamond; Jabez Hogg, Esq.; P. Le Neve Foster, Esq.; George De Morgan, Esq.; Dr. Hyde Salter; Henry Pollock, Esq.; Robert Hunt, Esq., F.R.S.; J. E. Mayall, Esq; T. Fred. Hardwich, Esq.; Nathaniel Machin, Esq.; A. Sweeting, Esq. Treasurers. — Sir William Newton and Roger Fenton, Esq. Hon. Secretaries. — professor Delamotte and Professor Goodeve. The following Bankers have very kindly consented to receive Subscriptions. — The London And Westminster Bank and The Union Bank Of London (Argyll Place).  List of Subscriptions. Her Majesty The Queen. £20 0s. 0d. The Council of the Photographic Society. £50 0s. 0d. … (This is followed by a list of approximately 80 subscribers, ranging from J. E. Mayall (£21) and Antoine Claudet (£10 10s.) to C. J. Slater (3s.). The list includes Dr. Diamond, Prout, Llewellyn, W. J. Newton, Hardwich, Malone, Shadbolt, Delamotte, Lake Price, Fenton, Sedgwick, Bedford, Johnson, Howlett and others.)]

“The Great Manchester Exhibition.” ALBION, A JOURNAL OF NEWS, POLITICS AND LITERATURE 35:24 (June 13, 1857): 286. [“The Photographers have a snug nook in the gallery, all by their wonderful selves. To review them in detail would be merely to repeat our remarks of the last exhibition in London, there being nothing but a six foot view of glaciers and and Alp peaks peculiarly astonishing as a Novelty, … Mr. Thurston Thompson contributes a long series of careful copies of Raphael’s drawings… Mr. Fenton is great in distances and rough stone gateways. Mr. Claudet is great in portraiture,… Dr. Diamond’s studies of the insane excite deep wonder… Messrs. Bisson are grand in their architectural views… Mr. Watkins admirable in his touched portraits…. Mr. Taylor’s studies of the tangles of plants astonish nature… Messrs. Dolamore and Bullock …Kenilworth studies… Bedford’s Welsh views… White’s rustic bits are matchless….”]

“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL 19:8 (Aug. 1857): 263. [Magazine review. The Sunbeam, A Photographic Magazine. Nos. I. & II. Edited by P. H. Delamotte, F.S.A. Published by Chapman & Hall, London. “Mr. Delamotte has given a most appropriate title to his published sun-pictures, when he calls his work the “Sunbeam;” but to speak of it as a “Magazine,” is surely a misnomer, according to the ordinary acceptation of the meaning of the word, which we believe is generally understood as a miscellaneous pamphlet containing original contributions in prose and verse, with or without illustrations of the text. But here the text is, in several instances, quotations selected to suit the pictures. However, we will not run a tilt with the editor upon a point not of any great importance in itself, and certainly of no value at all as regards the “Art” of his publication. Each part contains four subjects. The first number commences with “The Woods at Penllergare,” photographed by J. D. Llewelyn — a close, umbrageous scene, so thick that the “sunbeams” seem scarcely able to penetrate into its recesses; but they fall forcibly on the trunk of a large tree to the left of the picture, and on a rustic bridge that intersects it in the foreground; all else is in comparatively indistinct masses. “The Tournament Court, in the Castle of Heidelberg,” photographed by Sir Jocelyn Coghill, Bart., is very beautiful; the architecture of the old edifice comes out sharp and clear in its details; trees, ivy, and long grasses, are defined in all the delicacy of their sprays, leaves, and long tender blades. “Magdalen College, Oxford, from the Cherwell,” by P. H. Delamotte, is a very brilliant picture; it makes one feel hot to look at it: marvellous are the lights and shadows that stand opposed to each other. “The Baptistry, Canterbury Cathedral,” photographed by F. Bedford, is less vivid, but very striking: the dark trees and shrubs in the foreground contrast effectively with the light thrown on the buildings, which retain all the indications of venerable years, except weakness: the only sign of decay is on their wrinkled fronts. The first subject in Part II. is “The Old Bridge at Fountain’s Abbey,” by Dr. Holden: this is an extraordinary sun-picture, taken, it may be presumed, at a late season of the year, for the’ branches of some of the trees are denuded of their coverings, leaving the minutest spray in clear and sharp relief against the sky. How admirably the whole scene composes itself into a picture! what adjustment and balance of parts to each other! There is throughout not an object too much or too little; nothing that the most skilful artist would omit, and nothing that lie would introduce to supply a vacuum, or to aid the effect: had it been possible to lower the shadows on the bridge, it would have made the work a little less heavy, without lessening its powerful chiar1-oscuro. “Sunshine and Shade,” photographed by F. R. Pickersgill, A.R.A., is the title given to two figures, a lady and a gentleman, the former standing, the latter in the act of reading, in the open air under a hedge: the photographer has evidently placed his figures in position, and very pictorially they are arranged, and with wonderful truth are they made to appear. we know not whether Mr. Pickersgill’s title has a meaning beyond the mere expression of the sunshine and shade of nature, but certainly the face of the lady is not lighted up with sunny smiles: this is the only ” shadow” that casts a real gloom over this exquisite picture. “Cottages at Aberglaslyn,” by F. Bedford, is not a well-chosen subject: parts of it are rendered with undoubted fidelity, but, as a whole, it does not come well together, to speak artistically. “The young Audubon,” by H. Taylor, is a fanciful title given to a wood scene — the idea suggested by a young rustic, who is standing by a stile, contemplating, it may be presumed, some birds in the trees over his head; this is a beautiful photograph, delicate in colour, in gradation of tints, and in the expression of the minutest object that enters into the subject. Among the multitude of photographic works now coming before the public, the ” Sunbeam,” if continued as it has been commenced, must take a foremost place: the subjects, generally, are as well selected as they are varied, and certainly the camera of the photographer has never produced more satisfactory nor more exquisite results.”]

“Exhibition of Art Treasures at Manchester.” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 10:9 (Sept. 1857): 285-286. [“From the Liverpool Photo. J.” “It has always been esteemed a great advantage to the tourist, whether he journey through the beauteous regions of nature, or ramble among the inestimable treasures of art; whether he turn aside to contemplate the ancient reliques of times gone by, of to examine the triumphs of modern engineering skill, that the memory should be assisted by some means within his grasp. A portfolio of engravings, a wallet of fragments selected by himself (oft-times to the great detriment of the object of his visit), are of themselves great and useful adjuncts to the tablets of memory, on which with a pen of a writer more or less ready, every one writes to some extent. These things are not to be valued according to the simple standard of what they will fetch, if offered to competition, but are enhanced in worth by the associations which connect themselves inseparably with the objects or places visited, and which value, somewhat selfishly can only obtain in the possessor’s own mind. But when a traveller can by simple chemical appliances reproduce, not only to his own, but to the eyes of every one, the actual scene in which his delight was aroused, and in a great measure excite the same pleasurable feelings in others which he experienced himself, it must be clear that the benefit becomes infinately less selfish, and its extent is only confined by the limits of reproduction. Now photography is a combination of these contrivances; the ingenuity of many minds has arranged means, which if rightly made use of, can extend our most treasured reminiscences to those around us, and at the same time may increase our own enjoyment. But the photographer needs warning; it is not sufficient that a subject represented shall be so in a merely matter of fact manner. But its aspect must be favorable. A painting of Vesuvius without the usual concomitants of an eruption as detailed by Pliny, or the picturesque pine tree-like cloud which usually precedes it — a view of Niagara without a rainbow, would be to many people uninteresting; it would not certainly sustain our view of the matter, if we presented subjects like these without the accompaniments, simply because when we visited them they were absent. It is therefore incumbent on our photographic friends that they choose the most favorable conditions of which they can possibly avail themselves, and in this we are only seconding the opinion of a writer in the leader of the last number of this Journal. This idea is one which will hardly fail to occur to a visitor to this exhibition; for without some conceptions not necessarily suggested by the scenes themselves, many of the artists would have quite fallen short of our standard of excellence. The department of photography which we propose at this time to notice, commences with the Falls of Niagara (Nos. 110 and 140); these are interesting as the work of an American artist, whose name is not known to us, and still more so as faithful representations of a scene which has long been regarded at one of nature’s most marvellous masterpieces. We next notice two Alpine scenes, by Martens (142), “Glacier du Rhone” and (138) “Monte Rosa;” and, viewing pictures of these and similar scenery, we cannot fail to be struck with astonishment at the results obtained. We have not hitherto been favored with any account of Alpine photography; but, comparing great things with small, we are sure, from impediments which beset the Iess ambitious artist, that the difficulties of these higher regions must be immense, They are mostly of an altitude which is unattainable in this country. That of the Finsterhorn, exhibited by Prince Albert, is an immense height above the level of the sea. While speaking of the region of everlasting snow, we may mention, as fine specimens of photography, Matterhorn (184), by Mr. De la Motte; La Mont Cervin (231), Fluhlen, with fine cliffs in the background (261), Lucerne (272), with a somewhat spotty sky, by Martens; Glaciers (355); (359) the Mer de Glace, is a fine picture, though somewhat indistinct in parts; (216); Monte Rosahas, an atmospheric effect of distance quite illusive, exhibited by Murray and Heath. Messrs. Delamore and Bullock’s contributions rank amongst the first of their class, both as favorably chosen scenes and excellent specimens of photographic printing, being characterized by a decisive clearness which is not often excelled; and the productions of Mr. Bedford bear also the same marks. Of the former may the mentioned Rydal Fall (179) with capital transparent water. Aber, N. Wales (183); Coast Scene (200); the latter is a capital study for a geologist; (291) a mill, at Ambleside, is an example of photography much more agreeably told than in 258; (207), Stock Ghyll Force, a favorite scene; also (193), on the same stream (198), a frame containing four landscapes — Hamstead Heath — evidently taken quickly, so that we almost might expect to find images of rabbits emerging from the brake in the foreground of No. 1. (220) Rydal Church is not so successful, but is interesting, as a spot sacred to the memory of the best of the lake poets. (217), Lyulph’s Tower — we think a view from the west would have been preferable; (232) Rydal Water, another favorite spot. (238) Glastonbury Abbey, (245) Ulleswater (347) Conway Castle, (502) On the Rothay. By the latter artist are a fine view of Pont Aberglashyn (222) and (281) (286), a Gateway at Canterbury, and (320) the Baptistery of the Cathedral of that City. (364) (366), and (368), Welsh Landscapes, which for fine definition may be registered as very beautiful specimens; (510) and (514) are other fine views at Canterbury. There are some good studies of trees, marked T. Bedford. The same artist, we presume. (226) Fir Trees, (325) Plants (182) Pont du Diable, by Mr. Delamotte, is almost stereoscopic, and this gentleman’s pictures are all to be well spoken of. There are (188) Lausanne, which we rather suspect of painted clouds, (288) Highstreet, Oxford, much superior to his stereoscopic views of that city. The visitor should compare this with No. 138, in the Water Color Gallery, a drawing by Mr. A. Pugin. While speaking of Mr. Delamotte, we wish to call attention to his series of Recollections of the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition, of which honorable mention may be made. If well printed, every local photographer ought to possess a portfolio of these. Mr. White’s pictures are all good photographs. We wish we could say as much for his prints, some of which we have noticed to be in a state of deterioration from fading. He shows a first-rate view of a Watermill (199). The Decoy (189), Studies from Life (178) and (244); also (373), a Tale of the Crimea — these three have all the same back-ground of foliage, which is very good. In (228) Wotton House, we think he has attempted too much in endeavoring to show the whole precincts of Mr. Evelyn’s house; the print is of an unpleasant color, not usual with this artist. Mr. Fenton’s pictures may be identified anywhere; they are almost to be distinguished as well from any other artist’s as a Rembrandt would be in a collection of Claudes or Poussins, An extensive sweep of scenery such as (187) Reach of the Dee, a characteristic bit of ancient architecture, as (205) Roslin Chapel, a picturesque mill (217), a Waterfall (500),a River’s Bed (508), the Garravalt, (518) a romantic Bridge — all these are excellent examples of photography on a large scale, and some in which a degree of ingenuity in obtaining a position must have been required. Mr. Llewellyn sends some very good pictures, and of them may be very favorably contrasted with others. His views of Penellgare (371, 512, 516) are much superior to No. 566 of the same by Mr. Knight, and to 305, by Mr. Delamotte. Mr. Llewellyn’s “On the Tees,” is a very good study of rocks scattered about in a rapid stream. We think 365 and 369, “On the Warf” and “Tenby Bay,” must be early attempts of this artist. The comparisons between the different views of Penellgare will afford good illustrations of our opening remarks.”]

“List of New Works. American. English.” AMERICAN PUBLISHERS’ CIRCULAR AND LITERARY GAZETTE 3:36 (Sept. 5, 1857): 564-565. [Book notice. The Treasury of Ornamental Art: Illustrations of Objects of Art and Virtu. Photographed from the Original by F. Bedford and Drawn on Stone by J. C. Robinson. Royal 8vo. 73s. 6d.]

Theta. “Manchester Exhibition. Art-Treasures’ Exhibition, Manchester. Photographic Department.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL: THE JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY 4:58 (Sept. 21, 1857): 45-47. [“In this short notice of the Photographic Department of the Art-Treasures’ Exhibition, I only purpose giving a criticism upon the Landscape and Miscellaneous portion, as I look upon Portraiture almost as a distinct art. And, perhaps, a better idea of the adaptation of Photography to different branches of Art will be gained by classing the works according to their subjects, as follows: — 1. Studies from Life, Landscapes, and Architecture. 2. Statuary, Porcelain, and Still-life. 3. Copies of Paintings, Engravings, &c. 4. Stereoscopic. In the First Class, the most ambitious are the studies of Rejlander, of which No. 65, ‘Two Ways of Life,’ is the largest. As this is so well known, it needs very little criticism: the picture is well arranged, yet the figures are not perfection; and though it may be the best of its class, it cannot yet compete with the figure painter….” [(Rejlander, Grundy, Lake Price, A. Brothers, Martens, Batson, Llewelyn, Wilson, Delamotte, Delamore & Bullock, White, Le Gray, Fenton, Mudd, Bedford, H. Taylor, Bisson Freres, Dr. Golden, H. M. Page, W. S. Ward, B. B. Turner, Sir J. Coghill, Dr. Becker, Leverett, Goodman, Robertson, Dr. Diamond all briefly discussed.)
“… Of Bedford’s works it is difficult to make a selection, as all are so very artistic and perfect in tone, distinctness, and light and shade: certainly his works must raise the art in popularity. If Pictures can be perfect in black and white only, we need go no farther than these. No. 222, ‘Pout Aberglaslyn;’ No. 226, ‘ Fir-trees;’ No. 227, ‘Rivaulx Abbey;’ No. 286, ‘Gateway, Canterbury,’ and his ‘Welsh Landscapes,’ will, I think, justify the above remarks. In No. 320, ‘The Baptistery, Canterbury,’ the appearance of the foliage combined with the architecture is exquisitely beautiful. If he uses, as I suppose, the common collodion process, what an illustration of the truth that manipulation is less than taste in photography; and that a man must be an artist to get good results!…”]

“Architectural Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL: THE JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.4:59 (Oct. 21, 1857): 52. [“This Society, only established in May last, has met with such warm support both in the Architectural and Engineering professions, and from the Public, that it is even now taking a prominent place in the field of Art. It numbers already between 500 and 600 subscribers of One Guinea and upwards per annum, and the Committee have been enabled to enter into such arrangements with the most eminent Photographic artists both in our own country and on the Continent, as to ensure the formation of probably the largest collection of Architectural Photographs yet brought together. It is intended that the Photographs shall be exhibited in the beginning of December next, and that Members shall have free admission, when they will have an opportunity of choosing such subjects as shall best please them. By this arrangement not only will every one be enabled to select his prints of the styles which he prefers, but the annoyance will be avoided of finding that every other subscriber has the same as himself, — those perhaps selected by one having tastes and associations totally different from his own. “We have seen in the possession of the Association prints by Bedford and others illustrating the beautiful and chaste Mediaeval Architecture of our own country; by Robertson and Beale, of the ancient Architecture of Athens and Greece, and of the remarkable Byzantine and Saracenic Architecture of Constantinople and Turkey; Bisson, Baldus, and others will contribute numerous specimens of the Architecture of France, Belgium, &c.: Alinari and others of Italy; and for other countries arrangements are nearly complete. It would be premature to do more than mention the certainty of the operations of the Association being extended into India, China, and other countries of Asia; but as the warm cooperation of several Public Departments is being afforded towards this National project for promoting Art-education, and the extension of the love of Architecture amongst all classes of the community, we may safely rely upon the Association becoming worthy of the large support which is being accorded to it, and we recommend our readers to enable it at once to take up the position which it ought to fill, by becoming early subscribers….”]

“New Publications.” ATHENAEUM no. 1571 (Dec. 5, 1857): 1522. [Review. “Modern Statues.” Lithographed by Bedford. (Day & Son.) Mr. Wyatt’s ‘ Ino and Bacchus,’ Schuler’s ‘Adam and Eve,’ Mr. Marshall’s ‘Ophelia,‘ deserve better treatment than this. In our days such rough, black-leaded abnormals are to good, clear classical outlines what the Italians spotted casts are to Baily’s ‘Eve at the Fountain.’”]

“Photographic Society. Ordinary Meeting. December 3, 1857.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL: THE JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY 4:61 (Dec. 21, 1857): 101-102. [“. Dr. Percy, F.R.S., Vice-President, in the Chair….” “…The Secretary announced that at the next Annual Meeting in February the following Gentlemen would retire from the Council, in accordance with Law VII.: — Dr. Becker, Earl of Craven, F. H. Wenham, Esq., T. G. Mackinlay, Esq., Sir T. M. Wilson; and that the Council nominated in their stead — The Rev. J. Barlow, F. Bedford, Esq., M. Marshall, Esq., N. S. Maskelyne, Esq., F. H. Wenham, Esq…”]

1858

“Photographic Society. Annual General Meeting. Tuesday, 2nd February, 1858.” JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF LONDON 4:63 (Feb. 22, 1858): 154-159. [“…The Chairman announced that the Scrutineers had reported that the President and Treasurer had been re-elected; that Mr. Fenton had been appointed a Vice-President in the room of Sir W. Newton; and that the following gentlemen had been elected into the Council: Rev. J. Barlow. F. Bedford, Esq . M. Marshall, Esq. N. S. Maskelyne, Esq.,* [*In the place of Dr. Becker, Earl of Craven, T. G. Mackinlay, Esq., Sir T. M. Wilson.] F. H. Wenham, Esq.* [*Re-elected….”]

“Fine Arts. Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:905 (Sat., Feb. 27, 1858): 219. [“The fifth annual exhibition of the Photographic Society shows that considerable progress is making in the art; and offers, besides, some noteworthy features. In the first place, however, we must congratulate the society upon the very spacious, handsome, and well-lighted rooms to which they have been admitted in the South Kensington Museum. The situation is a little far from the general run of sight-seeing business; and this, to a certain extent, is a disadvantage; but to real lovers of art this drawback is fully compensated by the admirable view they may now succeed in obtaining of a class of works which, beyond many others, stand in need of a good, full, clear light. A most interesting circumstance in the progress and application of photography is its introduction into the Corps of Engineers, and the important use which has already been made of it, under Col.James, R.E., the Director of the Ordnance Survey, in making reductions of the various maps and plans required in that work. The money value of this application of the art may be judged of from the fact that in this item alone a saving will be effected to the country of not less than £30,000. This, however, has not been the only manner in which photography has been brought into public use under the authority of the Government. Photographers have been attached to military and other services employed in India, the Colonies, and other parts abroad where works of interest are going forward, with instructions to send periodical photographs of the progress of those works; as well as of other objects, either valuable in a professional point of view, or interesting as illustrations of history, natural history, antiquities, &c. The first results of this new enterprise are now before us in photographs of maps and plans made under the Ordinance Department, and a variety of subjects from all parts of the world; and a most interesting collection they form. Amongst the contributions from abroad are views in Moscow and St. Petersburg by Sergeant J. Mack, R.E., who accompanied the Embassy Extraordinary at the late Coronation; a series of photographs by Corporal B. Spackman, transmitted by Lieut. Smith, commanding the party of Royal Engineers attached to the expedition now exploring the ruins of ancient Halicarnassus, in the island of Mytilene; and views taken at Singapore by Corporal J. Milliken, of the23rd company of Royal Engineers, now en route to India. We may expect shortly to receive contributions from the actuals seat of hostilities in India and China, a photographic staff having been sent to head-quarters in both those parts of the world. In the general collection of photographs we are struck with the admirable use made of the art in reproducing drawings and engravings of acknowledged merit, particularly those of the old masters, some of which are of high price, and invaluable as a means of study. For instance, Mr. Robert Howlett produces (26) a marvellous facsimile of an etching by Rembrandt; Messrs. Caldesi and Montecchi, a fine translation of Raphael’s “St. Catharine’’ (32), after a copy by Mr. Stohl; and a translated copy of Michael Angelo’s sublime “Holy Family,” exhibited at the Manchester Art-Treasures; Alinari Frères, a study of a female head by Leonardo da Vinci (45), from the Academy of Fine Arts at Florence; Mr. Thurston Thompson, a copy of one of Raphael’s studies for a group in the “Transfiguration” (46), in the collection of the late Duke of Devonshire; to say nothing of numerous other products of truly classic art now placed by this means within the reach of all. Photography and portraiture are closely allied. Passing over, however, a whole army of mere portraits the eye rests upon one or two subjects of more than ordinary claims to attention,– as the curious group of the “Siamese Ambassadors” (171),and the charming group of the “Princess Royal’s Bridesmaids” (373), taken, by command of her Majesty, by Caldesi and Monteccchi; a pretty frame of vignettes (172), including a good study of “Juliet with the Phial in her Hand,” by H. P. Robinson; a capital scene from “Il Trovatore,” with Mario and Grisi in admirable pose (547), by Caldari and Montecchi. Mr. Hogarth, jun. sends three frames (444, 451, and 459), containing each six photographs from drawings by the Sketching Society, many of them very clever. Amongst the landscape subjects we have several very interesting from Coburg, well executed by Mr. Francis Bedford, by command of her Majesty, and a numerous series of views in Wales by Mr. Roger Fenton, Messrs. Lock and Whitfield exhibit a large collection of coloured portraits, executed with considerable ability and success. Of the respective merits of the various processes — collodion, waxed paper, talbotype, honey process, positive on glass, &c. — we have not room, now to speak; sufficient to say that in point of numbers the collodion appears to maintain a decided call. To those engaged in the practice of the art a critical comparison of results, appended in so extensive a collection, must be of interest and value.”]

“Minor Topics of the Month.” ART JOURNAL 20:3 (Mar. 1858): 94-95. [The Photographic Society Club has just published issues of portraits of the members, for their own use and interest. We notice this publication because of its intimate connection with Art; each page of the rules is elegantly decorated with colour printing until they rival the glories of an enriched manuscript of the olden time, but the novel feature is the addition of portraits of all its members, executed in photography. They are all “men of mark,” and include the able photographers Bedford, Delamotte, Diamond, and Fenton; Drs. Percy and Hardwick, Durham the sculptor, and Thomas, the editor of Notes and Queries, are among the number. The Lord Chief Baron Pollock, as the president, appropriately heads the series, and two of his sons are among the members, who have also executed some of the best portraits in the series. Out of the twenty which are here, Dr. Diamond has completed thirteen, and for clearness and beauty of composition in effect we have never seen his works surpassed. It would be well if many other of our societies would thus secure portraits of their members; it might readily be done on the plan adopted here, which is, that each member gives the twenty required of his own portrait, and receives twenty in return, being one of each member. The passages from the poets, which appear in these pages, are singularly happy, particularly that from Milton, which describes this photographic volume as well as if the poet lived since the art was discovered — “___What with one virtuous touch The arch-chemick sun, so far from us remote, Produces.”]

“Exhibition of Photographs at the South Kensington Museum.” LIVERPOOL & MANCHESTER PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL [BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY] ns 2:5, 7 (Mar. 1, Apr. 1, 1858): 61-63, 82-83. [“Supplementary exhibition, held by the London Photo. Soc., for the winter months. 705 “frames” exhibited, 74 of which were copy prints of works of art. 185 portraits. Caldesi & Montecchi, R. Fenton, F. Bedford, C. Thurston Thompson, F. Frith, Negretti & Zambra, O. G. Rejlander, Lake Price, W. M. Grundy, Dr. Mansell, R. Howlett, A. J. Melhuish, T. R. Williams, others mentioned.”]

“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL 20:5 (May 1, 1858): 159-160. [Book review. Art-Treasures of the United Kingdom; consisting of Selections from the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition of 1857. Published by Day & Son. London. “The magnificent collection of works of Art gathered together in Manchester, last year, has, like the productions of industrial art which were exhibited in Hyde Park in 1851, been again dispersed, and each individual object is once more placed in the security and silence of its appointed home. Thanks, however, to the enterprising spirit of Messrs. Day and Son, the public is not left without some worthy record of what was exhibited on both these occasions; they are following up their well-known splendid work, entitled, “The Industrial Arts of the Nineteenth Century,” by one of a similar character, illustrating a large number of the Art-treasures seen in Manchester, which come under the denomination of “Decorative Art.” The series includes sculpture, ceramic, metallic, vitreous, and textile I j productions. The work is edited by, or under the direction of, Mr. J. B. Waring, and the plates are executed in chromolithography by Mr. F. Bedford. About fifty plates — out of one hundred, to which the work will extend — have now been published, and we cannot speak too approvingly of the judgment that has directed the choice of subjects, nor of the manner in which the works have been copied. We are not, however, prepared to sav that the plates are superior to those in Messrs. Day’s preceding publication — it ought to satisfy all reasonable expectations that they are on an equality: this no one will doubt….” “…. The historical and descriptive essays, having reference to the arts represented, are written respectively by Messrs. G. Scharf, jun., J. C. Robinson, A.W. Franks, Digby Wyatt, Owen Jones, and J. B. Waring; a large number of wood engravings are interspersed among the text. Are fully justified in the expectations they formed, as set forth in the prospectus announcing the publication, that it “will spread far and wide the valuable lessons to be learned from the Exhibition, and constitute a standard and lasting record o fit.”]

“The Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL: THE JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY 4:66 (May 21, 1858): 207-211. [“The Fifth Annual Exhibition of the Society, at No. 1, New Coventry Street, was on Wednesday last inspected by the Members and Visitors invited by the Council, and yesterday was thrown open to the public…. As in the majority of critics (or perhaps better called visitors) who may visit this Exhibition, it is not likely that there will be many who do understand the photographic process; and as criticisms from a photographic point of view often appear in pages similar to these, allow us to venture upon another ground, and look and write upon this Exhibition as “one of the public.” In the first place, it is easy to sec that the majority of pictures in the present Exhibition formed a part of that so recently closed at South Kensington….” “…As we said before, the majority of the pictures in the present Exhibition formed a part of the Kensington Exhibition, and we are compelled to say far exceed anything which has been sent to the new one. Of course no one can touch Fenton in landscape: he seems to be to photography what Turner was to painting — our greatest landscape photographer; not that there is any similarity between the aerial perspectives of Turner, and the substantial and real which we get transferred by Fenton. The finest things produced by Fenton are Nos. 42 and 48. There is such an artistic feeling about the whole of these pictures, the gradations of tint are so admirably given, that they cannot fail to strike the beholder as being something more than mere photographs. Then there are others nearly as good and interesting; but as his contributions are so numerous — being between forty and fifty pictures, and all of them first-rate — it is needless to specify them. We notice an almost entire absence of Melhuish’s landscapes, which were indeed gems, but, on the other hand, we see some new ones by Leverett and B. R. Turner. There are also some small pictures by Rosling, by Taupenot’s process; these, as a rule, show the usual faults of this process — an absence of those middle tints which we find in Fenton, or, perhaps more appropriately, in Lyndon Smith’s pictures. There is too much white and too much black; none of those nice balancing tints which we see in some other landscapes, such as Bedford’s. Bedford need only be mentioned as exhibiting his perfect Continental landscapes: he is a very Nasmyth in the beautiful miniature landscapes (photographed by command of Her Majesty the Queen) in the present Exhibition. It would be difficult to say which is the best….”]

“London Photographic Society.” LIVERPOOL & MANCHESTER PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL [BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY] ns 2:12 (June 15, 1858): 148-151. [“Paper by Hardwich “On the Solarization of Negatives” read; Francis Frith was in the audience and was called forward, with applause, to describe his experiences in Egypt with solarization. (p. 150); Bedford, Davies, Malone and others also commented.]

“Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL: THE JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY 4:67 (June 21, 1858): 207-210. [“Ordinary Meeting. June 1, 1858. Roger Fenton, Esq., Vice-President, in the Chair….” “…Mr. Hardwich read a paper “On the Solarization of Negatives.” “This is the season of the year at which we expect to meet with that red and transparent appearance in the high lights of negatives, termed “solarization.” There are many photographers who understand quite well how to deal with such a condition, but others, doubtless, who do not, and to such I would address my observations this evening….” (Paper presented, followed by commentary by members in the audience, including Bedford.)  “…Mr. Bedford. — Sir, I have worked with Thomas’s collodion, with Ponting’s, and also with Hardwich’s, and, under most circumstances, have produced satisfactory pictures. I think that the mistake into which beginners and amateurs frequently fall, is owing to the theory that the collodion being a very rapid process, they jump to the conclusion that a subject is to be shot off quickly, and they work as a rule with too much light. I think that, however strong the light may be, if the lens is stopped down sufficiently, you may produce a good picture with the lights not more solarized than if you gave half the exposure. Again, a great deal is to be done with the development. I have worked in a broiling sun at 120°, and as soon as I have poured on the developer the picture has started up very quickly; and I have preferred, under such circumstances, to flush the plate in water, stop the development entirely, and then commence afresh, when I have generally found that you can go on developing perfectly. At Coburg last year I had one subject, an interior of a quadrangle, one wall of which was painted dark yellow, and the other was white-washed; the yellow was in shadow, and the white-wash in strong sun-light, yet that made my best picture. I used a very small stop, and gave it five minutes with collodion that had been iodized about three days: that picture was perfect in its shadows and lights, and had the texture of the wall most perfectly defined. I think generally it is better to work with collodion not fresher than a fortnight; but that by studying the light and other circumstances, including the size of the aperture in the stop, you may produce a picture with almost any collodion. I cannot enter into the chemistry of the subject, because I am accustomed to work with collodion which I buy ready-made….” p. 209.]

“Critical Notices: The Photographic Exhibition at the Crystal Palace. Part 1.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 1:3 (Sept. 24, 1858): 29-30. [“First Notice. It is a happy idea, on the part of the directors of the Crystal Palace, that in addition to the already long list of attractions, there should be added another item — in other words, a Photographic Gallery. This is as it ought to be. Photography has now assumed a very important position among the arts and sciences, and it is only fitting and proper that it should have appropriated to itself a court or gallery at Sydenham. and that in that court there should be a collection which should in every way be worthy of the importance of the art and the Palace. Fresh discoveries are being made every day, and every day we find out some new application of this wonderful art, whether it be a means by which we can the more easily detect a prisoner, or record the rapid flight of a cannon ball through the air. When first we heard of the idea of a photographic collection at Sydenham we thought that not only were the directors taking proper steps in regard to making the Palace even more attractive to the public than it is at present, and not only were they taking a course which must tend to increase their dividends, but that they were placing a means within reach of the photographic world of keeping a record of the progress which the art is daily making. We thought that it must be indeed a pleasing feature in the attractions of the Palace to the amateur or beginner in photography that here he might have an opportunity of consulting the best results of each particular “process,” and thus be enabled to judge of the efficiency or inefficiency of any particular mode of development, and that in this way the Sydenham Gallery might become an object of constant interest not only to the amateur, but to the public, who, having no means of seeing the progress in the art except in the shop windows, and not feeling sufficient attraction or interest in a simple exhibition of photographs, they might, by the more frequent familiarization of the eye with photographic progress, acquire a more widespread interest than they do at present. These were some of the thoughts which occurred to us, we say, when we heard of a Photographic Gallery being about to be formed at Sydenham, and with every desire of being m courant in all that relates to photography, and that we might (as it is our desire and intention) keep our readers equally so, we proceeded List week to Sydenham for the purpose of inspecting “The Photographic Collection.” We cannot but express disappointment at the almost entire absence of new pictures. It was to us by no means a new exhibition. Wherever we turned it seemed as though an old friend nodded to us, and that with an almost self-complacent air. Here we met with one whom we had first known at Manchester, and with whom we had afterwards renewed acquaintance at the South Kensington Exhibition; but not content with this, it again made its appearance in the Coventry Street Exhibition. This we had thought the culminating point of re-exhibition, but what was our astonishment to meet again with these old friends who seem to have retained (notwithstanding their exhibitive campaigns) all their juvenescence. The reader will be inclined to agree with us, that the least thing that could be expected, was some new pictures on the occasion of opening a Photographic Exhibition at the Crystal Palace. Of course it may be urged that just at present there is some difficulty in obtaining new photographs; then why not delay the opening and wait until such time as they are obtainable? By all means let the present collection be replaced with something which shall reflect credit upon the Palace, and the art. There is in the Crystal Palace Gallery, as far as regards light, arrangements for hanging everything which can conduce to a successful exhibition. The screen saloon principle we very much admired, and for such a gallery as that at Sydenham it is decidedly preferable. In the Art Treasures Exhibition at Manchester, the screen was used, but owing to the narrowness of the gallery the saloon principle, which was carried out in the picture galleries on a large scale, could not be introduced in the Photographic Gallery, as that portion of it which was appropriated to photographs was in such close contiguity to the orchestra that for three or four hours in the afternoon it was impossible to examine any of the photographs in the front of the screens, owing to the crowds who listened to the music. The saloon principle was admirably carried out at the fourth Kensington Exhibition, and it could not but strike the visitor how much it conduced to his comfort in examining the photographs, since it enables people to inspect the pictures in peace without that continual throng which is always passing behind them, when pictures are hung in long lines. The colour of the screens, which is a neutral or tea green tint, is admirably suited for as a background, and where there are spaces, which must necessarily occur now and then between the frames, it never obtrudes itself as more staring colours do, nor does it offend or strike the eye as disagreeable. It is worthy of notice how different is the effect here from that produced at Coventry Street, where there were dark rooms and bad light, and, to make things worse, a dirty looking background which gave a sombre appearance to the room that was anything but agreeable. Of course those works which are new deserve our first attention, and amongst these we may mention Herbert Watkin’s series of portraits of contemporaneous celebrities. These will no doubt prove interesting to the general public, who will be anxious to behold the lineaments of those about whom they may have heard or read much. Who, for instance, would not feel interested in seeing the portrait of William Howard Russell, the Crimean and Indian special correspondent of the Times? he who has certainly raised the profession of ” special correspondent” to an enviable position; who has thrilled the world with wonderful descriptions, and astonished it with his keen observations. He is indeed the photographer of life as it is. With all the correctness of the camera does he ‘transmit pen-and-ink pictures to paper, which make the blood of the reader circulate the faster by the wonderful power of his word-painting. We say, who is there, then, that would not feel a great desire to look on him as he really is, with his smiling face and patriarchal beard? None, we will venture to reply; and so might we say of each celebrity, who in the circle in which lie moves is a centre around which many admirers revolve, be that circle political, literary, artistic, dramatic, or scientific. This portion of the Exhibition will at all times prove an attraction, though to speak of the pictures from a photographic and artistic point of view, we cannot say that we admire them much. We think that it will not be denied that generally the human face has some defect or other, which, as we have it constantly before us, we do not so readily notice; but the moment that the face is portrayed on the glass or paper of a photograph, when there is the absence of that colour which hides what is here a perceptible defect, it is immediately noticed, and the photograph, though a good one, is condemned as being a bad likeness; another view is taken, possibly so as to exclude the defective part, and then we have what is termed a good portrait, which in reality is only half of the truth, but decidedly the pleasantest half, because it administers to the vanity of the sitters by the exclusion of what would be painful. If, then, this much can be said of ordinary plain photographs, what must be said of such exaggerated pictures as those of Mr. Watkins, where every one of the defects (which perhaps under other circumstances would hardly be noticed) is brought forward with faithful yet painful fidelity? To show that we are not taking too extreme a view of the case, we cannot do better than refer the reader to a hideous portrait of the eminent tragedian Mr. Barry Sullivan, which is here given with an alarming reality; all the smallpox marks which unfortunately that gentleman has on his face are here so exaggerated, that on inspection the face looks as though it were taken upon a coarse-grained canvas. Then there are other faces — for instance, those of Mr. Robert Bell, Viscount Combermere, Lord Palmerston, and many others — which look decidedly repulsive, but the portraits of those whom time has furrowed are the least able to bear exaggeration. All this series are given with a truthfulness free from flattery, which makes the human face appear anything but divine. The whole of these photographs are open to the above objection of exaggeration. Some faces do not suffer so much as others, but speaking generally we think it desirable that the size of these pictures should be smaller, and then they would be free from their most objectionable traits.”]

“Critical Notices: The Photographic Exhibition at the Crystal Palace.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 1:5 (Oct. 8, 1858): 52-53. [“The next person whom we have to notice in compositive photography, is Mr. Grundy, of Button Coldfield, near Birmingham. There is nothing new from the studio of that gentleman in the present collection. Already we have seen the whole of his productions at former exhibitions….” “…Next we come to Mr. Fenton’s views in Wales. We think that nobody will be inclined to dispute Mr. Fenton’s unrivalled claim to be the best English landscape photographer. He has succeeded in giving such breadth to his landscape pictures, that one is at first almost inclined to look upon them as copies of pictures. The selection which has been made by the Crystal Palace authorities for the Sydenham Gallery is far from being an adequate representation of Mr. Fenton, and what he can do. We miss that charming pair, the “Swallow Falls ” and the “Ravine in the Lledr Valley,” which were the decided gems of the South Kensington and Coventry-street Exhibitions. Those pictures deservedly ranked high as works of art, not only on account of the size, but also for the beauty of manipulation. The set of views of Wales are, we hope, but the foreshadowings of still greater efforts on the part of Mr. Fenton. The views on the continent, which were taken by Mr. Bedford at the command of her Majesty the Queen, are here exhibited again. It would indeed be superfluous on our part to do more than even mention such works as these. A verdict has been so generally pronounced in their favour, and they have so well deserved all the encomiums which have been heaped upon them, that we can only say, Go, Mr. Bedford, and charm us again in the same manner….” “…Concluding Notice….” “…The views on the continent, which were taken by Mr. Bedford at the command of her Majesty the Queen, are here exhibited again. It would indeed be superfluous on our part to do more than even mention such works as these. A verdict has been so generally pronounced in their favour, and they have so well deserved all the encomiums which have been heaped upon them, that we can only say, Go, Mr. Bedford, and charm us again in the same manner. Having thus dismissed the question of landscape photography, we of course come to the next feature of the exhibition, viz., portraiture. We have already given an opinion upon the productions of Mr. Herbert Watkins; we will, therefore, now proceed to notice briefly the other specimens. Fust, then, we have to call attention to the series of contemporaneous portraits by Mayall….”]

“Note.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL; BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY 5:74 (Dec. 11, 1858): 89. [“…Endeavours have been made from time to time, by Members of the Society, to organize a system of exchange of photographs. The subject has been several times brought before the Council, and a Committee was appointed last summer, one of whose duties was to arrange a plan for carrying out this object. Without going so far as to say that it is not possible to form a plan which shall work satisfactorily, it is enough to state that no progress has hitherto been made towards such a result. It is very desirable that the Members of the Society should have occasionally laid before them visible evidence of the progress which the photographic art is making. Other societies have purchased, and presented to their members, copies of successful photographs produced by artists of established reputation. There are obvious objections to the adoption of such a course by the Council of the Photographic Society of London. Some of its Members, however, together with other gentlemen belonging to the Society, have offered to contribute each a certain number of copies of their best negatives, in order that the Society may present to every Member, whose name shall be included in the list of the year 1859, a good specimen of the present state of the art. Mr. Bedford, Mr. Fenton, Mr. Delamotte, Mr. White, and Dr. Diamond have already pledged themselves to furnish 50 prints each. Mr. Frith and Mr. Thurston Thompson, we have heard, approve of the plan and will assist us. Mr. Rosling will be induced to favour us with specimens of his beautiful pictures now exhibited at the Crystal Palace; and Mr. Llewellyn some contributions from his portfolio, which all photographers are so desirous of possessing. Members may also expect to be favoured from Mr. W. B. Turner, whose choice specimens of calotype will be remembered by all who have visited our exhibitions,. In fact, we believe that among the many good photographers who are members of this Society, there are few who will not be pleased to give their zealous assistance. All those who are willing to cooperate in carrying out this plan, already announced, either by the loan of negatives, or the gift of a number of positive prints, are invited to communicate with the Secretary of the Society….”]

“Photographic Society. Ordinary General Meeting. December 7, 1858.” JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF LONDON 5:74 (Dec. 11, 1858): 90-94. [“…Mr. Pouncey was about to proceed, when Mr. Bedford said — As this is an interesting discussion, and it is getting late, I propose that it be adjourned to another evening. Mr. Thurston Thompson seconded the proposition, which was duly put and carried.” (p. 94.)]

“Exhibition of the Architectural Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 1:16 (Dec. 24, 1858): 185-186. [“The second annual exhibition of this association opened on Friday last — the “private view” being held on the previous evening — the attendance on that occasion was not large, and the show of -pictures, both in quantity and quality, was below that of last year. Indeed we cannot see how it could be otherwise, for if the association has merely for its object the illustrations of architecture, and monuments to be found here and there, it must be limited in its scope; and no better proof of this can be given than the present collection. In it there is scarcely a picture which the regular visitor to photographic exhibitions has not seen attempted some time or other. As yet the association is but an experiment, and it remains to be seen whether repetitions, or even new architectural subjects, are of sufficient interest to the majority of visitors to sustain it in existence. Macpherson has illustrated Rome in one hundred and twenty views. Cimetta, Venice in thirty-three views. Melhuish, London in two views. Robertson and Beato, Cairo, in thirty-one views. Lousada, Spain in twenty views. Lowndes, Cocke, Frith, Bedford and Cade, in England, and Baldus, Paris, are also contributors with several other minor artists. Among whom our readers will be as much astonished as we were to find the absence of Fenton; this is to be regretted, for there are very few who will not remember with pleasure such choice specimens of architectural photography as his Galilee Porch, Ely Cathedral,” “the West Porch of York Minster,” and pictures of that class….”]

1859

“Fine Arts. The Architectural Photographic Association.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 34:953 (Sat., Jan. 1, 1859): 22. [(Second Annual Exhibition.) “There is no more delightful and useful application of the art of photography than that to the wide field of landscape, and more particularly to architectural subjects. The Government have already acknowledged this position, and have, in consequence, made photography a distinct feature in the education and practice of the Engineer corps. Artists, tourists, and amateurs of all sorts also acknowledge the fact, and flock to all parts of the world, snatching hasty but permanent visions of “the Sublime and Beautiful” through the simple and inexpensive agency of the sun. The Architectural Photographic Association is formed for the purpose of encouraging this tendency, and concentrating and utilising the results obtained. The subscription is small, and is returned in photographs to the nominal value of the amount subscribed, at the choice of the individual. The second annual exhibition of this association is now open at the rooms of the Water Colour Society, in Pall-mall. The number of subjects exhibited is 379,and a glance at the catalogue show how distant and various are the fields from which they have been taken, and consequently the wide margin of choice offered by them to collectors. Macpherson produces upwards of a hundred extremely fine views in Rome, illustrating individually the most remarkable historical spots in the Eternal City. The “Sybil’s Temple,” “Tivoli,” “The Coliseum,” “The Horses of the Capitol from the Palazzo Caffarelli,” and “The Cloaca Maxima” — the last, all in ruins, and overgrown with ivy, struck us as particularlyeffective. In the “Cascatella”(No.64),and the “Cascatella at the Villa of Mecaenas” (No.89), the gushing waterfall, broken here and there into spray, is marvelously realised, proving the rapidity and accuracy of the process employed. Cimetta treats us to a score and a half views in picturesque old Venice, at once so gay and so gloomy in its character. “The Chiesa della Madonna dell’ Orto,” “The Doge’s Palace from the Pazza,” and the Byron-immortalised “Bridge of Sighs” stand before us in all their solid, somber individuality. Robertson and Beato (the former already well known and esteemed for his Oriental scenes) produce a series of views in Cairo. Frith, starting from Cairo, takes us up to the Pyramids, to Karnac, to Jerusalem, and to Mount Sinai. His panoramic view of Cairo, eight feet six inches long by one foot ten inches  high,must be commended as one of the most successful efforts of photography on a large scale that has yet been produced. Then Ponti wanders amongst the curious old historic sites of the North of Italy — Padua, Verona, Monza, Milan, &c., whilst Lousada illustrates some of the most interest in objects in Seville, Madrid, Malaga, and other Spanish towns; and Baldus presents views of the Tuileries, the Louvre, and other public buildings in Paris, as well as some ancient church architecture in Caen. Nor, amidst all this varied display from “foreign parts,” are the architectural beauties of our own country entirely overlooked. Cade, of Ipswich, produces most careful and artistic views of some of the principalº at Cambridge; Cook, of Salisbury, does the like for Oxford; and Bedford exhibits some thirty views of English cathedral, abbey, and castle architecture, amongst which seven of Tintern will strike everyone by their beautiful execution and the fine poetic character pervading them.”]

“Exhibition of the Architectural Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 1:18 (Jan. 7, 1859): 207-208. [“Concluded from page 199.” “The inspection of the views by Cade has given us much pleasure. These views are small compared with those we have already noticed, but they are exquisitely fine in tone and detail. (Several of Cade’s photographs named and critiqued.) “…Altogether these views by Mr. Cade do him great credit, and we hope to see some more by the same artist in future exhibitions. The brilliant and beautiful photographs by Frith of Egyptian scenery are already so well known to the majority of our readers, that it would be superfluous on our part to criticise them at any great length. They possessed such merit, and received such well deserved encomiums, that it is almost matter of surprise that any one should have attempted to photograph Cairo so soon after Frith had done it. However, we have here a series of views of Cairo by Robertson and Beato, not so large, nor yet so beautiful, as those of Frith. We do not intend going into detail; suffice it to say, that they have all the characteristics and peculiarities of oriental photographs. Many of the views are extremely interesting, among which we may mention the “Tomb of the Mamelukes” (198), and the “Tombs of the Mamelukes and Caliphs ” (203). In many of the photographs there is great nicety of detail, and generally the sites are well selected. The next series are the old Spanish views by Lousada. We are astonished to see these photographs here, since, apart from the interest attaching to those views themselves, there is nothing to recommend them as photographs, and they are very bad as architectural studies; for instance, in some of the architectural views illustrated there is really a great deal of fine detail, but in the photographs by Lousada there is nothing but masses of black and white, with no half-tone. A few Oxford views by Cocke are very mediocre indeed. They will not bear the slightest comparison with Cade’s Cambridge views; or even with any of the Oxford views we have seen. They have some few good points, but are generally too dark….” “…Baldus’s Paris views are certainly the worst we have ever seen executed by this artist. They are not clear in tone, nor interesting in subject. He has introduced into one an artificial sky, which we do not like. Indeed, we are surprised to find that a photographer, who has earned such well-deserved laurels as M. Baldus, has allowed such very bad pictures to leave his studio. Taking the photographs as they are catalogued, we next come to the Egyptian views by Frith; of these there cannot be two opinions — they have deservedly established the reputation of Mr. Frith as a first-class photographer. Of the English views by the same artist, we cannot speak so highly. There is, if we may use the term, a decided mannerism in them. They are treated exactly iu the same way as the Egyptian views: each photograph having a great intensity of black and white, and looking as though they had been taken under a scorching Eastern sun. This is a fault which is rendered more strikingly apparent by the contrast it offers to the Egyptian views. In the Eastern views there is much detail, while, in the English views, foliage is rendered in black masses. The view of “Inverness” (308) is a most faulty picture; it is full of spots, and is altogether a very bad photograph. The water in the foreground is especially bad, while the stones in the bed of the river appear much as though spots of soot had accidentally fallen on the negative. There is an exquisite little view here by Cade, of the “Terrace at Sir William Middleton’s,” which we are inclined to think far surpasses any of those pictures already noticed. The views by Gutch, the “Exterior and Interior of Holyrood Chapel” are not equal to some we have seen by this artist. Since the exhibition of the photographs of the Royal Engineers at South Kensington, we are not enabled to perceive any advance in the manipulation of these military photographers, if the “Rochester New Bridge,” and the “Rochester Cathedral” are to be taken as specimens of progress. And now we come to the most charming series of pictures in the collection. When we say they are executed by Bedford, need we say more? There are twelve views which have been “taken expressly for the association.” We cannot help thinking that, when the association obtained Mr. Bedford’s services, they ought at least to have asked him to have chosen some other subject than “Tintern Abbey.” We have had this splendid ruin ad nauseam. The only thing that makes the present views at all bearable, is the astonishing perfection in which they are rendered. When we compare the views by Cocke with those by Mr. Bedford, we are then enabled to judge how far Mr. Bedford can surpass all other photographers in his execution. In no piece is this so perceptible as in the “View of the Choir looking East”, and in the same view by Cocke. In the one there is clearness of tone, detail in (lie foliage, and a beautiful perspective half tint as seen through the window of the Abbey; the foliage in the background is given with the greatest nicety: while in the other we have few or none of the characteristics of Bedford’s photographs, and the foliage as seen through the window is only discernible in small patches. “The West Door, Tintern Abbey” (321), is a marvellously clear photograph; even the largo nails in the door are easily discernible. But decidedly the best views are “The Donjon, Raglan Castle” (315); “The Entrance Gate, Raglan Castle” (317). In these we can see almost the form of every leaf, clear without even the aid of a glass; all the foliage is crisp, and every sprig of the delicate tendrils of the creeper as it reaches upward, looks as though it were a copy of some finely pencilled picture; indeed, the mass of foliage seems almost to invite one to put one’s hand among the leaves. We confess we are at a loss to do full justice to these inimitable photographs. By the aid of a magnifying glass the detail of the grass could be almost seen. No photographer who exhibits in the present collection can compare with Bedford for the clearness of his foregrounds; whilst the lens with which these views were taken must be as near perfection ns human skill could make, it. There is a. number of photographs here by Mr. Bedford which were exhibited in 1857. They are beautiful, but when we compare them with the new pictures, they show how decided are the marks of progress in Mr. Bedford’s manipulative skill. The most beautiful of the old series is the celebrated “Baptistry of Canterbury Cathedral” (340), which attracted so much attention when first exhibited. Of the Italian views by Ponti we are not able to say much. They lack what is needful to make them good photographs. There is a fault in them which seems to be prevalent in the pictures exhibited in this collection — too much black and white, and a want of half-tone. Some have many good points, but generally speaking, they are not such as to merit a long notice. In conclusion we can only remark, that we think it would be almost desirable to introduce stereoscopic views as a part of the exhibition. One of the leading objects of the association is “to form a collection of photographs for the association; and, if thought desirable, to exhibit them; ” and, of course, to distribute them to subscribers. There are many persons who would gladly subscribe, if among the photographs there were some good stereoscopic slides — such, for instance, as those by Sedgefield, which we recently had occasion to notice.”]

“Fine-Art Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1628 (Jan. 8, 1859): 55. [“Brief review of Photo. Soc. exhibition. Fenton, Bedford, Caldesi & Montecchi, Roslyng mentioned.”]

“Fine-Arts. – Photographic Society.” ATHENAEUM no. 1629 (Jan. 15, 1859): 86-87. [“The sixth Annual Exhibition of these children of the sun, who, like the old Italian dial, “count only the sunny hours,” is now open in the Suffolk Street Gallery….” (6th annual exhibition. Caldesi & Montecchi; Fenton; Diamond; Gutch; Bisson Freres; W. Hamilton Crake; Truefitt; Frith; Morris Moore; Sherlock; Choponin; Cruttenden; Bedford; Deleferier & Beer; R. Howlett; B. B. Turner; Cade; Rejlander; Dr. Holden; Bingham; H. P. Robinson; J. H. Morgan; Delamotte; Maxwell Lyte; others mentioned.) “Meeting of the Photographic Society and their friends will take place on Thursday evening next, January 20, in the rooms at Suffolk Street. Every gentleman invited to this soiree is expected to bring a lady on his arm….”]

“Fine Arts. Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 34:955 (Sat., Jan. 15, 1859): 59. [(The sixth annual exhibition.) “The sixth annual exhibition of the Photographic Society, now open at the Suffolk-street Gallery, exemplifies in a striking manner the rapid development of a new process, which is destined to effect so much for art, and for all pursuits involving ocular illustration as a means. Moreover, the varied and ambitious subjects to which this process is already applied, and the success which has crowned each succeeding effort, lead us to a consideration of the status it is entitled to hold in the arts of representation, and more especially of its bearings and relations upon painting and engraving. That it will prove an invaluable adjunct to both, and at times, to a certain extent, a foil to them, all must admit who witness what it has already done, and with what avidity its products are seized upon by the public. But there are conditions essential to art — both painting and engraving which this sun-printing process can never command, and without which the highest aims of art cannot be even attempted — we mean the subjective power of the artist over his materials, which adapts them to his purpose, and, even in the merest effort of portraiture, and the most faithful engraving after a picture, shows the mind of the artist as the creative and ruling principle. We are, therefore, of opinion that photography can never supersede engraving or painting — even portrait painting — which, though now temporarily discouraged in presence of the cheaper attractions of a new and rapid process, must eventually recover its position in the estimation of all who really know the peculiar attributes and difficulties of art directed by mind, It may be true enough to say that, in the case of some great works of the highest genius– Raphael’s Cartoons, for instance, the photographs from which by Caldesi and Montecchi, and of parts of some of them by Thurston Thompson, gloriously fill one wall of the present exhibition: it may be  true, and it is true, to say of such works as these that  sun-painting has achieved that which no hand of engraver could possibly approach. But why is this? Simply because the great originals are so perfect in drawing, in expression, in the handling in every line, that no copy could satisfactorily reproduce them; whilst to colour- the only point in which photography fails of affording an accurate transcript — they are comparatively little beholden for their effect. Beside these, grand photographs — invaluable to art-the most elaborate and highly finished engravings after Raphael will in future appear tame and unsatisfactory. But, for the very same reason, works of less merit in design and expression, and depending for their effect, more or less, upon colour, will to a certain extent fail when submitted to the severest of sun-printing; whereas, with a little judicious treatment at the hands of the engraver, they might  be made to “come out” in a manner perfectly satisfactory for general purposes. In portraits, and the numberless made-up groups which photographists manufacture for the  multitude (particularly those intended for the stereoscope), we have all the natural defects, vulgarity of expression, forced grimace, and ungainly attitude of the original actors relentlessly perpetuated, without a hint of artistic intelligence applied to them; wherefore to our mind all such subjects, with few and rare exceptions, are abominations. Amongst the rare exceptions in the present exhibition in which the practitioner has succeeded to some extent in drilling his sitter to his mind, let us by the way mention H. P. Robinson’s four clever subjects from the story of “Little Red Riding Hood,” and the “Preparing for Market” and “The Dead Bird,” by W. A. Delferier and A. C. C. Beer. The “Fading Away” group of the first named, which appears to have had a wonderful run in the shop windows, is a sickly sentimental affair, too obviously taken from a “pose plastique,” the actors in which do not attain to our notions of the ideal appropriate to the case. The artifice of placing the father with his back to the spectator, because no model could be found to realise the necessary expression, itself betrays poverty of resource, and is borrowed from an early Greek precedent, which has been generally censured. But we must now — dismissing abstract qualities — take a hasty glance at some of the principal contents of the exhibition before us. R. Fenton exbibits a numerous and varied collection. In landscape he is particularly happy; take, for instance, “Chatsworth from the river,” with the shadows in the water, so fine in effect, and “Chatsworth–Cattle in the River,” full of material, which Claude or Cuyp would have rejoiced in; “The Virgin of the bas-relief after Léonardo da Vinci,” and “Copy of Engraving after Raphael,” are most successful productions. F. Bedford exhibits a frame containing nine views of Gotha and its vicinity, photographed by command of theQueen; and several views of Tintern Abbey, Pembroke Castle, and other picturesque ruins. R. Howlett has some exquisitely delicate photographs of St. Ouen, Rouen. P. Delamotte has a grand interior of the Crystal Palace, Sydenham, full of marvelous detail, and most satisfactory and striking in its general effect, which is only surpassed, in size by H. F. Frith’s unrivalled “Panorama of Cairo,” “The Forum — Rome,” two of the most interesting architectural representations we have ever met with, throwing even Piranesi into the shade. A new application of photography is that to the purpose of book illustration; and this we find is about to be adopted upon a considerable scale, and in a matter of no mean public interest. It appears that Mr. Redgrave, R.A., the surveyor of her Majesty’s pictures, has been employed to prepare a complete catalogue of all the Crown pictures, and that, to make the work more complete, it has been detrmined that each picture shall be identified in the catalogue by its photograph. Mr. William Johnson, formerly secretary of the Royal College of Chemistry, and now employed in the Lord Chancellor’s office, has been intrusted with the task of taking the photographs for this interesting purpose, and has received the permission of her Majesty to send some specimens of his labours to this exhibition.The photographs are necessarily small, four inches by three inches; but as there is no limit to the minute accuracy of sun-printing, the result will be perfectly satisfactory as regards book illustrations, although upon the walls of an exhibition they may seem somewhat diminutive. The four subjects here exhibited are — three portraits, “Rudolph, Prince of Hungary,” “Lady of the Court of Philip IV of Spain,” and “Marie Antoinette;” and “The Fruiterer’s Shop,” after Mieris; all in the Royal Collection at Buckingham Palace. We have something more to say about photography in general, and this exhibition in particular, and shall return to the subject.”]

“The Exhibition in Suffolk Street.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL: BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY 5:77 (Jan. 21, 1859): 143-150. [(Reviews of the exhibition from several journals reprinted.) “…Mr. Roger Fenton is an important contributor; and has sent, besides numerous landscapes, showing that amount of air and distance, for which his works are remarkable, some illustrations of Eastern costumes and manners. Mr. Frith has some charming specimens; notice particularly 547 and 558. For delicacy and clearness conjoined, Mr. Francis Bedford is unrivalled, — see, for example, his North Transept, Tintern (137), Pembroke Castle (139), and the West Front of Tintern (143).” — Builder.
“Foremost among the landscapes of the exhibition stands the magnificent dioramic view of Cairo, upwards of eight feet in length, by Mr. Frith. It was taken from the summit of one of the buildings that command a view of the famous city. The flat-roofed houses, the tall minarets, the narrow streets, the crowded localities, the Nile winding in the distance, and beyond it the dim outline and diminished form of the great pyramids, all contrive to make this one of the most extraordinary and interesting works which have been produced. The dioramic view is surrounded by a number of other views of the locality which have already been made familiar to the public by the charming stereoscopic views published by Messrs. Negretti and Zambra. Next to this in point of size, and remarkable for its boldness, combined with the most remarkable accuracy and clearness of detail, is the great view of the interior of the Crystal Palace, Sydenham, by Mr. Delamotte. The sharpness of outline of the long vaulted roof and its supporting columns, the play of shadow on the water of the basin of the crystal fountain, the foliage of the climbing plants, and the trees and shrubs iu the nave, are all given with a success which has rarely or ever been equalled. This work is one of the photographic pictures which it is intended to distribute among the subscribers to the newly-established Crystal Palace Art Union. Some views, by Mr. Cundall, of places of interest in Kent are deserving of great praise for their execution, not less than for the inherent beauties of the pictures themselves. Igtham Moat is exquisitely beautiful, and scarcely less so are some tine views of Charlton, of Rochester Cathedral, and other places. Mr. Alfred Rosling again exhibits some of those delicious little pictures in the choice of which he appears to have almost an instinctive good taste. It is difficult to say whether one admires more the points of view which he selects, or the careful manipulation which is evident in the development of his subjects. A view of Betchworth, a group of chestnut trees, and some other bits of rural scenery, are among the gems of the present exhibition. Mr. Bedford, a not less careful manipulator, revels in the ruins of Tintern Abbey, of old Kitham Palace, of Raglan, Haddenhall, and other places of interest and picturesque beauty. They are charming specimens, and the army of photographers who traverse the land every year to discover new beauties for the million, deserve the warmest thanks for their exertions.” — Morning Chronicle.
“…We marked for especial commendation a large series of lovely views of Tintern Abbey, the rugged cleavage of ‘Cheddar Cliffs’ and ‘Chatsworth Castle in the Water’ (69), a photograph as mellow as a Cuyp. Mr. Bedford’s landscape contributions are almost as numerous as those by Mr. Fenton, and include besides views in and near Gotha, ‘The Lakes,’ ‘Raglan Castle,’ ‘Tintem,’ and many other of our own favourite scenes. These, however, together with the Egyptian and Syrian subjects by Mr. Frith, and the delicate bistre-toned views in Rouen, by the late lamented Mr. Howlett, are alreadv too well known to require further comment.” — Daily News….”
“Of our home-landscape photographers, Mr. Fenton still maintains the lead. He has many works here, some perhaps new, but as we are not sure of the fact, as the major part are certainly familiar, we shall not attempt to particularize them. They are all, or nearly all, admirably selected as to point of view, and are enough to make the topographic landscape draughtsman tremble for his craft. They are also, we need hardly say, excellent as examples of photographic manipulation. But Mr. Fenton wants either some change of subject or of style. There is coming over his works some feeling of mannerism or monotony. It is needless to say that this does not apply to his noble photographs of ancient sculpture, or his studies of female form and costume, though these last are not among the happiest of his works. Treading closely on Mr. Fenton’s heels — if he would take a bolder stride we are not sure that he would not outstep him — is Mr. Francis Bedford, who has here the works we noticed in the Architectural Gallery, and others at least equal to them, all surprisingly brilliant in tone and sharp in detail, whether that detail be crumbling stone, or moss-covered rock, or quivering foliage — but here again we want to see some new thing. We are glad to see these here, however, for the exhibition is decidedly weak in architecture. It sadly wants supplementing with some works on a grand scale, like the Venetian buildings in the Architectural Gallery. Inferior to Mr. Bedford’s, but still very’ pleasing, are some of the views of Canterbury Cathedral by Mr. Turner….” — Literary Gazette.
“In Architecture Mr. Fenton ranks quite first as a ‘New Master,’ sometimes broad and crumbly as Front’s ripe Stilton, old and mildewy; sometimes fine and graduated as Turner. One of his finest works here is the nave of ‘Salisbury Cathedral,’ with the sunshine in arches on the wall, and in sister arches of light on the pavement. At the far end twinkles the painted window with its amaranthine bloom of saints turned to flowers, or rather of victorious saints heaped by the angels with the blossoms of heaven. His” ‘Wolsey’s Gate, Ipswich’ (622), is rich in tone and impasto; the bricks seem really thick and crusted. For massive breadth Mr. Cruttenden’s ‘Norman Staircase, Canterbury’ (112) is especially good, and a fine example of our early style it is. Mr. Bedford’s ‘Views of Tintern’ are choice, but scarcely equal to his ‘Raglan Castle’, which has darkness the eye can traverse, and bushes of ivy wrought in a way that would drive weak men to split their palettes and light their fire with them…”—Athenaeum.
“…English and foreign landscape and home and continental architecture have been treated with conspicuous skill, not only by Fenton — the completest master, perhaps, of his craft (everything considered) who exhibits here — but by M. Bisson, Mr. Maxwell Lyte, Mr. Francis Bedford, Mr. Morgan, Mr. J. W. Ramsden, and Mr. R. Howlett, among others too numerous to mention. The Rouen subjects by the latter are hardly to be surpassed in sharpness and delicacy of light and shade….” — Times….”]

“The Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 1:20 (Jan. 21. 1859): 230-231. [“In the present collection, the show of landscape photographs is not large, but it is diversified; and, as was to be expected. Bedford, Fenton, and Morgan are among the foremost. Fenton we have always regarded as the leading English landscape and architectural photographer; now, however, Bedford seems likely to take the lead. In the productions of the former we see scarcely any progress, on the contrary, rather retrogression, while in the latter gentleman’s pictures, as we recently remarked, there is great and decided improvement. In Fenton’s series there are some perhaps finer than he has ever executed before, but, at the same time, we regret to state that the majority of his landscapes are far below the average merit of his pieces. Among his best are “Tintern Abbey” (46); it is clearer in tone than the generality of his pictures, and as Bedford has happened to execute a view of almost the same place, comparison is forced upon us, and we are compelled to admit the superiority of Bedford’s treatment of the subject, “Raglan Castle ” (54) is a fine specimen of Fenton’s style, but it wants vigour. “The Central Valley, Cheddar Cliffe” (50), is, perhaps, one of his finest. In it there are nice light and shade, and clear foreground. The photograph “On the Wye, the Windcliffe ” (62), has combined in it many of the defects perceptible in the whole series. The foreground is so dark that it looks almost as if a curtain were drawn across the picture, while the background is beautifully distinct and clear; the transition from the foreground to the background is so abrupt as at once to strike and offend the eye. Many of Bedford’s views are similar in character to those already noticed in the collection of the Architectural Association. In looking at them we are almost inclined to think that they are even finer than those which we have previously referred to. We feel that we cannot speak too highly of this artist’s work; everything he does, he does well. It is a difficult matter, out of the large number of subjects he has sent for exhibition, to take one picture and say that it is positively the best of the series; the work is done in such an equal manner that it is impossible to select this or that as the finest. The new views which he has executed for her Majesty, we scarcely like so well as the first series. We do not now refer to the photographic manipulation, but to the views themselves; for this, however, Mr. Bedford is not responsible, inasmuch as the selection is not his, but that of her Majesty. Next in order comes Morgan, who is the nearest competitor that Bedford has. Yet how distinctive are the characteristics of the treatment in each case! Both are successful in the selection of artistic sites, in the beautiful delicacy of intricate detail. Still, each has an individuality so striking, that the most careless observer would at once detect the difference. Morgan’s views are numerous. In many points they are much like some that he has previously exhibited, but, generally speaking, they are more carefully executed. In his river scenery he is most successful, and every one of his pictures must be interesting to the artist. “On the Froom, Evening,” is a beautiful study. The shadows of the trees, and the reflection of the foliage in the river, are really charming. There are several views here by T. Davies, chiefly woodland scenery. They have many good points about them, but the artist’s style of treatment, and really excellent mode of printing, are hardly adapted to his selections; if he attempted architectural views he would be attended with great success. Rosling’s small views are, generally speaking, good, though they would lose nothing by having, in some instances, a little more half-tone….” “…The views by Truefitt Brothers are very feeble in tone. To the Indian Views by W. Hamilton Crape, we are not inclined to award such a high meed of praise as has been bestowed upon them in some quarters. As views of celebrated places in India they have a great historic interest, but in executive skill they are far below others which we have seen. Crittenden’s views have many good points about them, but, generally speaking, they are too intense in tone. We may just mention one, “The Baptistry, Canterbury Cathedral” (97), which at once calls to mind Bedford’s beautiful photograph of the same. The French views by the late Robert Howlett have the distinguishing beauties which marked his works. The present series of views of buildings are more like copies of elaborate ivory carvings than anything else. Dixon Piper has some good landscapes, although they are not superior to what we have seen by him on other occasions. B. B. Turner we are glad to see continues to adhere to his “Talbotype,” and gives us some very clever and interesting views, which make us regret that he is almost the only adherent of this beautiful process. Mr. Melhuish does not appear to have done much for the present exhibition; his landscapes, in many instances, are not equal to what we have seen by him before. To the geologist, Gutch’s photographs must prove of the greatest interest. The show of architectural views is not so large as might have been expected; no doubt the knowledge of the fact that an exhibition formed exclusively of architectural views was about to be formed, would influence photographers, and cause them to abstain from exhibiting here this class of views. The finest view in this way is one of Rome. It is on a very large scale, and is a grand and striking feature in the room in which it is placed. It is immediately over a panoramic view of Cairo, by Frith, and the contiguity of the two is by no means favourable to the patched, uneven tone of the Cairo view. Frith’s views are of the same character as those we have noticed before. Fenton’s interiors are fine, with a great amount of soft, clear tone. There are several views by Cade, much the same as those in the other exhibition already noticed. In sculpture copying, Fenton still stands unrivalled in the ancient department, while, in copying modern works, Jeffrey seems to be the best; witness the copies from Woolner’s bust of Tennyson (167). Picture copying, apart from the Raffaelle Cartoons, is not strongly represented here. Bingham’s copies, from Paul Delaroche’s drawings, are among the leading attractions. There are two beautiful copies by Howlett. The four copies of engravings contained in frame 198, by William Best, are about the nicest and most successful we have ever seen; the black tone in them is much better adapted to copies of engraving, than the brown one which is seen in Fenton’s copies. We must not omit to notice the beautiful little views by Maxwell Lyte. The combination of atmospheric effect, the beauty of his clouds, and the detail of the landscape, cause us to suspect that they are compositions, rather than actual views from nature. Ross and Thompson still continue to prepare botanic studies for artistic foregrounds, though on a larger scale than heretofore. What could have induced the Rev. J. M. Raven to exhibit his two views, “Pierrefitte” (86), and “View near Luz” (87), we cannot conceive: there is not the slightest pretence to anything like detail in them; they are, in fact, pure and simple blacks and whites. R. Ramsden has some interesting little landscapes, remarkable for clear printing, as “The Vale of St. John, Cumberland” (184), which is rather vigorous in tone. Dr. Holden, we regret to find, only exhibits a few very small views of Durham. Many well-known photographers are unrepresented, such as Lake Price, W. M. Grimsby, J. D. Llewellyn, and others. We are sorry for this. In looking at the beautiful little picture of “The River at Penllergau” (288), we thought we had fallen upon one of Mr. Llewellyn’s choice views, but a reference to the catalogue informed us that it was the work of James Knight. Sedgefield’s stereoscopic views, of which we have spoken at length, are here side by side with “The Stereographic Views in Brittany,” by Henry Taylor and Lovell Reeve; the latter have, indeed, among them the best we have seen for some time. (To be continued.)”]

“Exhibition of the Photographic Society of Scotland.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 5:78. (Feb. 5, 1859): 178-181. [“The Third Annual Exhibition of the Society was opened towards the end of December in Mr. Hay’s Pine Art Saloon, George Street, and has since continued to attract a large number of visitors. We may fairly congratulate the Society, not only on the admirable series of photographs which the Exhibition contains, but also upon the excellent accommodation which has been provided for their display; in this respect Mr. Hay’s Saloon appears to us to be much superior to the rooms occupied by the Exhibition on previous occasions, and has doubtless in some measure contributed to the greatly-increased attendance observable this year. Most of the old contributors appear to have sent specimens of their works; but there are a few whom we miss — Mayall, H. Taylor, White, Holden, and Ross and Thomson; on the other hand, the Exhibition is enriched with the productions of H. P. Robinson, Maxwell Lyte, W.T. Mabley, Melhuish, J. H. Morgan, Padre Secchi, Silvy, and an amateur W. D. C, all of whom we rather think contribute on this occasion for the first time, and many — indeed all — of them works of great excellence. In reviewing an Exhibition numbering nearly 1000 pictures, it is impossible to do more than notice a comparatively small number of the leading works; and even of these some may have escaped our attention. As must almost necessarily happen, several of the pictures in the Scottish Exhibition are duplicates of those now hanging on the walls in Suffolk Street, while a few others are so well known, from having been recently exhibited by the leading London publishers, as not to require particular remark….” “….A series of photographs taken by Mr. Bedford, from the rich and picturesque ruins of Raglan, Chepstow, and Tintern. Of these we particularly admire his interiors, (14) ‘Chepstow Castle — in the Chapel,’ and (19) ‘Tintern Abbey — the Nave,’ which are admirable for their detail and a fine play of light and shade; one or two of his other pictures — (11) ‘Raglan Castle,’ (12) ‘ditto — the Donjon,’ though equally beautiful in detail, appear to us to be somewhat monotonous in tone. We should be glad if Mr. Bedford would on a future occasion send some of his charming ‘ bits’ of English landscape, which we believe have not hitherto been exhibited in Edinburgh….” p. 179.]

“Critical Notices: Stereoscopic views in the North of England and in Wales. By Messrs. Ogle and Edge, Preston.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 1:24 (Feb. 18, 1859): 281. [“These gentlemen deserve the thanks of the artistic, for the very excellent series of views they have published. They consist of English lake scenery, “Welch landscapes, and English ruins. Of the quality of these slides there cannot be two opinions; they are clear, well defined, and, in many cases, very brilliant. Perhaps the only fault that can be urged against them is, a slight reddishness of tone. In some instances this is more agreeable than otherwise; but, generally speaking, we should prefer the red a little more subdued. “The Dungeon Ghyll, Langdale Pikes, “Westmoreland,” is a most vivid and beautiful picture. “Near Stock, Ghyll Porce, Ambleside,” is a wonderful specimen of clear printing; and, at the same time, it exhibits a great amount of detail in the foliage, while the water, as it rolls over the rocky bed of the river, is caught with great and striking force. But of the lake scenes, the best is “Rydal Water, with Hartley Coleridge’s Home and Nab Scar in the background.” The rendering of the water in the picture is really beautiful, while the background is clear and distinct; the whole picture seems, as it were, the very embodiment of tranquillity. In giving a happy illustration of “The brook that brawls along the wood,” Messrs. Ogle and Edge have been eminently successful in the selection of a spot that exactly represents the idea. It is a charming little picture. We will not go into particulars with regard to the other slides before us; suffice it to say, that the views of Tintern, Rievaulx, and Fountains Abbey, are done in a manner that would bear comparison with Bedford’s best and happiest views. Of all the views we have ever seen of “Tintern Abbey,” we have no hesitation in saying that the View from “The North Aisle, looking “West” (No. 4), is one of the best. It gives the spectator such an idea of distance, and impresses him with the grandeur of the building in a manner that cannot easily be forgotten. This series contains the most choice and beautiful views that we have seen. They are very artistic; and the selection of rites has been most careful and judicious.”]

[Story-Maskelyne, Mervyn Herbert Nevil.] “Art. IV.-The Present State of Photography.” NATIONAL REVIEW 8:16 (Apr. 1859): 365-392. [Book review. A Manual of Photographic Chemistry; including the Practice of the Collodion Process. By T. F. Hardwich. Fifth edition. Churchill. The Journal of the London Photographic Society. Taylor and Francis. “It is no rare phrase that characterises the exciting age on which our lives are thewn as the age of the electric telegraph and of photography….” “…But what artist would select such huge masses of masonry alone for the subjects of a picture? To convert them into a picture, he must make them into the background of some living scene, with humanity stamped upon it; or must throw round them the garb of beauty — some tinted gauzy atmosphere won from a setting sun, caught in those transient moments when nature is, as it were, her own poet; or rather when the exuberance of her beauties can overflow and deck in a foreign grace scenes not else beautiful, and so make even such to appeal to the seat of poetic and artistic sympathy, the human heart. De la Motte, and Fenton, and Bedford, and a few others, may strive, and may now and then succeed in catching some happy effect in their camera; but it is where the camera is pointed to some expressly lovely scene at some happy moment; and is it not also due in no small degree — in fact entirely, in so far as such a result is not accidental — to the artistic feeling in the mind of the photographist himself, who knows how to choose and when to take his view?…”]

“Photographic Society, London. Ordinary General Meeting. April 5, 1859.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 5:82 (Apr. 9, 1859): 241-247. [“…The Secretary then read the following list of Members of the Society who had accepted the office to serve on the Collodion Committee: — — Mr. Bedford; Dr. Diamond; Professor De la Motte; Mr. Fenton; Mr. Frith; Mr. Hughes, Strand; Mr. Llewellyn; Mr. Mayall; Count de Montizon; Mr. Morgan, Bristol; Mr. Robinson, Leamington; Mr. Rosling; Mr. Thurston Thompson; Mr. White; and Mr. Williams, Regent Street….:]

“On some of the Applications to which Photography has been applied. PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 5:84. (May 7, 1859.): 285-287. [“The recent and sudden call from the scene of his valuable labours of one who energetically promoted one of these applications seems to call for a statement of the modes he employed to effect this one among the many results of his life. Manuel Johnson, but yesterday the Radcliffe Observer at Oxford, established at that observatory, which he raised to so high a place among the observatories of the world, a complete series of meteorological records….” “…. Astronomy has also tried to avail itself of the photographic agency of light. Mr. De la Rue’s beautiful photographs of the moon, on a scale never dreamt of till he produced them, proclaim what may be hoped to be effected with such an instrument as Lord Rosso’s….” “… The microscope, too, has a part to play as an instrument for the photographist,…” “…On the relations of photography to art there is room for much discussion, and probably also for controversy. Photography has driven into the limbo of the unemployed a class of miniature-portrait painters, and they, like the ostlers and innkeepers of the old “roads,” who occasionally revenged themselves upon the railways by becoming employes upon them, have in many instances joined the motley ranks of photography itself. But that the true artist will not throw down his brush and retreat before the advance of photography into his domain, is evident enough. The utter powerlessness of the chemical pencil of the sun to give the true relations of intensity of colour, the absence from the photograph of that ideal element which is the soul of art, leaves the relation of the photograph to the picture at best only as that of a useful auxiliary to a great result. Even were it possible for the photographist to surmount the former of these difficulties, and to depict not only in correct relative intensity of light and shade but even in actual colour the truth of nature, of which at present there is not the faintest hope, must not the photograph still stand towards the artist’s great work as the truest prose description to the imagery of the poem? The artist need not fear the encroachment of the photographist. He may take the results of the camera, — he has already done so, — and by careful scrutiny of nature thus depicted on a flat surface in such marvellous detail, he may learn a new reverence for that patient elaboration of particulars which need not mar his whole; and he may thereby feel that if he never can attain he can yet approach that infinite delicacy of finish which marks the photograph, and that in that approach he is being truer even to the poetry of art than if he were to live in that scorn of detail and emulation of “broad effect” alone, which was born of the consciousness of the limit placed to human action in the production of minutiae, but has never characterized any really great school of art in any age. M. Le Gray may startle by the instantaneous production of a sea-piece, crisped with laughing waves, fringed with the froth and foam of breakers, and overhung with skies of magical reality. But these pictures only startle: the artist feels all their want of true soft harmony, in fact their want of truth; and the public express the same consciousness of their false contrasts by asking if they are indeed moonlight views, or if the heavy clouds are really thunder-clouds. M. Baldus and the Bissons have it all their own way in their colossal views of the new Louvre and the new Tuileries, or of other vast buildings in Paris and elsewhere. But what artist would select such huge masses of masonry alone for the subjects of a picture? To convert them into a picture, he must make them into the background of some living scene, with humanity stamped upon it; or must throw around them the garb of beauty — some tinted gauzy atmosphere won from a setting sun, caught in those transient moments when nature is, as it wore, her own poet; or rather when the exuberance of her beauties can overflow and deck in a foreign grace scenes not else beautiful, and so make even such to appeal to the seat of poetic and artistic sympathy, the human heart. De la Motte, and Fenton, and Bedford, and a few others, may strive, and may now and then succeed in catching some happy effect in their camera; but it is where the camera is pointed to some expressly lovely scene at some happy moment; and is it not also due in no small degree — in fact entirely, in so far as such a result is not accidental — to the artistic feeling in the mind of the photographist himself, who knows how to choose and when to take his view? But in fragments of foreground, in those small bits of detail in which the artist has to subordinate his genius to mechanical and patient labour, the photographist is his best colleague; and it is in the careful study of such photographs that he will feel that art has nothing to fear, but much to learn, from her mechanical (?) associate, photography….” “…The invention of the stereoscope has given a remarkable stimulus to photography. Without photography the stereoscope would have been but a curious apparatus confined to the lecture-room or the drawer of philosophic toys; with photography it has become an article of furniture in every household….” From the National Review.”]

“The Archer Fund. PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 5:85. (May 23, 1859): 299. [(Bedford is listed among the donors to Archer’s widow’s relief fund. He donated 2£. 2s, 0d., a respectable but not lavish amount.)]

“Photographic Societies. Blackheath Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 2:38 (May 27, 1859): 138-140. [“The seventeenth ordinary meeting of this Society was held on May 16th, at the Golf Club House, the President, J. Glashier, Esq., F.R.S., in the chair….” “…The President then proceeded to read a paper on “The application of Photography to Investigations in Terrestrial Magnetism and Meteorology, as practised at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich,”…” “…The following report of the council has been circulated among the members: —
Second Annual Report of the Council,
The lapse of another year brings round the second anniversary of the Blackheath Photographic Society, and the Council have the pleasure of presenting their second annual report. The Council heartily congratulate the Society upon its present prosperous condition. During the past year the Society’s numbers have been recruited by the introduction of many of the influential residents in the neighbourhood, several practical photographers — and all zealous to promote the art of photography. The treasurer’s account is annexed, exhibiting a balance of £49 11s. 2d. in favour of the Society. The soiree, which was held at the Mansion House, by the kind permission of the Rt. Hon. the Lord Mayor, on Friday, the 15th April, was eminently successful; and the works of Messrs. Glaisher, Heisch, Melhuish, Knill, Ledger, Smith, Spencer, Wire, and Wood, were such as to elevate the character of the Society from which they emanated. The following gentlemen contributed also materially as exhibitors to the success of the Exhibition, viz. — Messrs. Bedford, Bell, Dunning, Burfield and Kouch, Claudet, Cumming, Delamotte, Fenton, Frith, Horne and Thornthwaite, Jones, Knight, Ladd, London Stereoscopic Company, Murray and Heath, Malone, Negretti and Zambra, Otterwill, Paul Pretsch, Powell and Leland, Pillischer, Rayne, Reeve, Rosling, Ross, Salmon, Shadbolt, Smith and Beck, Thurston, Thompson, Turner, White, Williams, E. G. Wood, and Herbert Watkins; to each of these gentlemen the Council beg to render their warm acknowledgments…” “…The new forms of lenses are still exciting much discussion. The members have had some opportunity of judging of the results obtained with them at the late exhibition at Suffolk Street. The pictures by Mr. Bedford were mostly taken with a Grubb lens, those by the late Mr. Hewlett, with a Ross Petzval….”]

“Photographic Society, London.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 5:86 (June 15, 1859): 305-307. [“…The Chairman invited criticism. Obtaining no response, he then requested Mr. Malone to describe his camera, which was upon the table. Mr. Malone stated, that his camera combined in one instrument all the latest improvements for general working, both at home and out of doors, and at the same time with as little complication and weight as possible; of course, all being made with due consideration as to its usefulness. A similar camera, at first sight, appeared to have been made for Mr. Fenton and Mr. Bedford, but that was not so. He had heard remarks as to practice and theory, and he would state that he (Mr. Malone) had worked with M. Claudet and Mr. Talbot, and he would observe, for the sake of others, that that distinction which had been attempted to be made between a practical and theoretical photographer was often an illusion, inasmuch as those who study the theory practise in a small way with the camera….”]

“Second Annual Report of the Council of the Blackheath Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 5:86. (June 15, 1859.): 310-311. [“The lapse of another year brings round the Second Anniversary of the Blackheath Photographic Society, and the Council have the pleasure of presenting their Second Annual Report. The Council heartily congratulate the Society upon its present prosperous condition. During the past year, the Society’s numbers have been recruited by the introduction of many of the influential residents in the neighbourhood., several practical photographers, and all zealous to promote the art of photography…. The soiree, which was held at the Mansion House, by the kind permission of the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor, on Friday, the 15th April, was eminently successful; and the works of Messrs. Glaisher, Heisch, Melhuish, Knill, Ledger, Smith, Spencer, Wire, and Wood, were such as to elevate the character of the Society from which they emanated. The following gentlemen contributed also materially as exhibitors to the success of the Exhibition: viz. Messrs. Bedford, Bell, Bunning, Burfield and Houch, Claudet, Cumming, Delamotte, Fenton, Frith, Horne and Thornthwaite, Jones, Knight, Ladd, London Stereoscopic Company, Murray and Heath, Malone, Negretti and Zambra, Ottewill, Paul Pretsch, Powell and Leland, Pillischer, Rayne, Reeve, Rosling, Ross, Salmon, Shadbolt, Smith and Beck, Thurston Thompson, Turner, White, Williams, E. G. Wood, and Herbert Watkins. To each of these gentlemen the Council beg to tender their warm acknowledgments.
The Council regret that so few strictly scientific researches have this year to be reported, as from these only can fundamental improvements be expected. M. Niepce de St. Victor continues his experiments upon the so-called storing up of light…” “…The Council must also bring under the notice, of the Society Mr. Pouncy’s Carbon Printing Process; for though they can by no means agree with him in his assertion that his prints are quite equal to silver ones, the immense strides he has made, in a comparatively short time, render his process one of great promise….” “…The discovery of Mr. J. H. Young, that the invisible image on a collodio-albumen plate can be developed, after the removal of the iodide of silver, by hyposulphite of soda, or cyanide of potassium, is too important to be passed over without notice, showing, as it does, that the change produced in the iodide of silver by light is even greater than has hitherto been thought….” “…The new forms of lenses are still exciting much discussion. The members have had some opportunity of judging of the results obtained with them at the late exhibition at Suffolk Street. The pictures by Mr. Bedford were mostly taken with a Grubb lens, those by the late Mr. Howlett with a Ross Petzval….”]

“Critical Notices.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 3:40 (Oct. 28, 1859): 87. [Book review. How to take Stereoscopic Pictures. By William Ackland. London: Horne and Thornthwaite. “How to take stereoscopic picture is a problem which we trust most of the readers of the “Photographic News” have long since solved; those among them, however, who may have doubts on this subject can obtain the information necessary to enable them to overcome all difficulties in their way by purchasing a little book under the above title….” “…The kind of camera to be used, and all the various apparatus requisite to enable the novice to become a Fenton, or a Woodward, or a Bedford, are all duly set forth; and if he has not all the apparatus which he can possibly require under every conceivable circumstances, it will not be because Mr. Ackland has omitted to call his attention to it….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 3:61 (Nov. 4, 1859): 106. [“The first meeting of this Society since the vacation was held on Tuesday last, the President, the Lord Chief Baron Pollock, in the chair. The minutes of the last meeting having been read, the Secretary proceeded to read a letter from a subscriber, who withheld his name, on the subject of the Archer Fund. The purport of the letter was to urge on photographers the great claim which the family of the late Mr. Archer had on their generosity, and offering, on the part of the writer, to subscribe a sum of a guinea, or half a guinea, for each of the seven photographic establishments he possessed, for a certain number of years, provided two hundred other photographers would subscribe in a similar proportion;…” “…The President, addressing the meeting, said that there was no paper to be read, and asked if any gentleman present had any remarks to offer on any subject which might originate a discussion. For a long time it seemed as if no gentleman had anything to say on any topic of the kind suggested; but, eventually, Mr. Fenton stepped forward, and said, that just previous to the close of the last meeting the question of lenses formed the subject of conversation. During the vacation he had been working with one of the orthoscopic lenses, as well as with the old form of lens, and in his hands he found that the latter was the best for landscape purposes. With the orthoscopic lens he was unable to focus near and comparatively distant objects with the same distinctness, and, on the whole, he considered the old form of lens the best for general purposes. He had heard something of a new lens, invented by Mr. Sutton; and, perhaps, if any gentleman present had been using it, he would favour them with some remarks thereupon. He had made the above observations in the hope of inducing a discussion…. On Mr. Fenton resuming his seat another long silence ensued, which was at last broken by Mr. Bedford, who said that he, too, had tried the orthoscopic lens, and had arrived at the same conclusion as Mr. Fenton. For landscape purposes he found that it failed to give the same distinctness, in respect to near and distant objects, unless a small stop was used; and in that case, the length of the exposure was greatly increased. He had found that, to obtain the same degree of sharpness as with a different form of lens, it was necessary to expose for six minutes; whereas, with the latter, he could obtain the desired result in three minutes. He thought the orthoscopic combination a good one for architectural subjects, but not for landscapes. As for Mr. Sutton’s lens, he had not tried it, and therefore could not say anything on the subject. On Mr. Bedford ceasing to speak, the same uncomfortable silence pervaded the meeting, and several members rose and left the room, with that elaborate attempt to do so without making a noise, with which people sometimes leave a church at the beginning of a sermon, and which affects the nerves of those who remain infinitely more than would be the case if the exit had been accompanied by the overthrow of half-a-dozen chairs. At last, Mr. Shadbolt rose to offer some remarks on what had been said….” “…The Secretary read a letter from M. Joubert on the subject of a new process of producing fac-similes of engravings, &c., …” As it seemed hopeless to attempt to revive discussion on the subject of lenses, or to originate another on any other topic, the President announced that the meeting was adjourned until the 6th of December. The attendance of members at this the first meeting of the association, since June last, was very small, probably not more than forty were present at the commencement of business, if that may be called business of which we have given a report above….”]

“Photographic Society. Ordinary General Meeting. Tuesday, November 1, 1859.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 6:91 (Nov. 15, 1859): 72-74. [“…. Before they parted at the last Meeting, the question of lenses occupied a great deal of attention; and to begin a discussion he would state that he had been working with three of Ross’s orthographic lenses, comparing them with others by the same maker, and certainly he (Mr. Fenton) must confess that for landscapes he preferred the old combination. He had tried the orthographic lens for portraits for copying, and found that, if the picture was not too large, the lines were certainly very correct; but in forcing the lens beyond that which was legitimate, as one was obliged to do for landscape work, the variation of the lines of the orthographic lens was more objectionable. It also had the great defect that it would not give the foreground and distance with anything like a sharp definition. There should be a certain limit for distance, within which every object might be rendered comparatively distinct; and he could not get sufficient depth of focus to satisfy him as an artist. If by using a small stop any gentleman had been able to produce satisfactory results, he (Mr. Fenton) would be glad if that gentleman would communicate the result of his practice to the Society. There had been a lens constructed by Sutton, which was said to produce great results; perhaps some gentleman who had been working with that lens would communicate the result of his experience. Mr. Bedford had tried it but little this summer, because when he did try it he found that it possessed very few advantages over the old landscape combination, and those advantages were in rendering architecture, in which case there were advantages in rendering flat surfaces with less convergence in vertical lines. For landscapes, the old form of lens was decidedly the best in focal depth and sharpness. The same results could be obtained by the orthographic lens, but it must be stopped down to such an extent as to make the time become of importance….”]

“Proceedings of the Societies: North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 3:69 (Dec. 30, 1859): 201-202. [“The ordinary monthly meeting of the Association was held at Myddelton Hall, on Wednesday, the 30th ult.; George Shadbolt, Esq., V.P., in the chair. After the usual business of the Association had been disposed of, Mr. G. W. Simpson read a paper “On the Positive Collodion Process,” with some remarks on the Alabastrine Process, illustrated by a large number of specimens. A vote of thanks was given to Mr. G. W. Simpson for his interesting paper; and a discussion ensued on the permanency of pictures taken by the alabastrine process. Mr. Simpson informed the members that many of the specimens on the table had been taken more than three years; and during that time had been standing on a shelf unprotected by glass or case; and although exposed to atmospheric influence for so long a period, there was no perceptible change or deterioration in them. He thought this was a good test and proof of their permanancy….” (Followed by discussions from members.) “…The Chairman exhibited a number of stereoscopic pictures of China, published by Negretti and Zambra, and a remarkable picture of the spire of Salisbury Cathedral, by Mr. Sedgfield, which appeared horribly distorted in looking at it in the usual position of the stereoscope, owing to excessive “cocking up” of the camera; but on changing its position and looking upwards, the picture assumed a natural appearance. The Chairman also exhibited several stereoscopic sunset pictures, by G. W. Wilson, of Aberdeen, with the sun directly in front of the camera — a position in which it has been hitherto considered impossible to take a good impression. These proofs were very much admired for their brilliant and artistic effect. In addition to the above, he exhibited a small print, on paper, by Mr. Church, of Glasgow, prepared six weeks ago, and kept in a case similar in principle to that of Messrs. Marion and Co. A copy of the Presentation Photograph for the present year was handed round: the subject “Tintern Abbey,” by Bedford. This elicited general approbation, and a vote of thanks was given to the gentlemen of the sub-committee for the good taste and judgment displayed by them in the selection. Mr. D. W. Hill exhibited a picture taken by the Fothergill process, with the addition of one grain phosphate of ammonia to the ounce of albumen solution. Mr. Wall kindly presented a stereoscopic picture of the costly bedstead lately presented to the Queen, for which the thanks of the meeting were accorded to him. Captain Higginson and Mr. Henry Squire were duly elected members of the association. Two of Mr. Moginio’s tents were erected in the room for exhibition — one a tent only, the other camera and tent combined, weighing only 9 lbs. They attracted a considerable share of attention, and, long after the meeting had closed, many of the members were discussing the merits of both. The meeting then adjourned.”]

1860

“Fine Arts. Photographic Society.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 36:1012 (Sat., Jan. 14, 1860): 35. [“….Roger Fenton abounds in picturesque bits from Oxford, and in glimpses of fine natural scenery in Lancashire and Yorkshire; and altogether, may be said to be the most successful landscape operator in the room, though he is closely followed by F. Bedford, who also exhibits some very pleasing bits of sculpture….”]

“Photographic Society. Ordinary General Meeting. Tuesday, January 3, 1860.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 6:93 (Jan. 16, 1860): 116-127. [“…The Chairman reminded the Members that this was the night for the nomination and election of Auditors, and to nominate for the Council in lieu of any of those names recommended by the present Council. Mr. Bedford seconded the Motion, which was duly put and carried….”]

“Exhibition: London Photographic Society’s Exhibition.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 7:111 (Feb. 1, 1860): 41-42. [Seventh Annual exhibition. Bedford; Fenton; Gutch; Hennah; John H. Morgan; H. P. Robinson; Rosling; Thompson; Williams; Henry White; F. M. Lyte; James Mudd; Lyndon Smith; Dixon Piper; J. Spode; Vernon Heath; A. J. Melhuish; Bisson Fréres; Russell Sedgfield; Woodward; S. Bourne; Sykes Ward; Mrs. Verschoyl; others mentioned.]

“The Architectural Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 3:75 (Feb. 10, 1860): 265-266. [“On Wednesday last the Exhibition of the above association was opened at No. 9, Conduit-street; and whether viewed with regard to the number and excellence of the works of art displayed, or the attendance of visitors, the promoters may, we think, congratulate themselves on having achieved a well-merited success. The specimens of sun-painting are arranged and classified so as not only to impart full effect to the scenes they depict, but to arouse the mind to the contemplation of the many and important historical incidents with which they are inseparably connected. Set apart in a room by themselves are some of the finest productions of the camera, representing our own cathedral, civic, and palatial architecture, while those from Spain, Rouen, Rome, the Roman States, Constantinople, Jerusalem, France, and the North Italian States, fully evidence the skill, taste, and enterprise of the photographers of the present day. Space precludes us from entering into a critical and minute description of the pictures. This we shall do at another time; but at present we must confine ourselves to the enumeration of a few of the principal exhibitors, as follows: — Signor Ponti, and Messrs. Robertson, Bent, Macpherson, Cundall, Downes, Melhuish, Clifford, Bedford, Greenish, Fenton, Cocke, &c. &c….” “…Our English cathedrals were illustrated by many views in the gallery-. The civil and domestic architecture of the medieval period was also illustrated by many striking views, and our own true, happy England, with its Gothic abbeys, churches, baronial halls, and colleges, was represented by many pictures, upon which he could not now stop to enlarge. In connection with these works he would mention the names of Mr. Fenton and Mr. Cocke (to the latter of whom he could not refer without expressing his gratitude for the personal obligations under which he lay- to him), of Messrs. Dolamore and Bullock, Mr. Robinson, of Leamington, and also of Mr. Bedford, who was not only so well known to the profession as a photographic artist, but who was particularly successful in his combinations of building and landscape scenery- — views remarkably clear and distinct in all their various tones….”]

“The Photographic Society of London. — Annual Meeting and Soiree.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 3:75 (Feb. 10, 1860): 278-280. [“On Monday evening, the fifth inst., the soiree of the Photographic Society was held at the Suffolk-street Gallerv. The attendance, which was very numerous, included a larger number of ladies than usual, and the scene was one of great animation. The Right Hon. the Lord Chief Baron Pollock, F.R.S., President of the Society, received the guests…” “…Report of the Collodion Committee. In March, 1859, the Photographic Societv appointed a Committee to examine samples of photographic collodion, and report upon them, with a view of arriving at a definite formula….” “…The following are extracts from the Reports of those members who make complaint. Mr. Bedford says — “One fault I have found is a too quick drying of the film in hot weather. If, as is frequently the case the plate has to be kept over fifteen minutes or so, it is necessary to add alcohol to the developer to prevent stains and patches of unequal development…” “…First, with regard to the sensitiveness of the collodion, the opinion of the majority is, that it is unsurpassed. Mr. Delamotte, who has worked in the subdued light of the Crystal Palace, at Sydenham, with lenses of very considerable focal length, speaks confidently on his point; and Messrs. Bedford, Hughes. Robinson, Sedgfield, and Williams, are of the same opinion….” “…When iodide of potassium is employed as the iodiser, the collodion loses its sensitiveness verv considerably after a time, but the members of the Committee are not agreed as to how long it will keep in good working condition. Mr. Bedford says: “I prefer using it newly iodised, say in about two day’s; after five or six days it loses sensitiveness, and deteriorates rapidly, but in this state it works well enough when time of exposure is no object. I kept it in even working order by adding some freshly-iodised collodion to the stock bottle daily….” “…In drawing up a report in which gradation of tone in a photograph is spoken of, it must always be borne in mind that the character of the light and the aperture of the lens have much to do with the hardness or softness of the picture; and this observation we find corroborated in the separate reports sent in to us, for whilst one or two members have found at times a difficulty in obtaining sufficient contrast, others have complained of excessive intensity, although both were working with the same description of bath. Mr. Bedford alludes to this, and says: “In a strong light or glare of sunshine, there is, I think, a tendency to too great densitv, a too rapid starting out of the image. This I have remedied by employing a weaker developer, and, in some cases, by washing the free nitrate away from the plate before putting it on, or washing the plate once or twice during the development, using, in that case, silver to give force to the image. By this means I avoided hardness, and secured a good picture under trying circumstances of light and heat.” “…In concluding this Report, the Committee have much pleasure in expressing their opinion of the superior excellence of the collodion submitted to them by Mr. Hardwich, and they can confidently recommend the Society to stamp the same with the full mark of its approbation. F. Bedford, P. Delamotte, Hugh W. Diamond, Roger Fenton, C. J. Hughes, T. A. Malone, J. H. Moran, H. P. Robinson, Alfred Rosling, W. Russell Sedgfield, J. Spencer, T. R. Williams.”]

”Meetings of Societies: Architectural Photographic Association.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 7:112 (Feb. 15, 1860): 51-52. [Includes a paper by Prof. Donaldson, “Photography the Instructor of the Architect, and Architecture the Best Subject for the Photographer.” This was, in effect, a precis of the Society’s exhibition. Bedford; Bent; Clifford; Cundall; Cocke; Downes; Fenton; Greenish; Macpherson; Melhuish; Ponti; others mentioned.]

“Photographic Society of London. Annual General Meeting. Tuesday, February 7, 1860. Report of the Collodion Committee.” THE PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 6:94 (Feb. 15, 1860): 151-155. [“…Report of the Collodion Committee… In March 1859, the Photographic Society appointed a Committee to examine samples of photographic collodion, and report upon them, with a view of arriving at a definite formula. Advertisements were Issued, which were replied to by Messrs. Hardwich, Mayall, and Sutton; but the two latter of these gentlemen did not send in collodion in sufficient quantity to admit of its being thoroughly tested. Hence, although individual members have worked with the collodions of Mr. Mayall and Mr. Sutton, the Committee in its collective capacity can only pronounce upon that prepared for them by Mr. Hardwich. They trust, however, that the investigation which they have undertaken will not be suffered to end with one Report, but that other makers of collodion will come forward and assist the Society in the determination of this difficult but important question….” “…The Report being satisfactory on the points above mentioned, we next consider the quality of the film yielded by the collodion, as regards closeness or openness of texture, and here it is found that some members speak of it as being too horny. That the film does possess such a structure is certain, and hence the question of how far this must be considered a defect. The following are extracts from the reports of those members who make complaint. Mr. Bedford says, “One fault I have found is a too quick drying of the film in hot weather. If, as is frequently the case, the plate has to be kept over fifteen minutes or so, it is necessary to add alcohol to the developer to prevent stains and patches of unequal development.” Mr. Hughes also observes: “My dark room being small, and with a southern exposure, becomes almost like an oven in hot weather, and one of the principal difficulties which I encountered was the partial drying of the film whilst it was in the camera slide.” The attention of the other members of the Committee was particularly directed towards this horny quality of the film; but, with the exception of Mr. Morgan, who speaks of it as inconvenient, but not insuperable, they make no allusion to it in their replies….” p. 151. “…When iodide of potassium is employed as the iodizer, the collodion loses its sensitiveness very considerably after a time; but the members of the Committee are not agreed as to how long it will keep in good working condition. Mr. Bedford says: “I prefer using it newly iodized, say in about two days; after five or six days it loses sensitiveness, and deteriorates rapidly, but in this state it works well enough when time of exposure is no object. I kept it in even working order by adding some freshly iodized collodion to the stock-bottle daily.”…” p. 152. “…In drawing up a Report in which gradation of tone in a photograph is spoken of, it must always be borne in mind that the character of the light and the aperture of the lens have much to do with the hardness or softness of the picture; and this observation we find corroborated in the separate reports sent in to us; for whilst one or two members have found at times a difficulty in obtaining sufficient contrast, others have complained of excess of intensity, although both were working with the same description of bath. Mr. Bedford alludes to this, and says: “In a strong light or glare of sunshine, there is, I think, a tendency to too great density, a too rapid starting out of the image. This I have remedied by employing a weaker developer, and in some cases, by washing the free nitrate away from the plate before putting it on, or washing the plate once or twice during the development, using, in that case, silver to give force to the image. By this means I avoided hardness, and secured a good picture under trying circumstances of light and heat.” Allowing for these differences in intensity, which must occur with any collodion, we find that the preparation which we have examined is sufficiently good, and that it is not a collodion of that kind which requires a considerable addition of nitrate of silver to the developer, or fails to yield an intense picture unless acetate be added to the bath. As a rule, the image will attain its maximum density shortly after the pyrogallic acid is applied, and there will be a fair share of the characteristic drab or cream colour upon its surface….” p. 153. “…In concluding this Report the Committee have much pleasure in expressing their opinion of the superior excellence of the collodion submitted to them by Mr. Hardwich, and they can confidently recommend the Society to stamp the same with the full mark of its approbation. F. Bedford, P. Delamotte, Hugh W. Diamond, Roger Fenton, C. J. Hughes, T. A. Malone, J. H. Morgan, H. P. Robinson, Alfred Roslino, W. Russell Sedgfield, J. Spencer, T. R. Williams.”]

“The Photographic Exhibition. Third Notice.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 3:76 (Feb. 17, 1860): 282-284. [“It would be difficult to decide which prints are most attractive, those by Fenton, or those by Bedford. Fenton’s pictures have the advantage as regards size, but those by Bedford represent such beautiful scenes, and have a tone so peculiarly rich, that it is with renewed pleasure one returns to look at them. At all events, it is certain that without the prints contributed by these artists, the Exhibition would have made a comparatively poor appearance; not that there are no good prints beside theirs, but not a sufficient number to have formed an Exhibition worthy of the name. Beside these, Mr. Maxwell Lyte and M. Bisson are very liberal contributors, and their pictures possess a peculiar charm. We shall refer to them in detail as we advance in our review….” “…Just at this part of the room the attention is powerfully arrested by a group of Bedford’s prints. The first of these is a view of “The Eagle Tower, Carnarvon Castle,” a good picture, both in respect to manipulation and subject. The tower is a fine object, and well rendered; the water is particularly good. “At Llanberis” is a beautiful photograph of a picturesque spot; the gradation of tone is very fine, the mountains appearing to melt away in the distance, while the water in the foreground is rendered with that effect which, we may venture to say, is peculiar to this artist. Frame 216 contains four prints, three of which are perfectly charming. The exception is the “View at Aber.” There is too much glare in the foreground, and the scene is not so pleasing as the others. As regards the remaining three, the view in “Lledr Valley” is exceedingly good; the details are beautifully rendered; the water and foliage could not be surpassed, and the whole print has a wonderfully soft appearance. Quite as much may be said in favour of the picturesque view of “Pont Aberglaslyn” — a lovely spot, and one to which the photographer has done ample justice. The manner in which the water and the foliage, and the effects of light and shade, are reproduced, is worthy of the highest praise. The view on “The Lluywy” is also a beautiful print, but hardly equal to the preceding. It is a change in every way to turn from these representations of some of the most lovely scenes in Nature to views of streets in Chester. The view of “Bridge Street” is hardly worthy of Mr. Bedford’s reputation. In his case it is not sufficient that he should produce a picture of which we can say that it is very good; is a whole, but it should be perfect in all its parts, and this is not the case in the print under consideration. The upper part is all that could be desired, but the lower part has serious defects, which ought to have prevented him from sending it to the Exhibition. The view of “Eastgate Street Row” is much superior. The manner in which the quaint old architecture is represented is what it ought to be, and the print is a very interesting one. Hanging in the same frame with the view of “Bridge Street,” and offering a striking contrast in every way, is one of the best of Mr. Bedford’s prints. The scene is exceedingly picturesque, and selected with great judgment. ‘The catalogue says it is “Pont-y-Pair” (we will not set our readers’ teeth on edge by giving the remainder of the consonants which form a caption of the entry in the catalogue), and it is an infinitely more lovely spot than its name would seem to indicate. The print of “Conway Castle” is a very nice one; there is great clearness .and definition combined with great softness. “A River Scene, Capel Curig,” is not inferior to the preceding, but is excelled by that numbered 227, which is another view taken at Capel Curig. The perspective is excellent, the mountains gradually fade away in the distance, and the objects in the foreground are rendered with beautiful effect. The view of “Moel Siabod,” is not equal to many other of Mr. Bedford’s prints. ‘There is a want of definition in many parts, and it is altogether inferior to its companion print, a “View of ‘Trefriew Mill,” in which the foliage is beautifully given, as well as the minor details of the picture. These do not include the whole of the prints exhibited by Mr. Bedford, but they are sufficient to show how much he contributes to uphold the character of the Exhibition….”]

“Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ART JOURNAL 22:3 (Mar. 1860): 71-72. [The seventh exhibition of the Photographic Society is now open, and, with great unwillingness, we are compelled to declare that we are unable to detect any improvement in any division of this interesting art. There are numerous very beautiful pictures, but they are all at that dead level of excellence which has become wearisome. A few glaring departures from the stereotyped customs of the photographists of the day — even were they examples of failures — would be a great relief. The Photographic Society has been established for many years, and their Journal has been regularly published since March, 1853. They begin their work with the following paragraph: — ” The object of the Photographic Society is the promotion of the art and science of Photography, by the interchange of thought and experience among photographers, and it is hoped this object may, to some considerable extent, be effected by the periodical meetings of the society.” Let any one examine the work done by the Society in the seven years which have passed — let any one go carefully over the collection of pictures now exhibiting, remembering the promise of former years — we are convinced that their judgment will be in accordance with our own, and that they will declare the Society has failed in every way to fulfil the hopes, upon the strength of which it was started. We believe the cause of this lies somewhat below the surface, and hence it has not been detected in the earlier working of the Society; and the influence has evidently extended itself too thoroughly through the body now for us to entertain any hope of its removal, or of there being any chance for a renovation of a society which might have done much for the advancement of the art and science of photography. The exhibition of last year was rendered above the average by the collection of photographs from the Cartoons. Those were the striking point of that exhibition; the present one, wanting this, is singularly tame and uninteresting. There are the same exhibitors as before, and a few new ones. Mr. Roger Fenton exhibits between thirty and forty pictures, all of them fine specimens of photography, and many of them exceedingly beautiful. These pictures are examples of great industry, of the most careful photographic manipulation, and of a true artistic feeling. Mr. C. Thurston Thompson, who devotes himself to the photographic department of the Art-Museum at South Kensington, has contributed copies of the sketches by Raphael and Michael Angelo; of drawings by Holbein and some others, which ore evidences of the value of photography as a means of multiplying the works of our greatest masters for the purposes of study. Mr. Alfred Rosling is charming, as usual, in his small but complete pictures. Mr. Lyndon Smith, in his views on the Wharfe, treads close on the heels of Roger Fenton. Mr. Francis Bedford, always good, quite equals any of his former works: there are few things in the exhibition superior to those pictures which are to illustrate a work entitled “The Home tour of the Picturesque and Beautiful.” Messrs. Cundall and Downes have two or three very charming photographs; some are, however, to our eyes, objectionable in colour. It is useless particularizing the works of all: as photographs the works deserving of commendation are those of the well known Bisson Freres, of Captain Tnpper, of J.M. Mackie, of Lake Price — whose’ Romes’ are excellent, of John H. Morgan, of V. A. Prout, of Mrs. Verschoyle, of A. J. Melhuish, and of Sykes Ward. There are others who have produced good photographs, but they do not appear to rise in any respect above the level, which is so easily obtained by the Collodion process with a good camera obscura. Mr. Samuel Fry has attempted a large picture of a heavy sea at Brighton: we cannot but regard this as a failure. The wave rolling on the shore is most imperfectly represented. ‘Sea and Clouds,’ by the same photographist, is superior to the other attempt. Mr. Henry P. Robinson has some composition pictures; of these, ‘Sour Apples’ is the only one possessing any merit. The groups are most unartistically arranged, and the photography is of the common order. The exhibition of portraits is large, and many of them are certainly excellent specimens of the art, and highly recommendatory of the several eihihitors to those who desire faithful resemblances of their friends or of themselves. Photographs of the finest kind are now so publicly exhibited in the shop windows of our principal streets, that we must urge upon the Photographic Society the importance of their insisting on the production of novelties for their exhibitions. If the Society desires to maintain a respectable position, it must sternly refuse any picture which has been previously exhibited; and it should abandon the very objectionable plan of putting in their catalogue the prices at which the photographs are to be sold. There are 586 photographs named in the catalogue; of this number about one-half have the selling price printed, and the large majority of those not so priced are advertisements of individuals or companies who live by taking photographic portraits. The profession is a most honourable one, and one which calls upon the mind of the artist for the exercise of some of its best functions. We have the highest respect for all, an especial friendship for some, but we do contend that a Society honoured by having the Queen and the Prince Consort for Patrons, and the Lord Chief Baron for President, should not allow their exhibition-room to be converted into a shop. We have heard the Royal Academy and the Water-Colour exhibitions I quoted in defence: we have never seen the selling price of a picture in the Royal Academy catalogue. But there is no parallel between the sale privately of a picture, which has been the labour of months, or it may be of years, and the sale of photographs, which can be multiplied at will, and of which the finest specimens by Mr. Roger Fenton are ticketed at 12s. This must be altered, or the Photographic Society may rest assured that each exhibition will become less and less attractive, and it will learn that, as a Society, it has lost its vocation, since it does not attend to “the promotion of the art and science of photography.”]

“Exhibition: London Photographic Society’s Exhibition. Part II.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 7:113 (Mar. 1, 1860): 69-70. [Seventh Annual exhibition. Bedford; Fenton; Gutch; Hennah; John H. Morgan; H. P. Robinson; Rosling; Thompson; Williams; Henry White; F. M. Lyte; James Mudd; Lyndon Smith; Dixon Piper; J. Spode; Vernon Heath; A. J. Melhuish; Bisson Fréres; Russell Sedgfield; Woodward; S. Bourne; Sykes Ward; Mrs. Verschoyl; others mentioned.]

“Architectural Photographic Exhibition. Concluding Notice.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 3:79 (Mar. 30, 1860): 319-320. [“As soon as we turn from the views in France, by native artists, we are forcibly, and somewhat unpleasantly, reminded, that there is an artistic element in photography which is seldom recognised or employed by the photographer. The views in which the whole picture is covered with architectural or sculptural details are, for the most part, satisfactory in an artistic point of view; the chiaroscuro is harmonious, and an equality of tone throughout prevails. In those views, on the contrary, where a large portion of the picture is occupied with sky, the artistic effect is marred by the blankness of that portion of the subject, which produces a cold, raw, crude effect, very displeasing to the eye, and no less injurious to the picture: such is the result of stopping out the skies….” “…There is a series of views, taken expressly for the Association, by Mr. Bedford, which display that artist’s peculiar traits; among the best of which is 440, “Baptistry, Canterbury Cathedral,” and 441, “Precinct Gate” of the same. 459, 461, and 464, views of “Tintern Abbey,” possess great excellence….”]

“Minor Topics of the Month. Photographs and Stereoscopic Views by Mr. F. Bedford.” ART JOURNAL 20:4 (Apr. 1860): 126. [“…, have been issued by Messrs. Catherall and Prichard, of Chester, descriptive of scenery, buildings, &c., in North Wales. The series of the latter is large, and comprehends a considerable number of the leading objects which excite the wonder and admiration of tourists, and have been the special delights of artists time out of mind. The photographs are of good size, and it is scarcely requisite to say, are of the highest possible merit, — the name of Mr. Bedford will sufficiently guarantee their excellence. They picture the leading beauties of the country — hills, dales, rivers, rocks, and waterfalls — and are delicious copies of surpassing natural attractions. The stereoscopic views are certainly among the best that have been produced, supplying a rich intellectual feast: to us they have given enjoyment of the rarest character — and so they may to our readers, for they are attainable at small cost. We name them at random, but they are all of famous places — Pont Aberglaslyn, Capel Curig, Llyn Ogwen, Bettys-y-coed, Beddgelert, Pont-y-gilli, Trefriew, Llanberis, Pen Llyn, with views also of the Britannia Bridge, Carnarvon Castle, &c. It is highly to the credit of a provincial establishment to have issued a series so entirely good.]

“Proceedings of Societies. North London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 3:82 (Apr. 9, 1860): 363-364. [“The annual meeting of this Society took place on Wednesday evening, the 28th inst., G. Shadbolt, Esq., Vice-president, in the chair. The minutes of the last meeting having been confirmed. The Secretary read the following
Report.
The time has again arrived for your Committee to address you, and it congratulates you on the prosperous state of the Association….” “…Your Committee would not let this opportunity pass without recording its sense of obligation to those gentlemen who have kindly read papers, exhibited apparatus in the discussions at the meetings, and also to Mr. F. Bedford, for the liberal terms on which he supplied the presentation photograph….”]

“Exhibitions. Liverpool Society of Fine Arts. Exhibition of Paintings, Engravings, and Photographs, at the Queen’s Hall, Liverpool.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 7:117 (May 1, 1860): 136-137. [Rejlander, Robinson, Frith, Mudd, Fenton, Wm. Keith, Bedford, J. H. Morgan, Duckworth (India), W. G. Helsby (daguerreotypes of Tahiti, Copiapo, Chili and Bolivia) and “a Liverpool lady” mentioned.]

“Photographic Society of London. Ordinary General Meeting. Tuesday, June 5, 1860.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 6:98 (June 15, 1860): 246-254. [“…Mr. Dallmeyer read the following paper: — On the Nature of Distortion, as produced by the present forms of View-Lenses, — and on a Lens, or combination of Lenses, free from this defect….” “…“The Chairman invited discussion….” “…Mr. Bedford remarked that the objections made by Mr. Malone to the defects of certain lenses did prevail to a great degree. He (Mr. Bedford), for instance, had found the line of the horizon in a sea-view curved up or down, and the straight stems of the Scotch fir and larch bent to a serious extent, and he thought it desirable therefore, in order to be prepared for all difficulties, to take various forms of lenses now made. The £25 Portrait Lens of Ross, when stopped down, was especially useful for such subjects as dark glens and interiors; the Orthographic for architectural views; and the old “Ross” View Lens, than which there was nothing better for landscapes and general use, as giving greater depth of view and a better average of perfection than any other lens. The Ortho. lens was no improvement for landscape purposes, although very useful and almost indispensable in some cases. He should like to have seen what this lens would do on larger plates. The lines certainly appeared remarkably straight; but there was, even in these small plates, a very perceptible want of sharpness at the edges, particularly in the copy of the ‘Times,’ where the outside columns were out of focus and blurred; but possibly the lens had not been worked under the most favourable conditions….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 4:93 (June 15, 1860): 79-83. 3 illus. [“We this week continue our report of the proceedings at the above Society, held at King’s College on the 5th instant. The chair was occupied by P. Le Neve Forster, Esq., M.A., one of the Vice-Presidents of the Society. Mr. Dallmeyer read the following paper
On the Nature of Distortion, as produced by the Present Forms of View Lenses, and on a Lens or Combination of Lenses free from this Defect.
“He said, the subject he was about to bring before the notice of the Society had already occupied, at various times, a considerable portion of the Journal of this Society, as also of other journals, which he thought fully indicated the importance of the subject. Such being the case, he trusted that they would bear with him, if some of the points he might state were already familiar to some of them….”  (Followed by a long, detailed description of the topic, in turn followed by extensive comments from the audience.) “…Mr. Bedford said, that certainly the objections Mr. Malone made to the peculiarity of these lenses prevailed to a great degree. He (Mr. Bedford) had a sea line curved up and down, and he had also had larch and fir trees bent in a singular manner; and he quite agreed in the opinion that it was necessary, in order to be prepared for all kinds of work, to take all the lenses that were made. He took a portrait lens of Ross — the one known as the £25 lens — which he found very useful for dark objects in glens and interiors, and such subjects as those; the orthographic, for flat architectural views, and the old Ross view lens, than which there was nothing better for landscapes, as it gave greater depth of view and better average perfection than any other lens. He was quite certain that the orthographic was not an improvement for landscapes, although very useful and almost indispensable in certain exceptional cases. He should like to have seen specimens of the production of those lenses upon large plates. In those exhibited the lines seemed straight, but there was a very sensible falling off in the sharpness of the pictures, and particularly that of the Times, for, small as it was, the lines were not only out of focus but blurred. He did not know whether the lens had been worked under all its advantages….” (p. 82.)

“From A Photographer’s Commonplace Book.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 4:106 (Sept. 14, 1860): 230-231. [“Returning to Pegwell a day or two after I obtained from the other side of the village a capital collection of picturesque “little bits,” such as are usually called “studies for artists.” The best of them I got from a rugged, irregular, earth-bank beside the path, crowned with some stumpy, ragged bushes, with weeds, flowers, grasses, bits of detached earth, twigs, roots, &c., at its base and sides, which “composed” into something really nice when selected with due reference to light, shade, and colour. The actinic influence of colour must, as I have said before, never be absent when you are calculating photographically pictorial effects. Camera artists do sometimes look for these “little bits,” but when they introduce them we too commonly find all their beauty lost, because the combined influence of light and colour has not duly entered into their calculations. I don’t know when I — the digressor — shall get to the end of these rambles, for here am I going off the track before I am fairly on it again, because it strikes me I can say something that may be useful to you about these aforesaid ‘bits’.…” “…Photographic landscapes seldom have good foregrounds,* [*The reason for this may be an optical one, it being almost impossible to secure good definition in the extreme or middle distance, and in the foreground also;but then arises the question, where can sharpness be dispensed with to least injure the result? I do not think the artist will say it is in the foreground, whatever others may affirm. I have seen pictures by Lyndon Smith, Bedford, Frank Howard, and Fenton with good foregrounds, in which the middle and extreme distance had not, apparently, suffered.] and this I have frequently regretted, because conscious that nothing gives more interest or better effect. One of our celebrated water-colour landscape painters — Aaron Penley — says; “A good foreground often gives interest to a scene which otherwise would have nothing to recommend it.”…”]

“Correspondence.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:102 (Oct. 15, 1860): 22. [“All communications for the ‘Journal,’ and on business relating to the Photographic Society, may be addressed to the Secretary and Editor at Messrs. Taylor and Francis’s, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street, E.C.
L. B. (Shrewsbury). — 1. The Views in Switzerland are by Bisson, of Paris; they may be procured of Murray and Heath, Piccadilly. 2. We believe there is a work on Landscape Photography, by Mr. Hugh Owen, of Bristol, but have not seen it. For aerial perspective, you may procure the separately published pictures of Fenton and Bedford; for minute detail of foliage, there are some choice examples to be had, from the camera of Mr. H. White. In the last exhibition of the Society, Mr. Lyndon Smith also exhibited some choice effects.”…”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society – Continued.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 4:119 (Dec. 14, 1860): 391-393. [“Mr. Thomas prefaced and interspersed his paper on varnishing with some remarks, which were important….” “…the film shrivelled up in some places and finally cracked. Mr. Bedford had had some films spoiled by cracks of honeycomb form. They had been varnished with spirit varnish and printed from. He had not had any crack with amber varnish; but he did not find it hard enough. He sometimes recoated with spirit varnish after amber varnish, and never found any crack which were so treated. He would be glad to know if there were any means of arresting the cracking after it had commenced, for when it had begun on one part of the film it generally spread. Mr. Quin had met with the honeycomb cracks. He thought it important not to heat the plate too much before applying the varnish, a gentle heat was sufficient. Mr. Bedford always applied a greater heat in varnishing than he thought it was likely the film would be subjected to from the rays of the sun. Mr. Hughes remarked…” “…Dr. Diamond said he believed he was the first to use the Soehnée varnish in this country. It was originally intended for varnishing leather, and was manufactured by Soehnée Freres, from a recipe by Dr. Ure. Mr. Quin had made some experiments to ascertain its composition. he found it to consist largely of white lac in combination with some other gums. Mr. Vernon Heath had never heard of any case in which the Soehnée varnish had cracked, and asked Mr. Bedford if the spirit varnish which he had described as cracking was the Soehnée varnish. Mr. Bedford believed not. It was a spirit varnish he had from Mr. Thomas. Mr. Thomas had been prepared for much variety of opinion on this subject….”]

“Photographic Society of London. Ordinary General Meeting. December 4, 1860.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:104 (Dec. 15, 1860): 50-57. [“…Dr. John Ryley then read the following paper: —
Result of a Series of Experiments on the Collodio-Albumen Process, as tending to show that the structural condition of the Albumen plays an important part in the Sensitiveness of the Plate
….” “…(Comments by Mr. Thomas, Dr. Diamond, Prof. Hardwich, Sebastion Davis, Mr. Fry, Mr. Downes, Mr. Williams, Mr. Bedford, “Mr. Bedford stated that he thought negatives were not always destroyed by those ridges under the edges; he found that upon the application of heat the film would assume its original position and take a new coating of varnish. The most fatal was the clear open crack which was seen honeycombed all over the plate. He found, out of a dozen all varnished on the same day, two were all honeycombed in this way, and they had never been printed from; and that day he had noticed some stereoscopic negatives, from which he had printed about 800 copies, were beginning to crack in the same way. That was the hard spirit varnish. He tried varnish from another maker; and that answered perfectly. The amber he never knew to crack in this way, but he discontinued using that because it was not sufficiently hard to stand the printing of a large number of impressions: after a certain time, either by contact with the excited paper, or by damp acquired by contact with the paper, the varnish wore. He had also on a journey used amber varnish, and re-varnished at home with spirit varnish, and never knew that to crack. He would be very glad if anybody would tell what was to be done to prevent this spreading of the crack; from its first appearance its advance was very gradual, and in the course of a week or two it covered the whole of the surface. He never knew more than six plates go in this way out of a very large number indeed; but it generally happens that if an accident does occur, it is with the most valuable negative.” “…Mr. Bedford said, his rule in varnishing a negative was always to expose it to a greater heat than ever it was likely to be exposed to in the hottest sun. The two negatives he had mentioned were the only ones that had come to grief with him from varnish obtained from Mr. Thomas; the others were as hard and perfectly varnished as could he wished. He thought Mr. Thomas’s suggestions most admirable, as recommending great care in the varnishing of negatives; and it was quite as necessary to varnish a plate well as to form a good collodion film upon it.…”]

“Photographic Engraving of Blocks, To Be Printed with Ordinary Letterpress. The Invention of Mr. Paul Pretsch.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 7:131 (Dec. 1, 1860): 347. 1 illus. [Photo by Francis Bedford, of Dover Castle, reproduced by Pretsch’s engraving process.]

“Stereographs: Chester and North Wales Illustrated, by Francis Bedford.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 7:132 (Dec. 15, 1860): 368-369.

“Varnishes and Varnishing.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 4:120 (Dec. 21, 1860): 397-398. [“One of the most annoying circumstances that can happen to a photographer is the destruction of a fine negative. Vexatious at all times, even where it is the result of carelessness or unavoidable accident, it becomes irritating in the last degree when the destruction arises out of the very steps taken for its utmost protection. So far as the printing qualities are concerned, many negatives give finer pictures without varnish than with it, many varnishes having the tendency to reduce, slightly, the brilliancy and contrast in the negative. It is, therefore, in most cases for the sole purpose of protection that varnish is used. The numerous instances of late in which we have heard of the varnish cracking and destroying the picture, prove, however, that the protector becomes under some circumstances the destroyer. Under the operation of what law, it might puzzle the profoundest philosopher to decide; but it often happens, as recently remarked by Mr. Bedford, that the most prized negatives are the most certain victims. The only portrait of a valued and perhaps departed friend; the one choice view out of a series which have cost much effort and time, perfect in selection, lighting, exposure, and development, having passed through every process quite safely, is carefully varnished. If the fates be unpropitious, its doom is sealed: it may be that the picture is dissolved before the operator’s astonished eyes;it may be that — safely put away in the box until opportunity serve for printing — it is found in a few months to be hopelessly cracked; or if it escape these fatalities, it may, if printed in the sun, stick to the print and be destroyed without remedy in removing. As all these misadventures are dependent on varnishes and varnishing, the question becomes, therefore, one of serious import to consider. A very interesting discussion on this subject took place at the meeting of the Photographic Society, reported in our last….”]

“Critical Notices.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 4:120 (Dec. 21, 1860): 400-401. [North Wales Illustated. A Series of Views by Francis Bedford. Chester: Catherall and Pritchard. “The names we have just written in juxtaposition, North Wales and Francis Bedford, will suggest at once to most of our readers sonic very lovely and picturesque stereographs; glorious scenery and perfect photography combined. Abounding with views pre-eminently adapted to the stereoscope, Wales has been a favourite resort with landscape photographers, and its scenery has been done in almost, every style. Who, for instance, is not familiar with the Rustic Bridge at Beddgelert? But how few have obtained such a picture as this before us, No. 174 of the series? Nothing could more forcibly illustrate how far the photographer may also be an artist than these pictures, and the taste, judgment and feeling of the beautiful which has regulated their selection. Perhaps one of the greatest gems of the series — it is almost invidious to select where all are good — is No. 186, Beddgelert, Pont Aberglaslyn, from below the bridge. Unlike so many photographic renderings of water, which present little but a glaring mass of white paper, the stream here is thoroughly transparent, and dark with the shadows of overhanging rocks and foliage. .Just at the bend of the river, portion of the arch of a bridge embowered in foliage is seen, beyond is distant foliage, whilst the extreme distance is a huge, ragged hill, which shuts out all but a glimpse of sky. Scarcely inferior in beauty of an entirely different class, is Capel Curig, Moel Siabod, No. 130. Here the foreground consists of a broken wall and bold woodland scenery; whilst the atmospheric effect in the retiring foliage and distant hills is most beautifully rendered. A Water Mill at Trefriw is a most charming slide and full of poetry, the disused, silent wheel forming a striking contrast with the tumbling, headlong water, which rushes down by its side, as though glad to escape its accustomed work, and boisterously bent upon a holiday among the wild foliage which overhangs the stream into which it hurries. Llanberis Pass, from Pout-y-Cromlech, pleases us less: an admirable chosen scene, consisting of a stream running its zig-zag turbulent course, dashed hither and thither by the huge boulders which so plentifully intercept its passage, between the far-reaching rocky hills which hem it in on either side, its chiaroscuro is sadly marred by a mass of ungraduated white sky. Cottages, at Aberglaslyn, Beddgelert. otherwise a lovely picture, is marred by the same fault. Bettws-y-Coed, Pont-y-Pair, from below the bridge, is a magnificent production, and leaves nothing to wish, except the annihilation of time and space to the extent of placing the beholder by the side of the youth who reclines there on the green knoll in the glorious summer time. Llanberis Slate Bridge is another of our favourites in the series; but we must. forbear further detail. The series throughout, in an artistic point of view, is full of beauty; photographically or stereographically, there is in some of the pictures a slight tendency to chalkiness from under-exposure and over-development, which we could wish had been avoided, as we could that of the white skies to which we have referred in a few. As a whole they are amongst the most charming stereographs we have seen. The series will form a valuable addition to the delights of many a Christmas meeting.
————————————
Chester Illustrated: A Series of Views for the Stereoscope. By Francis Bedford. Chester: Catherall and Pritchard. “There are few of our old cities possessing more features of interest for photographic illustration than the city of Chester, and the series before us does full justice to all those interesting features. the quaint old houses presenting their pointed steep gables to the narrow streets are highly picturesque, and tell their own story of times long before railways, electric telegraphs, and photography. This series will form a rich treat for many besides the archeologist.”]

“Our Weekly Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1730 (Dec. 22, 1860): 874. [Praise for “a dozen stereoscopic views of Chester and North Wales, photographed by Mr. Bedford, and published by Mssrs. Catherall & Pritchard.”]

1861

“The Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:124 (Jan. 18, 1861): 25-26. [“The annual Exhibition in connection with the Photographic Society is naturally regarded as the epitomized and embodied record of the year’s photographic progress; of its scientific discoveries, its practical improvements, and its advance in art-culture. What men of science or practice have proposed, what societies have discussed, and what journals have suggested, recorded, examined, and criticised, we here hope to find in practical results, and, in a very literal sense, “teaching by example.” The eighth annual Exhibition, which was opened for a private view on Saturday the 12th, and to the public on Monday, at the Gallery of Water Colours in Pall Mall, whilst it meets this view very fully in some respects, is scarcely a satisfactory exponent of the year’s progress as a whole….” “…The result of an analysis of these six hundred and twenty-two specimens is somewhat singular. Of the total number not less than five hundred and fifty-two are by the wet collodion process; twenty-eight by the collodio-albumen process, of these twenty-eight, seventeen are by Mr. Mudd; twenty by the metagelatine process, eighteen of these being by Mr. Maxwell Lyte; eight by the Fothergill process; nine by the waxed paper process, of which eight are by the Rev. T. M. Raven; two are by the malt process; two by the honey process; and one by the oxyrnel process. Whilst the wet process claims such a pre-eminence in the number of its representatives, we can by no means accord to it the same position as to excellence; the number of specimens being borne in mind, dry collodion takes much the foremost rank. It is a somewhat invidious task to award the palm of highest merit where there are a dozen of unexceptionable artists; but deciding by the specimens now exhibited, we should give decided priority to the works of Maxwell Lyte, Janms Mudd, and Francis Bedford; or to Mudd, Bedford, and Lyte; or to Bedford, Lyte, and Mudd, for the three are equal. The specimens of these gentlemen represent three distinct processes, the wet collodion worked by Mr. Bedford, the collodio-albumen process worked by Mr. Mudd, and the metagelatine process worked by Mr. Lyte. Nothing could be a more satisfactory verification of the idea so frequently enunciated in these pages, that it is not so much in processes, as in the cultivation of artistic taste and manipulatory skill that excellence depends. The pictures of each of these processes, abound in everything, constituting good pictures; the most perfect photography guided by thoroughly artistic feeling, We might mention a host of others whose productions are scarcely inferior: Fenton, Robinson, Bisson Freres, Wilson. Wardley, Bourne, Cundall and Downes, Heath, Campbell, Dovizielli, Fry, Gillis, Piper, and others….” “…Mr. Bedford’s pictures, of which there is a goodly number, are all fully equal to his own standard, and that is saying much; some indeed surpass what we have before seen….”]

“Exhibition of the Architectural Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:124 (Jan. 18, 1861): 26. [“The Exhibition of photographs of architectural subjects in connection with this association was opened in Conduit street, on the evening of Tuesday, the 15th instant. As a whole the Exhibition is superior to that of any former year, and displays a greater number of fine interiors than were perhaps ever exhibited. We find the familiar names of Bisson, Fenton. Bedford, Mudd, Dellamore and Bullock and others, and we are glad to add especially, Mr. Frith, who puts in no appearance at the Society’s Exhibition. There are some exquisite interiors of Canterbury Cathedral by Mr. Austin, a gentleman whose name we do not remember before to have met with, but who possesses especial excellence in this branch of the art. We shall notice the Exhibition in. detail in a. future number.”]

“Photography as a Fine Art.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:125 (Jan. 25, 1861): 41-42. [“Those who deny to Photography the right to be ranked among the Fine Arts may be surprised to learn that it, requires a greater variety of talent, and that of a high order, to produce a good photographic picture, than it does to cover a square yard of canvass with a picture eligible as an Art-Union prize….” “…We watch, year by year, the development of the artistic element in photography in the Society’s exhibitions. This year there are evident signs of progress. There are few very bad pictures, while the average is far above mediocrity. In landscapes, the productions of Fenton, Bedford, Heath, Mudd, Piper, Raven, Lyte, and some others, are noteworthy for a genuine appreciation of the artistic capabilities of their subjects, in portraiture the coloured specimens are greatly in the majority, and the pictures of Garrick, Claudet, Lock, Whitfield, Gust, and Ferguson arrest the attention of admiring crowds. Two large views in Rome — the Colosseum and the Church of St. Peter — the work of P. Dovizielli, are marvels of art. There is the usual quantum of contributions from amateurs, neither remarkable for excellence, nor particularly interesting for their subjects. We miss many names of those who have powerfully contributed to render the art as excellent as it has now become, and we may justly deplore the extremely narrow limits within which this wonderful art continues to be exercised. There is abundant display of dilettantism, but little of genuine connoisseurship. With the boundless wealth in art possessed by this country we ought to have been made much more familiar by the aid of photography than we now are. Looking at the unlimited resources of photography, we must confess ourselves disappointed at the poverty of this year’s exhibition. — The London Review.”]

“Fine Arts: Architectural Photographic Exhibition.” ATHENAEUM no. 1735 (Jan. 26, 1861): 124-125. [“Photography, let the ignorant or thoughtless say what they will, unless, indeed, the now unattained mystery of colour be applied at some future time, can never be anything more than the reproducer and transcriber, not the inventor; claiming for it the powers of the last displays only astonishing blindness to the very meaning and ends of Art proper…” (Bisson Freres; Frith; Annan; Fenton; Bedford, others mentioned.)]

“Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ART JOURNAL 21:2 (Feb. 1, 1861): 47-48. [“The eighth exhibition of pictures by the members of the Photographic Society is now open, at the Gallery of the Society of Painters in Water Colours, Pall Mall East. There is a large collection of these sun-painted pictures; sufficiently large, indeed, to persuade the observer, that 1860 was not the year of gloom that most persons imagine it, to have been. Although luminous and calorific rays may have been absorbed by the vapoury clouds which hung over our islands, it is quite evident that a fair proportion of the actinic radiations must have readied the rain-soddened earth. There can be no Jack of enthusiasm amongst photographers. Notwithstanding the uncertainty of the past season, we perceive that the camera-obscura has penetrated the wildest moors, the most iron-bound coasts, the bleakest hills, and the recesses of the flooded valleys. The love of the art has carried the photographer onward through rains and storms. Indeed, we are disposed to believe that many of the most striking effects observable in the pictures exhibited, are due to that beautiful transparency of the atmosphere which follows a period of drenching rain. Our catalogue informs us that 622 pictures are exhibited; but there are more than this number of frames, and many frames contain four and six photographs. This is a proof of industry amongst the members of the society; but, when we ask ourselves if there is any distinguishable advance in the art, we are compelled to pause. For several years we have seen photographs which have possessed all the qualities that mark the best of these chemical pictures, in an eminent degree. Minuteness of detail, sharpness of outline, aerial perspective, freedom from the convergence of perpendicular lines, are merits with which we are familiar. The pictures which Mr. Roger Fenton exhibits this year — many of them very beautiful — are in no respect superior to photographs exhibited by that gentleman four or five years since. The Cheddar Cliffs and the views at Lynmouth are very charming, — perhaps Mr. Francis Bedford never produced more perfect works, — but we do not think them superior to many of the productions which Mr. Llewellyn, Mr. Sutton, and others have shown us. We were especially attracted by Mr. Bedford’s interiors. The views of parts of Canterbury Cathedral, of chosen bits of the Cathedrals of Wells and Exeter, together with portions of St. Mary Redcliffc Church, are all of them valuable studies to the artist, the architect, and the archaeologist; but we have now before us views of the interior of St. Mary Redcliffe, taken full ten years since by Mr. Owen of Bristol, which are in no respect inferior to them. So we might proceed from one class of subjects to another, showing, and we believe correctly, that there has not been any real advance in the photographic art for many years. The facilities for producing pictures, under all circumstances, are far greater than they were. Every mechanical arrangement has received, it would appear, the utmost amount of attention. The physical appliances have been improved, and the chemistry of the art, producing extreme sensibility to the solar influences, has been carefully studied. Yet we have not obtained pictures superior to those which marked the productions of the earlier exhibitions of the society. We cannot explain this. Has photography arrived at its maximum power? Can it not, by the aid of physical science — by the optician’s skill, — or the chemist’s experiments — be advanced higher? We believe much may yet be done; and we hope the society will interest itself in lifting the art beyond that dull level of excellence which has marked the exhibitions for several years. It is not possible for us, even were it desirable, to go through the long list of productions, so much like each other, and so nearly resembling the photographs which we have seen in former years. Fenton is good in his landscapes, but we venture to ask him if he has been quite so careful as usual; Bedford deserves praise; Cundall and Downes are in no respects behind; Caldesi has many beautiful studies; Maxwell Lyte has proved what can be done with metagelatine; Vernon Heath has wandered with advantage amidst the woods of Devonshire. James Mudd exhibits many pictures — all of them excellent — many of them may be classed with the best photographs ever produced. Maull and Polyblank require no advertisement for their portraits, nor do the London Stereoscopic Company for their stereoscopic views. There are, as might be expected, a crowd of “album portraits.” Those of Her Majesty the Queen and the Royal Family, by Mayall, are well-known, but we saw none superior to the chosen few exhibited by the London Stereoscopic Society. There are some successful attempts, not so ambitious as many which Lake Price and others have exhibited, in the direction of subject pictures. ‘The Holiday in the Wood,’ is the most successful of these, but the grouping indicates a deficiency of artistic feeling. Some of the small and so-called instantaneous pictures are good, but, with the extreme sensibility of the collodion process, when employed under the best possible conditions, we certainly fancy that better results are to be obtained. The Photographic Society directed especial attention some few years since to the fixing of photographs. This is a most important matter, demanding still the care of the society. We have now before us photographs which have been executed more than twelve years, in which there is not the slightest symptom of decay. We have others which have been produced within twelve months, which are fading rapidly. We have frequently expressed our opinion that there is no reason why a photograph should not be rendered as permanent as a water-colour drawing. These pictures need not necessarily fade. The experienced eye can almost always certainly tell whether a photograph is fixed or not. We do not intend to say that a man so judging may not be sometimes deceived, although within our experience this is rarely the case. It is to the interest especially of the seller of a photograph, that it proves permanent. If his pictures fade it shows carelessness, and he loses his customers. If the buyer of those chemical pictures finds, by and by, that he has a portfolio of “vanishing scenes” or of “fleeting images” he will weary of collecting them, and return to less truthful, but to more enduring productions. Is it not possible for the society to give some guarantee, or to insist upon some guarantee, that the necessary amount of care has been taken in washing the pictures sold from its walls? We advise our readers to pay this exhibition a visit, they will be much gratified; there is a great variety of subjects, and many very beautiful works. The solar rays have produced pictures which must ever strike the reflecting mind with wonder. A power has been generated millions of miles beyond this earth, which flows, and gives life and beauty to it. That agency which combines and maintains a living organism, paints, by its occult power, a magic picture. Every picture now hanging on the walls of the Photographic Exhibition, the result of chemical change in the hands of the photographer, is directly due to a physical change occurring in the far distant Sun.”]

“Proceedings of Societies. North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:126 (Feb. 1, 1861): 54-56. [“The usual monthly meeting was held at Myddleton Hall on the evening of Tuesday the 30th ult. Mr. George Shadbolt in the chair. The minutes of the previous meeting having been read and confirmed, Mr. Woodward of Nottingham, and Mrs. Chapman were elected members of the society. The Chairman called the attention of the members to some exquisite specimens of photography on the table, which had been presented by Mr. Bedford to the portfolio of the society. He took occasion to commend Mr. Bedford’s example in presenting these pictures to the members generally. The portfolio he might remind them was always on the table, except when out in the hands of some member. Any gentleman wishing to borrow it at any time, could do so on application to the secretary, who, if the portfolio were at the time engaged, would place the applicant’s name on a list for receiving it in the order of his application….”]

“Photographic Society of London. Annual General Meeting. King’s College, February 5, 1861.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:106 (Feb. 15, 1861): 98-108. [“…Mr. Shadbolt wished to know what Mr. Thomas called an agreeable colour. Mr. Thomas thought that was very much a matter of taste, and very difficult to describe; but his own impression was, that it was not a very black, cloudy, and smudgy tone. He might illustrate his meaning of an agreeable colour, by simply referring to Mr. Bedford’s productions in the Exhibition. Mr. Shadbolt’s reason for asking the question was, that it was thought that the colour produced by paper sized by gelatine was not so agreeable as that which was sized by starch, while he was of a precisely opposite opinion….”]

Thompson, S. “Notes on the present Exhibitions. PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:106. (Feb. 15, 1861): 110-114. [“When the alchemists of old, amidst the multiplicity of their processes, in the vain pursuit of the “philosopher’s stone” and the “elixir vita,” stumbled upon a peculiar form of silver which became blackened on exposure to light, and after experimenting on the phenomenon, — doubtless taking it up like a savage would a watch, or a monkey a letter, and obliged after all to lay it down again with a puzzled expression of countenance which told they could make nothing of it, — simply recorded the fact for their posterity in science, how little they imagined they had hit upon the germ of a discovery that was one day to be to art what printing was to literature; and that by its means this dear old world, which so often has presented itself to many of us in moral and social problems, would now present itself to us in pictures!…” “…The Annual Exhibition now open in Pall Mall is the eighth one of the Photographic Society. There will be found in it a more than usually interesting display of sun pictures – pictures, in which is exhibited the latest development of the art. The landscapes and architectural subjects comprise a wide range of examples of varied style and treatment, and in some of them there are carried farther what have hitherto been the boundaries of the art in particular directions. There is also more than an average number of works, a fact which is the more remarkable when we remember how unpropitious the past season has been for the trapping of sunbeams….” “…Turning from Mr. Mudd’s to Mr. Bedford’s, it would be difficult to decide who should hold the champion belt. The photographs of both are emphatically pictures. Mr. Mudd has the advantage in size: for versatility, Mr. Bedford carries away the palm. All are alike good, whether we turn from his architectural subjects to his ‘Cheddar Cliffs,’ from these to his cathedral interiors, and thence to his studies as in No.485, which would set a pre-Raphaelite crazy, — such leaves and tangled weeds, such a conglomeration of beautiful forms and ferns, and such richness of tone as make one scarcely deplore the absence of colour. For perfection of half-tones his ‘Cheddar Cliffs’ are unrivalled. No. 438, ‘South Aisle of Nave, Wells Cathedral,’ is one of, if not the gem of the Exhibition. There is an inimitable grace in the treatment; and from the broken masses of light, the eye is carried into the picture in a most remarkable way. Nos. 477, 479, ‘ Valle Cruris Abbey,’ are both very beautiful. Such subjects are always especial favourites, and the artist has displayed his usual felicity in treating them. Rich, crumbly, picturesque,
“And everywhere the torn and mouldering Past Hung with the ivy. For Time, smit with honour Of what he slew, cast his own mantle on him, That none should mock the dead.”
The last number is hung so low that its merits cannot be well seen; but it is a remarkable picture, taken quite against the light. The sun is glancing in softened radiance through the loopholes made by Time, lighting up turret and tree, and scattering patches of light on objects beyond. It has all the witchery of effect which a picture taken so much against the light would naturally possess, yet it is not in any way deficient in detail — indeed is quite a pioneer of what may be done in photographing effects rather than objects.”
The Fourth Exhibition of the Architectural Photographic Association, now open at the Institute in Conduit Street, is by far the best they have yet been able to set before the public. Their specialties are some grand subjects of Rouen Cathedral, of the very largest size, by Bisson Freres. No. 8, ‘Hotel de Ville,’ has never been surpassed; and No. 9, ‘ Rheims Cathedral, West Portal,’ is wonderful; a journey need no longer be made to study its details. It may be done here at leisure, and with the sunshine for ever on it. We have also some fine interiors shown; and some details of wood-carving, &c., by Mr. Bedford, from which the most skilful draughtsman must turn away in hopeless despair. Some of them were secured by the opportunities afforded during the alterations at St. Paul’s Cathedral, and which may never occur again. Messrs. Delamore and Bullock send some new ones of Ely, and details of New Museum, Oxford; Mr. Frith some thirty new Egyptian views; and Dr. Murray contributes some of the Temples and Tombs of India. The remainder of the Exhibition consists either of old subjects and views, or duplicates of those shown at the Society’s Exhibition….” p. 113.]

“Photographic Printing by Electric Light.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:106 (Feb. 15, 1861): 113-114. [“As the subject of photographic printing is before the Members of the Society, by the adjournment of the discussion on the interesting paper read by Mr. Hughes at the last Meeting, it may not be undesirable to call the attention of our readers who are interested in printing, to a frame of photographs exhibited at the Exhibition by Mr. Bedford (623), which have been printed by the electric light of Professor Way. The quality of these prints is excellent; they are clear, sharp, and well defined, and are equal in all respects to sun-printed pictures. This may be tested by comparing these specimens with some other prints of the same subjects that are exhibited in frame 483. The only information afforded in the Catalogue, or in the frame, is that it is “a first trial.” Had a little more information on the question been given, it would have been very desirable. It would doubtless very much interest photographers to know how long the negative took to print, and other technical points, by which alone photographers would be guided in their estimate of its practical value. We would suggest to Professor Way that he should favour the Photographic Society by attending and exhibiting the light, and giving all necessary information in respect to its principle, and also to its practical utility. If we are rightly informed, the light has been largely tested by Mr. Bingham, the celebrated French photographer, and his opinion is decidedly in favour of its use, not only as a means of printing, but also as a means of taking. We understand that the expense of this light, in comparison with other artificial lights, is small. Further experiments will no doubt be conducted, when we shall not fail to communicate the results to our readers. In the mean time discussion on this interesting subject would be very desirable.”]

“Criticism on the Exhibition. PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:106. (Feb. 15, 1861): 116-121. [(Reviews from various journals reprinted.) “The Exhibition of the Society in Pall Mall East has attracted so much notice, and has received such a large share of attention, from all the leading journals and periodicals, that we have thought it very desirable that our readers should be enabled to see, with as little trouble as possible, the opinions which have been expressed upon it….”
The Times, January 18, 1861.
The Eighth Exhibition of the Photographic Society, now open at the Old Water-Colour Gallery, Pall Mall East, contains gratifying evidence that this new art is advancing in English hands, and has been carried by English manipulators at least as far as by their French or Italian rivals. We are glad to observe in this year’s Exhibition indications that our photographers, or at least the Council of this Society, are arriving at a sound conception of the real functions of photography. We see here hardly any examples of those unwise encroachments by the photographer on the domain of the painter which we, in former notices of this Exhibition, felt it our duty to protest against. There is only one signal case of this kind, in Mr. Robinson’s “Summer Holiday,” a composition showing very considerable taste in grouping, and commendable ingenuity in the employment of photographic machinery, but not the less to be protested against as a miserable substitute for even the photographic reproduction of a picture. It is true that Mr. Robinson has done his best by combining into his composition separate studies, lighted and arranged in subservience to a common design; but the effect is not the less unpleasant — reminding us of a stage-grouping after pictures, or a tableau vivant, than which nothing more entirely fails in all ihj true conditions of picture-making. It is well that the domain where photography ends should be so sharply and certainly fenced on as it is from that where art begins. Nothing short of the proof of this separation afforded by the conspicuous failure of all the photographer’s attempts to make pictures is required to correct the corresponding error which most of our young painters fall into when they strive to make their pictures photographs. Let the painters who are pursuing this mistaken road examine such works as Mr. Bedford here exhibits — for example, his “Study of Rocks at Ilfracombe,” — and they will be forced to admit the hopelessness of contending with the sun and chemistry combined, in the delineation of natural details. In all this Exhibition there is no man’s work, take it all in all, comparable, in our opinion, to Mr. Bedford’s, whether it be of subjects architectural — as his interior views of Wells Cathedral and his exterior subjects from Exeter Cathedral — or natural, as the rocks we have referred to. and other Devonshire scenes. Besides other merits, Mr. Bedford seems to us to have carried the perfect rendering of reflected lights and half tones further than any of our photographers. This is the crux of photographic art. Nothing can be conceived more delicate than the gradations from highest light to deepest shadow in the Ilfracombe subject; nothing fuller of aerial effect than the bit of the Chapter-house vestibule, Bristol. Mr. Bedford appears to us to show peculiarly sound judgment in his selection of subjects. Mr. Mudd is little inferior to Mr. Bedford in perfection of photographic execution, and in taste applied to landscape subject. After Mr. Bedford’s, we should single out Mr. Mudd’s work — …”
Athenaeum, January 19,1861.
“…The exhibition, as a whole, is far above the average in ready productions….” “… Landscape Photography is exceedingly well represented. Mr. Bedford, of course, stands first, as a clear, neat, and careful photographer. His architectural interior of ‘Wells Cathedral, North Porch;’ ‘Exeter Cathedral, South-west Door’ (442); and ‘View in Ladye Chapel, Wells Cathedral’ (448), are among the most exquisite things that this most perfect of photographers has done. Mr. Fenton no longer holds the place he once held as the only good landscape photographer. He is now surpassed in manipulation by Mr. Bedford, and quite equalled by Mr. Mudd and Mr. Earl…”
Illustrated News of the World, Jan. 16, 1861.
The private view of this Exhibition was held on Saturday last in the Gallery of the Old Society of Water Colour Paintings, Pall-mall East. The Exhibition of this year is, perhaps, the best of the kind that we have seen. It is equal, in quality of pictures, to that held at South Kensington some years ago, though not so extensive….” “…In English architecture Mr. Bedford, the foremost of English photographers, has some very flne views on the “Second Screen.” In landscape photography Mr. Bedford and Mr. Mudd lead off very spiritedly. Then comes Mr. Roger Fenton, Mr. R. Gordon, Mr. Earl, and Mr. Spode…. “The Sun,” January 24, 1861….”]

“Printing by Electric Light.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:129 (Feb. 22, 1861): 85-86. [“Since the opening of the present Exhibition, and too late for either regular hanging or insertion in the first edition of the catalogue, Mr. Bedford has contributed a frame of three photographs, which to us possess an interest equal to, if not surpassing anything in the room. These three specimens, No. 623, are printed by the electric light, Professor Way’s valuable modification having been used. The first impression on glancing at the frame is that it simply contains some of Mr. Bedford’s prints, the only peculiarity of which is their excellence. The fact of there being copies of the same prints already on the walls induces an examination to ascertain why this duplicate frame stands in front of the Curator’s table, and then it is found that the modest information is subjoined, that they are printed as we have stated, and that they are the result of a first trial. The latter part of the information need not be understood in any apologetic sense, for the pictures need no such plea: they are as brilliant, vigorous, rich, and perfect as need be desired; and so far as the gas-light comparison we made may decide, equal in all respects to the same pictures produced by sun-printing. Our readers are aware that printing by electric light has before been accomplished. The interesting paper read a few months ago by Mr. Malone, and published in our columns together with the results he showed, demonstrated the possibility of the process; but we have not before seen absolutely perfect pictorial results produced by such agency, and under conditions which attest that this experiment need not remain an isolated one, illustrating a curious and inapplicable possibility; but affords good assurance that the process may be brought quite within the commercial exigencies of the first-class photographer. Mr. Bedford has favoured us with a few details of the conditions under which these pictures were produced, which are to us in the highest degree interesting, and cannot fail to be so to photographers generally. Our readers are already aware of the peculiarities of Professor Way’s lamp, which have been described in previous articles. One of its advantages over the Duboscq and other electric lamps being that the perpetual flow of the fine stream of mercury gives a light perfectly continuous, whilst where the carbon points are used the light is intermittent. The chief peculiarity and advantage to photographers arise out of the nature of the light, which possesses great volume, instead of appearing as a single vivid point; and, of still more importance, that it possesses, in a much greater degree than the electric light produced by other means, an intensely actinic character, which gives it a peculiar value for printing purposes. The pictures now exhibited, Mr. Bedford informs us, are not only the result of a first trial, but that trial was made under circumstances somewhat unfavourable for success, the lamp being an imperfect one, and all the arrangements of an improvised and temporary character. The printing-frames were suspended about twenty inches from the source of light, and the exposure required was a little upwards of an hour, the negatives being somewhat dense and the paper prepared as for ordinary printing. One especial point that strikes us is a remark made by Mr. Bedford, to the effect that the light possesses a peculiarly penetrating power, readily finding its way through the densest portions of dense negatives, thereby giving more detail in the lights than can be obtained by diffused daylight. Here, then, is a valuable source of power to the artistic printer, by which every class of negative may receive exactly the treatment it requires. If it be dense, and require a penetrating light to bring drawing into what would otherwise be snowy patches of light, it can be brought near to the source of light, the most penetrating power of which it may then receive. If the negative be soft or weak, by removing the printing-frame some distance from the source of light, all the effect of diffused daylight may be obtained; and this may be graduated to suit any character of negative. Here is a power of the utmost value to the printer quite under his control. Regarding the cost of the light, Mr. Bedford informs us that in this instance the expense was about two shillings per hour, and adds, that “as it would be an easy matter to arrange a goodly number of frames around the light, it might be worked economically.” Various details as to the best method of working, at the least cost, and questions regarding the best method of preparing the paper, &c., must necessarily be elucidated by further experiments; but we think that this “first trial” of Mr. Bedford’s establishes the fact that the thing can be done, and that it may, at least, under many such circumstances as Mr. Malone on a former occasion adverted to, be done so as to be commercially remunerative. Mr. Bedford emphatically remarks, “I am convinced that the light is suitable for our purpose; it only wants utilizing.”…”]

“Proceedings of Societies. South London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:130 (Mar. 1, 1861): 105-106. [“The usual monthly meeting was held in St. Peter’s Schoolroom, Walworth, on the evening of Thursday, February 21st. The Rev. F. F. Statham, B.A., F.G.S., in the chair. The minutes were read and confirmed, and some specimens and apparatus were examined. Amongst the former were some exquisite card portraits by Mr. Lacy, of Ryde, and a fine specimen of reproduction from an oil painting, which was contributed to the society’s portfolio by Messrs. Sydney Smith, and Valentine Blanchard….” “…Mr. Thomas Clarke handed round for inspection, some stereographs from negatives prepared by the Fothergill process, which had only been exposed 20 or 30 seconds. Mr. Hughes remarked that, with all due deference to Mr. Clarke, he must urge the importance of abundance of exposure, and the specimens handed round, he thought would have been better if they had been exposed at least twice as long. He thought one of the chief charms of the best pictures in this year’s Exhibition arose from this very circumstance that they had been exposed sufficiently to give transparency and detail in the deepest parts of the deepest shadows. The tendency of good photographers was to expose longer than of yore, and the consequence was a softness, a delicacy, and truth, before unattained. He would refer especially to two illustrations, the pictures of Bedford and Mudd. He had recently been in conversation with an intelligent amateur, who remarked that Mr. Bedford regarded full exposure as a sine qua non in the production of first-class results, and mentioned one picture to which he gave twenty-five minutes exposure with wet collodion. Mr. Clarke thought that in some instances energetic and long development might be substituted for long exposure. Mr. Hughes thought not….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:131 (Mar. 8, 1861): 113-116. [“The monthly meeting of the Photographic Society was held at King’s College on the evening of Tuesday, March 5th. F. Bedford, Esq., in the chair. After the minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed, the following gentlemen were elected members of the society: — Thomas Sutton, Esq., B.A., Lecturer on Photography at King’s College; the Hon. Maurice Wingfield; R. K. Dick, Esq.; Capt. James Buchanan, Madras; J. E. Norris, Esq.; L. Musgrave, Esq.; R. W. Hall, Esq. Several specimens of prints were exhibited by Messrs. Vernon Heath, Fry, and others; also a large folding camera by the first-named gentleman….” “…Mr. Samuel Fry said, that there was a picture of his on the table, to which he would call attention, which had been kept a month after printing before toning, having been accidentally put away with some sensitive paper. It subsequently toned very well….” “…The Chairman [Bedford] remarked that too much atmospheric air was enclosed with the quantity of paper to render the chloride of calcium available. Mr. Fry described…” “…A desultory conversation on the causes of cracking in the varnished negative film ensued, in which the Chairman, Dr. Diamond, Mr. Spiller, Mr. Fry, Mr. Thomas, and others, took part. A general opinion prevailed that damp and changes of temperature were the chief causes of such cracks….” (A general discussion involving about a dozen members about fading in photographs ensued.) “…Mr. Malone, referring to the pictures from the “Pencil of Nature,” remarked that in the one which had faded at the edge it was not the mounting which had caused that fading, but simply that the edge was first attacked by the atmosphere. These pictures furnished a singular illustration of how little was understood of the causes of permanency. They were printed in 1844, and had most of them remained permanent, and yet they only received about half an hour’s washing. After fixing each print was put into a pan with two gallons of water, and about 25 prints would be washed in that water. After remaining about ten minutes in the first pan, the print was removed into another similar pan, and in ten minutes more to a third; each print in succession, until the whole 25 were completed. So that six gallons of water washed the 25 prints of the size 9 x 7. That some portion of hyposulphite of soda remained in them there could be no doubt, as they toned darker when a hot iron was passed over them; and yet many of them were good now. It was a great misfortune, but the simple fact was we knew very little about it; we did not know to this day of what the image was formed, whether of metallic silver entangled with the fibre of the paper, or of suboxide of silver with organic matter. Knowing so little of what the picture itself really was, it was not surprising we knew so little of the sources of permanency or fading. The Chairman thought the causes of many photographs fading was the culpable negligence and carelessness with which they were kept. He thought if the same care were bestowed upon them as upon valuable drawings, the cases of fading would be less frequent….”]

“Photographic Society of London.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:107 (Mar. 15, 1861): 123-130. [“King’s College. Tuesday, March 5, 1861. F. Bedford, Esq., in the Chair….”]

“Editorial.” THE PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:109 (Mar. 15, 1861): 171. [“In Our last Number we took occasion, in a hurried manner, to call the attention of our readers to the extraordinary classification decided upon by Her Majesty’s Commissioners for the Exhibition of 1862. Since then, an official communication from Mr. F. K. Sandford, the Secretary to the Commissioners, has been addressed to our President, requesting the Council of the Photographic Society to appoint a Committee to organize Class 14, “Photographic Apparatus and Photography.” Under these circumstances the Lord Chief Baron assembled the Council to consider the proposition. The Council express themselves unanimously as feeling aggrieved at the manner in which the Art of Photography is classed. In a reply, which will be found below, the Lord Chief Baron puts the grievance in a manful and logical manner. It is needless to recapitulate the various points in this powerful and effective reply. From the manner in which the case is put, we cannot anticipate anything other than an immediate alteration of the obnoxious classification. Last month we quoted instances which we think sufficiently prove that Photography by common consent is acknowledged to be a branch of the Fine Arts. Since then, in the discussion of the new Copyright Bill, the Attorney-General, and the various Members of the House of Commons who spoke on the subject, placed Photography on the same footing as Engraving; that being the case, the Lord Chief Baron is undoubtedly right when he says “that the Council of the Photographic Society claim for it a position (however humble) among the Fine Arts (if etching and engraving may be so placed, as no doubt they may).” He then goes on to say that “Photography, quite as much as engraving, gives room for the exercise of individual genius, so as to stamp a special character on the works of photographers, and give to the result of their labours the impress of the mind of each artist.” The truth of this succinct statement is annually to be found on the walls of our Exhibitions, where any one who has the least knowledge of the productions of our leading photographers can instantly, without the assistance of a catalogue, single out the productions of Messrs. Fenton, Bedford, Llewellyn, Lake Price, Robinson, Vernon Heath, G. Washington Wilson, Maxwell Lyte, and others too numerous to mention. It is this “impress of the mind of each artist” that enables us to do so without any trouble…. Sir Charles Eastlake, in his speech at the Royal Academy dinner recently, alluded to the satisfaction felt by the artistic profession at the decision that no prizes would be given in the Fine Art Department of the forthcoming Exhibition. Knowing, as we do, the strong feeling on that subject in the same direction, felt and expressed by photographers, we can easily account for the strong expressions which have reached us in letters on this subject….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:135 (Apr. 5, 1861): 163. [“The annual meeting of this Association was held on the evening of Wednesday, the 27th ult. Mr. G. Shadbolt in the chair….” “…The President, Vice-President, Treasurer and Secretary were then, on the motion of Mr. Dawson, re-elected. On the motion of Mr. Hughes, the rule enacting that the committee consist of six members was modified, to make the committee consist of eight members. The following gentlemen were then elected as members of the committee for the ensuing year: — Messrs. T. A. Barber, F. Bedford, G. Dawson, C. Jabez Hughes, G. R. Mainwaring, C. J. Moens, W. Shave, and G. Wharton Simpson….”]

“Photography, and the International Exhibition of 1862.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:140 (May 10, 1861): 217. [“The photographic community at large were somewhat startled when, some weeks ago, the first rough draft of the classification proposed for adoption in connection with the coming International Exhibition was published, in which photography was placed under the head “machinery,” and in the, doubtless highly respectable, company of “ship’s tackle,” “agricultural implements,” &c. Our own first impression of the matter was that it was purely an inadvertency or oversight. It appeared too rich a joke to suppose that the pictures of such men as Bedford and Mudd, Wilson and Fenton, Lyte and Heath, Rejlander and Robinson, Williams, Claudet, and Mayall, and a host of others, could seriously be regarded as rightly classified amongst railway plant, machinery, and tools; and the more so, when we remembered that the royal family of this country were amongst the warmest admirers and patrons of our art. Knowing, however, that the surest way to render permanent the blunder was to enlist the amour propre of its perpetrators in its defence, by a public condemnation of it, and perceiving no readier means of calling the attention of the authorities to its rectification, we resolved to write to Her Majesty’s Commissioners, pointing out the error, and the evil influence it must have in preventing a fair representation of our art. Accordingly, a little more than a month ago we forwarded a letter, of which the following is a copy: — …”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:140 (May 10, 1861): 222-223. [“The usual monthly meeting was held on Tuesday evening, the 7th instant, at King’s College; Mr. Henry White in the chair. Captain Willoughby Osborne, H. Hailstone, Esq., and Col. Maitland were elected members of the society. The Secretary read a letter from Mr. Lazarus, Secretary of the Bengal Photographic Society, remitting the sum of one hundred pounds collected in India in aid of the Archer Fund. Mr. Thomas then read a paper entitled, “How to prevent Stains and Streaks in the Negative.” Passing over a variety of easily traceable causes of stains, &c., such as damp or dirty clothes for polishing the glasses, he expressed his conviction that the most prevalent cause was too much light in the dark room. Photographers were, he observed, in the habit of working at the present day with their dark rooms admitting as much yellow light as they did several years ago, forgetful of the increased sensitiveness in which improved preparations communicated to their excited plates….” “…Mr. Bedford, in reply to an appeal from the Chairman for his opinion said, that he worked with so much light in his dark room, and yet got satisfactory results, that he felt unwilling to make any remark on the subject. He certainly could not entirely go with Mr. Thomas in regarding this as such a fertile source of failure. It was undoubtedly essential to take every precaution to avoid the presence of diffused white light; but he thought a sufficient amount of yellow light was desirable. Had Mr. Thomas ever developed a plate without any further exposure than that to which it was submitted in the dark room to see if it produced streaks? He remembered that some of the most brilliant negatives he ever produced were taken at Marlborough House, on plates 8 by 5, and he there only used two thicknesses of yellow calico over the window. He there had sufficient yellow light to read the smallest print in any part of the room, and yet the negatives did not fog, streak, or stain. When he had been troubled with those streaks, he had tried darkening the room with additional yellow calico; but, although it made the room very inconvenient to work in, it did not remove the streaks. He did not think Mr. Thomas had indicated the true cause. Mr. Vernon Heath asked what aspect the window had at Marlborough House to which Mr. Bedford had referred. Mr. Bedford: Nearly south. Mr. Heath thought it was due to Mr. Thomas to mention his experience during the last few weeks. He had been much troubled, whilst working in his glasshouse in London, with stains, and Mr. Thomas had pointed out the cause as being too much light in the dark room, although it was lighted with ordinary care. He had altered it according to Mr. Thomas’ suggestion. The streaks at once disappeared, and he obtained brilliant negatives, with printing qualities to which others he had obtained in the room bore no comparison….” “…Mr. Thomas, referring to Mr. Bedford’s statement regarding his operating at Marlborough House, remarked that he believed that this was some six or seven years ago, and that the nitrate of silver then used contained much nitric acid; the collodion was chiefly iodized with potassium; and the pyroxline then used was of that quality which soon decomposed, so that everything at that time was in a less sensitive condition than at the present time, and that now, therefore, additional precautions were necessary. In reference to the use of orange, or yellow glass, he could not allow that it was ever sufficient to protect sensitive wet plates from the action of light. He had not had much experience in dry collodion, and for his own part he wished all dry collodion processes were at the bottom of the sea, because they had superseded the most beautiful dry process in his opinion, the calotype paper process, the results of which were superior to anything produced by dry collodion plates that he had ever seen. Mr. Malone protested against the assumption that orange glass might not be procured, which would entirely intercept actinic light, if not always in one thickness, at least in two. Mr. Crookes’ experiment was conclusive on that subject, and he was too good a chemist to use a nitrate bath containing nitric acid in such an experiment; if that were the assumption which was to meet Mr. Bedford’s experience. Mr. Thomas of course could speak definitely in that case, as he had sold Mr. Bedford the nitrate of silver containing this free acid….” “…Mr. Vernon Heath gave notice that at the next meeting he would bring under the notice of the society the anomalous position in which photography was proposed to be placed in the Exhibition of 1862. Dr. Diamond stated that the Chief Baron had received a communication from the Commissioners requesting the Photographic Society to appoint six or eight persons to advise with them regarding arrangements for the representation of photography. A meeting of the Council was at once called, and it was resolved that photography ought to be placed in its right position before photographers could take any part in the matter. The Chief Baron had, therefore, written a remonstrance to the Commissioners, which he hoped would have the effect of bringing about the desired result. Mr. Heath thought that this was highly satisfactory. When he first saw the announcement of the classification he thought it must have been a mistake, as photography could never be intended to rank as a simple mechanical operation. How was it there was such a striking individuality in the productions of different photographers? The distinctive styles of men like Bedford, and Fenton, and Lyte, were just as distinctly marked as those of the masters in painting. This distinctiveness, as artistic excellence, was alone surely enough to prove the right of photography to a place amongst the skilled arts, and rescue it from being regarded as purely mechanical. Mr. Shadbolt suggested that if photography were not properly placed in the Exhibition of 1862, photographers should not exhibit there, but that a contemporaneous Photographic Exhibition should be got up, disassociated from that undertaking. He might mention that a correspondent of the British Journal had suggested that it would be well if the space could be so arranged as to allow of the works of different societies being kept together, so as to secure the emulation of societies as well as of individuals. Mr. Malone stated some of his personal experiences in connection with the Exhibition of 1851, having been appointed at the last moment on a sub-committee to attend to the matter; and he well remembered the hostility of feeling then manifested to any consideration of photographs as works of art. Some specimens arrived late which were coloured, and the photographer who had sent them contrived to get them into the fine art department. He (Mr. Malone) pointed out the anomaly, and simply received for answer that the photographer who had sent them was a noisy troublesome fellow, and they had better remain where they were. He feared a similar spirit was likely to prevail in regard to the Exhibition of 1862….”]

“Photographic Society of London. Ordinary General Meeting, Mar 7,1861.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:109. (May 15, 1861): 175-182. [“Henry White, Esq., in the Chair. The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed….” “….How to prevent Stains and Streaks in the Collodion Negative. By R. W. Thomas, Esq.” “Whilst some have been for several years engaged in investigating the changes which take place in the various photographic substances exposed to the reducing action of the sun’s rays, others have been no less actively employed in researches of a more practical, and perhaps of an equally useful character….” (Responses from the audience.) “…Mr. Bedford had worked with so much light in his room that, instead of producing effects similar to those stated by Mr. Thomas, it had produced results which were so perfectly satisfactory to himself that he could hardly go the length that Mr. Thomas had gone in ascribing the streaks to too much light or diffused light. He thought it was necessary to take every precaution in not having too much light or diffused light; but he would ask whether Mr. Thomas had ever developed plates without having exposed them in the camera, and whether the greasy streaks which were observable on the plates on lifting them from the bath would develop the same results as a streaky picture. He remembered that some of the brightest negatives he had ever taken were produced in Marlborough House with a bright window two feet by five, with two thicknesses of yellow calico, the room being be light that he could read the smallest print; and yet his negatives were free from spots, stains, or fog. He had tried lately to find out the cause of the streaks, and had put an additional thickness of calico to his light, and made his room inconveniently dark; but still the evil was not remedied; therefore he concluded that, although too much light might cause streaks in some cases, there were other causes beyond too much light in the operating-room. Mr. Vernon Heath asked, what was the aspect of the window in Marlborough House? Mr. Bedford replied, very nearly south. He did not for a moment wish to be understood as disregarding the amount of light; for he thought that a most important thing, and very often photographers did work with too much light….” p. 179. “…Mr. Thomas said that that, was a most favourable condition, provided the candle be protected, for it was known that a candle or gas-light might be used to produce prints on a collodion plate; therefore, if a candle were used, it would be necessary that the candle should be protected, though not to so great an extent as in the case of sunlight….” “…He thought he was right in coming to the conclusion that the negatives referred to by Mr. Bedford as having been obtained as described were obtained some six or seven years ago. He was able to say be because Mr. Bedford had been one of his patrons for many years. Mr. Bedford said that the negatives to which he had alluded were taken nearly seven years ago. Mr. Thomas then said that he thought he could suggest a satisfactory explanation. In the first place, seven or eight years ago very little was known about the character and the quality of the nitrate of silver used for the bath…” p. 180.”
(Later in the meeting the controversial action of the Commissioners of the forthcoming Exhibition of 1862 placing photography among the mechanical arts rather than the fine arts was brought up and discussed.)
“Mr. Heath regretted that so much time had been devoted to that which he could not help feeling might have been left out of the business of the evening. Observing the late hour, he would only ask permission to give notice that at the next Meeting he would offer some observations as to the position of photography in the Exhibition of 1862, because he thought the session should not close without some remarks upon a subject of so much importance to photography. The Secretary stated that he had seen the Lord Chief Baron, who informed him that he had received a communication from Her Majesty’s Commissioners of the Exhibition of 1802, requesting the Photographic Society to appoint some six or eight members who were competent to advise the Commissioners what course they should pursue with reference to photography being exhibited at the Exhibition; and the Lord Chief Baron at once requested a Council to be called, which was done, and which was very fully attended. The Council were unanimously of opinion that, previously to the Society taking any part in that Exhibition, photography should be placed in its right position. The Chief Baron had interested himself very much; and that day he had brought, in his own handwriting, what he considered a strong remonstrance and proper address to the Commissioners, of which they had yet to learn the result. Mr. Vernon Heath said that, somehow or other, photography had been misunderstood when it was proposed to treat it as something which was wholly mechanical. If it were so wholly mechanical, how was it that there was such a striking individuality of character in the works of different photographers? How was it that persons were so well able to select the works of Mr. Bedford, Mr. Fenton, Mr. Maxwell Lyte, and others, just as well as the works of different masters could be selected on the walls of the Royal Academy? Surely such a peculiarity could not be due to mere superiority of apparatus. If the peculiarly characteristic distinctiveness was really duo (as he apprehended it was) to artistic excellence, it was surely not for this age to say that that artistic excellence, which had only been obtained after years of struggling, should be put back again and dealt with as something mechanical. Mr. Shadbolt was glad that the Executive had intimated a disposition to enforce that which only the Society was capable of enforcing on behalf of photography. He had been requested to call the attention of the Council of the Society to the suggestion, that, if there shall be no intention of placing photographers on the footing of other artists, photographers should take the matter into their own hands, and get up an Exhibition about the time of the Exhibition of 1862, totally dissociated from that undertaking….” pp. 182.]

“M. Ferrier’s Albumen Process.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:144 (June 7, 1861): 265-268. [“A singular controversy has recently occurred relative to the albumen process of M. Ferrier, whose exquisite transparencies have long been the admiration of photographers. Some half dozen years ago Mr. Negretti read a paper to the Photographic Society, which was published in the Society’s Journal, describing an albumen process which had been communicated to him by M. Ferrier. Our Liverpool contemporary having recently published an article entitled “The Albumen Process of M. Ferrier, as practised by Mr. Negretti,” which it appears was a resume of the paper read in 1855, M. Ferrier emphatically denies that the process is his, or that he ever communicated it to Mr. Negretti….” “…We think it important here to reiterate what we have often before endeavoured to enforce; that less at any time belongs to a process than to the individual working it. No one dreams of doubting that the master-pieces of men like Williams or Bedford are produced by the wet collodion process. And yet it is well known that the vilest libels on the art are constantly perpetrated by the same process. A good process and reliable formula; are unquestionably of vital importance; but certainty and success can come with no process without a patient and persevering compliance with the common-sense conditions of success….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:144 (June 7, 1861): 272-273. [“The monthly meeting of the society was held at King’s College on Tuesday evening, Joseph Durham, Esq., in the chair. The meeting was held on this occasion in the theatre of the college to afford a better opportunity of exhibiting Professor Way’s electric light, as announced by Mr. Vernon Heath at the last meeting….” “…The Secretary called attention to some specimens by Mr. Bedford taken for the purpose of testing one of Ross’s orthographic lenses. Mr. Bedford stated, that the lens had been especially tested in reference to an alleged want of what was termed depth of focus. He had tested the lens very severely, inasmuch as he had taken the negatives upon a 12in. by 10in. plate with a lens only intended to cover 8½ by 6½ in., or ordinary whole plate. The interior, one of Ely Cathedral, was exposed five minutes with the full aperture, and taken on a wet collodion plate. The exterior of the same building was exposed eight seconds with a stop of 7/16 of an inch. The results were, he thought, under the circumstances, very satisfactory….”]

“Way’s Electric Light for Photographic Purposes.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:145 (June 14, 1861): 279-280. [“It is not necessary that I should offer to you, sir, or this meeting, any apology for the subject I am about to bring under your notice: for the possibility of making the electric light subservient to our purposes in photography, is too important and too interesting to need my excuses….” “…It will be remembered that in our late exhibition Mr. Bedford exhibited a frame of photographs which were printed, as a first experiment, with Mr. Way’s lamp; and it will also be remembered that these peculiar photographs had all those brilliant, vigorous, and rich qualities for which Mr. Bedford’s photographs are famous. One remark Mr. Bedford made as to his results with this lamp I am quite able to confirm — viz., that the light possesses a singularly penetrating power. For this reason the negative should be somewhat dense, and probably it will result that a paper with less silver than ordinary in its preparation could be used. That is, if, as I believe, the lamp will come into use for printing purposes, we shall have to manipulate our negatives accordingly….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:145 (June 14, 1861): 282-283. [“We resume the report of the meeting of this society, held at King’s College on the 4th inst., Joseph Durham, Esq., in the chair. Before proceeding to the electric light experiments we may refer to the specimens submitted to the attention of the society….” “…Mr. Hughes having made his enlarging experiments, Mr. Malone referred to the former experiments of himself and others with the electric light. Interesting as the subject doubtless was, he did not think the experiments they had seen were sufficiently conclusive….” “…He was not at all sure that the mercury lamp would prove the best, and in comparing it with a Duboscq lamp, they should bear in mind that there was now an improved form of lamp with the carbon points, that of M. Serrin. The mercury might also prove dangerous to health. He knew one gentleman who having been experimenting with the Way lamp, suffered in health next day from its effects.* [*We may remark that the gentleman referred to was Mr. Bedford, who felt unwell the day after his printing experiments with one of these lamps. It is but fair to add. however, that Mr. Bedford explained to us that the lamp was confessedly an imperfect one, and out of order, the escape of mercurial vapour being an accident rather than a necessity of the apparatus. — Ed.] Mr. Heath was not there to recommend that lamp to photographers as best for their purpose, but rather as the exponent of its characteristics, as he knew something of it and its inventor….”]

“Photographic Society of London. King’s College. Ordinary General Meeting. Tuesday, June 4, 1861.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:110 (June 15, 1861): 196-202. [“…The Secretary stated that Mr. Bedford exhibited three pictures which were taken with a Ross’s 8½ x 6 ½ orthographic lens, — the one picture being taken with a full aperture and an exposure of five minutes, which was an interior of one of the chapels in Ely Cathedral, lighted by a small window; another picture by the same lens, with an aperture of 5-10ths of an inch and 20 seconds exposure, was of the outside of Ely Cathedral; and another picture, also of the outside of Ely Cathedral, with the same lens, aperture 7-10ths of an inch, exposure 8 seconds. Mr. Bedford stated the pictures were taken with the object of testing a lens manufactured by Ross; and those pictures were a severe test. It was only just to Mr. Ross to say that the lens had been alleged to be quite unfit for the work, the particular charges against it being that it did not give depth of definition, and that it did not cover or give any of the work which it ought. Therefore he (Mr. Bedford) thought he could test it with a prepared plate for a picture 12 x 10 inches with as large an aperture as he generally used. The convergence of the lines in the one picture of the exterior was due to the necessary tilting of the camera to take in the height of the building; and he thought, considering the angle at which it was taken, that it satisfactorily proved the good working powers of the lens, bearing in mind that it was only intended to cover 8½ x 6½. The pictures were then handed round the theatre, and proved to be exceedingly good. Mr. Shadbolt, as the matter had been brought before the Meeting, thought he might as well mention some circumstances which had come under his notice. He held in his hand some proofs from negatives taken by the gentleman who stated that the lens with which they were taken (and which was the same lens with which Mr. Bedford had taken the pictures which were before the Meeting) was incompetent to do its work. He (Mr. Shadbolt) had no opportunity of testing it; but there were two things which struck him so very prominently when the pictures he held in his hand were first placed before him that he could not refrain from saying a word upon the subject, particularly as he found that most photographers were considerably at sea upon the subject if they were not acquainted with optics….” “…Mr. Vernon Heath, at the request of the Chairman, then exhibited and explained Professor Way’s new Electric Light,…” “…“…It will be remembered that in our late exhibition Mr. Bedford exhibited a frame of photographs, which were printed as a first experiment with Mr. Way’s lamp; and it will also be remembered that these peculiar photographs had all those brilliant, vigorous, rich qualities for which Mr. Bedford’s photographs are famous. One remark Mr. Bedford made as to his results with this lamp I am quite able to confirm-viz, that the light possesses a singularly penetrating power….” p. 200.]

“Stereographs. North Wales and Chester Illustrated, by Francis Bedford. Chester: Catherall & Prichard.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 8:147 (Aug. 1, 1861): 272-273.

“August 15, 1861.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:112 (Aug. 15, 1861): 239-244. [“The termination of the official correspondence between the Council of the Photographic Society and Her Majesty’s Commissioners for the International Exhibition of 1862 will be found in our columns this month. During the discussion of this question, we have from month to month kept our readers au courant of all the facts connected with it….” “…But when it shall have been decided that either Voigtlander, Ross, Secretan, or any other great optician has constructed the best photographic lens — that either Thomas, Hardwich, Hocking, or any other good chemist has made the best compound of collodion, is it to be supposed that all photographers who are able to purchase such lenses and such collodion can produce invariably with them the same photographic representations — that they want nothing else to bring out and compose pictures all of the same character — that every photographer of landscape and rural sceneries is a Fenton, a Maxwell Lyte, a Lake Price, an Aguado, a Montizon, a Bedford, a Legray, a Ferier, a Bisson — that every photographer of portraits can produce pictures of the most perfect kind — and that there are no such portraits as those the price of sixpence for which is a fair remuneration for the talent and taste displayed in their composition?…” “…An artist would be worn out with fatigue before having painted half the details which Messrs. Fenton, Maxwell Lyte, Bedford, &c. &c. assemble on their plates by a few seconds’ exposure to the camera obscura. Are those gentlemen on that account the greatest landscape painters in the world? Let them produce the same works without the succour of the lens and the camera, and no one will refuse them that title. The mechanical part and the artistical part are so completely united that each advancement accomplished by one promotes the advancement of the other. Take away the camera obscura; and photography is an impossibility….”]

“The Art Claims of Photography.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:157 (Sept. 6, 1861): 426-427. [“Audi alteram partem.” “Sir, — The old and trite story of the two-sided shield seems to illustrate, not inaptly, the controversy which has recently arisen regarding the position photography is to occupy in the International Exhibition of next year. Photographers, or at least some of them, have accustomed themselves to look only on the golden side of the shield, and appear ready to do battle with all comers who shall declare that any particle — not to say a whole side — of baser metal enters into its composition. To a looker-on like myself, associated with art, but not indifferent to a power, so nearly allied to art as photography, and having some practical knowledge of both, the controversy, the record of which in your pages I have read, has alternately amused and surprised me….” “…And now I fancy some enthusiastic photographer ready to exclaim. “Why the fellow who can form his estimate of the capabilities of our glorious art by an examination of the specimen cases of twopence-halfpenny portrait shops, is unworthy of attention. Why does the fellow ignore the exquisite productions of Mudd and Bedford, Heath and Wilson, Rejlander and Williams! Why I wonder if the fellow ever saw a good photograph!” Fair and softly my extravagant young friend. I have a portfolio of photographs in which are specimens of the masters you have named and some others, and which I cherish amongst my art treasures. Nay more, I unhesitatingly admit, that I have seen many photographs perfect gems of art, and that photography in the hands of a true artist may often yield results worthy to be classed as works of fine art. But all this is due to the man, not to the method. The true artist will make himself felt no matter what the vehicle of expression…. “…R. A.”]

“The Art Claims of Photography.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:158 (Sept. 13, 1861): 431-433. [“Is photography a fine art? With all submission to our correspondent R. A., and those who hold similar opinions, we maintain that it is. It is both an art and a science, or perhaps more correctly speaking it is, like many of the arts, whether polite or industrial, an applied science, or an art based upon a science. We are not at all concerned to refute our correspondent’s arguments, by which he endeavours to prove that photography is essentially a science, although perhaps he would have been more exact if he had simply affirmed that it was a branch of chemical science. Science is the grand foundation upon which all the arts are based, and we readily admit that for the successful practice of the art of photography, a more comprehensive knowledge of science is necessary, than is needed for the prosecution of any other art. We have yet to learn, however, that the necessity for completer education, or higher culture of a given kind in the artist, should involve any derrogation to the art. To succeed perfectly as an art-photographer, the student requires all the art-knowledge of the painter. He should he perfectly familiar with the laws of composition and chiaroscuro, have a perfect appreciation of the balance of forms and of tones, and their value in his work; and be a master of those higher qualities, relating to concentration of interest, expression, &c., which give unity, purpose, and character to a picture. he needs not to learn the mechanical art of drawing, or applying pigments; but in place of this, he must acquire a perfect knowledge of the chemistry of his art, and such a practical knowledge of optical laws as will enable him to choose, and use, his lenses efficiently. But there is no such difference in the mechanical part of the duties of each as to constitute an essential distinction in the character of the art. If the painter require more skill with the hand, the photographer requires more activity of the brain: if the drawing of the one be more under his own control, the result of the other is generally more absolutely true and exact. All painting is not fine art; nor all painters artists. Our correspondent “R. A.” admitted the existence of photographs which were gems of art, but attributed these to the skill of the artists producing them, not to the art by which they were produced. To “the man, not to the method.”…” “…The individual genius of the photographer, as well as that of the painter, may be stamped upon his work. Photography, too, has its masters in different styles, as painting has. The grander phases of imaginative art, it is true, are unsuited to its powers. But in rendering the calm beauties of nature, the graceful and true in portraiture, the unmistakeable purpose and intention in genre pictures, photography can boast of its masters, each having a distinct individuality. Who that has given the subject fair attention has not been reminded of Wilkie and Webster by the genre studies of Rejlander? of Sir Thomas Lawrence by the portraits of Williams? Of Sant, by those of Lacy? Are finer or more characteristic portraits than the Lord Brougham and Lord Derby of Mayall, to be found amongst those of Grant? Are the interiors of Bedford much surpassed by those of David Roberts? In Lake Price we are often reminded of Leslie; in Claudet, of Sir Joshua Reynolds; in Wilson, of Turner; in Heath, of Claude Lorraine; in Mudd, of Constable; in some pictures recently issued by hitherto comparatively unknown artists — Jackson, brothers — we are forcibly reminded of Ruysdael, and other Dutch masters. We know that on reading these comparisons there are some who will charge us with comparing great things with small; but we, nevertheless, maintain that the mental characteristics, the genius, which produced the paintings, are manifested to a large extent in the photographs; that the men are in the best sense of the word artists, and that the works and the process are worthily designated by the term fine art. We have not attempted in these few remarks to define the term fine art. We have rather chosen to show how photographs comply with the conditions popularly regarded as constituting fine art in paintings, and how, notwithstanding limitation and modifications, the methods by which each are produced, and their excellence secured, are in many of their elements identical in character….”]

Silvy, C. “The International Exhibition of 1862.” THE PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:113 (Sept. 16, 1861): 269-270. [“Dear Sir, — I regret much troubling you with the request to insert in the esteemed journal of the Society this letter, in answer to M. Claudet’s, which appeared in your number of the 10th of August, and in which he honoured me, both at the beginning and the end, with the title of a servile unhappy exception. Faithful to the view with which they have been founded, photographic journals should be the promoters of progress, and not a battlefield for questions of amour propre; nevertheless, since the subject of classification interests at present the whole of the photographic world, I hope you will permit mc, who am as much devoted to my art as any one, to sustain in your columns an opinion which is less mine than that of the Royal Commissioners, and which, I regret, is not shared by the greater part of photographers. I remain, Sir, yours faithfully, C. Silvy.
A Monsieur Claudet. Sir, — Permit me, from the commencement, to assure you that I am sorry to be obliged to refute all your arguments, one after the other. If I have not the pleasure of being known to you, I have, at least, that of knowing you. I am aware that, from the very first, you were engaged with those learned men to whose researches we owe the discovery of photography. I fully acknowledge all the claim that you have to the esteem and consideration of the public, and which you so justly enjoy. I know, moreover, that you arc twice my age; and this alone would oblige me to be silent, were it not that the desire of serving the real interests of photography compels me to speak. In my letter addressed to the Photographic Society on the 4th of June, 1 said that, for my own part, I accepted the department which the Royal Commissioners had given to photography (that is to say, the mechanical one). You find the position assigned to photography unworthy of it; you protest, and demand for it a classification with the Fine Arts. Let us, then, examine frankly and calmly, if you will, the subject in dispute.…” “…Must we therefore say that photographic productions are not works of art? Far from it, they partake with every object formed by the hand of man, even indirectly and with the aid of machinery, the privilege of retaining the impress of the sentiment which has inspired them. The talent, the taste employed in the execution of these productions, constitute their quality, but cannot, on that account, make us forget their nature and origin, which are essentially mechanical. Their very perfection is an argument against it. Since you speak of landscapes, do not those obtained tiy the means of photography surpass in delicacy and exactitude all that the hand of man has ever been able to produce? An artist would be worn out with fatigue before having painted half the details which Messrs. Fenton, Maxwell Lyte, Bedford, &c. &c. assemble on their plates by a few seconds’ exposure to the camera obscura. Are those gentlemen on that account the greatest landscape painters in the world? Let them produce the same works without the succour of the lens and the camera, and no one will refuse them that title. The mechanical part and the artistical part are so completely united that each advancement accomplished by one promotes the advancement of the other. Take away the camera obscura; and photography is an impossibility. Suppress collodion, and you irreparably injure the production of portraits in bringing them back to the necessity of a lengthened sitting. Is it not therefore natural to show the public both the productions of photography and the instruments by which they have been effected? Every object, whatever it may be, bears the stamp of the originality, taste, and care of the maker who has produced it. When you simply see in it the result of machinery, it is a mechanical production; on the contrary, when the imprint of artistic sentiment is evinced, it becomes an object of art….” p. 269.]

“The British Association at Manchester.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:113 (Sept. 16, 1861): 271-272. [“The arrangements of the Manchester men for the Annual Meeting of this Association have been characterized by all that business-like precision for which the men of Manchester are celebrated. The whole of the elaborate details have been so well arranged, that there has not been a single hitch to interfere in any way with the comfort of the visitors. Taking advantage of the presence of so many men distinguished in science and art, the Manchester Photographic Society has got up a most interesting collection of photographs. The following account of it is taken from a local newspaper: —

Exhibition of Photographs — This exhibition, got up by the Manchester Photographic Society, opened on Thursday morning in one of the large rooms of the Exchange. Members of the Association are admitted on showing their tickets, and the public at a small charge. The Exhibition has been arranged so as to show the progress of the art from its commencement up to the present time….” “…. Amongst the specimens of the collodion process are two by Wilson, of Aberdeen; several by Vernon Heath, of London; and one which calls for particular notice is ‘Aberfoyle,’ by Annan, of Glasgow. A print, taken by Professor Way’s electric light from a. negative by Francis Bedford, of London, is a novelty which will, no doubt, attract much attention. There are a number of landscapes exhibited, taken by Mr. Roger Fenton, who, it will be remembered, went to the Crimea during the war, and brought home an interesting series of photographs with him….”]

“‘A Copy of the Photographic Album’ (Fading Photographs).” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:114 (Oct. 15, 1861): 285-286. [“To the Editor of the Photographic Journal. October 5, 1861. Sir, — As the last volume of the ‘Photographic Album’ is now before me, which has been carefully wrapped up since its delivery and preserved in a dry place, I fear the following notes on the pictures therein will not be thought very satisfactory for the permanence of photographic works in general….” “…The Photographic Album. Vol. ii. (Thirty nine Pictures.)
Quis solem dicere falsum Audeat? — -Virg.
The Frontispiece — – Durham’s beautiful Bust of Her Majesty the Queen. By Dr. Diamond.
A truly effective photograph; but the white parts are all becoming yellow, premonitory of future decay.
2. Jerusalem: Site of the Temple on Mount Moriah. By John Anthony, M.D.
Faded very much; all the delicate shadows gone; what was a very excellent picture is now a miserable production.
3. Wild Flowers. By Mark Anthony.
Remains as perfect as when produced.
4. Babbicombe from the Beach. By Alfred Batson.
Yellow, and fast decaying.
5. Pont-y-pair, North Wales. By Francis Bedford.
A very beautiful picture, as perfect as the day it was printed.
6. The Lesson. By W. G. Campbell.
An admirable picture, with great artistic excellence; remains quite perfect.
7. The Castle of Chillon. By Sir Joscellyn Coghill, Bart.
The sky and water have become of one dirty-yellow tint. The mountains in the distance, which were well given and very effective, are now scarcely visible; the picture will soon disappear.
8. Winter. By C. Conway. Quite fresh and beautiful.
9. Highlanders. By Joseph Cundall.
Almost obliterated, the foot of one of the worthies having vanished into the floor.
10. The Court of Lions, in the Alhambra, Spain. By John G. Grace.
Remains in a very satisfactory state; the tone is admirable.
11. Wood Scene, Cheshire. By Thomas Davis.
Full of breadth, and no signs of change.
12. Art Treasures’ Exhibition. By P. H. Delamotte.
Beautifully soft and effective; quite unchanged.
13. Bury St. Edmunds. By George Downes.
Almost vanished; the tomb-stones in front ofthe Abbey are all blended together, and the print has a yellow tint all over.
14. Birth of St. John. By Roger Fenton, from a carving in yellow house-stone by Albert Durer. Nothing can exceed the truthfulness of this picture in its present state, the yellow tone it has assumed being an improvement. I fear, however, that peculiar tint forebodes future decay.
15. The Meeting of the Waters, Killarney. By Lord Otho Fitzgerald.
Is perfect, without any change.
16. Peasants of the Alto Douro. By Joseph James Forrester (Baron de Forrester).
Is a picturesque contribution, and remains unaltered.
17. The Lower Fall. By G. B. Gething.
This is in a dreadful state of fading. It would puzzle those who had not seen it before, exactly to imagine what is intended to be represented.
18. Loch Long Head. By R. J. Henry.
Is also in an unsatisfactory condition.
19. Old Gateway, Raglan. By the Rev. Dr. Holden.
Remains with all its minutiae quite perfect.
20. Piscator. No. 2. By J. D. Llewellyn.
Is unchanged.
21. Still Life and Embroidery. By R. W. Skeffington Lutwidge.
Was never a first-rate picture; it is not altered.
22. Newark Abbey, near Chertsey. By the Rev. J. R. Major.
Is fast disappearing.
23. Dr. Livingstone. By J. E. Mayall.
Has become of an unfavourable brown tint, and is fast vanishing.
24. Port de Dinar, Brittany. By Dr. Mansell.
Is as beautiful as ever.
25. Study for a Picture. By Thos. G. Mackinlay, F.S.A.
An excellent performance, and quite unchanged
26. Windsor Park. Deer feeding. By W. H. Nicholl.
In its present state good, but shows incipient stages of decay.
27. Lynmouth, North Devon. By Henry Pollock.
Is much changed, and losing the beauty it formerly possessed.
28. New Mill, near Lynton, Devon. By Dr. Percy.
Is as perfect as at first.
29. Near Lynton. By Julius Pollock.
Becoming yellow and disappearing.
30. The Woodland Stream. By W. C. Plunkett.
Has signs of decay.
31. Earlham Church Porch. By Dr. Ranking.
Has become a very unsatisfactory production; it is much decayed.
32. Sparrowe’s House, Ipswich. By R. C. Ransome.
Much faded, although there is none of the yellow tint so common with fading pictures.
33. Study of a Head. By O. G. Rejlander.
Is off colour, but has lost none of its details.
34. Nant Frangen, North Wales.
Has almost disappeared; it is now like the worst of lithographs.
35. The Time of Promise. By George Shadbolt.
Has become of a pale blue colour and almost vanished; as this is one of the most unsatisfactory pictures in the book, it is only just to Mr. Shadbolt to say that it was not printed by himself.
36. Tenby Town and Harbour. By George Stokes.
Is quite as good as at the time it was printed.
37. The Castle of Nairns, Forfarshire. By John Sturrock, Jun.
Is 38. Bonchurch. By B. B. Turner.
of a beautiful tone, and unaltered.
Has not altered. It was always printed so dark as to be in some parts quite indistinct. No doubt this is a truly permanent picture.
39. Hever Castle, Kent. By H. T. Wood.
The sky has turned quite yellow, and the entire picture anything but agreeable.”]

“Talk of the Studio. Award of Medals.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:168 (Nov. 29, 1861): 562. [“The following award of medals was made at the close of the Photographic Exhibition in connection with the Birmingham Society: —
Silver                                        Portrait                                   Claudet
Bronze                                     Group                                       Robinson
Silver                                        Landscape                              Bedford
Bronze                                     Landscape                               Heath
Bronze                                     Landscape                               Mudd
Silver                                        Solar, untouched                  Angel, Exeter
Bronze                                      Solar, coloured                      John Turner, Stafford Street,
Birmingham
The judges recommended the society to give an extra bronze medal to Mr. C. Breese, for his stereographs, and Sir Francis E. Scott generously awards an extra prize to Mr. Rejlander for his works generally, but more especially for the likeness of a little girl (which he exchanged for the one of Prince Albert, which was withdrawn shortly after the exhibition opened), and which was of course too late for competition.”]

“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL 23:12 (Dec. 1, 1861): 376. [Book review. Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain. By William and Mary Howitt. The Photographic Illustrations by Bedford, Sedgfield, Wilson, Fenton, and others. Published by A. W. Bennett, London. This beautiful volume, one of the books of the season,” reached us at the eleventh hour only, when time and space are opposed to our noticing it in such a way as we desire to do. A hasty glance through its pages is sufficient, however, to warrant a commendatory line or two this month; in the next we hope to speak of it at greater length.”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:168 (Dec. 6, 1861): 582-583. [“The usual monthly meeting of this society was held on the evening of Tuesday, December 3rd, Henry White, Esq., in the chair. The minutes of a previous meeting having been read and confirmed, the following gentlemen were elected members of the Society: — Messrs. Greenwood, Cole, Taut, Montefiore, Hewitt, and Castleman. The Chairman said in accordance with the seventh rule of the society, he would now read the names of the retiring officers, and those nominated by the Council for election in their places at the annual meeting to be held in February. Should any member desire to propose other gentlemen for election it would be necessary to do so at, or previous to, the next meeting to be held in January. The retiring Vice-President was Professor Bell, and Mr. F. Bedford was nominated by the Council as his successor. The members of the Council retiring were Messrs. Crace, Maskelyne, Stokes, Delamotte, Bedford, and Dr. Fane; in their places the following gentlemen were nominated: — Messrs. D. Wright, Vernon Heath, Glaisher, Joubert, H. P. Robinson, and Professor Sedgwick….” “…Mr. T. Ross then read a paper on the panoramic lens. At the termination of which he exhibited the apparatus and showed a number of very fine negatives; one of his assistants also showed the facility with which curved plates could be coated with collodion. The Chairman asked if it was possible to flatten the glass after the negative was taken, and so print from it flat. Mr. Ross did not think it could be done, nor did he think it was necessary. If the chairman would examine the printing frame provided he would see that the printing was very easy. It had been suggested that the film might be removed so as to print from it when flat. The Chairman remarked that removing the film was a difficult and a dangerous operation. He asked Mr. Bedford’s opinion of the apparatus. Mr. Bedford said this was the first time he had seen it. Mr. Ross stated, in answer to a question, that the glasses exhibited, 9 by 5, were 18s. a dozen….”]

“Photography in its Relation to the Fine Arts.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:169 (Dec. 13, 1861): 595-596. [“From the London Review.” “Define terms,” it has been said, “and controversy will cease.” Unfortunately for the simplicity of this dictum the uncertain relation of well-defined terms to indefinite ideas constitutes the whole difficulty. The term “Fine Art” is one of the most common to be found in the works of writers on esthetic science: its meaning in a general sense is understood by everybody; but for any precise definition, any accurate statement of the conditions involved, any unchallengeable landmarks pointing out its extent or limitations, we may search in vain….” “…As regards the art itself, then, and the amount of skill and culture necessary for its successful practice, there is nothing to derogate from the claims of photography as a fine art. The question resolves itself into one of results. These entirely depend upon the artist. The rough sketches of a Raphael with a piece of charcoal are treasured as works of art, because they give expression to the beauty of form in the mind of the artist. The true artist produces true art, no matter what his vehicle of expression, and the first ranks amongst photographers are already filled up by men who have been associated with art before they practised photography; such as Bedford and Wilson, Lake Price and Rejlander. The new art needs, however to be wielded by such men in order to receive recognition, for photography cannot create or idealize. It is not an imaginative art; it must be literal. It must deal with the actual; the world of imagination is to it a terra incognita. What it sees of beauty or deformity it uncompromisingly depicts and nothing more….” “…The recent controversy between her Majesty’s Commissioners and the Photographic Society regarding the classification of photography in the forthcoming International Exhibition, has illustrated, for the first time since the birth of the new art, the importance of having its position accurately defined. Recognized art authorities do not admit photography to be fine art; that was to be expected. On the other hand, photographers disclaim the mechanical position. The Commissioners decide on a happy compromise: they offer to photographers a separate department, a kind of neutral ground. The question is not whether photography is a fine art per se — neither painting nor sculpture can make that claim — but whether it is capable of artistic expression; whether in the hands of the true artist its productions become works of fine art. This photographers have to prove, and await the decision of one of the largest juries ever empanelled since the world began. There is one other question the Commissoners have yet to deal with: how will they modify the position of photography in the catalogue? They can scarcely leave it in its present companionship.”]

“Photographic Society of London. Ordinary General Meeting King’s College, London. Tuesday, December 3, 1861.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:116 (Dec. 16, 1861): 319-326. [“The Chairman, in pursuance of the 7th Rule of the Society, announced the names of those Officers of the Society who would retire in rotation, and of those whom the Council proposed for Election, as follows: — Professor Bell, as Vice-President, will retire, and Francis Bedford, Esq., is recommended to fill his place. A. R. Hamilton, Esq., is recommended for re-election as Treasurer. The Members of the Council who retire are — J. G. Crace, Esq., P. H. De La Motte, Esq., Dr. Farre, V. J. Maskelyne, Esq., J. Stokes, Esq., F. Bedford, Esq.; and to supply the vacancies thus created, the following Gentlemen are proposed as new Members of the Council: — Dr. H. G. Wright; H. Sedgwick, Esq.; Vernon Heath, Esq.; James Glaisher, Esq.; H. Joubert, Esq.; and H. P. Robinson, Esq….”]

Hughes, Jabez. “My Impressions of Photography in Paris; Autumn 1861.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 5:173 (Dec. 27, 1861): 611-612. [“I have already stated my impression that English landscape photographers are more advanced than French ones. But I cannot resist the conviction that the French are superior to us in portraiture. I have been reluctant in coming to this conclusion, and have been trying to persuade myself that I am led away by the freshness and novelty of all things around me; but as 1 look on the collection of portraits in in the photographic exhibition, as well as those in the principal Boulevards, I feel compelled to acknowledge that those of our neighbours, compared with our own, surpass us….” “…Vernon Heath contributes a frame of his exquisite pictures, as if to show what good landscapes should be. Mr. Russell Gordon of Chiswick, has some of the most exquisite pictures I have ever seen — views in Madeira. How is it we do not know more of this gentleman, for truly he is one of our very best photographers? While looking at his charming views I made a marginal note in my catalogue, that “they were examples of the very best English landscape photography, combining the sharpness and softness of Bedford, the delicacy of Heath, the atmosphere of Mudd, the sentiment of Robinson, and artistic feeling of Lyndon Smith,” and I still feel that they merit this eulogium. I was proud to see such excellent work by a comparatively new name. I notice that this gentleman remarks that all his pictures were taken with wet collodion heavily bromised. Can this in any way account for the unusual softness and atmospheric feeling in these pictures? It is certainly confirmation for the advocates of bromine in collodion. Mr. Annan of Glasgow exhibits three very nice Scotch scenes. It was very pleasant to stand in the Champs Elysees, to admire “the country of Rob Roy,” the banks of Loch Lomond, and the old Clachan of Aberfoyl. I looked in vain for art-photographs, in the sense that Rejlander and Robinson execute them. Neither in the shops nor the Exhibition did I see any….”]

“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL 24:1 (Jan. 1, 1862): 31. [Book review. Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain. By William and Mary Howett. The Photographic Illustrations by Bedford, Sedgfield, Wilson, Fenton, and others. Published by A. W. Bennett, London. “We recur, according to promise, to the beautiful volume, the appearance of which was merely announced in our last number. There is in the simple title of the book a world of thought and reflection; it carries us back to a period of our history when might overcame right, — when there were lords and vassals, — when there were intestine feuds, and men of the same lineage strove together, — when there were pageants and tourneys, as if in mockery of the real” tug of war;” — to a time when the people were but half civilised, and half the land brought forth briars and thorns. It takes us back, moreover, to ages when priestcraft was dominant, and prince, noble, and peasant bowed in submission to ecclesiastical rule, — when the sacerdotal robes covered iniquity of every kind, and vice turned holy, — when ignorance was allied with superstition, the one using the other to work out its object, the enslavement of the human mind. “Sailors at sin,” say the authors of the book before us, “bait for fish with a mere bit of red rag, the mockery of a piece of flesh, but the Romanists of the middle ages baited for souls with more empty and sapless things. Yet for the cupidity of the rich and powerful, God made them unconsciouslv and blindly bait with substantial temptations. Their vast hoarded wealth, their gold and silver vessels, their shrines garnished and loaded with jewels, their pictures by the greatest masters, and still more their magnificent estates, drew the eyes and hearts of kings and nobles even as they pretended to worship, and at length they laid rapacious hands on the whole stupendous prey. The system was built on the delusive sands of imposition, and when the floods and tempests of secular power beat upon it, it fell — and great was the fall thereof. What a moral in this worldliness! The very things which they imagined were building up their strength, were preparing their destruction. And yet admitting all the evils arising from the ecclesiastical and feudal systems of those days, loth, perhaps, were not unsuited to the times, and each could point out some good arising out of it. The powerful barons operated as a check on the despotism of the monarch, and every noble’s castle was a place of refuge for his dependant, though it might be his vassal: want and miserv, and absolute destitution, were far less frequent in that semi-barbarous ago than in our own, with all its boasted civilisation and its numerous agencies for relieving distress. If the people were regarded as so many cattle, they were at least cared for as such; while they found other benefactors, when needed, intoe who inhabited the monasteries — the men who, with all their worldliness and superstitious absurdities, had among them minds which enlightened the earth, and whose intellectual powers cleared the way for all future progress. And thus it is that the sight of an old feudal castle, or of the shattered remnants of some monastery, draws out our feelings in harmony with those of the poet who says — “I do love those ancient ruins; Whenever tread upon them but we set Our foot upon some reverend history them especial value to every admirer of Art;” while their picturesque character, generally, gives combined with nature: these old castles and abbeys are stock subjects everywhere with the landscape-painter. Seventeen of the most famous of these mouldering edifices Mr. And Mrs. Howitt bring under notice — the abbeys of Bolton, Glastonbury, Tintern, Fountains, Melrose, Roslin, and others; the castles of Chepstow, Conway, Raglan, Carisbrooke, Goodrich, &c. The idea is not novel, but it has never been more satisfactorily carried out: the history and description of each building are given with sufficiently ample detail, and the narrative is interspersed with adventures and anecdotes connected with the authors’ journeyings in search of the picturesque; a pleasant admixture of historical and antiquarian reading with personal experiences of modern travelling. If, however, the plan of the book is not new, the manner in which it is illustrated is somewhat of a novelty, for the pictures are photographs, and perfect gems, too, they are. The authors say, — “It appears to us a decided advance in the department of Topography, thus to unite it to Photography. The reader is no longer left to suppose himself at the mercy of the imaginations, the caprices, or the deficiencies of artists, but to have before him the genuine presentment of the object under consideration.” Without subscribing to the opinion of artistic failings here implied, we are perfectly willing to express our own upon the beauty of these sun-pictures; and only hope, though we may doubt, they will be as brilliant twenty years hence as now. One of them forms a medallion in the centre of each side of a richly ornamented cover of Magenta and gold — fit outward adorning of an elegant gift-book.”]

“Photographic Tourist. Photographic Pencillings of an Eastern Tour.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:174 (Jan. 2, 1862): 9-10. [“Taking a pleasant, hurried, final leave of my few good friends and true, one briskly invigorating, and hearty December morning, after duly superintending the stowing away of luggage, I sprung into the railway carriage, and away I went, feeling that I really was, at last, on my way to quit dear old England for a long-promised tour amid scenes associated with so much that is dear to the Christian’s heart. That night I stowed myself away, horizontally, in one of the berths on board the boat which conveyed me across the channel, and woke up to go ashore and be horridly annoyed by ‘the suspiciously overhauling of my various traps, especially the photographic. This trouble over — I had to pay duty, by-the-bye, for such glass as I took with me — I was speedily in the streets of Paris….” “…Paris is said to be the home of art, and I have seen, in the pages for which I am now writing, that photography is regarded as superior in artistic quality there than here. Now I am no artist myself, although an amateur photographer, but I must say that while no one can deny that art is more widely understood and appreciated in Paris than in London, French art, in all its applications, including photography, is, after all, wanting in the elements which we English best understand. It is brilliantly attractive in all the more popular qualities, but does not indicate much thought or feeling. Its paintings arc almost gaudy in colour, and their subjects seem always to be more or less melodramatically treated; and as to its photography, I have no patience with those who would compare, detrimentally, the productions of Robinson, Heath, Mudd, Bedford, Rejlander, and other eminent English masters, with works of a similar character by their French representatives….” “…M. H.”]

“Sixth Exhibition of the Photographic Society of Scotland, at Edinburgh.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:117 (Jan. 15, 1862): 347-349. [“Having only partially inspected this interesting Exhibition, our notice of it must be brief….” “…In the few lines which are left to us, we can only indicate at hazard a few pictures that have caught our attention, satisfied at the same time that we must have overlooked many, perhaps equally deserving of notice, and regretting that neither time nor space enabled us to do justice to all. Among those by Mr. Bedford the finest is (411) “Rocks at Ilfracombe,” almost equal to anything in the Exhibition; (559) by Mr. Mitchell, jun., amateur, “Scene on the Eye Water;” (360) “St. John’s College, Oxford, garden front;” (403) “Roadside on Isle of Wight,” R. Gordon; (418) “On the Maclury, Strathallan,” J. B. Stewart; (483) “ In Hawthorn Grove, Phoenix Park;” (92) “The Dargle, Wicklow,” by J. M. Brownrigg; (99) “View on the Don,” Lamb…”]

“Photography in its relation to the Fine Arts.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:117 (Jan. 15, 1862): 359-360. [“Define terms,” it has been said, “and controversy will cease.” Unfortunately for the simplicity of this dictum, the uncertain J relation of well-defined terms to indefinite ideas j constitutes the whole difficulty. The term “Fine Art” is one of the most common to be found in the works of writers on Aesthetic science; its meaning in a general sense is understood by everybody; but for any precise definition, any accurate statement of the conditions involved, any unchallengeable landmarks pointing out its extent or limitations, we may search in vain. The consideration whether photography possesses a legitimate claim to a position amongst the fine arts involves, however, at the outset, that the conditions necessary to such recognition should be defined. All art may be broadly divided into two classes, the mechanical or industrial arts, and the beautiful or fine arts. The first has reference only to what belongs to the material facts — the physical necessities of man’s life. These supplied, he discovers that he has a higher nature and nobler cravings which must be satisfied. The subjugation of matter to all purposes of material use is the province of the industrial arts. The perception and embodiment of the beautiful in its various forms belongs to the province of fine art. The distinction here drawn is a broad and obvious one, and has, in effect, been universally recognized. We shall have to inquire, then, to which category photography belongs whether it is a mechanical or a fine art….” “…The rough sketches of a Raphael with a piece of charcoal are treasured as works of art, because they give expression to the beauty of form in the mind of the artist; the true artist produces true art, no matter what his vehicle of expression, and the first ranks amongst photographers are already filled up by men who have been associated with art before they practised photography, — such as Bedford and Wilson, Lake Price and Rejlander. The new art needs, however, to be wielded by such men in order to receive recognition, for photography cannot create or idealize. It is not an imaginative art: it must be literal. It must deal with the actual; the world of imagination is to it a terra incognita. What it sees of beauty or deformity it uncompromisingly depicts, and nothing more….” From the London Review.]

“Photographic Allotments at the Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:178 (Jan. 31, 1862): 50-51. [“The allotments of space in the photographic department of the forthcoming International Exhibition are by this time, we believe, in the hands of photographers. The conditions for the guidance of contributors, which are few, simple, and reasonable, are as follows…” “…The “consideration of the Committee” will doubtless be largely influenced by the character of the pictures submitted to them. We must confess that we should feel sorry if, in the rigid enforcement of the rule, it were found necessary to regard as “touched” some of the skilfully managed skies of Mudd, Bedford, and others. The limited space at their disposal, will, however, compel the committee to be more inexorably rigid in their exclusiveness than would be otherwise necessary….”]

“Photographic Exhibition at Edinburgh.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:178 (Jan. 31, 1862): 55-57. [“We extract the following notice of the exhibition in connection with the Photographic Society of Scotland from the Photographic Journal.” “From the wretched weather with which Scotland, and particularly its western districts, was visited in 1861, we were prepared to anticipate a scanty supply of contributions from that quarter, and to doubt whether these would possess their usual excellence. These anticipations, we are happy to say, have not been realized. Among our resident Scotch photographers the specimens sent equal the best contributions of former years, while Mudd, Dixon Piper, and Vernon Heath from England, and Mr. Maxwell Lyte from the Pyrenees, have filled the walls with specimens of their characteristic styles (for a difference of style among photographers is just as perceptible as a different touch among artists), which leave nothing, we think, to be desired. On the whole, we cannot hesitate to say that the exhibition of this year is at least equal to any of its predecessors. The number of photographs exhibited amounts to 635, many of these (such as the cartes de visite) embracing twelve in a frame. To the old list of exhibitors have been added some new ones of distinguished merit; and some of the productions of amateurs, who have only recently become votaries of this delightful art, maintain their places beside the performances of veterans and professionals….” “…In the few lines that are left to us, we can only indicate at hazard a few pictures that have caught our attention, satisfied at the same time, that we must have overlooked many, perhaps equally deserving of notice, and regretting that neither time nor space enable us to do justice to all. Among those by Mr. Bedford the finest is (411) “Rocks at Ilfracombe,” almost equal to anything in the exhibition; (559) by Mr. Mitchell, jun., amateur, “Scene on the Eye Water (360) “St. John’s College, Oxford, garden front (403) “Roadside on Isle of Wight,” R. Gordon; (418) “On the Maclury, Strathallan,” J. B. Stewart; (483) “In Hawthorne Grove, Phoenic Park (92) “The Dargle, Wicklow,” by J. M. Brownrigg, (99) “View on the Don,” Lamb (who, by the way, has this year tried the experiment of printing on unglazed paper, and, as we think, with manifest advantage to his prints); “Portrait” (273), H. Hering; (307) “Portrait of Miss M. Wilson,” Tunny; (328) “The Bass,” D. Campbell; (388) “Fountains Abbey, from the West,” A. F. Adam (wax-paper); “Wooden Bridge, St. Fillans,” Vernon Heath; (485, 486) “Studies of Trees,” A. J. Harris (waxed paper)….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:178 (Jan. 31, 1862): 57-58. [“The usual monthly meeting of this association was held at Myddelton Hall, on the evening of Wednesday, January 22nd. In the absence of the Vice-President, Mr. C. J. Hughes occupied the chair. The minutes of the previous meeting having been road and confirmed, The Chairman called the attention of members to the presentation print for this year, a copy of which was on the table. It is a very fine photograph by Bedford, “A Study of Rocks, at Ilfracombe.” The size is 12 in. by 10 in., and is an exquisite specimen of photography — delicate, brilliant, and well defined. Its photographic merit is, however, superior to its pictorial interest….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. The London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:179 (Feb. 7, 1862): 68-70. [“The annual meeting of the Photographic Society was held on the evening of Tuesday, the 4th instant, at King’s College. Sir F. Pollock, the Chief Baron, in the chair. The minutes of a former meeting having been read and confirmed, the Chairman called attention to some stereoscopic views in Ireland by Mr. Browning, and a large and interesting collection of slides by Capt. Allen Scott, embracing a variety of Indian subjects in portraiture and natural scenery. A pair of coloured miniatures, Her Majesty and the late Prince Consort, being Mayall’s album portraits, coloured by Madame Mansion were exhibited. A water-tight bath, invented by Dr. Wright was also handed round for inspection….” “…The Secretary read the names of the gentlemen who had been proposed in December as officers of the society. Sir F. Pollock for re-election as President, and Mr. Hamilton as treasurer. Mr. F. Bedford as Vice-President, in place of Professor Bell. The retiring members of the council were Messrs. Crace, Maskelyne, Stokes, Delamotte, Bedford, and Dr. Fane; in place of these, Messrs. Vernon Heath, Glaisher, Joubert, H. P. Robinson, Sedgwick, and Dr. Wright, had been proposed, and were now elected by general consent….”]

“Talk in the Studio. The Prince of Wales and Photography.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:179 (Feb. 7, 1862): 72. [“We have much pleasure in announcing the first public act which illustrates that the heir to England’s throne takes as deep an interest in photography as his late royal father. In the Eastern tour, which he is about to take in as private a manner as possible, accompanied by a very limited suite, eight gentlemen only accompanying, Mr. Francis Bedford, photographer, forms one of that eight. A complete equipment for photographic operations will be taken so as to secure, under the best possible conditions, photographic mementoes of a journey through scenes so fraught with historic and sacred associations. Mr. Bedford has, we believe, received permission to publish the series of photographs, when, after their completion, the requirements of Her Majesty are supplied. The 13th instant is fixed for the Prince leaving England….”]

“Annual General Meeting. King’s College, London. Tuesday, February 4, 1862.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:118 (Feb. 15, 1862): 363-367. [“…. The Secretary then mentioned the “on dit” of the evening, that Mr. Bedford was about to proceed to the East with the Prince of Wales, he believed, to preserve a photographic record of the travels of the Prince….”]

“Notes Literary and Photographic.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 7:118 (Feb. 15, 1862): 368. [“We are sure that our readers will join with us most heartily in rejoicing at the appointment of Mr. Francis Bedford as the photographer who is to accompany His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales in his Eastern tour. Mr. Bedford will take views of landscapes, figures, and architecture of the various remarkable places that may be visited. Those who remember the charming landscapes which Mr. Bedford took for Her Majesty and His late Royal Highness the Prince Consort on the Continent will see at once the judiciousness of the appointment. Mr. Bedford is not only one of the very best photographic manipulators we have in this country, as all our readers know, but he is one of the best lithographic artists also; so that His Royal Highness has, in Mr. Bedford, a first-rate artist and a first-class photographer. We shall look forward with great interest for the results of this journey. We expect that Her Majesty, with that liberality which always characterizes her, will permit the public to have the benefit of Mr. Bedford’s photographs, if not for sale, at least for exhibition, as on former occasions.”]

“Eastward Ho!” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 9:160 (Feb. 15, 1862): 66. [Note that Bedford accompanying the Prince of Wales on his tour of the East.]

“Miscellaneous Items: The Prince of Wales and Photography.” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE ALLIED ARTS & SCIENCES n. s. 4:19 (Mar. 1, 1862): 454-455. [From Photographic News. Note that Francis Bedford, one of only eight gentlemen accompanying the Prince of Wales on his eastern tour.]

Thompson, S. “Photography in Its Application to Book Illustration.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 9:161 (Mar. 1, 1862): 88-89. [Discusses the Howitt’s Ruined Castles and Abbeys of Great Britain, with photos by Bedford, Sedgfield, Wilson, Fenton, etc.]

“Talk in the Studio. Mr. Bedford at the Pyramids. PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:185 (Mar. 21, 1862): 144. [“We notice that Mr. Bedford is attempting instantaneous effects in his eastern tour with the Prince of Wales. The Times correspondent describing the visit of the royal party to the Pyramids states that the cavalcade was successfully photographed by Mr. Bedford before its return to Cairo….”]

“The Prince of Wales in Egypt.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 40:1136 (Sat., Mar. 22, 1862): 300. [(Left Cairo for Upper Egypt by steamer, met locals, visited the pyramids and Sphinx, etc.) “…An hour or more was devoted to the examination of the other antiquities in the neighbourhood, and the cavalcade returned as it had come, not without having been successfully caught up by the skill of Mr. Bedford, the photographer, who accompanied the Prince’s suite…”]

“Proceedings of Societies. North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:186 (Mar. 28, 1862): 153-154. [“The annual meeting of this Association was held in Myddelton Hall on the evening of Wednesday, March 19th, Mr. G. Shadbolt in the Chair. The minutes of the previous meeting having been read, the following gentlemen were elected members of the Society: — Messrs. Homersham, Jones, Spicer, and Toulman. The Secretary then read the following Annual Report. In addressing you on the Fifth Anniversary of the North London Photographic Association your Committee has little but congratulations to offer. The success of the Association has been steady and progressive. The number of its members exceeds one hundred, and there are this evening several new names for election. The meetings have been well attended; the papers read have elicited more than ordinary interest; and the discussions have been conducted with greater freedom, ability, and energy — all tending to demonstrate the progress of our art and the social feeling pervading our Society. The financial statement is satisfactory, showing a balance more than sufficient to defray all the liabilities of the Association. Your Committee regrets the unavoidable delay in the distribution of the presentation photograph, but rests assured there will be ample compensation in the size and beauty of the picture; and your Committee takes this opportunity of thanking Mr. Bedford for his liberality in supplying so superior a photograph at a mere nominal cost to the Association….”]

“Miscellanea.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:120 (Apr. 15, 1862): 39. [“Mr. Bedford, it is stated, produced a successful photograph of the cavalcade, consisting of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales and his attendants, on the occasion of their visit to the Pyramids.”]

1 illus. (“Prince of Wales’ Visit to Egypt: His Royal Highness Examining the Negatives Taken by Mr. Bedford, Photographist, at Philae.”) on p. 466 in: “The Price of Wales in Egypt.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 40:1143 (Sat., May 10, 1862): 466, 467, 488. 3 illus. [(A sketch of Bedford showing his negative to the Prince and several companions, surrounded by Egyptian boys and bearers, Bedford’s camera on a tripod and a portion of his developing tent, with native assistant, are depicted — all of these before the ruins of a temple. Bedford is mentioned as accompanying the Prince’s expedition on p. 488. Illustrations, from drawings, of scenes and events –the reception of the Prince by Said Pacha, Viceroy of Egypt, the Prince at Philae, the Prince on camels to visit the pyramids. during his visit.) “…We returned the same day to Assuan, and thence back to Edfon, where we remained one day inspecting its magnificent temples. Several fine views were taken by Mr. Bedford, photographer to the Prince. The following day…” p. 488.]

“Review. Ruined Abbeys and Castles.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:121 (May 15, 1862): 57-58. [Book review. Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain, by William and Mary Howitt. The Photographic Illustrations by Bedford, Sedgefield, Wilson, Fenton, and others. A. W. Bennett, 5 Bishopsgate Without, London, 1862. “There could scarcely be any subject selected by a writer better calculated to show to advantage the great aid which photography can render as a means of illustration than that before us, — photographic views of buildings of architectural note being generally among the most attractive pictures in our Annual Exhibitions. The views in this work are small, and their miniature size in many cases adds greater beauty to them. In the preface the publisher makes some very sensible remarks upon the necessity of accuracy in views of this class, as a means of enabling the reader correctly to understand the technical descriptions which accompany the views. He says, “In this volume, he has availed himself of the accuracy of photography to present to the reader the precise aspect of the places which at the same time are commended to his notice by the pen. It appears a decided advance in the department of topography thus to unite it to photography. The reader is no longer left to suppose himself at the mercy of the imaginations, the caprices, or the deficiencies of artists, but to have before him the genuine presentment of the object under consideration. He trusts that this idea” (and we heartily join with him) ” will be pursued to the extent of which it is capable; and that hereafter we shall have works of topography and travel illustrated by the photographer with all the yet-to-be improvements of the art, so that we shall be able to feel, when reading of new scenes and lands, that we are not amused with pleasant fictions, but presented with realities.” Nothing could possibly contribute more to this desirable state of things than the very clever manner in which the publisher of this work has combined able descriptive matter with first-class illustrations. The views executed by Mr. Sedgefield vary more in quality than any of his collaborateurs. It is to be regretted that he has vignetted several of his architectural views; he has by that means so entirely destroyed the fine and striking lines which are the chief beauty of views of this character. His little vignette of the “Shid,” is a perfect gem of photographic landscape photography. Of the views by Messrs. Fenton and Bedford it is needless to say more than that they are done in the usually careful manner that they execute all their works. Mr. Wilson, who has gained a deserved reputation for the beauty of his miniature landscapes, entirely preserves it by the views he has contributed to this work. We must, in conclusion, say a word about the neat and careful manner in which these pictures are mounted. Inattention to this little point, in our opinion, often spoils the effect of the most carefully executed pictures.”]

“Miscellanea.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:121 (May 15, 1862): 57-58. [“…Mr. Francis Bedford has been very successful in the East, having already secured a large number of excellent negatives. He has made arrangements, we understand, with Messrs. Day and Son to publish them….”]

“Talk in the Studio. Photography in the Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:193 (May 16, 1862): 240. [“We observe with pleasure that, notwithstanding the inferior position accorded to photography by Her Majesty’s Commissioners, the “leading journal” regards it as worthy of repeated and prominent notice in its criticisms on the contents. Of the British department it recently remarks: — “ We mentioned yesterday, with the praise they deserved, the very fine collection of French photographs in the south gallery, though we now learn that some of the very best in this display are by English artists resident in France. Some remarkably good ones are sent by Mr. Maxwell Lyte, an amateur, whose pictures may be at once known by the words, ‘Lux fecit’ — a true photographer’s pun on his name and art. Mr. Bingham, too, one of the best of the Paris professionals, sends some fine specimens, which go far to keep up the general excellence of the French show. There is a special class devoted to English photography in the building, which contains some of the finest specimens of the photographic art ever brought together. There was no class devoted to photography in 1851, and there was near being no exhibition of the art on this occasion, in consequence of the most unfavourable place assigned to it. As it is, the London Photographic Society have refused to exhibit, and, but for the efforts made by the most eminent photographers, the art, as regards England, would have been unrepresented altogether. The photographic collection is placed along with the class devoted to educational appliances, in a large room in the upper floor of the tower, between the English and foreign picture galleries — about the most inaccessible and unfavourable spot to which it could be banished, but to which we feel now justified in calling the attention of visitors, as containing a collection which will repay a long visit. Here are collected the finest portraits of Williams, Claudet, Watkins, and Mayall, Caldezi’s copies of miniatures and cartoons, the exquisite views of Bedford, Fenton, Cundall, Downes, and White, and the fancy pieces of Robinson. Frith also sends specimens of three great views in the East, which were taken for Negretti and Zambra. Some of the best exhibitors in this class are to be found among the amateurs, of whom there are many, such as Colonel Sir Henry James, the Earl of Caithness, Lady Jocelyn, Colonel Verschoyle, Colonel Stuart Wortley, Sir A. Macdonald, &c. the educational appliances in this department of the Exhibition likewise deserve an attentive visit.” The error made as to the Photographic Society having refused to exhibit, will be understood by photographers as a misconception as to the nature of the steps taken some months ago.”]

“Talk in the Studio. The Photographic Contract at the Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:193 (May 16, 1862): 240. [“We intimated a conviction a few weeks ago, that the impossible conditions attached to the photographic tender, for the privilege of photographing in the Exhibition Building, had a definite purpose, and was part of a little scheme of jobbery. An advertisement which appears in the official catalogue, affords a striking illustration of this idea. A certain firm who have not obtained the contract, had made such arrangements and received such assurances, it would appear, that the contract was already regarded as secured. Accordingly, in the advertisement in question, the firm to whom we allude, announces the publication of a series of views of the interior and contents, taken by Mr. Francis Bedford! Rumour tells other curious tales on this subject, which we forbear, however, to chronicle. We may mention one incident we have heard related, however, which throws some light on the source of the scurvy treatment photography, generally, has received in this international undertaking. A few days ago Mr. England was engaged in photographing a piece of machinery in the annexe, and had placed an attendant in such a position, as to show relative size, &c., when one of the commissioners passing, immediately denounced this as a breach of contract, styling the operation as taking “shilling portraits,” and obtaining a sight of Mr. England’s pass or warrant unhesitatingly appropriated and put it in his pocket! A telegraphic message brought Mr. Nottage, who took prompt measures to have the pass restored, and his staff put on a proper position, safe from further indignities. Without mentioning this commissioner’s name, we may state that it was the same gentleman, who, some time ago in certain evidence before the House of Commons, denounced “photographic professors” as “pests!” We then said photographers were obliged by his good opinion. They may now guess how much more they have to thank him for.”]

“Illustrations of the Prince of Wales’s Visit to Egypt.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 40:1144 (Sat., May 17, 1862): 495, 498, 499. 4 illus. [(Scenes of events, from drawings, of the visit.) “…On the preceding page we illustrate the ride of the Royal party to Edfou. here the Prince remained for a day inspecting its magnificent temples, several fine views of which were taken by Mr. Bedford, photographer to hid Royal highness…” p. 499.]

“Copyright in Photographs.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:195 (May 30, 1862): 253-254. [“On another page we give at some length the discussion which arose at the second reading in the House of Lords, of the “Copyright (Works of Art) Bill,” in which protection from piracy is provided for photographs. We do so in order to impress on those concerned the fact that the Bill and their recognition in it, is by no means safe yet. We know there are, at the present moment, many photographers who are reserving, at temporary inconvenience and loss, with hopes of permanent gain, works ready for publication, until the Bill shall pass into law. It is important, therefore, that any influence which can be brought to bear shall not be neglected or relaxed….” “…Earl Stanhope, whilst defending the Bill generally, and showing the groundlessness of the forebodings and vaticinations of objectors, stops short when he approaches photography. In defending the object of the Bill he cannot be gainsaid. “If,” he observes, “it were once admitted that a man should profit by the fruits of his own genius, no person could fairly say that, having given a copyright to another, Parliament should refuse it to the artist. There was no difference in theory between a poem and a picture, and the producers of both had an equal right to protection.” Why, in the name of common sense, the insertion of the word “photographic’’ before the words “artist” and “picture” in the above sentence, should alter the whole case, we cannot conceive. But he suddenly qualifies his arguments, and admits he feels some difficulty on one part of the Bill. “For example, he could not see how the principle of copyright could be carried out in the case of photographs. One person might make a copy of a photograph of the Coliseum, originally produced by another; but who could say that the copy was not an original photograph? How could anyone assert that the person who published it did not go to the Coliseum, take his stand upon the same spot of ground as the other photographer, and commence his operations at the same hour? So, too, with respect to photographic portraits of living persons. He should be glad if some noble and learned lord could show how the proposed law was to be enforced in the case of photographs.” If the noble earl had understood anything of his subject, had known anything of photography or photographs, he would not have needed to ask how it was possible to distinguish between the works of different photographers. He would have understood that in photography it was as possible for the artist to stamp his individuality upon his productions, and be distinguished by his “manner,” as in painting. If he will walk with us, or anyone familiar with photography and photographers, through any public exhibition of photographs, we will undertake, unhesitatingly, to point him out at once, without reference to catalogue, the works of Bedford, Heath, Mudd, Wilson, or any other artist of standing, in landscape; or of Williams, Claudet, Mayall, and others, in portraiture. But another argument might have suggested itself to the noble earl. If photographs were so lacking in individuality as he seems to conceive; if photographs of the same place and person were necessarily as much “alike as two peas,” a large element in the photographer’s desire for protection would be removed. If all photographs were alike, the value of property in any of them would be at least much diminished. But one part of the injury done to photographs by piracy derives its force solely from this individuality. The pirated copies possess the style and manner of the artist who is plundered, but the work is bad, flat, mealy, and fading. Thus the original artist is not only robbed, but his works are travestied, and his reputation damaged. Again, in the case of portraiture, there could rarely be any difficulty in enforcing the law or proving its infringement, because it would be very easy to prove, in the majority of instances, that the original of any pirated portrait never sat to the pirate for the picture in question, and that he could only have obtained a negative by reproducing it from an original print. The piracy would in such case be placed beyond a doubt. But we can put a stronger case than this, in reference to many subjects, and one in which the wrong is still more patent. We have not, moreover, to suppose a case; there is one before us actually in point. The London Stereoscopic Company have just paid a heavy sum to Her Majesty’s Commissioners for the right of photographing inside the Exhibition Building. Fifteen hundred guineas have been paid down, and an engagement entered into for the prospective payment, under certain conditions, of sums which may amount to twice the amount already expended. The Company have undertaken these heavy payments for the sole right of photographing in the building, and doubtless with the view to reaping the sole profit of such undertaking; and, if we are not mistaken, they are at present delaying the publication of the pictures until the passing of this Bill shall give them protection. Without such protection the moment they publish their views, the sole right to obtain which has cost them some thousands of pounds, they are at the mercy of all who are sufficiently unscrupulous to profit by pirating the property of others….”]

“Who Should Receive the Medals — Artists or Exhibitors?” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:196 (June 6, 1862): 265. [“As the period approaches when the awards of jurors in the Exhibition will be made; a question of considerable interest arises, which is, however, one of not less difficulty. On examination of the pictures, and reference to the catalogue, it will be seen that the contributor and the artist are not always comprised in one and the same person. A correspondent, whose letter will be found in another column, calls attention to the anomaly which may very easily be perpetrated in the award of medals in such cases, by placing the laurels on brows which have not won them, awarding an honour to the publisher, who exhibits, which unquestionably should belong to the artist who has produced…” “…We submit that the case is different, however, as regards photography. There is no difficulty in deciding to whom the palm belongs. Whatever advantages he may have derived from the purest of chemicals and the best of apparatus, these matters will receive recognition in their proper quarter. Whatever wide-spread publicity his productions may have received through the efforts of an enterprising publisher or employer, there no is room for doubt at any time that the results of the skilful photographer are due to himself alone, and that he alone should receive recognition in an award to merit. Francis Bedford is at this moment in the employment of the Prince of Wales: his pictures are announced for publication by Messrs. Day and Son; but no one will for a moment dream of crediting either his Royal Highness, or the publishing house we have named, with the merit of Mr. Bedford’s pictures. As a general rule, moreover, there is no obscurity or doubt existing about these matters. Skilled photographers are well-known and recognised; their productions being more familiar evidence than their sign-manual….”]

“The South London Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:197 (June 13, 1862): 277-278. [“We cannot help coming to the conclusion that the Crystal Palace at Sydenham possesses, for a Photographic Exhibition, many advantages over the building, which is no palace, at South Kensington; and we fancy that those least disposed to admit this some months ago, will now, in view of the absolute fact, be quite prepared to agree with us. We admit the occasional distraction of music and “frivolous amusements;” but the music is not perpetual; and even the agile Blondin cannot risk his neck for more than an hour a day; whilst the minor claims on attention, such as distant music of the organ or pianos, the plashing of water from fountains, the murmur of a happy multitude in the magnificent grounds, &c., add, we think, to the pleasure — rather than cause any distraction — of examining the photographs. These, and the ready access to the department, the ample space afforded, the good array of pictures, and the excellent arrangement, will all contribute, we think, to make the South London Society’s first Exhibition a successful one….” “…Passing from the portraiture, we come to a screen covered with the well-known pictures of Francis Bedford. Most of these are very familiar; but from their real excellence they always seem to possess the charm of freshness. The interiors have unquestionably never been surpassed. Mr. E. C. Buxton contributes a frame containing shipping, genre studies, &c. “The Pickle” yacht, on one of the Scottish lochs, is a very good picture. Messrs. Jackson, Brothers, of Jumbo, near Manchester, contribute a series of their charming studies of rustic grouping and scenery. We have more than once on former occasions referred to these pictures, which are, of their kind, amongst the very finest which have been produced by our art. The subjects are for the most part familiar and accessible to everyone; but by careful and judicious selection of position and lighting, we have pictures such as would have delighted Gainsborough. We especially commend these pictures to the attention of those visiting the Exhibition….”]

“Memoranda: Photographic, Scientific, and Practical.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:122 (June 16, 1862): 74-77. [“…Photography at the International Exhibition. –The photographic department of the Exhibition is now complete. A new and corrected Catalogue of the photographs has been issued; and notwithstanding the somewhat remote and inconvenient position which — compelled, we presume, by the exigencies of space — the Commissioners awarded to British photographers, their works have received honourable recognition by the public and the press. The Times, speaking of them, says: — “We mentioned yesterday,…” “…Here are collected the finest portraits of Williams, Claudet, Watkins, and Mayall, Caldesi’s copies of miniatures and cartoons, the exquisite views of Bedford, Fenton, Cundall, Downes, and White, and the fancy pieces of Robinson. Frith also sends specimens of three great views in the East, which were taken for Negretti and Zambra. Some of the best exhibitors in this class are to be found among the amateurs, of whom there are many, such as Colonel Sir Henry James, the Earl of Caithness, Lady Jocelyn, Colonel Verschoyle, Colonel Stuart Wortley, Sir A. Macdonald, &c….” “…South London Photographic Society’s Exhibition.- — -We notice that the Exhibition of Photographs at the Crystal Palace, under the auspices of the South London Photographic Society, is now open to the public. It comprises a very fine selection of pictures, many of them by photographers whose works have been familiar at our own annual exhibitions, and some few whose names are new to the public. The various processes in use are fairly represented, the wet process having, however, the largest number of adherents. Amongst the names hitherto comparatively unknown to fame, we may mention those of Jackson Brothers, near Manchester, who exhibit a series of very charming rural studies, in which the composition and photography are alike good. Mr. J. J. Cole, a recently joined Member of our own Society, has a series of very fine architectural photographs, consisting of examples of the works of Sir Christopher Wren. They are taken on tannin plates, and many of them possess very great merit in every sense. Mr. Buxton, an amateur, exhibits some views in the East, taken on collodio-albumen plates, which will compare favourably with the best we have seen of the localities. Mr. Bedford and other well-known artists contribute freely. The Exhibition is altogether a good one, and the ample space at the Crystal Palace permits the contributions to be arranged to the best advantage….”]

1 b & w (“West Front of Wells Cathedral.”) facing p. 42; 1 b & w (“St. Auqustin and His Mother.”) facing p. 44 in: “Engraving by Photography.” GENTLEMAN’S MAGAZINE (July 1862): 42-45. [(Two tipped-in photoengraved illustrations. One is a view, credited to Francis Bedford, the second is a copy of an artwork, credited “By Ary Scheffer. From an Engraving. Printed by the ordinary Letterpress from a Block produced by means of Photography and Electrotype. Absolutely untouched by the graver.”) “Comparing the productions of the present International Exhibition with those of its predecessor, the progress is most strikingly visible in photography; in fact, in 1851 photography not being sufficiently advanced to be placed in a separate class, it was, with the apparatus used, included among philosophical instruments; now, however, it has a class of itself, namely, Class XIV. We have not space to describe the beauties exhibited, or to enter into the difficulties surmounted, but we can present our readers, at least, with some specimens of a process which appears to be an extraordinary achievement, and of which the consequences may be of great importance. Many people interested in photography may recollect having seen some photographs, done from paper negatives, obtained by the ordinary wet process, and exhibited in 1851 under the head of the Imperial Printing Office at Vienna, executed by the manager of it, Mr. Paul Pretsch, for which he was rewarded with the prize medal. But they may have asked themselves, What has a printer to do with photography? In the present year we have received an answer to such questions. There are to be seen in Class XIV of the English Department eighteen frames, filled with impressions, printed with ordinary printing ink by the ordinary printing-presses, from plates and blocks engraved by nature’s mysterious hand only, viz. by photography and electro-metallurgy. Photography and its sister art are made subject to the printing press, and for this reason the manager of the Vienna Printing-office became a photographer. These frames are headed by printed inscriptions, “Engraving by Photography.” The blocks, from which these copies have been printed with the ordinary press, are all absolutely untouched by the graver; and the plates, whose printed copies are exhibited in a considerable number, are of various descriptions. Some of them are, like the blocks, absolutely untouched by the graver, but some have been assisted, cleaned, and improved by the engraver, and a few shew the process of nature in combination with the work of the human hand, producing a result not attainable by the latter alone. In many instances this capability proves to be of great advantage. They are distinguished by printed labels on the specimens, and two frames of them contain the photographed original side by side with the printed copy….But not satisfied with this clear definition, Mr. Pretsch has exhibited on a counter in glass cases the plates and blocks themselves for examination by connoisseurs. There are to be seen seven blocks entirely untouched with the graver; the photographic originals of them being partly taken from nature and partly from works of art. There is also a large engraved printing-plate of copper, absolutely untouched; and a second plate, which has been assisted by the graver, and afterwards coated with a very thin film of steel, by which means the copperplates have been made almost as durable as engraved steel-plates. Therefore we see here the specimens of two processes, viz., — 1. Producing engraved printing-plates of copper, coated with steel, for the copperplate printing-press. 2. Producing engraved printing blocks (surface copper, backed with type metal, mounted on wood, like the cast of a wood engraving), to be printed by the ordinary printing-press with or without types; and by this last process the specimen before our readers is executed. Both processes preserve the true finger of nature, or the real touch of the artist. The first process is for the best works of the fine arts, and for hundreds of people; the second process, however, is for the million. Photographs in our present time are still perishable, but printer’s-ink and paper stand the test of centuries. The influence of light is used in these two processes only for the production of the first engraved surface; having obtained the engraving in the desired effect, the subsequent portion of the processes is mere mechanical skill, however great the number of copies. Our ancestors had only written books, but since the invention of typography, religion, wisdom, and knowledge became universal goods of mankind. The rapidity and cheapness of production by the ordinary printing-press are as well known as the spread of its productions over the whole globe. And what typography has been for the spread of thought that is photography for the reproduction of authentic illustrations, if they can be printed with ordinary printer’s-ink, and by the common cheap process. To enable our readers to obtain a correct idea of these processes, we introduce a brief explanation of them. An ordinary glass plate is coated with a certain mixture sensitive to the influence of light, and this coating is dried. The photographic negative is placed on the surface of the coated glass plate, both of them are fixed in an ordinary photographic copying frame, and exposed to the influence of light. After sufficient exposure they are taken out of the frame, separated, and the picture now appears in a faint coloured copy on the flat surface of the coated glass plate, which is to be immersed in a bath of powerful chemical action. By this treatment some portions of the picture become more or less raised, and some remain sunk, according to the previous action of light, and exactly corresponding to the lights and shadows of the picture. Id fact, this picture is the main portion of the process; it forms the engraved surface, and therefore must be obtained so as to answer the requirements of the printing-press. A picture can be obtained without much difficulty, but not so easily the picture which will suit a certain purpose. It is marvellous how nature can accomplish this result, but it does so only under certain conditions; she demands great attention, experience, and study of her laws, because they are not easily discovered. Having obtained in this manner the engraving as it ought to be, though the material is perishable and transient, a cast or mould is made from it; the coating of the glass plate, having served its purpose, is removed, the plate cleaned, and may be used over and over again. The above-mentioned mould, having been made conductive, is used for the purpose of inducing, by means of voltaic electricity, a deposit of copper thereon, forming the matrix from which the printing surface of copper is obtained by repeating the process of electrotyping. The illustration of a portion of Wells Cathedral, in our present number, has been executed in the above-mentioned second process. The photographic original has been taken from nature by Mr. Francis Bedford, and the engraved block, absolutely untouched by the graver, produced by Paul Pretsch. Only the white portion of the sky, requiring great depth in the block, has been built up in the matrix. We selected the west front of Wells Cathedral for a specimen of this process, with the double object of testing Mr. Pretsch’s powers by giving him a very elaborate subject, which requires great skill on the part of the draughtsman, and great patience on the part of the engraver to produce an accurate representation of it by the ordinary processes of art, and consequently must be very expensive and very apt to be unsatisfactory. Such exquisite figures require to be drawn and engraved with minute care, whereas by the process of Mr. Pretsch the matter is almost as easy as if the subject was a plain wall; and as the magnifying glass can be applied to it to any extent, the renovations of the sculptures, which are numerous, can be at once detected, which cannot be done in an engraving. This very remarkable series of sculptures was originally executed in the first quarter of the thirteenth century, and it is considered by Professor Cockerell and other high authorities to be absolutely unrivalled in Europe in work of that period. Many of the figures have been renewed, but the greater part are original. Another reason for selecting this subject was to call the attention of the Dean and Chapter, and the architect to the Ecclesiastical Commission, to the very bad effect produced by having four of the windows in this beautiful west front blocked up, in order to save a few pounds. It really does appear almost incredible that they should be suffered to remain blocked up at the present day, and in any ordinary engraving the accuracy of the artist might well be doubted, but in photography there can be no mistake or misrepresentation; and there they stand plainly, two of the tall lancet windows on either side of the central triplet; that is to say, there have been originally seven lancet windows in the front, three of which remain open; the other four are blocked up in consequence of a change in the roofs of the aisles behind them, and it having been thought cheaper to fill them up with stone than to retain the glass and put black boards behind it, which would have retained the original effect of the windows in the front. It would not be difficult, nor very expensive now, to restore the passage behind these blocked-up windows, and thus again give reality to them. Our second engraving, “St. Augustin and his Mother,” requires neither explanation nor comment.”]

“Talk in the Studio.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:200 (July 4, 1862): 324. [“Francis Bedford has arrived in England from his Eastern tour, with a large number of very fine negatives.”]

“Talk in the Studio. Mr. Bedford’s Eastern Pictures.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:201 (July 11, 1862): 336. [“We hope shortly to announce definitely the opening of an Exhibition of Mr. Francis Bedford’s Eastern Photographs, most probably in the German Gallery. After upwards of four months of very rapid travelling by every mode transit, he has arrived at home in excellent health and spirits, with something like two hundred good negatives, having met with no more serious casualty than the smashing of his camera by an Arab to whom it was entrusted to carry up a rock. The bulk of the negatives were by the wet process. A stock of Dr. Hill Norris’s plates which were taken, gave excellent negatives during the earlier part of the journey; but some trying changes of temperature having rendered them doubtful, Mr. Bedford, not having time for experiment, confined himself in future to the wet process. The appliances for this, we are violating no confidence in stating, were a stock of Ponting’s collodion, and a stock of Thomas’s bromo-iodized, both of which were used with the pyrogallic acid development. The former was found very sensitive, but, owing to the very glaring light, solarized very readily. The use of the bromo-iodized collodion obviated this difficulty, and was found therefore most suitable for the work. Notwithstanding the great intensity of the light, a tolerably long exposure was generally necessary to bring out detail in the black shadows. The heat was found very trying, the plate not unfrequently being partially dry before it could be developed; the use of a weak pyro developer was found the best mode of meeting the difficulty. All the negatives were on 12 by 10 plates. The lenses used were a single Ross and a Grubb, both of which we understand did their work very well. His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales manifested a deep interest, we understand, in Mr. Bedford’s success, making daily enquiry as to the result of operations, and making an occasional attempt at some of the manipulations. His brother, the Prince Alfred, we may here add, is an enthusiastic amateur, undertaking any department of the work himself, from cleaning the plates to focussing the negative. Messrs. Day and Sons, as we have before announced, will publish Mr. Bedford’s pictures.”]

“Photography at the International Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:123 (July 15, 1862): 79-86. [“The Great Exhibition has become for photography, as for many of her sister arts, a very great fact. The palace in Cromwell Road contains a selection of fine pictures from many nations, unrivalled for number and for beauty, for the variety of subjects chosen, for the novelty of many of the processes, and for the perfectness of the execution….” “…                      Jury Awards.                                                          Medal.
Nation.                         No. in.      Name of Exhibitor.                   Objects Rewarded and
Catalogue                                                          Reasons for the Award
.
United Kingdom.      3031       Amateur Photographic     For general photographic                                                                              Association                           excellence.
Beckley                           For a valuable series of photographs of
                                                                                                 spots on the sun, and for the application
                                                                                                  of photography to astronomical science.
  ,,    ,,                          3039         Bedford, F.                      Photographs. For landscapes and
                                                                                                   interiors of great excellence.
  ,,    ,,                          3049         Breese, C. S.                   For a series of instantaneous views on
                                                                                                   glass of clouds, waves, &c….
etc.”]

“Miscellanea.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:123. (July 15, 1862): 97. [“Mr. Francis Bedford has returned from his Eastern tour in company with His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. The number of good negatives obtained is nearly two hundred, prints from the whole of which, with the exception of a few private ones, will shortly be exhibited and published. Notwithstanding the inconvenience of very rapid travelling, and the trying vicissitudes of such a tour, Mr. Bedford has been on the whole successful. His chief operations were on 12 x 10 plates, with wet collodion, in a dark tent.”]

“Awards of Jurors in the Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:202 (July 18, 1862): 337-338. [“The second great ceremony in connection with the International Exhibition is over. How processions were marshalled, how addresses were delivered, and bands played, how the grand pageant was performed in all its parts, it is unnecessary to describe here, as our readers are doubtless more interested in the important announcement that the awards are made and published. The record of medals and honourable mentions tills a bulky volume, sold by the Commissioners for five shillings, this being the cheapest rate at which successful exhibitors were apprized of their good fortune, and the unsuccessful that they had been overlooked, or were undeserving of recognition. In another page we give the awards in Class XIV., with the reasons appended, as published in the official record. In the main we believe the decisions are tolerably just, and will give as much satisfaction as could be anticipated, under the circumstances….” “…In the ceremonial of last Friday, photography was represented by Dr. Diamond, M. Claudet, and Mr. Thurston Thompson, as jurors; and by Messrs. R. Fenton, T. R. Williams, H. White, and H. P. Robinson, as a committee to receive the awards. The names of the Lord Chief Baron as chairman, and of Mr. Bedford and Mr. Kater, as members of the committee, were also mentioned in the programme of the ceremonial, but only the gentlemen we have named were present.”]

“The International Exhibition. Jury Awards in Class XIV.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:202 (July 18, 1862): 342-344. [“                               Medal
United Kingdom.
    Name of Exhibitor.                                              Objects Awarded and Reasons for the Award.
Amateur Photographic Association       For general photographic excellence.
Beckley                                                            For a valuable series of photographs of spots on the
sun, and for the application of photography to
astronomical science.
Bedford, F.                                                      Photographs. For landscapes and interiors of great
excellence.
Breese, C. S.                                                   For a series of instantaneous views on glass of
clouds, waves, &c.
Colnaghi and Co.                                          For a valuable series of large photographs of
antiquities, copies of cartoons, miniatures, &c.
Dallmeyer, T. H.                                           For excellence of lenses, and introduction of a new
triplet lens free from distortion, with chemical and
visual foci coincident.
De la Rue, W.                                                 For the application of photography to astronomical
science.
Fenton, R.                                                       For great excellence in fruit and flower pieces, and
good general photography.
Frith                                                                 For views in Egypt taken by himself.
Heath, Vernon                                              For excellent landscape photography.
James, Col. Sir H., R.E.                               For specimens of photography, photozincography,
and photopapyrography.
London Stereoscopic Company               For great excellence of photographic views, and
especially a series of stereoscopic pictures of Paris.
Mayall, J. E.                                                    For artistic excellence in photographic productions.
Mudd, J.                                                           For very excellent landscapes produced by the
collodio-albumen process.
Negretti and Zambia                                   Beauty and excellence of photographic
transparencies, and adaption of photography to
book illustration, &c.
Piper, J. D.                                                       For general excellence in the pictures exhibited,
especially in landscape photography.
Ponting, T. C.                                                    For the excellence of his iodized sensitive
collodion.
Pretsch, P.                                                        For a series of specimens of photographic printing
by various means as improved and invented by
himself.
Robinson, H. P                                      For good photographic manipulation, and great
artistic excellence in combined pictures, as well as
in carte de visite portraits.
Ross. T.                                                            For superiority of his photographic lenses.
Roach, W. W.                                                    For small photographs taken with his new binocular
camera with Hardwich’s bromoiodized collodion.
Sidebotham, J.                                      For beautiful landscape photography by the
collodio-albumen process.
Talbot, Fox. W. H.                                             For photographic engravings on copper and steel
produced by the action of light alone.
White, H.                                                          For great artistic excellence in landscape
photography.
Williams, T. R.                                       Photographs. For excellence in photographic
portraiture.
Wilson, G. W. Photographs.                               For the beauty of his small pictures of
clouds, shipping, waves, &c., from nature. &c.
Australia
Osborne                                                           For the photolithographic process invented and
patented by himself
Canada
Notman.                                                            For excellence in an extensive series of
photographs.
    India.
Simpson, Dr.                                                     For a valuable series of portraits of the native tribes.
                                                                Jersey.
Mullins                                                  For general photographic excellence.
                                                               Victoria.
Daintree.                                                           For an extensive series of photographs illustrative
of the colony.
Haigh.                                                               For stereoscopic and other views in the colony,
excellent in photographic treatment.
Nettleton.                                                          For excellence of photographic views in the colony.
                                                                Austria.
Angerer, L.                                                        For general excellence and great definition of the
photographs exhibited.
Dietzler, Ch.                                                      For photographic lenses of excellence.
Ponti, Ch.                                                          For the alethoscope, with the photographs exhibited
therein.
Voigtlander and Son                                          For great excellence of photographic lenses.
                                                                 Baden.
Lorent, Dr.                                                        For a beautiful series of large pictures of great
photographic excellence.
                                                                Bavaria.
Albert, T.                                                           For a valuable series of reproductions of pictures
and objects of art
                                                               Belgium.
Fierlants, Ed.                                                    Photographs. For excellence in a series of
photographs taken by the albumen process for the
Government.
                                                                France.
Aguado, Count O.                                              Enlarged photographs. For specimens of
enlargements from small negatives.
Aguado, Viscount O.                                          Enlarged photographs. Pictures of shipping. &c.,
enlarged from small negatives.
Alophe, M.                                                        Photographs. For excellent photographs, especially
as regards artistic arrangement.
Baldus, E.                                                         Large photographs. For large views of monuments,
views from nature, reproductions, &c.
Bayard and Bertall.                                            Photographs. For excellence of photographic
pictures.
Bertaud                                                             For excellence of lenses.
Bertsch, A.                                                        For excellence of articles exhibited.
Bingham, E.                                                      Photographs. For excellent reproduction of pictures
and other objects of art.
Bisson, Bothers                                                 Photographs. For panoramic views of Mont Blanc,
pictures of monuments, &c.
Braun, A.                                                          Photographs. For pictures of natural flowers, views.
&c.
Cammas                                                           Photographs. For large views, on waxed paper, of
Egypt and its monuments.
Darlot                                                               For excellence of articles exhibited.
Davanne and Girard Photographs.                     For pictures of photographic excellence.
Delessert, E.                                                     Large photographs. For large views of monuments
in Paris, untouched.
Derogy                                                 For an arrangement for altering the focus of a lens.
Disderi                                                  Photographs. For excellency of enlarged and other
pictures.
Dubosq, L. J.                                                    Photographic apparatus. For photographic
appliances, lamp, &c.
Duvette and Romanet                                        Photographs. For excellent architectural views of
Amiens cathedral.
Fargier                                                  Photographs. For pictures done by the carbon
process.
Ferrier                                                              Large photographs on glass. For excellent pictures
on glass, instantaneous views in Paris, &c.
Garnier and Salmon                                          For the carbon process invented by them.
Jeanrenaud                                                       Photographs. For excellence of photographic views,
&c.
Lafon, De Camarsac                                          For photographic reproductions in enamel.
Lyte, Maxwell                                        Views in the Pyrenees. For excellence of landscapes
in the Pyrenees.
Marville                                                             Photographs. For photographic pictures of objects
of antiquity, landscapes, &c.
Muret                                                                Views of the Isère. For good landscape
photography.
Nadar                                                               Photographs. For pictures obtained by the aid of
electric light.
Negre, C.                                                          For heliographic pictures on steel.
Niepce de St. Victor                                           For heliographic engravings on steel, and various
specimens by processes described by himself.
Poitevin, A.                                                       Carbon photographs. For carbon pictures and
photolithographs, &c.
Robert                                                              Photographs. For landscapes and copies of works of
art, &c.
Warnod                                                             Photographs. For views of shipping, natural clouds
and waves, &c.
                                                            Greece.
Constantin                                                        For views in Greece of great excellence.
                                                            Hanse Towns.
Kruss                                                                For photographic lenses of great excellence.
  Italy.
Alinari, Brothers                                                For great excellence of photographic productions.
Van Lint, E.                                                       For excellence of pictures exhibited.
                                                            Prussia.
Busch, E.                                                          For excellence of lenses and photographic
apparatus.
Oehme, G., and Jamrath                                   For excellence of photographic productions.
Schering E.                                                       For chemical products and photographs.
Wothly, J.                                                          For excellence of large pictures by the process
invented by himself.
                                                            Rome.
Cuccioni                                                           For general photographic excellence.
Dovizielli, P.                                                      For general photographic excellence.
                                                            Russia.
Denier                                                              For general photographic excellence.
                                                            Saxony.
Manecke, F                                                       For excellence of photographs.
                                                            Sweden.
Manerke                                                           For excellency of photographs exhibited.
Honourable Mention.
.                                                           United Kingdom
Austen, W.                                                        For superior arrangement of headrests, and beauty
of action of rolling press for photographs.
Barrable, J. G.                                       For artistic excellence.
Beatty, F. S.                                                      For heliographic surface and intaglio printing.
Bland and Co.                                                   For very excellent workmanship and arrangement,
especially adapted for India and foreign countries.
Bourquin and Co.                                              For general excellence of articles exhibited,
especially for photographic albums, of his own
manufacture.
Brothers, A.                                                       For artistic excellence, and for a photographic group
finished in water colours.
Bull, J. T., and G.                                              For photographic accessories and backgrounds.
Burnett, C. J.                                                     For experimental researches in photography, as
exhibited in the specimens of printing by uranium,
platinum, palladium, copper, &c.
Caithness, Earl of                                              For photographic landscape, especially the
representation of hoar frost.
Cox, F. J.                                                          For general excellence of articles exhibited.
Cramb, Brothers                                                For a series of views in Palestine.
Cundall, Downes, and Co.                                  For photographic reproductions.
Dancer, J. B.                                                     For microscopic photographs, landscapes, and
portraits.
Davies, T. S.                                                     For excellent arrangement of his photographic
manipulating camera for field purposes.
Gordon, R.                                                        For excellent views in the Isle of Wight.
Green, B. R.                                                      For artistic excellence in coloured photographs.
Hare, G.                                                            For excellence in the manufacture of cameras.
Hemphill, Dr. W. D.                                            For excellence of views of antiquities in Ireland.
Hennah, T. H.                                                   For photographic portraits.
Hering, H.                                                         For artistic excellence.
Highley, S.                                                        For excellence of apparatus exhibited.
Hill, D. O.                                                          For great artistic merit in photographs exhibited.
Hockin and Wilson                                             For excellence of articles exhibited.
Hopkin and Williams                                          For excellence of photographic chemicals.
Horne and Thornthwaite                                    For general excellence in articles exhibited.
Jocelyn, Viscountess                                         For artistic effect in landscape photography.
Kilburn, W. E.                                        For artistic excellence in coloured photographs.
Lock and Whitfield                                             For artistic excellence in coloured photographs.
Maclean, Melhuish, and Co.                               For general excellence of photographic apparatus,
and artistic excellence in coloured photographs.
Mayland, W.                                                      For good photography in views, &c.
Meagher                                                           For great excellence and cheapness in the apparatus
exhibited.
Moule, T.                                                          For his apparatus for taking portraits by night.
Murray and Heath                                              For superior arrangement and work in articles
exhibited, and especially for usefulness of Smart’s
tent.
Olley, W. H.                                                      For photographs from the microscope by the
reflecting process.
Ottewill, T., and Co.                                           For excellence in the manufacture of cameras.
Ramage, J.                                                       For applications of photolithography.
Reeves, A.                                                        For microscopic photographs.
Rejlander, O. G.                                                For artistic photographic effect.
Ross and Thompson                                         For artistic portraits.
Russell, J.                                                         For views of the ruins of Chichester Cathedral after
the fall of the spire.
Sedgefield                                                        For good stereoscopic views.
Skaife, T.                                                          For a pistolgraph and a series of productions called
pistolgrams.
Smith, Lyndon                                       For landscapes, &c., artistically taken.
Smyth and Blanchard                                        For a series of instantaneous views for the
stereoscope.
Solomon, J.                                                      For the introduction of many useful aids to
photographic manipulation as exhibited.
Sutton, E.                                                          For artistic excellence in coloured photographs.
Thompson, S.                                                   For excellence in architectural photography, &c.
Traer, J. R.                                                       For excellence of photographs of microscopic
objects, &c.
Wardley, G.                                                       For excellent landscapes by the collodio-albumen
process.
Warner, W. H.                                       For photography in a series of enlargements from
small negatives.
Wortley-Stuart, A. H. P., Lieut.-Col.                    For views of Vesuvious during the eruptions of
1861-62.
Wright, Dr.                                                        Portable photographic apparatus for field purposes,
combining tent, &c., adapted for railway
travelling.
            British Columbia.
Claudet, F.                                                        For a series of views in New Westminster.
British Guiana.
Tucker                                                  For photographic views in the colony.
                                                                     India.
Sellon, Capt.                                                     For a series of views in India,
Jamaica.
__* [*The name is blank in the official
list of awards, and there is no mention of
the contribution in question in the catalogue.] For a valuable series of photographs of the fish of
the island.
.                                                                 Melbourne.
Cox and Lukin                                       For photographic excellence.
New Brunswick.
Bowren and Cox                                                For photographic views, being the earliest taken in
this colony.
New Zealand.
Crombie, J. N.                                       For views in the colony.
 Queensland.
Challingor, G.                                                    For excellence of photographs.
Wilder, J. W.                                                     For excellence of photographs.
South Australia.
Hall, Rev.                                                          Ethnological studies of the aborigines.
 Tasmania.
Allport, M.                                                         For interesting pictures exhibited, including
stereoscopic and other views.
         Victoria.
Bachelder and O’Neill                            For photographs of volunteers, &c.
Charlier                                                             For portraits of the aborigines of the colony.
Davis                                                                For excellence of photographs in Melbourne and
Fitzroy.
Johnston                                                           For a collection of photographic views
Austria
Lemann, C.                                                       For excellent reproductions of objects of art and
`             archaeological subjects.
Leth                                                                  For a new carbon process, and copies of wood
engraving accomplished by the same.
Melingo, A.                                                        For general photographic excellence.
Oestermann, C.                                                 For illustrations of Buda-Pesth, the metropolis of
Hungary.
Rupp, W.                                                          For his valuable application of photography.
Tiedge, T.                                                         For a large collection of photographic pictures of
peasantry, costumes, &c., from South Hungary.
Widter, A.                                                          For general excellence of pictures exhibited.
                                                                   Bavaria
Gypen and Frisch                                              For excellence of pictures exhibited.
                                                                   Belgium
Ghémar, Brothers                                              For general excellence of photography.
Maseré, J.                                                         For photographic copies of pictures, &c.
Michiels, J. J.                                                    For general excellence of photographs.
Neyt, A. L.                                                         For excellent specimens of photographic
micography.
Denmark.

Hansen, G. E.                                                   For excellence of photographs.
Lance, E.                                                          For excellence of photographs.
Striegler, R.                                                       For his portrait of the Princess of Denmark.
                                                            France.
Albites, T.                                                         For excellence of articles exhibited.
Aleo                                                                  For delicacy in landscape photography, &c.
Bérenger, Le Marquis de                                    For good landscape photography on wax paper, &c.
Berthier. P.                                                        For excellent reproduction of works of art.
Blanc, N.                                                           For good artistic arrangement in portraiture and
excellent photography.
Bobin, A.                                                           Photographic reproductions of maps and plans with
great accuracy.
Breton, Madame                                                For archaeological views, &c.
Briois, C. A.                                                       For excellence of chemicals used in photography.
Carjat and Co.                                       For excellent photographic portraits.
Charnay, D.                                                      For excellence of photographs exhibited.
Charavet                                                           For his carbon pictures.
Collard                                                  For excellence of photographic views.
Crémière                                                          For instantaneous pictures of animals, &c.
Dagron, E                                                         For microscopic photography applied to bijouterie.
De Clercq, L.                                                     For excellence of photographs exhibited.
Delondre, P.                                                      For excellent views obtained by the wax paper
process.
Delton                                                               For instantaneous pictures of animals.
De Champlouis                                     For views in Syria, obtained by his “wet-dry”
process, as described by himself.
Garin                                                                For excellence of photographic chemicals.
Gaumé                                                 For reproductions of photographic pictures for glass
in churches, &c.
Hermagis                                                          For excellence of photographic lenses.
Jouet, E.                                                           For landscape photography.
Ken, A.                                                 For good photographic portraiture.
Koch                                                                 For excellence of articles exhibited.
Lackerbauer                                                      For excellence in microscopic photography.
Laffon, J. C.                                                      For studies of still life, photographs on silk.
Lecu, F. N.                                                        For excellence of articles exhibited.
Lemercier                                                         For specimens of photolithography, &c.
Mailand, E.                                                        For excellent photographic landscapes by the wax-
paper process.
Marion                                                  For excellence of photographic paper.
Masson                                                             For excellence of photographs exhibited.
Mayer and Pierson                                            For excellent photography.
Michelez, C.                                                      For reproductions of works of design ancient and
modern, &c.
Millett, A.                                                          For excellence of photographic lenses.
Moulin, F.                                                          For excellence of photographs exhibited.
Pesme                                                              For excellence of photography.
Plessy, M.                                                         For excellence of photographic chemicals.
Potteau                                                             For excellence of photographs exhibited.
Puech, L.                                                          For excellence of photographic chemicals.
Quinet, A. M.                                                     For excellence of articles exhibited.
Richebourg                                                       For good photography in portraiture and objects of
art.
Rolloy, Fils                                                        For excellence of articles exhibited, especially for
his photographic varnish.
Roman, D.                                                        For excellence of photographs exhibited.
Silvy                                                                 For good photographic pictures.
Tournachon, A. jun.                                           For instantaneous pictures of horses and other
animals.
Villette, E.                                                         For large photographic pictures obtained by
Duboscq’s electric light.
                                                            Frankfort
Hamacher                                                         For excellence of articles exhibited.
                                                               Italy
Roncalli, A.                                                       For excellence of microscopic reproductions.
                                                            Mecklenberg-Schwerin.
Dethleff                                                            For excellence of pictures exhibited.
                                                            Netherlands
Eyck, Dr. J. A. van                                             For his photographic copies of etchings by
Rembrandt, the size of the originals.
Norway

Selmer                                                  For a series of pictures of the peasantry of the
country.
                                                            Persia
Peace, Luigi                                                      Views of Teheran, Persepolis, and other localities in
Persia.
                                                            Portugal
Silveira, J. W.                                                    For excellence of photographs.
                                                            Prussia
Beyrich, F.                                                        For photographic paper.
Kunzmann, H.                                       For photographic paper.
Minutoli, Von                                                     For a valuable series of reproductions of objects of
art
Schauer, G.                                                      For excellence of pictures exhibited.
                                                            Russia
Mieczkowski, J.                                                 For good portraiture and artistic effect.
Rumine, G.                                                       For a series of views in the East, and general
photographic excellence.
                                                               Sweden.
Unna and Hoffert                                               For general photographic excellence.
                                                            Switzerland.
Georg                                                               For general photographic excellence.
Poncy, F.                                                          For general photographic excellence.
Vuagnat                                                            For general photographic excellence.
                                                            United States.
Dexter                                                              For a series of busts of the Governors of States in
America.
                                                            Wurtemburg.
Sprösser                                                           For photographic excellence.
                                                            Zollverein.
Exhibitor not identified.                          For excellence of photographic impressions.”]

“Calendar for the Ensuing Week.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1155 (Sat., July 19, 1862): 78. [“His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales’s Tour in the East. — The Photographic Pictures of the many remarkable and interesting places in the Holy Land, Egypt, &c. &c, made by Mr. Francis Bedford during the tour in which, by command, he accompanied his Royal Highness are, by special permission graciously accorded, Exhibited Daily at the German Gallery, 168, New Bond-street. Dally, from Ten to Six O’Clock. Admission, 1s.]

“Mr. Bedford’s Photographs of the East.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:203 (July 25, 1862): 351-352. [“Mr. Francis Bedford invited his friends, on Tuesday last, to a private view, at the German Gallery, Bond Street, of his Photographs taken during the tour in the East, in which, by command, he accompanied His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. These pictures are one hundred and seventy-two in number, chiefly on 12 by 10 plates. The entire series will be published in twenty-one parts, each containing eight or more pictures, the cost of the entire series being forty-three guineas. They will also be divided into sections, consisting severally of the Holy Land and Syria, of Egypt, and of Constantinople and the Mediterranean. The occupation of a gallery, and formation of a complete exhibition with the works of one photographer, is a novel thing in this country, but we have rarely been more delighted by a visit to any exhibition than we were on Tuesday, and we left, after a few hours of close examination of these pictures, feeling very proud of photography; proud of its capabilities, of its progress, and of the recognition it was beginning to receive. If it had been necessary to offer any plea in mitigation of judgment, Mr. Bedford would have been furnished with the most cogent. A hasty summons, with little time for preparation; vicissitudes and transitions of climate the most unfavourable to photographic operations, rapid travel permitting no opportunity for the examination and selection of localities, points of view, or conditions of light. Mr. Bedford informs us that he never had a single opportunity of going twice to the same view, such selection as he could make at once, under such conditions of light as might then exist, was alone possible. Of the trials of climate, &c., some idea may be formed when it is stated that it was not unusual for swarms of small flies to fill the camera during exposure, and sometimes cover the plate! With all the drawbacks which existed, however, we have never seen a more magnificent collection of photographs, even of scenes and subjects affording the best facilities for successful operation. Apart from all other associations which give value and interest the photography is, in the majority of instances, perfect. Unlike so many eastern pictures, these are entirely free from hardness, and that spotty, cut-out effect and entire absence of atmosphere, which many have regarded us the inevitable characteristic of photographs taken under the glare of an eastern sun: these are full of gradation of tone, delicate, yet vigorous, and full of relief. There is no white-paper sky in the whole series, everywhere a satisfactory atmospheric tint is present, and in many instances exquisitely-managed clouds are introduced by skilful “dodging.” We know this will be condemned by some photographic purists as not legitimate. We have ever held that success is the touchstone of legitimacy. These are so successful, in many instances, as to deceive even a technical eye into the conviction of their genuineness. The method employed is, we believe, simply painting on the back of the negative, in which the sky is in all cases sufficiently thin to print through; the old-fashioned sky, “as black as your hat,” once regarded as such an excellence in a negative, has no existence here. Only the skilled artist could, however, produce such results by painting on the negative, as these; and this success will be no justification to the bungler who shall attempt a similar process. Mr. Bedford’s object has been to make his photographs pictures, and he has succeeded to admiration. This is, unquestionably, out of all proportion the finest series of eastern photographers which has ever been produced. Many new pictures not brought home by former operators are here; and subjects before done are here presented from new aspects. Notwithstanding the necessity of prompt action, and the lack of time for carefully studied choice of position and light, it is surprising in how many instances both seem all that could be desired, the practised eye of the artist having, almost intuitively, at once selected the position which would yield a picture. Our space precludes the possibility of entering into detailed criticism or description of the pictures, otherwise, perhaps, no subjects could be more alluring. The scenes here depicted are fraught with associations of the deepest possible interest in relation to sacred or profane history; here are relics, indeed, of a period, in regard to which the most venerable antiquity of recorded facts are but as yesterday. Here, amongst the ruins of Baalbec, are still standing, notwithstanding the ravages of time, and the still more ruthless ravages of man, titanic columns, in regard to which much of the architecture of modern days seems child’s play. These were ruins even before the dawn of history, and are monuments of the state of the arts at a period we are in the habit of regarding as the night of time! Here, too, are the scenes so sacred to the student of Biblical history; Bethlehem, Bethany, and Jerusalem; here is the Mount of Olives, and the Garden of Gethsamene; and here the Lake of Gennesareth, whose face seems to wear an eternal calm in memory of the feet which once trod it. But the series abounds with associations of every kind which are full of interest, to which we have not space even to refer. We merely call the attention of our readers to the photographic interest of the series, and earnestly recommend all who can to visit the German Gallery where they are now exhibited. To photographers they are full of value in an educational point of view, as illustrating the result of excellent judgment, fine taste, and unsurpassed photographic skill when working under difficulties. Notwithstanding the picturesque nature of the subjects and the associations by which they are surrounded, we have seen many views of eastern scenes, which from their hard, dry, spotty character, even these associations have failed to make interesting. These photographs are, however, valuable as pictures: some few are a trifle under-exposed, one or two may not be well lighted, and in one or two more the architecture may be a trifle distorted, but, as a whole, they are perfectly harmonious, with a singular uniformity of excellence, well worthy of study and imitation. As we have before stated, those pictures were produced by the wet collodion process, the operator working in a tent. In the majority a bromo-iodized collodion and pyrogallic acid development were used. The lenses were single landscape lenses, about thirty seconds being an average exposure. Development was in all cases stopped before entire density of the sky was obtained, a circumstance to which much of the harmonious and atmospheric character of the pictures is doubtless due.”]

“The International Exhibition. British Photographic Department.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:203 (July 25, 1862): 354-356. [“The landscape photographs in the British Department is, as we have before intimated, out of all proportion the best in the Exhibition. It is not, however, illustrated by many novelties, the majority of the pictures having been exhibited before. The exquisite examples of Bedford, and Heath, and Mudd, have all before come under our notice. Wilson’s charming little views, 7 by 4 in., including a wide angle, by the triple lens, are novelties, and are universally admired. Here are Sidebotham’s “Chepstow Castle” and “Tintern Abbey,” by the collodio-albumen process, which we have noticed on a former occasion, and which we now think, notwithstanding the extensive collection in which they appear, are as fine pictures as ever have been produced by the art. Dixon Piper’s “Old Curiosity Shop,” “Lock Gates,” &c., have before been seen and admired; a large instantaneous picture entitled, “Early Morning,” is, we think, new; it contains a magnificent study of clouds. The photographs of Sir A. K. Macdonald, Bart., we have already noticed at the Crystal Palace: all the specimens we have seen, both in the Exhibition and elsewhere, are among the finest examples of picturesque photography we have seen. Mr. Rouch exhibits a frame of the small landscapes of the same sort and style as those to which we have referred of Wilson’s. The subjects, which are all in the Isle of Wight, and include some instantaneous pictures, are well chosen and picturesque, and the photography delicate and brilliant, and the pictures altogether exceedingly good. Lieut. -Col. S. Wortley exhibits a series of views of Vesuvius in a state of eruption. These are, in our estimation, amongst the most charming photographs in the Exhibition: each picture includes some view of the noble Bay of Naples, with Vesuvius belching forth smoke in volumes; this, together with the exquisite natural clouds, are most perfectly rendered, indicating that the exposure has been instantaneous. There are some interesting views of the effects of the earthquake in the town of Torre del Greco. The majority of the pictures are on 12 by 10 plates, and were taken, we are informed, with the 8½ by 6½ triple lens. We regret that these prints were amongst the severe sufferers by the damp walls, and are at present removed for the purpose of being replaced by fresh prints. Mr. Henry White exhibits a series of very beautiful and well-selected views in North Wales, in which the photography and the art are alike good. The contributions from the Amateur Photographic Association include many specimens of great excellence. Mr. Lynden Smyth exhibits several of his most artistic pictures. Mr. D. Campbell sends his fine picture, the “ Auld Brig o’ Doon,” and several others. Dr. Hemphill’s photographs of Irish antiquities attract attention, not only from the interest of the subjects, but the excellence of the photography. W. L. Novorre’s photographs of Indian subjects are full of interest. Mr. W. J. C. Moens sends a capital series of fine pictures taken at various places full of classic memories, during a yacht voyage up the Mediterranean. Roger Fenton sends many of his old favourites. Mr. Wardley contributes a number of his very excellent pictures by the collodio-albumen process. Mr. H. Keene contributes a good number of very fine specimens. B. B. Turner sends some of his fine calotypes. Amongst other very meritorious contributors of landscapes we find the names of John Burton, and Robert Pateson, T. Carr, W. Mayland, Baynham Jones, Stoven and Co., Major Russell Manners Gordon, Major R. Gordon, J. Cade, Stephen Thompson, Dr. Holden, J. Spode, S. Bourne, F. Frith, Lord Caithness, and some others. As we have before said, however, so many of the landscape photographs have been exhibited before that they do not call for lengthened notice here.
The Daily Telegraph has the following remarks on the display of British photography: —
“The stairs that lead from the middle vestibule of the picture galleries to the photographic department are three score and ten. Sated and dazed. With acres of glowing colour, the visitor to the Louvre of Old Brompton will hesitate about ascending to that height where sun-pictures are displayed in their uniform sameness of hue, relieved here and there by tinted specimens. Truth to tell, the photographs have proved the least attractive branch of the show; and the contributors of these productions must now perceive that they gained little by refusing to be classed with exhibitors of machinery. Still, for those who take any interest in an art which is one of the poetical commonplaces of our day, and whose history is quite a fairy tale of science, the ‘skychamber’ in the south central tower of the Exhibition Building will, assuredly, have charms enough. We ask our readers to accompany us thither in our notice to-day. The first thing to strike them is the ominous fact, that many frames are being removed, leaving great blank gaps on the bare walls. Damp is the unfortunate cause of this proceeding. Signs of warping, and of mildew, are apparent on many of the photographs which remain. Another very striking peculiarity about some of these works — we will not say of all, or half, or a quarter of the number exhibited, but certainly of a large proportion — is their faded appearance. Evidently there has been haste on the part of several photographers; and if their pictures continue this growth of indistinctness, they will, before the close of the Exhibition, be little else than strips of yellow paper. It is not a pleasant indication of the quality of photographs, on the permanence of which we depend for reminiscences in future years of scenes and faces which are present, and which are dear to us. Every practitioner should be able to assure his patrons that each portrait is sufficiently washed to stand exposure to light for any duration of time. That this precaution is efficacious, we may see in the pictures taken of the 1851 Exhibition by Mr. Mayall. The date of these works is established beyond dispute. We know that they were produced exactly eleven years since, and they are as clear and deep in tone as if they had been printed yesterday. The fact speaks for itself, and must prove an additional recommendation of Mr. Mayall to the confidence of the public. Of his portraits we need only say that they are worthy his reputation.”
Without any wish whatever to lessen the weight of this recommendation, we must point out the absurdity of the deduction. The pictures of the Exhibition of 1851, here referred to, are very fine Daguerreotypes, worthy of all praise, but their permanency and that of paper pictures have nothing in common, the causes of permanency in the former having no analogy or relation to the amount or mode of washing employed in the latter. The writer proceeds: —
“Others who follow in the same beaten track of portrait photography deserve praise as great for the good focussing and tone of their specimens. Messrs. John and Charles Watkins are specially to be commended; and Mr. H. N. King has a great variety of likenesses, which readily strike the beholder. In coloured photographs — a very nice and somewhat dangerous ground — we see nothing to rival the pure, though rich and brilliant, miniatures of Messrs. Loch and Whitfield. Their table includes quite a little gallery of aristocratic beauty. Mr. A. Claudet, who takes a bold stand as a life-size delineator, has a portrait of a lady which might almost pass for an original painting from the walls of the Royal Academy; and his likeness of Sir Charles Wentworth Dilke, taken by the enlarged solar camera, is a most characteristic and vivid piece of portraiture. The branches into which the practice of photography has lately struck are fairly, though not abundantly, illustrated in this collection. The photogalvanographic process, which is a species of engraving by the combined aid of photography and the electrotype, is exemplified by Mr. Paul Pretsch. The kindred method of phototyping in carbon, claimed as a French invention, is also shown in the fac-similes of old prints and title-pages exhibited by Mr. John Pouncy. Another system of reproduction by photographic agency, is that of Col. Sir Henry James, director of the Ordnance Survey, whose plan of photozincography has the credit of saving the country many thousands a year. For maps, engravings, and printed objects, this method is eminently efficient and serviceable. We must conclude our present remarks with a reference to the transparent albuminous pictures for the stereoscope, and other interesting productions shown by Messrs. Negretti and Zambra. In these stereoscopic views, principally from Siam, Java, Sumatra, China, and Japan, the only specimens of albumen transparencies to cope with the works of M. Ferrier of Paris, are here afforded. There is in the stand of the above-named firm a work of high merit and interest. It is in the form of a printed volume, published by Messrs. Smith and Elder, but chiefly noticeable as a wonder of photography. The book is a recollection of Egypt, Nubia, and Ethiopia, principally from the pen of Mr. Joseph Bonomi, the great Eastern traveller, with controversial notes by Mr. Sharpe, of Egyptian celebrity. It is illustrated with stereoscopic scenes; and a folding instrument accompanies the work, to enable the reader, as he proceeds, to realise each description. The London Stereoscopic Company, as may be supposed, is not behindhand in contributing to the display. Among their noteworthy objects are some American views, including an excellent photograph of the Virginia Falls, and several good examples of the instantaneous process. Messrs. Cundall and Downes have a show of unexceptionable specimens. They manifest quite a speciality for picture copying — another and a far more difficult operation than photographing a print in black and white. Mr. L. Caldesi reproduces cartoons and other works of art with wonderful skill, and also displays great capability in rendering all the fine qualities of highly-finished and delicate miniatures. The albumen photographs from Palestine, by Messrs. Cramb Brothers, are praiseworthy for their clearness and precision; but, as pictures, they are deficient in half-tones and nice gradations. That deservedly-famed artist, Mr. James Mudd, adheres principally to the collodio-albumen process, and wite [sic with] a result which justifies his preference. Indeed, we are of opinion that this is the only known operation of photography by which justice can ever be done to scenes of external nature. Ordinary collodion photographs are best for portraiture, simply because they do not require so much time; but for landscapes, despite the almost perfect works of such experienced and able men as Mr. Bedford and Mr. Wilson, the true method of bringing out every nuance, and of assimilating shadows with high lights, seems to involve the slower operations of collodio-albumen.”
Photographers will smile to learn that the exquisite delicacy, softness, atmosphere, half-tone, and gradation of Mr. Mudd’s pictures are due to his use of a dry process, and that in regard to such qualities wet collodion is inferior!
“We have mentioned Mr. Bedford, and it would be a difficult task to do him full justice, were this column free for a descriptive account of his labours at the International Exhibition. We need scarcely say that they do not comprise the pictures taken by him in the Holy Land, while accompanying the Prince of Wales, inasmuch as the return of his Royal Highness and suite took place after the Exhibition had long been open. They are, in fact, mostly English and Welsh scenes. “Cheddar Clift’s” and a “Study of Nature” are gems which no visitors to the gallery should miss. The simple truthfulness of these and kindred works is worth a hundred feats of artistic arrangement, such as photography, undervaluing its true mission, sometimes aspires to. A very ingenious manufacturer of subjects is Mr. Robinson, whose “Holiday in the Woods” made quite a sensation at one of the annual shows of the Photographic Society. Almost as much trouble must have been expended on the building up of this scene, and on the bringing together of all its constituent parts, on the drilling its actors, on the subordination of its accessories, and on the careful eliminating of all petty “accidentals,” which, though likely to pass unobserved in a tableau vivant, are apt to grow painfully obtrusive in a permanent picture — almost as much trouble, we say, is apparent in the mere posing and scene-setting, and arrangement of properties, in this composition, as a practised draughtsman would have found in placing the whole group on paper or canvas. There is something almost absurd in all this preparation for a mechanical and instantaneous operation. It is an anti-climax — a reversal of the order of things. Mr. Robinson’s subject photograph, “The Lady of Shalott,” is quite an artistic bouleversement. We not learn from Mr. Tennyson that this interesting damsel, before she floated down to Camelot, had her hair nicely crimped and spread out as we see it in the picture; but this may or may not have been the case. What we would specially remark is the disproportion in this work between the model’s part and the artist’s. The whole merit lies in the cleverness of a pose plastique. The printing from several negatives may be adduced as a feat of photographic skill, but such a system of legerdemain is radically vicious, and cannot help photography on to higher things.”
It is somewhat amusing to remember that the “set scenes” and “properties” which the critic declaims against in the “Holiday in the Woods” are simply the noble woods of Kenilworth. His other strictures here are of equal worth. For instance, the real beauty of the “Lady of Shalott” consists far more in the mystic twilight effect which pervades the meadow trees overhanging the river, than in anything else; the faults chiefly belong to the boat and figure; .and yet we are told the “whole merit lies in the clearness of a pose plastique” The question of composition printing is one upon which competent authorities differ; but the mode in which the critic discusses the matter shows that he understands nothing whatever about it, either as regards its failings, difficulties, or merits.
“Mr. Frith exhibits some of those wonderfully sunny Eastern views for which he is celebrated; and Messrs. Dolamore and Bullock have some neatly vignetted landscapes. The cartes de visite of Mr. Kilburn must not be passed over; they are very sharp and well defined. Colonel Verschoyle contributes several valuable illustrations of different processes. His favourite method seems to be the employment of collodio-albumen, but he is also very successful with tannin. We spoke yesterday of the effective results of printing in carbon, instead of nitrate of silver; and we may refer to the specimens exhibited by Messrs. C. Walker and Son as admirably demonstrating the immediately good results of the operation. Its lasting qualities, however, are its great speciality. The prints may be submitted to acid, which will destroy the paper, but leave the carbon uninjured. The perishable nature of photography is the worst charge that can be brought against it. Let this character of evanescence and frailty be removed, and photographic portraits will be preferred to all others. We have had to speak of the faded appearance of many pictures in the present exhibition, and we have ventured to attribute the defect to want of care in fixing the image. It is urged as a plea in extenuation that the damp on the walls has partly caused the blemish; but this excuse will only serve the photographs on the walls, not those on either of the screens.”
And we may add, although the critic implies the contrary, that it is on the walls alone, and not on the screens that the palpably fading pictures are found. Some few old pictures on the screens, have a somewhat yellow tinge; but it. Is unquestionably the damp walls which has proved the grand crux of exhibitors. We trust, as we have before said, that the annoyance will be turned to good account.”]

“Talk in the Studio. Mr. Bedford’s Tour.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:203 (July 25, 1862): 360. [“History informs us that in all memorable journeys the functions of the secretary have not been least important. Even the Japanese, on their late entrance into society, were everywhere accompanied by this indispensable functionary. The works of Mr. Bedford go far to prove that another state officer must shortly be created. While Court dignitaries in different countries are defining the duties of the Court photographer, the public at large cannot do better than admire the very admirable memoranda of the latest Royal progress which have been penned by the industry and skill of the artist who took part in it. — The Times.”]

“Photographs of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales’s Eastern Tour.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1156 (Sat., July 26, 1862): 99. [“The German Gallery, New Bond-street, is now opened with a collection of photographs, taken by Mr. Francis Bedford, the eminent photographer, during the tour in the East, in which, by command, he accompanied his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. The series is extensive, numbering 172 photographs, and comprising views of all the most striking or historic cities and buildings, ruins and sites, traditional and sacred localities, visited in the four months’ tour. As a mere manipulator Mr. Bedford has been eminently successful. If these photographs had been taken at home with none of the excitement and unforeseen difficulties of travel in the known conditions of our own climate, Mr. Bedford could hardly have been more successful than in the large majority of these photographs. He has, by judicious “exposure” and perfect control of “developing” processes and chemicals employed, overcome the difficulty of giving the middle tint better than we have hitherto seen in photographs from Eastern subjects, in which the contrasts of light and shade are usually so violent. Breadth and detail are combined in the happiest and most effective manner. The minutest hieroglyphic and other details are not lost by radiation in the lights or swallowed up by the intensity of the darks. The photographs, indeed, probably present more than could be detected by the unaided eye on the blinding sands of Egypt and Syria. Mr. Bedford has, moreover, shown much artistic taste in the choice of the point of view. The series opens with twelve views of the streets, the citadel, the new palace, and the beautiful arabesque mosques and fountains of Cairo. One of these is an interior view of the mosque of Sultan Hassan. There are also two photographs of the tombs of the Memlooks. At Gheezeh we have, of course, the great and lesser Pyramids, the Sphinx, and the excavated temple at its feet, which we have described in another column. We are then taken up the Nile to the extreme point of the journey, at the first cataract, and Philae with its very elegant temples, colonnades, propylea or gateways, and plumed palms. Thence we descend the river to the remarkably perfect remains at Edfou, and then to the stupendous ruins on both sides of the sacred river — of Thebes, the temples, and hall of columns of Karnac, the Memnonium, the colossi of the plain, and many other scenes which we engraved recently in illustration of his Royal Highness’s tour; the temple-palace of Medeenet Haboo, and the ruins of the Christian church, and the great propylon, &c., of Luxor. Denderah is the last place in Egypt given. The views of the Holy Land and Syria are equally numerous, and many of them are less familiar. The localities presented are Jaffa (the ancient Joppa), Upper Beth-Horon, Gibeon, Jerusalem (of which there are seventeen views), Bethlehem, Bethany, Mar Saba, with its convent; Nairnlus, Sebaste (the ancient Samaria), the Sea of Tiberias, Kahn Minyen (the reputed side of Capernaum), Banias and the Chapel of St. George, Hasbeiya, the scene of the late massacres; and Damascus, with its Greek church and Christian quarter, its mosques and minarets. A photograph is given of the ancient Pentateuch, preserved at Nabulus or Nablous, which is said to be the oldest book in the world. The Samaritan sect who inhabit this neighbourhood is certainly the most ancient in existence; they have worshipped in the same sanctuary for nearly twenty-five centuries. Their Pentateuch is a manuscript on a parchment roll, which they reverently keep, like the Jews, in a richly-embroidered cover and within a brass case; and they preserve the tradition that it was written by the great-grandson of Aaron. The strongest proof of its extreme antiquity is that it is written in the ancient Hebrew characters used before the introduction of the alphabet employed by Ezra after the captivity. Hasbeiya and the Christian quarter at Damascus bear the traces of the frightful devastation committed in the massacres of the Maronites nearly two years since. One photograph taken from an elevated point shows some scores of unroofed houses. Nothing conveys a higher idea of the magnificence of ancient architecture than the stupendous remains, the vast blocks of granite, and the rich and elaborate carvings on the ruins of Baalbec. One of several photographs of Baalbec shows the western end of the outer wall of the Temple of the Sun, with the immense stones, three of which, at about 20ft. from the ground, measure each 60ft. in length and 12ft. in height and thickness. After Baalbec we have Beyrout, Tripoli, Lebanon, the seaports of Dalmatia and Albania, Durazzo, Corfu, Rhodes, Patmos, and Smyrna. At Constantinople Mr. Bedford was very industrious, bringing home views of the city from the Seraskah Tower, of the Mosque of St. Sophia, the Obelisk of Theudosius, the Fountain of the Seraglio, and the splendid new Palace of the Sultan. There is also a similar series of Athenian views. Some of the photographs contain portraits of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales and suite; but these are not the most successful, from causes probably beyond the photographer’s control. The collection is altogether of extraordinary interest and instructiveness.”]

“Exhibitions: H. R. H. the Prince of Wales’ Tour in the East, Photographically Recorded by Francis Bedford.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 9:171 (Aug. 1, 1862): 288. [Exhibition at the German Gallery, London.]

“Entremets: Photography at the Royal Dramatic College Fete.” and “The ‘Powerful’ Lecture on Photography, by Professor Toole, F.R.A.“ BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 9:171 (Aug. 1, 1862): 295-296. [Everybody having fun – “Prof. Toole” and “Mr. Bedford” mentioned as an important part of the festivities.]

“To Correspondents.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:204 (Aug. 1, 1862): 372. [“Subscriber inquires, “If such articles as cloud plates exist, or in what manner clouds are introduced into views?” We presume, by “cloud plates,” our correspondent means negatives of clouds. These certainly exist, and aid in one of the methods of introducing clouds into photographic landscapes; we are not aware that they exist at all as articles of commerce, each photographer who uses them producing his own, and getting such a selection, under such circumstances, as will best suit his pictures. Mr. Maxwell Lyte adopts this method; Mr. Annan, of Glasgow, and Mr. Samuel Fry, both, at times, adopt the same method. The latter gentleman described his plan of operating in our last volume. There are other methods of introducing clouds, either by using a very rapid process, or shading the sky so as to secure them on the same negative. This method is used by Mr. Wilson and others. Some secure cloud effects by painting carefully on the back of the negative; these effects maybe seen in some of the pictures of Mudd, Bedford, and others. Whichever plan be used, taste, judgment, and care are imperatively necessary….”]

“Mr. Bedford’s Exhibition of Photographs (taken by command) of the Tour of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:124. (Aug. 15, 1862): 102-103. [“There are many reasons why this exhibition should receive at our hands, and also at the hands of photographers generally, a most cordial and appreciative welcome; and amongst these, not the least is the great meritoriousness of the collection as chefs-d’oeuvre of the photographic art under the greatest difficulties. We well remember the predictions of the probable failure of the expedition, and how positively it was stated that the hurry and pressure of a Royal tour would utterly disarrange the necessary neatness and care which is requisite, especially to such a photographer as Mr. Bedford, whose works have hitherto had those characteristics almost to a proverb. How all these vaticinations have been falsified, it will be our duty further on to point out. But a still more important point appears to present itself to us in connexion with this collection; and that is the entire triumph of photography as a branch of the fine arts, and the complete refutation of that prejudice and narrow-mindedness which would class it as purely mechanical. Singularly enough, at the very time when five gentlemen, acting as Commissioners, in Her Majesty’s name, for the management of the International Exhibition, were disputing the right of photography to enter its proper class, Her Majesty, with that keen and discriminating good sense which has always marked her, commands (happily for photography) Mr. Bedford to attend in the Royal suite, to record with the pencil of light the tour of His Royal Highness. To those who still maintain that photography is purely a mechanical art, we recommend most heartily a visit to this exhibition, and whilst there, let them disabuse their minds, by carefully examining Nos. 20, 38, 39, 68, 97, 105, and 106. Out of these we can only speak of one, viz. (20) “Philae, the Hypraethral Temple, commonly called Pharaoh’s Bed, and small chapel.” This is probably the most complete picture in the series. In artistic arrangement, there is nothing that the most fastidious and hypercritical could object to; and as a photograph it contains such infinite variety of detail, such an amount of half-tones, clearness, and indeed everything that goes to make a good photograph. That Mr. Bedford, in executing this collection, has put out his best efforts, and has in every -way done all that he could to enhance his own reputation, there can be but little doubt; but we at the same time think that he has, especially under recent circumstances, done all he can to raise the art which he so much loves, and has done so much to promote, above the unworthy cavils which have been urged against it. If we are right in our surmises, we have just to congratulate him on his success, and then thank him. In examining this collection for critical purposes, we have a formidable difficulty to encounter; and that is, that there is such a uniformity of excellence in all the subjects that, if we were to enter too largely into detail, it would result in a tedious reiteration of praise. To obviate this, we must be content to speak of classes of subjects, and that only in a general way. The figure-groups, which are few in number, are well arranged and carefully executed: Nos. 34 and 84 have a special value as including in each a portrait of the Prince. Of the landscapes, with one or two exceptions, it is impossible to speak too highly. We have, for another purpose, already enumerated above a number of works. In these and many others, we feel that there is a truly poetic rendering of the ruins of past ages. Silent though they be, they speak to us, in their solemn and deserted grandeur, of a past civilization, a past power, and a past wealth; they speak to us, in their carved columns, pillars, and friezes, of all that has been great and glorious, more eloquently and more forcibly than anything which the words of a ready writer could convey to us in poetry or in prose. The feeling of utter blankness and desolation which is expressed in many of these views, is often very much heightened by the artistic introduction of figures, which at the same time enables us to more fully appreciate the height and grandeur of these piles. No description, however vivid, could ever convey the feeling of desolated grandeur as shown in (28) “General view of the Temple of Karnak,” and again, in (97) “Damascus, part of the Straight Street, in the Christian Quarter.” In the architectural views which are here exhibited there is a marvellous stereoscopic effect, produced of course by the wonderful perfection of the half-tones which Mr. Bedford has succeeded in obtaining. In this lies a great part of the charm of the pictures. Comparisons are proverbially odious; but we cannot help contrasting these views with those which have preceded them; and in doing so, we must say that they are by far the best that have ever been done of similar subjects. Probably this is in a great measure attributable to the introduction of skies, which, whether produced naturally or artificially, undoubtedly add immensely to the artistic effect of these pictures. We have none of those hard skylines so noticeable in Oriental photographs. In the Grecian views, more especially the copies of the friezes, there is wonderful perfection of detail. We must not omit to call attention to (79) “The Ancient Samaritan Pentateuch,” which is apparently copied with great fidelity, and must be of interest to the linguist. Of the more modern views we need say nothing more than that they are in every respect worthy of Mr. Bedford. Shortly after the opening of the exhibition, His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales visited it, with the Hon. R. Meade, Major Teesdale, Colonel Keppel, and Dr. Stanley — a compliment which was, certainly, in every way deserved. As a record of the tour, the series is most valuable; and we doubt not that many persons will be desirous of having copies of these productions. We wish the publication every success. Before concluding, we should say that this collection is not a rechauffe of what has already been done before by other photographers. The facilities afforded by the passport of Royalty have enabled Mr. Bedford to obtain views never before done, and not again likely to be done, except under somewhat similar circumstances; so that there is a real value attaching to a large number of these photographs.”]

“The ‘Times‘ on Photography at the International Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:124. (Aug. 15, 1862): 109-111. [“There was, as usual, a large proportion of country excursionists, whom the Great Western alone are now bringing up at the rate of 7000 a day. These country visitors do really go as far towards seeing the whole contents of the building as any human beings can in a one-day’s inspection. They are not ” among-‘ the earliest arrivals; they form the early arrivals themselves, coming in en masse the instant the doors are opened, and only leaving with the last. They penetrate every court, gallery, and nook, even to that least visited and least known place of all within the precincts of the building — the tower devoted to the exhibition of photography and education. Both these classes are far better worth a visit than many others which receive more notice. The visitor will find the staircase which gives access to them in the centre tower, between the picture-galleries over the entrance from the Cromwell Road. Photography may be said to be an entirely new class since 1851; indeed, the art itself can scarcely be said to have existed at that time, if we compare it with its now universal spread. It is true we had then the Daguerreotype and the Talbottype, the former the only process sufficiently rapid to take portraits, and the latter only suited to views and objects admitting of long exposure to the camera. We all remember the very beautiful specimens of both these processes exhibited in the building in Hyde Park. They were, however, few in number, and exhibited as mere adjuncts of the philosophical instruments. In 1851 Archer invented the collodion process; and this has given rise to the marvellous development of the art of late years. The Daguerreotype, however exquisite in its details (probably even now unsurpassed by any process), bad an unpleasant leaden hue, and gave a ghastly appearance to the picture. The Talbottype, owing to the negative being on paper, was subject to all the imperfections of texture; and though, when great care was bestowed on the manipulation, charming pictures were produced, the art had no commercial value, and it remained in the hands of a very few amateurs. The Exhibition of 1851 showed what was doing; for hitherto the workers had carried on their labours without knowing what others were employed upon; and this, combined with Archer’s invention, gave a great impulse to the art. The Society of Arts established and held in the Adelphi the first photographic exhibition; and this led to the formation of the Photographic Society of London, the parent of the innumerable photographic societies existing all over the kingdom. By the collodion process the extremest rapidity was obtained, the imperfection of the texture of the paper got rid of, and the power of multiplying copies to any extent, at a cheap rate, was achieved. Hence photography at once took a commercial standing, and photographers multiplied in all directions. With this the adaptation of the art to an infinite variety of purposes rose up in all directions. Mr. Charles Vignoles was, it is believed, the first to turn it to account for engineering purposes. Having large works in Russia, he had photographs sent him periodically of their progress, and copies were also sent to the Emperor Nicholas. Such reports could not be •’ cooked,” and the Emperor saw literally with his own eyes what was doing. Astronomers have turned the art to account; and Mr. Warren De la Rue this year has received the gold medal of the Royal Astronomical Society — the highest honour it can bestow — for the perfection to which he has brought the art in this direction, and for the valuable addition to science which he has made by its aid. The Commissioners for the present Exhibition seemed to have been puzzled in what class to place it, and at last decided to give it a class to itself; and fearing to give it a position in Section IV. (Fine Arts), placed it in Section II., as a sort of branch of philosophical instruments. This gave great offence to the lovers of the art; and the council of the Photographic Society of London, whose assistance had been invoked by the Commissioners, after a long correspondence, flatly refused to give as a body any aid whatever in the matter. Some few persons having at heart the interest of the Exhibition and of their art, and not wishing that English photography should be imperfectly shown, took the matter up, and a committee was formed. The result will show, notwithstanding the very inadequate space which the Commissioners have been able to allot for the display of the art, that British photography need fear no comparison with its Continental rivals. The landscapes of Bedford, Mudd, Robinson, the Earl of Caithness, Vernon Heath, Lady Jocclyn, Cundall and Downes, and a host of others, attest a supremacy in the art which, we venture to assert, very few, if any, Continental rivals will dispute. C. Thurston Thompson and Caldesi show gigantic photographs of the cartoons of Raffaelle, which are wonderful as masterpieces of manipulation. In portraits, the well-known names of Williams, Claudet, Mayall, Lock and Whitfield, Mayer, Dolamore and Bullock, Maull and Polyblank, &c., as exhibitors, give assurance of that branch of the art being well represented. Their coloured photographs are in reality miniatures, bring so-worked by hand as to leave no trace of the photograph. Doubts at one time existed as to whether these should be admitted in this class; but, inasmuch as they are founded on the photograph, it was thought desirable to allow their introduction. Photography has completely destroyed miniature painting proper; hence it was but fair that the new art of converting photographs into miniatures should be represented. Very eh arming and artistic are some of the specimens shown; but photographs these are not. One of the great drawbacks in photography has been the liability of the specimens to fade or change colour, and sometimes absolutely disappear; hence great efforts have been made by chymists and photographers to get some process in manipulation which should defeat this enemy of the art. The result has been that photographs, when carefully and honestly prepared, and preserved with ordinary care, are now very fairly permanent — probably as permanent as a water-colour drawing. Many trials have been made to produce in printers’ ink or carbon a print from a photograph, which would thus have all the permanency of an engraving, and some very charming results have been produced; but hitherto — probably from expense, uncertainty, or difficulty in manipulation — none have come into general use. Negretti and Zambra exhibit transparent photographs on glass, similar to those well-known productions of Ferrier of Paris, than which none were thought finer till Negretti and Zambra entered the field against them. Enlarged photographs are shown by Claudet and! others, which are life-sized, and some of them coloured; the latter, however, can scarcely be called photographs — they are simply a result of photography. Paul Pretsch, Pouncey, John Field, and F. Joubert contribute specimens of this class. Colonel Sir Henry James, director of the Ordnance Survey, shows specimens of a very valuable adaptation of the art, by which the Government saves many thousands a year in the operations of his department, in the reduction, enlarging, and printing of maps and plans. It is termed “photozincography,” and the results are extremely beautiful and interesting. Sir Henry shows adaptations of it to the production of fac-similes of ancient MS.; and one of a page of Domesday Book is shown. The photograph, by a simple and cheap process, is transferred to a zinc plate, whence any number of copies can be taken off by the ordinary plate printing-press. F. Joubert exhibits a series of very beautiful pictures burnt in on glass, a marvellous adaptation of the photographic art in an absolutely new direction; and hero perfect permanency is obtained, at least so long as the glass will last. By a pure photographic process he produces on the glass, in ceramic colours, a picture, which by exposure to heat in the furnace becomes burnt in like any other picture on glass or china. By a careful and artistic manipulation he has been able to produce effects in several colours. The process has been perfected, and a cheap and artistic ornamentation of our windows, whether in portraits of our friends, landscapes of familiar scenes, architectural objects, or statuary, is brought within the means of the many. Mingled with the photographs, and closely packed on the small floor-space allotted for their display, are the instruments and appliances used in the art. In lenses, on which the artist is so greatly dependent, there has been great progress made since 1851. Ross and Dalmeyer show some very fine specimens — marvellous proofs of a combination of mathematical theory with the skilful development of the practical optician. Horne and Thornethwaite, veterans in the field of photography, Murray and Heath, Bland and Co., attest what the English can do as makers of apparatus. All sides show a host of contrivances thoroughly unintelligible to the uninitiated, but seemingly contrived with great ingenuity for extemporizing a laboratory, workshop, and dark room, wherever the labours of the photographer may carry him. Ono firm shows specimens of albuminized paper, an article much in use by the photographer, and it is said that this firm alone (and it is only one of a legion of others) uses for this purpose annually half a million of hens’ eggs. Class 14 has a high position in the building, and, though only to be reached by overcoming the labour of a long staircase, will, we venture to say, well repay the toil of the undertaking.”]

“British Photographic Department.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:206 (Aug. 15, 1862): 388-389 [“The Times has an excellent article on British Photography speaking of this and the Educational Department contiguous it says: — “ Both these classes are far better worth a visit than many others which receive more notice. The visitor will find the staircase which gives access to them in the centre tower, between the picture galleries over the entrance from the Cromwell-road. Photography may be said to be an entirely new class since 1851; indeed, the art itself can scarcely be said to have existed at that time, if we compare it with its now universal spread. It is true we had then the Daguerreotype and the Talbotype, the former the only process sufficiently rapid to take portraits, and the latter only suited to views and objects admitting of long exposure to the camera. We all remember the very beautiful specimens of both these processes exhibited in the building in Hyde Park. They were, however, few in number, and exhibited as mere adjuncts of the philosophical instruments. In 1851 Archer invented the collodion process, and this has given rise to the marvellous development of the art of late years….” “…The Commissioners for the present Exhibition seemed to have been puzzled in what class to place it, and at last decided to give it a class to itself, and, fearing to give it a position in Section IV. (Fine Arts), placed it in Section II., as a sort of branch of philosophical instruments. This gave great offence to the lovers of the art, and the Council of the Photographic Society of London, whose assistance had been invoked by the Commissioners, after a long correspondence, flatly refused to give, as a body, any aid whatever in the matter. Some few persons, having at heart the interest of the Exhibition and of their art, and not wishing that English photography should be imperfectly shown, took the matter up, and a committee was formed. The result will show, notwithstanding the very inadequate space which the Commissioners have been able to allot for the display of the art, that British photography need fear no comparison with its Continental rivals. The landscapes of Bedford, Mudd, Robinson, the Earl of Caithness, Vernon Heath, Lady Jocelyn, Cundall and Downes, and a host of others, attest a supremacy in the art which, we venture to assert, very few, if any, Continental rivals will dispute. C. Thurston Thompson and Caldesi show gigantic photographs of the cartoons of Raffaelle, which are wonderful as masterpieces of manipulation. In portraits, the well-known names of Williams, Claudet, Mayall, Lock and Whitfield, Mayer, Dolamore and Bullock, Maull and Polyblank, &c., as exhibitors, give assurance of that branch of the art being well represented….”]

“To Correspondents.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:208 (Aug. 29, 1862): 420. [“R. G. — We do not know anyone who undertakes professionally to paint clouds on negatives for photographers. Those of Mr. Bedford, to which we recently referred, are done by himself.”]

“Echoes of the Week, and the International Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1164 (Sat., Sept. 13, 1862): 283. [“Those so well-abused One of the most admirable and interesting exhibitions now open in London is that of the photographic pictures taken by Mr. Francis Bedford during his tour in the East, on which, by command, he accompanied his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, and which are now on view at the German Gallery in Old Bond-street. Panoramas, sketches, pictures, and photographs of the Holy Land are no novelties in this country, and are honourably connected with the names of Roberts, Bartlett, Bonomi, and others; but the circumstances under which Mr. Bedford’s tour was undertaken give additional interest to his collection of photographs. We may remark, en passant, that another artist of eminence, although in a widely-different style, is now occupying himself in Oriental fields. Mr. Buckstone, of the Haymarket, has commissioned the famous scene-painter, Mr. William Telbin, to proceed to the East to follow the scarcely-effaced footsteps of the Prince of Wales, for the purpose of making sketches illustrative of his Royal Highness’s tour in Syria and Palestine, which will be reproduced in a panorama for a grand spectacle founded on the Story of “Rasselas, Prince of Abyssinia.” Dr. Johnson will himself officiate as chorus, and, in his immortal snuff-coloured suit and bushy wig, deliver a sonorous commentary on the adventures of Rassolas, who, dramatically speaking, is to be taken in hand by Mr. William Brough.”]

“Printing and Bookbinding in the International Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1166 (Sat., Sept. 27, 1862): 350-351. [ (Background. WSJ) “Typography proper — at least the produce of the typefounders’ art and appliances of the printing-office — are not things to tell well in an exhibition upon the desultory visitor, deprived of one of his senses by the groaning of organs and braying of brass bands; not even have they the seductions of form or colour to attract. Printing, that magic power of modern times, so potent as a leader of public opinion, so essential to our wellbeing and development, is worthily represented in class 28, north gallery, next the eastern dome, where our founders show type and printed specimens of good and durable character, well suited to the wants of the newspaper, book, and general offices, the whole of the contributors wisely avoiding a display of decorative printing, in which we are not great, our pattern-books being sadly discounted by the volumes from Paris, Vienna, and Berlin; indeed, here the taste in book-printing and book-binding is rather to retrograde, to seek in old forms and styles that have a beauty, but tell not of progress. Old type, quaint cuts, toned paper, and Renaissance bindings are the order of the day, exhausting a great deal of talent in their production, or rather reproduction- affectations that ought not to be encouraged. It is by improving upon the good English type of the present bit by bit, and the bringing good art to bear upon the ornamental parts, that printing will be advanced. Besley and Co., Caslon, Figgins, the Patent Type Company of London; Stephenson, Blake, and Co., of Sheffield; and Miller and Richards, of Edinburgh, all show, effectively and well, plain specimens, which include the Times, the Illustrated London News, the “Official Catalogue,” and one or two other severe tests for type. Of printers’ furniture — that is to say, rules, cases, frames, and wood letters — Bonnewell has a large display, and Ullmer a small one. Scott shows a collection of box-wood, as prepared for the draughtsman and engraver. Stereotype, electrotype, engraved and prepared plates, copper, steel, zinc, and pewter, brass type, and bookbinders’ tools, are all to be found here. Of foreign types, the specimens sent by the Imprimerie Impériale at Paris must take the lead, so complete is it in all the forms known, including signs and hieroglyphics. Derriey, of Paris, also has a nice show of type, delicate and in good taste. Austria and Prussia like- wise show; but in connection with printing, the concentration of labour upon one department or branch of profession being less common abroad than with us, many establishments doing everything, one or two even to the fabrication of their own paper. But to continue with our exhibitors of printing surfaces. We have but one wood-engraver — Leighton and Leighton — showing a collection of blocks and transfers below, and impressions of nice engravings above, demonstrating the ordinary method, old as the days of Albert Durer and Bewick, who doubtless had their dreams of metallic relief to supersede the labour of the engraver, as shown by Mr. Linton in his process of keriography, which, though brilliant and artistic in the hands of a master, is speculative in the highest degree for general use. [In the awards of the juries this process receives reward “for engraving,” being in truth exactly the contrary, a method to supersede engraving, showing the justice of the decisions arrived at.] Here, perhaps, may be noticed the very ingenious method (not new, for it was shown in Paris, in 1855, by a French exhibitor) of enlarging and reducing engravings employed by the Electro Block Company, celebrated neither for their blocks nor electrotypes, but for their power of making great or small impressions from engravings by the elastic properties of indiarubber, especially valuable where a few copies are required, as in the instance of Mr. John Leech’s sketches in oil now exhibiting, they having been taken from woodcuts in Punch stretched by this method and painted over. From France we have a process of obtaining relief and incised plates from engravings, drawings, &c, shown by Dulos. In the Austrian Court are lithographs transferred to copper, and chemically treated to become surface blocks, by Giessondorf, of Vienna. In this battle of the processes both artists and engravers take part, the one trying to do without the aid of the other, as may be seen in an engraving from Flaxman exhibited by Mr. John Leighton — an engraved photograph on wood, with which the draughtsman has had nothing to do. Photography and printing surfaces may be seen to great advantage in the display of Sir H. James, of the Ordnance Department at Southampton, who shows one of Hogarth’s engravings, “The Election,” reduced and engraved by the action of light, producing a repetition that would puzzle a connoisseur to make out. Messrs. J. and J. Leighton also show an old print by the same process in their case of restorations. In nature-printing we have tangible objects reproduced without the aid of draughtsman, engraver, or photographer, Nature doing all but print for herself, as may be seen in the beautiful transcripts of ferns and seaweeds by the late Mr. Henry Bradbury — a principle in part taken advantage of by Mr. Wallis in his specimens of autotypography, a process by which he is enabled to impress in a plate of soft metal an artist’s own drawing, even to his washes and delicate renderings, provided they be done upon the transparent medium supplied by him, somewhat as drawing upon tracing-paper, on easy and facile method, requiring no reversing of the subject or writing. From typefounding and printers’ surfaces to specimens of typography the transition is not great, commencing with the most opulent printing establishment in the world, the Bank of England, who expose their own notes, both English and Indian, in tempting array. They are of all denominations, printed and numbered by steam power from surface blocks in imitation of the old copperplate script — the most ephemeral, most valuable, and most coveted productions of the press, made but to be destroyed — to confound the forger rather than develop the noble art they grace. Of samples of printing contributed by a printer, the well-arranged frame of Mr. Clay is the only specimen here — the pages bearing evidence of nicely-balanced art direction. Mr. Watts, also a printer, exhibits not so much as such as the owner of founts of type curious and rare. His one hundred repetitions of the text, “And how hear we every man in our own tongue wherein we were born?” show the wide range of his types, and the dialects from zone to zone. Messrs. Bradbury and Evans and W. and R. Chambers come next — actual bookmakers — combining as they both do the offices of printers and publishers. Mr. Austin, of Hertford, has printed some creditable works, with borders in gold and colours, Persian in style; and educational works in Sanscrit and other Oriental characters. Of the two houses exhibiting Bibles, her Majesty’s printers are the largest — holding as they do the patent right to print the authorised version, a right that has not degenerated into a monopoly, the Holy Scriptures, perhaps, being the cheapest book produced. Of Messrs. Baxter’s productions, their biblical works in all languages are as good as the width of the demand and wants of the subject will allow, being produced for a superior class of students and polyglot readers. Mr. Mackenzie, of Glasgow, has a well-printed Bible, composed by machinery and illustrated by photographs. In England it is the practice to divide and subdivide trades, publishers taking the rank of producers of the highest order, as may be seen by the show of Longman, who exhibit “Macaulay’s Lays” and “Cat’s Emblems;” or Murray, who shows “Milman’s Horace” and “Lockhart’s Ballads.” We have named these books because they are good, and are displayed. Messrs. Black, McMillan, Bell and Daldy, Low, Trübner, and Dulau, all show their best works, to describe which would be like writing a description of daylight — things to be seen every day and everywhere, and yet wanting to complete the vast encyclopaedia, to demonstrate to foreigners what is doing. In France, in the gallery next the nave, will be found their display of books. That of M. Henri Plon, showing the produce of an establishment where nearly everything is executed; as also MM. Mama and Sons, of Tours, who here display their chef-d’oeuvre of 1855, “La Tourraine,” printed upon vellum — a beautiful sample of engraving and typography, executed by a provincial house, which shows books and bindings from the cheapest to the most costly. Of other exhibitors, M. Paul Dupont, of Paris — who works his large establishment on a co-operative system where all to some extent participate in the profits — shows a folio collection of French histories and other fine works. Renouard has many works in the fine arts, geography, and history; Dideron, works on archaeology; Parin, of Lyons, some good specimens of typography in old type; Charpentier, of Nantes, a good illustrated book on Normandy; M. Mallet-Bachelier, many scientific books; and Ernest Bourdin, a first-rate atlas. B. Bance shows architecture, including the works of “Violet le Duc.” Pagnerre has not a good display; Claye many of his illustrated books; and Charpentier books of a classical and varied character. Of the books of M. Crumer, his livres de luxe and their lavish illustration — well known from the time of his “Paul and Virginia,” reprinted here — to the costly and beautiful illuminated books of latter years the display is fine. Of Austrian specimens the exhibition is not large, several works being in the educational department, including that magnificent specimen of typography in colours, a “Missale Romanum,” shown by H. Reiss, of Vienna, a truly fine book; also a copy of a translation of “Paradise Lost,” printed in Armenian, at the Mechitarists’ College, Venice, a duplicate of which may be seen in the Italian Court. With mention of the house of Zamarski and Dittmarsch, who send many ordinary-printed books, we pass into Prussia, or rather the Zollverein, there to find a collective exhibit — one of the largest being that of Trowitzsch, of Berlin, who sends specimens of type-founding and printing, rather coarse in quality beside those of R. Duncker, of the Imprimerie Royale, and his goodly array of 4tos. The works of the Great Frederick, and the Grand Prussian Bible: the letter and pattern book sent by this exhibitor is fine and classic in style. A. Duncker, also of Berlin, sends some fine works, including “König Friedrich’s Zeit,” glorious drawings on wood by Menzel; and R. Friedlander and Sons some old books, reproduced, we suspect, by the anaestatic process. Of typography, Leipzig, of course, contributes specimens, Brockhaus showing the products of his extensive office, where everything, from the compilation to the completion of a volume, is performed in a fair and substantial manner; not, of course, in luxurious taste, but good, very good. The same, also, may be said of Giesecke and Devrient, of that famous town, who send all sorts of specimens — books, engraved plates, ornamental printing and embossing, and of first-rate excellence; whilst from the capital, Dresden, we have from C. Meinhold and Sons four volumes of capital oblong woodcuts of events in German history, and many other books. From Stuttgardt little of importance comes; though from Brunswick excellent scientific works are sent by Vieweg and Sons. Belgium sends but few specimens of printing; M. Hayez, of Brussels, printer to the Academy, contributing some good quartos; as does also M. Grouse, and M. Tireher a history of glass-painting. Italy sends some specimens; as do the Portuguese, Norwegians, and Turks — none being very remarkable for style. Those from China and Japan are very curious and instructive, and would well repay the attention of the careful student; the quaint beauty of their block books, printed in colours, is something extraordinary. But to conclude with our typographic section, we finish in the Netherlands. Holland, the home of so much that was excellent in early printing, sends little or nothing to be commended; a book or two from Leydon, in Chinese and Japanese; whilst Haarlem, which claims to be the cradle of the art and home of Jacob Costor, sends a few droll specimens of type worthy of the last century, and a large frame in which is locked up the facade of a building — het paviljoen te haarlem — done in printers’ rules and ornaments; a wonderful piece of pain, not worthy the candle burned over it — a work that ought to be hung with that of M. Moulinet, a French compositor, who has done a statue of Guttenburg and other heroes in “leads,” that look strikingly like engravings — a difficulty overcome, or nearly, and that is all. Having disposed of the principal typographic works, we will devote a few lines to the display of impressions from incised plates, in so far as they come within the province of class 28, a class bordered by a great deal of debatable ground, literary and artistic. In plate-printing Messrs. M’Queen show some of the choicest line engravings of late years, well printed; also, Chardon, of Paris, in the French department. This art, old and primitive in its manipulation, is, nevertheless, important, the engraver owing much of his effect to the printer for its development. In the display of Messrs. Bradbury and Wilkinson are many engraved plates, impressions of bank notes, bills of exchange, and postage labels — a marked advance upon anything done here before. Their large exhibition diploma is excellent; whilst for use the copper plate coated with steel, exhibited beside it, will be apparent when it is known that by this process a soft engraved plate may be made hard and durable, the covering of iron to be renewed and washed away at pleasure. Of the nature prints here we have spoken before. Not so the machine engraving, or effects produced by the “guilloche engine,” a most difficult thing to use with effect in connection with art or hand work. Of postage-stamps the French send the plates of Barre, and also those of Hulot, who likewise sends that of the bank-note of France. In chromatic printing lithography will first have our attention, not because it has a priority of invention, but because it was brought to perfection earlier than chromo-typography, having made vast strides since 1851, when the Austrians caused a sensation with a few brown transcripts of still life. All our lithographers make creditable displays, Messrs. Hanhart, in black, white, and colour, doing good work, particularly in rendering representations of still life, their birds’ -nests and flowers making the walls most charming and refreshing to behold. So good now are our chromatic prints become that artists do not hesitate to sign them as faithful transcripts of the drawings. Vincent Brooks also has a varied and excellent display, imitating equally well the old cracked oil picture, the chalk drawing, or the water colour, for which he deserves all praise. Rowney and Co. also have some nice works of a pleasing character; whilst behind, at a stall redolent in brown, and blue, and gold, is the show of Day and Son, not very strong in pictorial chromatics, but making up in illuminated books, displayed upon a counter before a screen covered with private portraits, in black and white, the property of the Queen. For chromo and other lithography of a commercial character — as plans, documents, &c. — the frames of Maclure, Standidge, and Faulkner, of Manchester, bear good evidence of the useful; whilst Underwood, of Birmingham, in one specimen of colour, a corn-field, after V. Cole, shows the provinces alive to excellence in the reproductions of pictorial effects and landscapes we are in advance of other nations; though in renderings of the figure, and particularly in the imitation of illuminations and miniature drawings, either in black or colour, greatly in the rear of France and Germany, From this latter country — the home of Senefelder, the inventor of the art — the display is good. Zemarski and Dittmarsch exhibiting two of large size in colour — Christ taken from the Cross and to the Sepulchre–with others. Reiffenstein and Roesch also expose one of much merit for texture and rendering, “Boys stoning a Scarecrow,” with others, in black and white. Hartinger and Son, again, exhibit several, good in manipulation but crude and hot in colour. All are well drawn, the Viennese seeming better in that respect, even unto the mercantile work sent by Seiger, than we are. Again, in the Bavarian Court, the large oil prints by Becker, of Munich, “The Four Seasons,” though hot and brown, are well drawn. From Leipzig we have several mural maps in oil colours, most durable and good, sent by S. C. Hinrichs. From Paris Lemercicr sends a good display of lithography in all styles; but the most remarkable thing shown is a full-length portrait of the Queen, about the size of life, printed from a stone quarried in France. Of the chromo-lithographs the illuminated work is better than the pictorial, a remark that may be applied to some very beautiful chromo-lithographs sent by Mathieu, perfectly marvellous miniature renderings of figures and ornaments for a small book of prayer; unnoticed by the jury. From chromo-lithography to chromo-typography the gulf is not wide; indeed, to a casual observer, the results are the same — printing in colours — the spectator caring little how it is produced, from stone or wood, provided the price be moderate, a thing that could not have been but for surface-printing and the steam-engine rendering an old principle rapid, enabling Messrs. Leighton Brothers (who make a display in the north gallery) to produce pictures, truly for the million, at a moderate cost, many of them being given gratis with this Journal, thus placing pictorial art in distant homes all over the world, in nooks and comers where it would never other- wise penetrate. In the nicely-arranged show of Mr. Dickes, commendable in many respects, some beautiful specimens are exhibited, printed by machinery, thus following the steps and experience of others. We regret not seeing a display by Mr. G. Baxter, to whose energies the public have been much indebted. From France we have but two small specimens of chromo- typography — portraits of the Emperor and Empress, by Dunaud-Narat, hung so high that it is impossible to see them. Next to British colour-printing, in no art have we made greater progress than in bookbinding, particularly “publishers’ bookbinding;” that has had the benefit of first-rate art, publishers being enabled to devote a sum of money to the decoration of a new work of which thousands are to be struck off, where the extra binder, with his hand- tools, is obliged to rest upon old set types and patterns, often done, as far as art is concerned, infinitely better 200 years ago — Renaissance patterns that find plagiarists in more than one expositor, as may be seen by visitors to the Museum at South Kensington, upon volumes sent by such secondhand booksellers as Toovey, of London, and Craig, of Edinburgh. Of the few extra bookbinders who have not been shackled by old traditions may be named Zaehnsdorf, who should stand first in our alphabet for workmanship and finish, but little on the British side being comparable with his. The Dore’s “Dante,” a noble book (the linings of green morocco, tooled in gold), very perfect; a “Poets of the Nineteenth Century,” in olive morocco, with a good Grolier, a beautiful volume. “The Sakoontola,” though well finished, is not be happy in the ornamentation as the “Etude sur S. Champin,” nice and cleanly tooled on sage morocco. Of the calf books by this exhibitor these “blind” tooled are bright and sharp as it is possible; in fact the whole display, though small, is first-rate. The books sent by Mr. Riviere, though sombre in hue, are nice in design and well tooled — but few of them, we think, having been specially produced for the exhibition — sage and olive morocco covers predominating. The work is particularly solid and good. For novelty of design and execution, combined with colour, no one makes so good a display as Messrs. J. and J. Leighton — not alone in covers, but in the restoration and completion of old volumes; their fault, or virtue, seeming to be in a love of the quaint and original. Their large illuminated “Oxford Album,” in russia, is bold and very good; like two copies of Dore’s “Dante,” one in red morocco and another is black — with the serpent and apple illuminated upon the side — the latter very choice and Venetian in aspect, a poem in itself. A “Moore” also, with its Irish harp, and a “Tennyson,” richly tooled, breathe of the same spirit; also a Rogers’ “Italy,” truly Italian; a valuable original copy of Jacob “Cat’s” works, in folio, tooled in a pane pattern; some calf, vellum, and richly illuminated books, showing the great resources of this house to obtain excellence, not the less to be commended because not painfully laboured. In most of the other examples of bookbinding on the British side we have the other extreme — nothing novel, all the patterns being copies of old forms, executed with a painful expenditure of labour, as if the rich mine of art-manufacture was exhausted and nothing more could be done. Of Mr. Bedford’s display his work is excellent and good, the forwarding solid and durable, though in forms and colours not remarkable for new combinations, except in the case of the fine folio volume designed by Mr. Shaw, F.S.A., much to be commended for its disposition of parts, being quite the reverse of a Louis Quinze folio, which, apart from its appropriateness to a book of the nineteenth century, is a warning of what to avoid, the “beef-bone and chequer” ornament being happily on the wane. The library calf books of this exhibitor are very nice. Mr. Holloway, we must say, is more judicious in his ornament than the last-named exhibitor, showing more leather and colour. His quarto volume, illuminated, though heavy in some of its parts, is very nice. For insides he is not to compare with Chatelin, or for precision with Zachnsdorf. Of M. Chatelin’s display many good words may be said, the exteriors being novel and pleasing. They are sharply forwarded; the tooling, especially that upon silk, admirably worked, though we cannot praise the taste that leads to the delineation of the human figure on the side of a book. That on the “Belle Inconnue” would be better unknown; it is a difficulty nearly overcome, but not vanquished. Rammage, of Edinburgh, has a nice illuminated side, well worked, but of old design again. Of the display of Wright, a line Grolier upon purple morocco is the best; his other books are coarse and heavy. Bemrose, of Derby, deserves great praise for his attempts at novelty of design, though not always successful. Potts and Bolton have some good work, though placed rather out of the way. But, after all is said and done, in extra bookbinding we do not excel the French, or excite their admiration by our blind adherence to conventional traditions. In clothwork this order is just reversed. In this we have created a style the admiration and wonder of all foreigners — toile Anglaise being known for its excellence of workmanship and taste over the whole world, a thing greatly due to the efforts of such men as Mr. Owen Jones and Luke Limner, aided by firms like Leighton, Son, and Hodge. This may be seen by their varied and excellent display, the large size of some of their blocks, the quality and rapidity with which are worked the adaptation of new materials, more than one being worthy of the highest praise apart from the introduction of steam power and development of trade, on which thousands are dependent. Very many old friends that have graced the drawing-rooms of polite society will here be recognised with pleasure; bindings that we see in the shop windows of Paris, Berlin, Vienna, and all the capitals where they can boast a bookseller. Messrs. Westleys and Bone are also exhibitors of this class of work, the former displaying good extra books as well, the latter many illuminated and stamped. With a glance at the well- known designs of Mr. John Leighton, to be seen here and all over the building, being borne to every clime on the cover of “The Official Catalogue,” we will quit class 28 in the north gallery, feeling that something has been done in that class since 1851 to indicate the onward march — straw-paper, chromo-typography, and British publishers’ bindings being the most important. But now to France, or rather Paris, to view the case of M. Gruel Englemann, whose works are the very perfection of workmanship and delicate manipulation, making our own look clumsy and coarse, putting us to the shame in everything but design (lavished on a genre France knows not — clothwork). So fine and sharp are they that we — as is always the case with French work — fear their durability in the hands of a less light-handed race. Of the large book in red and dark green, perfect as it is, we could have wished the colours reversed — the primitive put upon the tertiary, and the ornament perfectly flat instead of imitated from a scroll-shield — some of the diapers and harmonies are very choice, the enamels being delicious, the clasping and hinges well disposed, ornamental, and suited to their office. All the books are simple, not overlaid, though some of them depend upon the embroiderer, the goldsmith, the carver, and enameller for their effect. Not so M. Mame, of Tours. He binds his own books in first-rate style, depending alone upon tooled leather for his effects; and very good they are — choice in form, novel, bright, clear, and harmonious in colours; the lines, scrolls, and flowers worked with precision, even into the inside boards and silk lining. To describe the many good works would take more space than we have to spare. A few are less happy than others, but very few. Of Belgic bookbinding we have but one display, that of M. Schavye, of Brussels; well finished and forwarded books, not always to be commended for style, the best, perhaps, being “Catalogue do la Bibliotheque de la Chambre,” a nicely-covered side in red morocco, well tooled; one or two in old style, including a pigskin with the title under horn, in imitation of Low Country binding of the sixteenth century. Of the Austrian books much may be said in favour of the covers, though little in that of the solidity of the volume itself, the sewing and general getting up not being good; the most remarkable feature is their method of modelling and raising the leather, which is afterwards painted and gilded. The most noteworthy are by Habenicht, of Vienna; a missal, with vessica pattern and brass corners, coarse, but with much character; also a folio, in pigskin, with iron or steel ornaments, bold and good; and an album, or solandor-case, with an archangel in raised leather, painted and illuminated. Of the big album in mosaic leather, by Hollinger, of Vienna, whilst it is ingenious, little can be urged in favour of its design or the policy of its author sending two pirated designs, exhibited by Mr. Leighton in 1851. Of Italian bookbinding little can be said, except that it is spongy and only good for a certain way in which forril is used; of German, that it has the soft quality so common in paper bookbinding, though cloth is working its way and gold stamps coming in — Denmark, even, showing good blocking and engraving, ill adapted to the purpose by Clément, of Copenhagen. Russia sends some bookbinding — a sort of raised leather, metal, and mosaic work, good in design, but rather unsuited to the wants of a volume. C. Haig, of St. Petersburg, and A. Kantor, of Warsaw, are the contributors. Portugal sends a specimen by Ferin, of Lisbon, a red morocco volume, tooled in silver and gold, rude and rich in its workmanship, but with some character; and also a blind pattern on calf of much beauty. We need not remark that our criticisms are little guided by the prize awards, so eagerly displayed by the small exhibitors and neglected by the Iarge. How such a bouleversement of affairs as we find in class 28 could have passed the council of chairmen is beyond our comprehension; and we have good reasons for stating that her Majesty’s commissioners do not consider the administration of the juries their least errors, and heartily wish they had treated the whole exhibition as the Fine Arts, as meditated in the first instance.”]

“Minor Topics of the Month. Mr. Bedford’s Photographs.” ART JOURNAL 24:10 (Oct. 1, 1862): 211. [“This is the most interesting series of photographs that has ever been brought before the public. There must have been many failures, but nothing can be more beautiful than the precision of these views; they give us that which is masked in pictures, that is, the ground surface, on which most frequently is written ruin and decay. In comparison with these obdurate realities, all pictures of Egypt and the Holy Land are pleasant dreams. We have, for instance, the Vocal Memnon; we are disabused of his being now a monolith; he has been repaired in vulgar piecemeal, at least so he looks here, and he does not look either so human or so mythological as Roberts paints him. Again, the Pyramids appear small, and the ground around them is strewn with a kind of desolation that reminds us the curse lies heavy on every part of the land. The series commences with Cairo, of which there are not less than twelve views. we know not whether the Pasha has seen thoso views; if he have not, he has lost an opportunity of congratulating himself on the contrast presented by the region under his immediate sway with those under the direct dominion of the Porte. From Cairo we proceed to Gizeh, where are shown the Pyramids; after which comes Philae, whereof there are six views, comprehending, of course, the famous Hypnaethral Temple, known as the Bed of Pharaoh. Then follows the Temple of Edfu, a building of the time of the Ptolemies. The figures and names of several of them are commemorated in the sculptures on the pyramidal towers of the gateway, and on the faces of the temple. Thebes supplies not less than nineteen subjects, as the Hall of Columns and other portions of the Temple of Karnak, the Memnonium, the Colossi, the Temple of Medinet Habu, the Temple of Luksur, and the Egyptian subjects, and with the gateway of the Temple of Dendera. The Views in the Holy Land and Syria commence with Joppa, which is followed by seventeen of the most interesting sites in and about Jerusalem, as the Mount of Olives, the Mosque of the Dome of the Rock, the Golden Gate, the Valley of Jehoshaphat, the Garden of Gethsemane, the Monuments of Absalom, James, Zacharias, the Village of Siloam, the Hill of Evil Counsel, &c.; then come Bethany, Mar Saba, Hebron, Nablus, and then Damascus — ” O Damascus, pearl of the East, as old as history itself.” The views number one hundred and seventy-two, and in some of them are grouped the Prince of Wales and the distinguished persons in attendance on his Royal Highness. the tour terminates at Malta, and the series is, perhaps, the most interesting ever offered to the Christian and the scholar. We had almost forgotten to mention that the exhibition is held at the German Gallery, in Bond Street.”]

“Antiquarian and Literary Intelligencer. Cambrian Archaeological Association.” GENTLEMAN’S MAGAZINE (Oct. 1862): 445-454. [“The annual meeting of this Association for 1862 took place at Truro, and began on Monday, August 25th, lasting throughout that week….” “…The temporary museum, formed in the Council Chamber of the public buildings at Truro, was unusually rich in rubbings, drawings, and photographs. We understood, indeed, from the gentleman who remained in charge of the museum during the whole week, that the Society had never exhibited so much nor so well before. The photographs comprised the whole of Bedford’s series of views, large as well as stereoscopic, of all the buildings and the natural scenery of North and South Wales and the Marches; and there must have been from 800 to 900 such views in the Welsh department alone. The Cornishmen also exhibited a large collection of excellent photographs; and among them a complete series of the views in the Scilly Islands. Upon enquiry, we were sorry to be informed that this collection, which could never have been previously paralleled in Cornwall, excited not much attention: the ordinary visitors gazed at the photographs with more of vacancy than of astonishment, and asked very few questions about them. Nobody expressed a wish to acquire any of them, though Mr. Bedford had sent down duplicate sets to meet a probable demand. It was much the same with the drawings and rubbings, some of which, such as Professor Westwood’s series of crosses and early inscriptions, were uncommonly fine; the visitors did not understand them. It was the duty as well as the policy of the Association to have instructed the public upon the peculiar merit and value of what was exhibited; and we cannot but think that it would be well for a morning, or else for an evening, to be specially devoted to an examination of the museum under competent guidance, followed by short lectures upon the leading classes of objects by members really competent for the duty….” p. 447.]

“Photography. A Triumph of Photographic Art.” POPULAR SCIENCE REVIEW 2:5 (Oct. 1862): 125-128. [(Francis Bedford; Alfred Brothers (Manchester, England); D. Campbell (Ayr, Scotland); Dallmeyer; R. M. Gordon; Vernon Heath; London School of Photography; James Mudd; Mr. Sidebotham; John Spiller; Mr. Warner (Ross, England); G. Wharton Simpson; Henry White; T. R. Williams; mentioned or discussed.) “…The other works by Mr. Mudd are hanging chiefly on the central screen in the photographic gallery, where they are considerably less liable to be affected by damp, and have consequently preserved all the delicacy and beauty of toning for which the photographs by this gentleman have long been celebrated. The same remark applies to the pictures exhibited by Mr. Vernon Heath; to the views in North Wales, by Mr. Henry White, and by Mr. Sidebotham; to those of Mr. D. Campbell, of Ayr; and likewise to the exquisite landscapes in Madeira, by Mr. R. M. Gordon: none of these disclose the least symptom of fading, and all are placed upon the central screens. In like manner, with regard to the portraits by Mr. T. R. Williams, and to the magnificent series of abbeys and cathedrals by Mr. Francis Bedford, not one of these shows the least indication of fading; but it must be stated that they occupy the more favoured position in the centre of the gallery. A remarkable instance of the formation of mildew is apparent on the leather binding of a book exhibited by Mr. A. W. Bennett, and entitled The Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain, illustrated by Photography.” This book is inclosed within a glass case, and hangs directly in contact with the wall….”

“Photography at the International Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:126. (Oct. 15, 1862): 153-155. [“There is scarcely a class in the Exhibition which does not profess, with more or less of truth, to have its peculiar grievances and hardships. Not one, however, has such just grounds for complaint as the contributors to Class 14 (Photography); and from none have fewer complaints and remonstrances been received. Not that photographers have been at all indifferent to the slights they have received or the way in which their once superb collection has been treated. As a body they were among the first of the many whom the Commissioners unfortunately managed to offend; and their association, therefore, early withdrew from cooperating in bringing about an exhibition which they knew was not only to be located in a place where few would see it, but exposed to such influences as would destroy their chances of successful competition with their foreign brethren. We would venture to say that only a very small percentage of the visitors to the building ever found by their catalogues that there was such a thing as a photographic collection in the Exhibition; and of this small number only a smaller number still have been tempted to scale the weary flights of stairs which give access to the room where the photographs are almost hidden away. For the information of those who may wish to see the little that yet remains worth looking at in this collection, we may state that the room is built above the brick tower of the Cromwell-road entrance — a height very nearly equal to the roof of the nave itself. A worse place than this could not possibly be given to it. The glazed roof, for a long time left unscreened, made the heat here during the summer quite unbearable. The heat peeled the pictures off their mounts, cracked and warped their frames; and the glare of the son’s rays ruined the tints of some of the finest specimens exhibited. Add to this, that the -whole space given was inadequate to the requirements of the class, and that more than half even of this little had to be shared with the maps and school-books of the Education Class. It must give foreigners (if any ever penetrate up here) a curious notion of our ideas on education, to -find that great dolls and cases full of the commonest kinds of children’s toys are thought more worthy of exhibition as educational objects than the artistic and beautiful results of one of the most important scientific and chemical discoveries of the age. It may possibly be due to this state of things that the collection is by no means divided or arranged with proper effect, and that the Catalogue is therefore far from being as good an assistant as the purchaser has a right to expect. Photography in 1851 had no class of its own, and, in fact, was scarcely represented at all, except by a few Daguerreotypes and Talbottypes, which, with their apparatus, were exhibited among philosophical instruments. The collodion process, to which is due the development which has taken place since, was then not known. In the present collection all the photographs, with very few exceptions, are by the collodion process, and include, of course, every variety of specimens of the art — large and small portraits, cartes de visite, landscape – views, instantaneous and otherwise, towns and buildings, stereoscope, and positive transparent pictures on glass. Compared to what might have been expected, only a small number of portraits are exhibited, and of these collections only three call for any remark, viz. those by Mayall, Williams, and Watkins. Mayall very wisely makes every spectator a judge of his perfection in his art by exhibiting the likenesses of such personages as Lord Palmerston, Earl Derby, Mr. Gladstone, and others whose features are familiar. The art with which he has transferred the features and expressions of these statesmen is something almost marvellous even for photography. The portraits of the two first named peers might be set before all photographers as models of the excellence which they should aim at in such works. Mr. Williams, among untouched photographs, only shows one very well-known face — that of Mr. Gladstone, of which we cannot say more than that it is as good a likeness as that taken by Mr. Mayall, with all the additional advantage derivable from Mr. Williams’s exquisite method of printing. His other portraits are chiefly those of less-known individuals; but one has only to look at them to see that the same success has been attained, especially with the likenesses of ladies. Mr. Watkins shows a fine series of portraits of Histoid in all her chief characters. It may be that these have suffered somewhat from exposure; for their printing is scarcely up to the high standard usual with this photographer. In coloured portraits, Claudet and Williams are the chief exhibitors in point of merit. Some of the former’s enlarged portraits are really wonderful efforts, as are also Williams’s photographic portraits, painted in oils, of the late Primate and the Earl of Malmesbury. Some very admirable likenesses, which can neither be said to belong to the plain nor coloured series, are exhibited by Mr. Eastham. These are taken upon opal glass by the tannin process. Several of these, from the peculiarly soft and delicate tone given by the glass, are exceedingly effective. Caldesi is, as usual, first in his photographs from paintings and miniatures. Of views and landscapes there is great variety. The place of honour in this class, whether for the wildest mountain scenery, for towns or buildings, for interiors of grand old minsters, likenesses of quaint old country inns or ivy-covered ruins — in short, for perfection in all that relates to out-door photography in its wildest and highest sense, belongs to Francis Bedford. Many landscape artists show in this collection, each of whom in his own peculiar walk may equal what Bedford does of the same kind in that branch, but he stands alone in being the only one who can equal all, no matter how long they may have practised, or how peculiarly their own they may have made any single department of landscape photography. Let the visitor look at Ludlow Castle, the Feathers Inn, Ludlow, Raglan Castle, Tintern Abbey, and the interior of Wells Cathedral, and then turn to such views as the Cheddar Cliffs, Pont Aberglaslyn, and the Pass of Llanberis. With the wild, solemn, stony grandeur of the latter, with its pile of overhanging cliffs and rugged crags, he fails, as all photographers have and must do, when they cope with mountains of this class; but the Pont Aberglaslyn is wonderfully rendered in all its endless variety of rocks and pines; and the Cheddar Cliffs are equally good. Mr. Rouch exhibits near these -views a beautiful series of instantaneous pictures of Ventnor and Bonchurch, Isle of Wight. These, especially some of the latter, on the beach, are exceedingly good in the minute clearness of their detail, from the first ripple of the inshore wave out to the regularly marked though distant undulations of the sea in the background. Of the same kind, and equally praiseworthy, are those shown by Mr. Wilson. Than his small view of Land’s End there is nothing better in the collection. The picture of the ‘Cambridge’ at gun exercise, with the smoke wreathing out of her heavy broadside, is also very commendable, and the result, we presume, either of a wonderful piece of good luck or else very carefully timed preparation. Mr. Stephen Thompson shows some remarkably well-developed cathedral pictures; and in the small but very good display made by the Amateur Photographic Association will be found some of an excellence which well-to-do professionals might envy. Conspicuous among the amateurs, though not exhibitors under the association, arc the pictures of the Earl of Caithness, Lady Jocelyn, Sir A. Macdonald, &c. The Earl exhibits many very good views indeed, one of the best being a snow-scene, though in this, as is usually the case in the effort to secure detail in the light flaky effects of the new-fallen snow, all other objects are rendered of an intense blackness. Lady Jocelyn’s pictures are conspicuous for their clear detail, though some appear to have been rather overprinted. Messrs. Sidebotham, Robinson, Mudd, and Piper each send a careful selection of their best effects in landscape and other news, all of which are remarkably good, and some, especially those of Mr. Mudd, are not to be surpassed in their way by any in the gallery. Mr. J. Spode also shows some good views of Stoneleigh-park, which make one wish for more of the same kind. Mr. Vernon Heath exhibits very largely, and, what is more, everything he shows is of the best description. There are views in this collection which are equal in clearness, softness, and detail to any shown by Bedford himself, and which are as exquisitely printed as the portraits of Williams. Sir Henry James, the Director-General of the Ordnance Survey, exhibits a process known now as photozincography, by which photographs can be transferred to a zinc plate, and thus reproduced in common printer’s ink to any extent. This process is used by the Government in the production of maps and plans, either enlarged or reduced in the camera; and a great saving is effected by it. Specimens of it, including a modification of the process called photopapyrography, as well as photolithography, and showing its adaptation to the reproduction of printed matter, engravings, and, above all, MSS. (whether old or modern), are exhibited. For MSS., or for maps and plans, these zincographs are admirably suited, but the more ambitious effort of copying engravings is far less successful. Mr. Paul Pretsch calls to the aid of photography the electrotype process, producing thus not only the engraved plate but blocks for surface printing. The prints, however, especially of portraits, no matter how carefully done, are coarse and thick. The minute detail of a photograph, which an electrotype just as faithfully reproduces, is far too much for the action of such a thick viscid agent as printer’s ink. No doubt this obstacle will be overcome in time, but at present it is still a desideratum. The London Stereoscopic Company, as usual, carry off the palm for stereoscopes. Negretti and Zambra exhibit a -very beautiful series of positive transparent pictures on glass. For a long time this process was exclusively practised in France, and it was believed to be the forte of French photographers till Negretti and Zambra entered the field and latterly distanced all competitors. Their series includes some of the stereoscopes taken for them by Frith in Egypt and Nubia, and their book published on the antiquities of Egypt, the first of the kind ever issued with stereoscopic illustrations, and the forerunner, we believe, of many valuable works of the same class. Mr. Breeze also shows some excellent transparent pictures, among which is one of a statue taken by moonlight. Even now, after all the ill-usage the collection has experienced from atmospheric influences, there is still more than enough left to show how well our photographers have maintained their reputation against all comers. Few, however, have visited it without feeling that they deserved better at the hands of the Exhibition authorities than having their works huddled away in such a remote and almost inaccessible corner of the building. — Times.”]

“The International Exhibition. British Photographic Department. — Apparatus.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:217 (Oct. 31, 1862): 518-520. [“We find the last days of the Exhibition approaching before the amount of time and space at our disposal has allowed us to complete our notices. We now hasten to proceed with further brief remarks on the apparatus….”
“…The following notice of the British Photographic Department appeared recently in the Times: — There is scarcely a class in the Exhibition which does not profess, with more or less of truth, to have its peculiar grievances and hardships. Not one, however, has such just grounds for complaint as the contributors to Class 14 (photography), and from none have fewer complaints and remonstrances been received. Not that photographers have been at all indifferent to the slights they have received, or the way in which their once superb collection has been treated. As a body they were among the first of the many whom the Commissioners unfortunately managed to offend, and their association, therefore, early withdrew from co-operating in bringing about an exhibition which they knew was not only to be located in a place where few would see it, but exposed to such influences as would destroy their chances of successful competition with their foreign brethren. We would venture to say that only a very small percentage of the visitors to the building ever found by their catalogues that there was such a thing as a photographic collection in the Exhibition, and of this small number only a smaller number still have been tempted to scale the weary flights of stairs which give access to the room where the photographs are almost hidden away. For the information of those who may wish to see the little that yet remains worth looking at in this collection, we may state that the room is built above the brick tower of the Cromwell-road entrance — a height very nearly equal to the roof of the nave itself. A worse place than this could not possibly be given to it. The glazed roof, for a long time left unscreened, made the heat here during the summer quite unbearable. The heat peeled the pictures off their mounts, cracked and warped their frames, and the glare of the sun’s rays ruined the tints of some of the finest specimens exhibited. Add to this that the whole space given was inadequate to the requirements of the class, and that more than half even of this little had to be shared with the maps and school-books of the education class. It must give foreigners (if any penetrate up here) a curious notion of our ideas on education to find that great dolls and cases full of the commonest kinds of children’s toys are thought more worthy of exhibition as educational objects than the artistic and beautiful results of one of the most important scientific and chemical discoveries of the age. It may possibly be due to this state of things that the collection is by no means divided or arranged with proper effect, and that the Catalogue is therefore far from being as good an assistant as the purchaser has a right to expect….” “…Compared to what might have been expected, only a small number of portraits are exhibited, and of these collections only three call for any remark; viz., those by Mayall, Williams, and Watkins….” “…Of views and landscapes there is great variety. The place of honour in this class, whether for the wildest mountain scenery, for towns or buildings, for interiors of grand old minsters, likenesses of quaint old country inns or ivy-covered ruins — in short, for perfection in all that relates to out-door photography in its wildest and highest sense, belongs to Francis Bedford. Many landscape artists show in this collection, each of whom in his own peculiar walk may equal what Bedford does of the same kind in that branch, but he stands alone in being the only one who can equal all, no matter how long they may have practised, or how peculiarly their own they may have made any single department of landscape photography. Let the visitor look at Ludlow Castle, the Feathers Inn Ludlow, Raglan Castle, Tintern Abbey, and the interior of Wells Cathedral, and then turn to such views as the Cheddar Clifts, Pont Aberglaslyn, and the Pass of Llanberis. With the wild, solemn, stony grandeur of the latter, with its pile of overhanging cliff’s and rugged crags, he fails, as all photographers have and must do, when they cope with mountains of this class; but the Pont Aberglaslyn is wonderfully rendered in all its endless variety of rocks and pines, and the Cheddar Clifts are equally good. Mr. Rouch exhibits near these views a beautiful series of instantaneous pictures of Ventnor and Bonchurch, Isle of Wight. These, especially some of the latter on the beach, are exceedingly good in the minute clearness of their detail, from the first ripple of the inshore wave out to the regularly marked, though distant, undulations of the sea in the background. Of the same kind, and equally praiseworthy, are those shown by Mr. Wilson. Than his small view of Land’s End there is nothing better in the collection. The picture of the Cambridge at gun exercise, with the smoke wreathing out of her heavy broadside, is also very commendable, and the result, we presume, either of a wonderful piece of good luck or else very carefully timed preparation. Mr. Stephen Thompson shows some remarkably well-developed cathedral pictures; and in the small but very good display made by the Amateur Photographic Association will be found some of an excellence which well-to-do professionals might envy….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 6:218 (Nov. 7, 1862): 538-539. [“The first meeting of the Photographic Society for the session was held on Tuesday evening, at King’s College. Mr. Francis Bedford in the Chair. The meeting was a full and interesting one, and the table was liberally bestrewn with many excellent specimens for exhibition and for presentation to the society….”]

“Photographic Society of London. Ordinary General Meeting. King’s College, London Tuesday, November 4, 1862.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:127 (Nov. 15, 1862): 159-165. [“Francis Bedford, Esq., in the Chair. The Chairman mentioned, in explanation of the absence of the Lord Chief Baron, that having been engaged in Court all day, and having to resume his duties there on the following morning, it was desirable that he should avoid the fatigue incident to presiding at that Meeting. The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed….”]

1 b & w (“Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives.”) on p. 552 in: “Jerusalem and the Holy Places.” and 1 b & w (“Principal Entrance to the Sultan’s New Palace at Constantinople.”) on p. 552 in: “Jerusalem and the Holy Places.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1175 (Sat., Nov. 22, 1862): 550, 552. [“From a photograph by Mr. F. Bedford, who accompanied the Prince of Wales in his tour of the East.” “When it was determined that a photographer should accompany the Prince in his Oriental tour, Mr. Bedford was selected as in every way fitted for the post of Royal photographer during the tour. The great beauty of the specimens brought home, and the general success of Mr. Bedford when working in the East, in the face of obstacles of various kinds which would have discouraged a less persevering artist, prove that the choice was well made. Mr. Bedford describes some of is trials and adversities in the pursuit of art with great humour, especially the difficulties he had to contend with when photographing the Mosque of Omar at Jerusalem. The general View of Jerusalem given on page 552 is from a very successful photograph taken by Mr. Bedford from the Mount of Olives, the distance being about half a mile from the city. the morning which Mr. Bedford had selected for his view of the city from that commanding position turned out very hazy — a gleaming, shimmering light playing in the air, and especially over the city, which he thought would be fatal to photographic operations; but he was agreeably surprised to find that, even in the first negative taken, the actual character of soft, Oriental haze was reproduced in the photograph in a most accurate manner, and yet the outline of every edifice in the city was as distinctly defined as if traced out with a sharp knife. The Mosque of Omar, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, every irregularity of the walls, every pebble of that stony soil, and every branch of the olive-trees, which so many centuries ago gave their name to the hill over against Jerusalem, were perfectly reproduced in his photograph. Nothing can be more interesting than this inevitably truthful view of Jerusalem. In made-up artistic pictures there is always more or less of exaggeration of principal parts. Masses of light are cast cleverly athwart some point of interest, while other portions of the landscape are thrown into deep shadow, merely for pictorial effect. In ordinary subjects we do not object to this. A “Turner” version of Dover Castle and Cliffs, full of the best poetry of art, is very charming; but Jerusalem is a subject not to be tampered with, even by a Turner. It is the naked, unadorned reality that we seek in a representation of a site made for ever sacred as the centre around which all the events in the life of the Saviour were enacted. Photography alone would give us that absolute reflex of the scene in which nothing is added and nothing taken away; and this aspect of truthfulness, which we feel confident must of necessity exist in the photograph, has, we believe, been most conscientiously preserved by our engraver. The summit of the Mount of Olives rises about 180ft. above the highest part of the city, and being, as stated, only half a mile distant, the view of the whole of Jerusalem and its environs is remarkably firm. Mr. Bedford placed his camera on a spot at some distance from the top of the hill, preferring the prospect there obtained to that from the higher ground, and also to the far more extensive one from the top of the minaret near the Church of the Ascension, or that from the roof of a tower which stands at some distance to the north-west. The best time for the view of the city, as before stated, is the morning, when the valleys are still lying in a soft dewy shade and the early sun is brightly lighting up the buildings of the city. It is at this time that most visitors to the Holy City come to Olivet, map in hand, as it is a point from which they are then able with little difficulty, in the clear atmosphere of Judaea, to identify every prominent or interesting building and witness its exact situation and aspect. The spectator looks down from his elevation, through the olive-trees, towards the barren glen of the Kedron. In the foreground, beyond the ravine, is the inclosure of the hareem, the octagonal-domed mosque (occupying the site of Oman’s threshing-floor and Solomon’s Temple), with the paved space which surrounds it, and beyond an area partly filled with olives and cypresses. At the left-hand extremity is the mosque El Aksa, with its pointed roofs and dome. The group of buildings to the right of it, with a tall minaret adjoining, forms the present residence of the Pacha. At the southern angle of the wall some massive masonry may be distinguished, which is part of the ancient inclosure, and the arohes of the Golden Gate, now walled up, may be plainly distinguished. Further to the right, north of the hareem area, is St. Stephen’s Gate, with the path winding up to it. Northward from this point the city wall is a principal object, its lines varied with the conspicuous towers. The ridge to the right of the hareem, it will be seen (this is the hill of Bezeth), is but thinly inhabited, and the houses are mixed with gardens, among which there is a mosque. These objects occupy the city hills — Bezeth, Moriah, and Ophel. On another ridge, on the eastern side of the city, the Latin Convent is situated, and below the convent one sees the two domes and square tower of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. To the left is Zion, still the most prominent of the hills, its northern limits marked by the massive turrets of the citadel. Close to these is the fresh-looking architecture of the English church, and further to the left the irregular, straggling buildings of the Armenian Convent, with small central dome. The Jewish quarter occupies the steep slope of the hill; and outside the walls at this point a white square mass and high minaret mark the site of the supposed, and probably true, tomb of David. About three miles from the city, on the south, the Convent of Elias may be distinguished, on the road to Bethlehem; and another object on the distant hills is the ancient Mizpeh. On the way down from the Mount of Olives, by the path indicated in the Engraving, the traveller may reach the Garden of Gethsemane, a spot so closely connected with the closing scene of the life of the Saviour. On the night of his betrayal, we are told that he went forth, passing the Brook Kedron, “to the garden where he oftentimes resorted with his disciples.” The spot believed at the present day to be the Garden of Gethsemane, and which, if not the actual spot, cannot be far from it, is situated in an inclosure of high white walls, near the dry bed of the Brook Kedron, just below St. Stephen’s Gate and between the paths that lead up to the Mount of Olives. This inclosed space is under the charge of an old Latin monk, who for a small fee admits the pious traveller. The ancient olive-trees within the walls are venerable in their ruin, and some of them may actually have existed at the time the events took place which have caused the spot to be considered holy ground. The great number of subjects which Mr. Bedford has succeeded in obtaining in the Holy Land, under adverse circumstances, is very extraordinary, and his results are, in almost every instance, highly successful, greatly surpassing the celebrated series of Egyptian photographs executed by M. Maximi [sic] du Camp for the French Government. The entire series of Mr. Bedford’s photographs, made for the Prince of Wales, is being, by the Royal permission, published by Messrs. Day, of Gate-street, Lincoln’s-inn-fields, by whose kindness we have been enabled to engrave the “View of Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives” previous to its publication.”]

[Advertisement.] “New Photographic Gift-Book.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1179-1180 (Sat., Dec. 20, 1862): 657. [“…Ornamental binding, fcap 4to, cloth. 21s.; morocco, 31s. 6d., Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain, By William and Mary Howitt. The Photographic Illustrations by Bedford, Sedgfield, Fenton, Wilson, and others. “Among illustrated books the newly-published volume entitled ‘The Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain’ is at once the most conspicuous and the most beautiful. As a gift-book the volume is in every respect to be commended, and, better than most gift- books, it will repay whoever shall carefully examine, and peruse it.” — Westminster Review. “Probably few persons would believe how pleasantly to the eye and gracefully the photographs interweave with the typographic, as they most faithfully supplement the topographic, department of the Work.” — Illustrated London News.”]

[Advertisement.] “Bedford’s Photographs of the East,” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1181 (Sat., Dec. 27, 1862): 698. [“…taken during the tour in which, by command, he accompanied H.R.H. the Prince of Wales in Egypt, the Holy Land and Syria, Constantinople, the Mediterranean, Athens, &c., Exhibiting by permission, and names of subscribers received, at the German Gallery, 168, New Bond-street, daily, from Ten till Dusk. Admittance, 1s.”

1863

“Photography.” ART JOURNAL 25:1 (Jan. 1, 1863): 38. [“The exhibition of the Photographic Society was opened in the rooms of the Society of British Artists, by a private view, on the 10th of January, with a collection of subjects numbered in the catalogue up to four hundred and seventy-nine; but the numbers on the walls went far beyond this, and presented a variety of interest greater than we have yet seen in any similar antecedent collection. In novelty and enterprise we are behind the French, but we have worked out old formulae to a higher perfection than they have ever attained. The imitations of Limoges enamel by M. Laon de Camusac are so perfect as not to be detected save by minute inspection; admirable also are the transparencies by Ferrier, and the examples of the charbon, and photo-lithographic processes. We regret, by the way, we cannot give the names of those who have carried these methods to such perfection. There are many brilliant and highly-finished portraits exhibited by M. Claudet and others; in these we enter the region of Fine Art, for the utmost power of oil colour is called forth in their production. Mr. Williams’s vignettes are peculiar in colour, but in softness and gradation they excel everything that has appeared in this way; and we have to observe of the portraiture generally (Vernon Heath, Robinson, Mayland, McLean and Co., Caldesi, &c.), that the former coarse skin textures are superseded by that kind of softness which is characteristic of painting. There is so much excellence in all the landscape pieces, that it were almost invidious to mention any names; the taste, however, displayed in the selection of subject, and the success in securing effect, give to a great many of these views a rare merit in addition to their photographic quality. The instantaneous views at Naples, by Colonel Stuart Wortley, present well-chosen subjects, and the effects, such as no artist could improvise, immediately suggest Turner, and the truth of his versions of nature. Mr. Bedford exhibits a series of his Eastern views, perhaps the same that were shown in the German Gallery. In such as the Temple of Isis at Philie, that of Medinet Habu at Thebes, and the remains at Baalbek, we are lost in an attempt to penetrate the dim antiquity that veils the history of the remains; but we become fully alive to the thrifty and uncompromising detail of photography wherever there is anything, either in the way of ragged and picturesque objects and surfaces to be represented, or of stately and more formal foregrounds, with retiring distances, as instanced in ‘Four Views in Perthshire,’ and two views near Burnham, and two views of the lock on the Thames at Maidenhead; ‘View up the Llugwy — Bettws-y-Coed;’ ‘The Miner’s Bridge on the Llugwy,’ and ‘ The Lledr Cottage;’ ‘Melrose Abbey,’ ‘Dry burgh Abbey;’ ‘Calton Hill, Edinburgh;’ ‘A Leafy Nook;’ ‘Chedder;’ ‘On the Tay, above Dunkekl;’ ‘The Mill Stream;’ four subjects by the Fothergill process: ‘View near Rokeby;’ ‘An Old Chalk Pit;’ and others. At the meeting of the Photographic Society, and in the journals that treat exclusively of photography, new processes are from time to time announced, and it is sometimes professed that the methods whereby certain effects are produced are accurately detailed; but experimentalists frequently try in vain to arrive at the same results. It is difficult to believe that there is anything disingenuous in the explanations, but successes bear a small proportion to the failures. The great majority of the photographs are taken with collodion. Instances occur of the employment of dry plates, and there are occasional examples of the tannin method. The first instances we have seen of printing on resinised paper are here exhibited; they are vignettes, heads, and figures, and brilliant beyond what we were prepared to see. Mr. Robinson’s (of Leamington) ‘Bringing Home the May,’ makes a figure in the room; the composition has many beauties, but the time and expense indispensable to the production of such a photograph, or rather set of photographs, can scarcely be less than what would be necessary to the painting of a picture of the samo size.”]

“Mr. Bedford’s Photographs.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:181 (Jan. 1, 1863): 9. [“These have originated a discussion in the pages of the Parthenon, owing to the names given n in Mr. Bedford’s catalogue to the two great temples of Baalbeck.”]

“Notes of the Month.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:181 (Jan. 1, 1863): 21. [“Time, with remorseless fingers, has folded down another page in the chronicle of human affairs. Another year, best described as an exceptional one, is over — a year crowded with stirring events and many vicissitudes, in which photography has duly shared; and members of our guild perhaps have, on the whole, not much reason to look back upon 1862 but with feelings of kindliness. If photography has been slighted by Commissioners, it has been honoured by Royalty in a way in which it has never been honoured before; if it has been thrust into a garret by the ignorant, on the other hand it has occupied a degree of prominence in the public mind and in the current literature of the day never so conspicuous before. There has been real solid progress too, and a yet higher standard of excellence has been attained. British photography has come out of the trying ordeal of competition with the whole world in anything but an inglorious manner. The old year has taught many lessons — dispelled many illusions. Thus we may part with ’62 kindly and with regret, as with an honest, rugged friend, whose admonitions, if not often agreeable, were always wholesome and salutary. Requiescat in pace! So far, the arrival of contributions to the forthcoming Photographic Exhibition in Suffolk Street does not give promise of a large Exhibition, though it will probably be a good one. Photographers have, perhaps, not borne in mind how very much greater is the wall-space to be covered at the spacious rooms in Suffolk Street; some also of the formerly largest exhibitors have forsaken their first love for the seductive carte de visite. Mr. Mudd is said not to have taken a single landscape during the past year. Mr. Bedford will probably prefer to be represented by some of his Eastern scenes. Mr. Vernon Heath will have some fine pictures executed for Her Majesty, and some exquisite bits of “wood and water” scenery. There will also be some very beautiful pictures by the Hon. Major Vernon, of Italian and Florentine subjects. Mr. Robinson’s greatest and most successful effort in composition sub jects will be there. Although he has doubled the price of it (from ten to twenty guineas) he continues to receive more orders than he can possibly execute….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:227 (Jan. 9, 1863): 21. [“The usual monthly meeting was held in the theatre at King’s College, Mr. Francis Bedford in the chair. The minutes of a previous meeting were read and confirmed. The Secretary then read a letter just received from Lieut.- General Knollys, in reply to a communication from the secretary, in which he stated that His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales would have pleasure in becoming the patron of the society. The Chairman called attention to a couple of prints from an enlarged negative, by Mr. W. H. Warner….”]

“Exhibition. The Ninth Annual Exhibition of the Photographic Society (London).” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:182 (Jan. 15, 1863): 31-33. [“(On Saturday, the 10th instant, the private view of one of the most interesting collections of photographs that have hitherto been gathered together was held at the rooms of the Society of British Artists, in Suffolk Street, Pall Mall, London; and on Monday, the 12th instant, the Exhibition was opened to the public. It is notorious that now-a-days private views are more crowded than public ones; and, despite the large space and ample accommodation in the rooms at present occupied by the Photographic Society, it was not at all times easy to obtain a sight of the particular specimens to which one’s attention was at the moment directed. The collection is indeed a large one, and of very great excellence…” “…We are much pleased to find a goodly show of Mr. Francis Bedford’s delightful works. There are many that we have already noticed from the collection illustrative of his Eastern tour in the suite of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, and their present arrangement by no means detracts from their beauty. There are in addition many new subjects, some of which we very much admire, especially the Vale of Neath, St. Catherine’s Cave, Tenby, Cheddar Cliffs, and A Devonshire Lane. We observe with satisfaction that several are marked as being the property of the City of London National Art-Union — a fact indicative of the advancing estimation in which our art is held. Any collection deficient in Mr. Bedford’s works would be wanting in a feature that no other person could supply — not even Mr. Stephen Thompson, who, probably from frequently working with Mr. Bedford, is imbued with somewhat of his spirit, just as musicians who often perform together contract a similar style, or, at any rate, styles somewhat akin to each other. Mr. Stephen Thompson has recently been working in Northumberland and Cumberland, and brought away many reminiscences of the Border districts, including Dryburgh, Jedburgh, and Kelso Abbeys; Bamborough, Richmond, and Warkworth Castles; Durham Cathedral, &c, &c — most of which appear in the present Exhibition. The name of Thompson naturally brings us to the consideration of the contributions of Mr. C. Thurston Thompson, whose style differs from that of his namesake as widely as light from darkness….”]

“Meetings of Societies, London Photographic Society.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:182 (Jan. 15, 1863): 36. [“An ordinary meeting of this Society took place at King’s College on Tuesday evening, the 6th instant, — Francis Bedford, Esq., occupying the chair….”]

 

“Fine-Art Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1838 (Jan. 17, 1863): 91. [“A very good Exhibition of Photographs has been opened by the Photographic Society, in the galleries of Suffolk Street. Landscape has a more prominent place this year than usual; but there are endless examples of album portraits and a few attempts at elaborate compositions. Among the landscapes our readers should examine carefully a series of studies by Col. Stuart Wortley…. Thurston Thompson… Bedford… A large composition by Mr. Robinson, called ‘Bringing Home the May,’ which stands over the mantelpiece, is worthy of attention. It is an illustration of Spenser, and is perhaps the first picture yet composed mechanically. It has some very beautiful effects…. “]

“The Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 42:1184-1185 (Sat., Jan. 17, 1863): 66. [“The ninth annual exhibition of the Photographic Society was this week opened in the large and two of the smaller rooms of the Society of British Artists, Suffolk-street; the remaining two apartments being occupied by the Exhibition for the Relief of Lancashire Distress, noticed elsewhere. This year’s photographic exhibition is more variously illustrative of the art, and especially of its many new applications, than any previous collection. We regret, however, that unforeseen demands on our space oblige us to defer till next week a detailed notice of the many interesting and valuable features of this display….” “…Very noteworthy also are the Eastern and other subjects by Mr. Bedford; the skies and eruption of Vesuvius by Colonel Stuart Wortley; the figure-studies by Viscountess Hawarden; the large and fine foreign contributions in the south-west room, and the works of Messrs. Mudd, Dixon Piper, Henry White, H. P. Robinson, Bullock Brothers, and Vernon Heath. There are no portraits for purity and beauty equaling the vignettes of Mr. T. R. Williams; but there are many striking likenesses by Claudet. Among the coloured photographs the miniatures of Messrs. Lock and Whitfield decidedly bear the bell, not only for artistic excellence but also for the respect paid to the likeness.”]

“Fine Arts. The Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 42:1185 (Sat., Jan. 24, 1863): 102-103. [“We last week announced the opening: of this very interesting exhibition in Suffolk-street, and now proceed to give the more detailed notice of its contents we then promised. We need merely make the preliminary observation that, for whatever the subject, the marvellous preparation of gun-cotton, collodion, has almost entirely superseded every other process; and that, although we miss some of the “old familiar names,” such as Delamotte, Rejlander (except attached to comparatively unimportant studies), Lake Price, Frith, jun., and Fenton, there are many new aspirants of great merit. It has been already remarked that the future of some branches of photography will consist in the development of the “enlarging” system….” “…The landscape photographer’s greatest (difficulty is with foliage, from the activity of its minute lights and its colour — green, from its component yellow ray, having little photographic power, and tending, therefore, to become black. Otherwise, the grey and humid atmosphere of this climate is well known to be more favourable to the photographer than the brighter blue and fiercer sunlight of Southern Europe and the East. The most important series of landscapes, &c., by a single exhibitor, are Mr. Bedford’s admirable views, taken while, “by command,” accompanying the Prince of Wales on his Royal Highness’s Eastern tour, a series we have already reviewed on their original exhibition. Mr. Bedford also contributes a number of home scenes in Devonshire and elsewhere, of conspicuous merit. We may here observe that photographers — Mr. Bedford in common with his brethren — seem disposed to force the power of their lenses more than heretofore; hence the curvature in the lines of architecture which is becoming so frequently perceptible….”]

“Art Photography and its Critics.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:231 (Feb. 6, 1863): 61-62. [“The majority of the art-critics have shown an amusing agreement in condemning art-photography, as displayed in the Photographic Exhibition this year. Critics do not often endorse each other, but “when they do agree, their unanimity is wonderful.” It is true they vary as to the precise grounds of their condemnation, but they agree in attacking the art wherever it seems most likely to innovate upon what they conceive to be the legitimate province of the artist, wherever it seems likely to produce pictures, or something more than studies, which “may be taken as memoranda for the use of artists.” It is the old story, which we had thought dead and decently buried, revived again. Photography is to be a servant of servants; it may hew wood and draw water, or do other mechanical labour; but it must not presume to act as having attained its freedom in the guild of art. Accordingly, it is against the attempts to make pictures we find the greatest rancour is directed, and Mr. Robinson’s noble composition, “Bringing Home the May,” has been the especial victim….” “…Another remarkable fact is discovered by this critic, which photographers will be surprised to learn, is, that “photographers seem disposed to force the power of their lenses more than heretofore; hence the curvature in the lines of architecture, which is becoming so frequently perceptible.” Our own conviction, which we held in common with the majority of photographers, was, that this curvature, at one time almost universal, was, since the invention of a lens absolutely free from such distortion, becoming very rare. The remark is made, it is true, whilst speaking of Mr. Bedford’s pictures, and charging them with this fault. It happens that Mr. Bedford, in working in the East, used simply the single lens, which, in architectural subjects, gives this curvature; but to base on this fact a statement that such curvature is becoming more common, simply displays ignorance of the real facts. Amongst some just and discriminating remarks, we have many further misuse of terms, displays of ignorance of the art, which are sufficient to show the worthlessness of the general opinion. We have, for instance, talk about “the inevitable focal distortion,” whatever that may be; about the enlargement of the “spectrum,” by which is meant not a spectrum at all. but the point of light in the eye….”]

“Photographic Exhibition. Award of Prizes.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:231 (Feb. 6, 1863): 63. [The adjudicators appointed by the council of the Photographic Society to award the prize medals for the best contributions representing six phases of the art, have just tendered their report. We stated in our last that, regarding the majority of the medals, little hesitation would exist as to whom they should be awarded to; but that in regard to landscapes the task would be one of some difficulty. We find from the report that our own views have been shared by the adjudicators. They state that in reference to four of the medals they had no hesitation in coming to a conclusion; that in portraiture the merit was more divided; and that in landscape it was almost equally shared by many contributors. Although it is probable that in regard to some of the decisions opinions will vary, we cannot but think that on the whole the awards will give satisfaction. They stand as follows: — M. Claudet, for the best portrait or portraits. Mr. F. Bedford, for the best landscape or landscapes. Col. Stuart Wortley, for the best instantaneous picture or pictures. Viscountess Hawarden, for the best amateur contribution. Mr. H. P. Robinson, for the best composition picture from life. Mr. Thurston Thompson, for the best reproduction. We must delay further criticism of the exhibition until our next.”]

“Prizes at the Photographic Exhibition. Adjudicators’ Report.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:232 (Feb. 13, 1863): 81. [“As to four of the medals, we have had no hesitation in fixing upon the names of those best entitled to the honour of the award. To begin with the Amateurs’ Medal. There is a beautiful picture exhibited by the Earl of Caithness; but it is simply a translation, though very faithful and artistic, of an accidental effect of nature. Greater merit is, we think, shown in the series of studies from nature exhibited by Lady Hawarden. 2. In the class of elaborate figure compositions, we can see nothing that can be placed on a level with Robinson’s “Bringing Home the May.” 3. As for reproductions, Thurston Thompson is facile princeps in this Exhibition. 4. Of instantaneous views, the series exhibited by Col. S. Wortley stand alone in their excellence. So far it has been easy for us to assign the places of honour. In landscape subjects we had much more difficulty, and have not without much hesitation made up our minds as to the rightful claimant of the medal. Messrs. Bedford, Annan, Mudd, Vernon Heath, Dixon Piper, and White have each exhibited pictures of the greatest beauty. If the medal were to be the reward of the best single production, we might have found the duty of deciding even more difficult than it is. The medal, however, is to be given as the reward of the greatest general excellence. We find instances in the works of each of the gentlemen already named, either of happy choice of subject, or of skill in the composition of their picture, or of due attention to contrast of light and shade, and to gradation of distance and atmospheric perspective; but we think that we see in Mr. Bedford’s works the most complete union of all the qualities which must be united in a good photographic picture Taking the same principle of general excellence as our guide in examining the merit of the portraits in the Exhibition, we consider that M. Claudet is entitled to the first place; but we must add that, in delicacy of treatment, nothing can be finer than Mr. Williams’s vignetted portraits. The carte de visite portraits of M. Joubert are unsurpassed, we think, by any of that class of pictures. We were also much pleased with the portrait of Thomas Carlisle, by Jeffrey, and with one of the large portraits exhibited by Mr. Voigtlander. R. Fenton. J. Durham.”]

“Photographic Society of London. Annual General Meeting. King’s College, London. Tuesday, February 3, 1863.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:130 (Feb. 16, 1863): 219-228. [“The Lord Chief Baron in the Chair….” “The Secretary next read the following report from the gentlemen appointed to award the Medals in the Photographic Exhibition: — Report. As to four of the medals, we have had no hesitation in fixing upon the names of those best entitled to the honour of the award. 1. To begin with the Amateurs’ Medal. There is a beautiful picture exhibited by the Earl of Caithness; but it is simply a translation, though very faithful and artistic, of an accidental effect of nature. Greater merit is, we think, shown in the series of studies from nature exhibited by Lady Hawarden. 2. In the class of elaborate figure compositions, we can see nothing that can be placed on a level with Robinson’s “Bringing Home the May.” 3. As for reproductions, Thurston Thompson is facile princeps in this Exhibition. 4. Of instantaneous views, the series exhibited by Col. S. Wortley stand alone in their excellence. So far it has been easy for us to assign the places of honour. In landscape subjects we had much more difficulty, and have not without much hesitation made up our minds as to the rightful claimant of the medal. Messrs. Bedford, Annan, Mudd, Vernon Heath, Dixon Piper, and White have each exhibited pictures of the greatest beauty. If the medal were to be the reward of the best single production, we might have found the duty of deciding even more difficult than it is. The medal, however, is to be given as the reward of the greatest general excellence. We find instances in the works of each of the gentlemen already named, either of happy choice of subject, or of skill in the composition of their picture, or of due attention to contrast of light and shade, and to gradation of distance and atmospheric perspective; but we think that We see in Mr. Bedford’s works the most complete union of all the qualities which must be united in a good photographic picture. Taking the same principle of general excellence as our guide in examining the merit of the portraits in the Exhibition, we consider that M. Claudet is entitled to the first place; but we must add that, in delicacy of treatment, nothing can be finer than Mr. Williams’s vignetted portraits. The carte-de-visite portraits of M. Joubert are unsurpassed, we think, by any of that class of pictures. We were also much pleased with the portrait of Thomas Carlisle, by Jeffrey, and with one of the large portraits exhibited by Mr. Voigtlander.” “R. Fenton. J. Durham….”]

“Award of Medals.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:184 (Feb. 16, 1863): 69-70. [“Our readers are most of them fully aware that we do not advocate the principle of presenting medals to exhibitors at our photographic exhibitions. We believe it to be inherently fallacious, and not conducive to progress; nay more, we have reason to know that some of the recipients of medals have, ere now, regarded the presentation of them rather in the light of “bitter pills” which they had to swallow with as good a grace as possible, knowing that the intention of the donors was to confer honour….” “…Having again recorded our protest against the principle, we now turn to a consideration of the methods adopted in selecting works for recognition; and here there is plenty of room for aggravating a vicious principle by an injudicious mode of applying it, or of nearly neutralising its bad effects by tact and skill. Six medals have just been awarded by the Council of the Photographic Society (London), full particulars of which will be found in our report of the last general meeting of the Society; and we are bound to add that the course pursued by the Council was the most judicious one possible (being already pledged to award medals), the delicate task of selection having been entrusted to two gentlemen well fitted to perform that function, and altogether unobjectionable, viz., Mr. Joseph Durham and Mr. Roger Fenton — the former a sculptor of deservedly high reputation, the latter too well known amongst photographers to need any introduction. Lastly, the selection of works — the producers of which are to be honoured — has been made, as perfectly as the somewhat difficult circumstances would allow, as follows: —
For the best portrait or portraits M. Claudet.
For the best landscape or landscapes. Mr. Francis Bedford.
For the best instantaneous picture or pictures Lt.-Col. Stuart Wortley.
For the best contribution by an amateur. Lady Hawarden.
For the best composition picture from life Mr. H. P. Robinson.
For the best reproduction, Mr. Thurston Thompson….”
“…Again, with regard to the landscapes: so many are excellent that one cannot help regretting there were not half-a-dozen more medals for distribution; but of this we are assured that no one will question the propriety of one having been conferred upon Mr. Bedford, whose productions are always so perfect in execution as well as tasteful in selection….”]

“Meetings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:184 (Feb. 16, 1863): 79-80. [“The annual general meeting of this Society took place on Tuesday the 3rd instant, at King’s College. The Lord Chief Baron (Sir Frederick Pollock), President, occupied the chair….” “…After the Report had been read, the award of medals by the adjudicators to the successful competitors in the Photographic Exhibition for 1863 was read. [See list in leading article, page 69.] The award was accompanied by the following letter from the adjudicators, which was read by Dr. Diamond: — As to four of the medals, we have had no hesitation in fixing upon the names, of those best entitled to the honour of the award. To begin with the Amateurs’ Medal. There is a beautiful picture exhibited by the Earl of Caithness; but it is simply a translation, though very faithful and artistic, of an accidental effect of nature. Greater merit is, we think, shown in the series of studies from nature exhibited by Lady Hawarden. 2. In the class of elaborate figure compositions, we can see nothing that can be placed on a level with Robinson’s Bringing Home the May. 3. As for reproductions, Thurston Thompson is facile princepts in this Exhibition. 4. Of instantaneous views, the series exhibited by Col. S. Wortley stand alone in their excellence. So far it has been easy for us to assign the places of honour. In landscape subjects we had much more difficulty, and have not without much hesitation made up our minds as to the rightful claimant of the medal. Messrs. Bedford, Annan, Mudd, Vernon Heath, Dixon, Piper, and White have each exhibited pictures of the greatest beauty. If the medal were to be the reward of the best single production, we might have found the duty of deciding even more difficult than it is. The medal, however, is to be given as the reward of the greatest general excellence. We find instances in the works of each of the gentlemen already named, either of happy choice of subject, or of skill in the composition of their picture, or of due attention to contrast of light and shade, and to gradation of distance and atmospheric perspective; but we think that we see in Mr. Bedford’s works the most complete union of all the qualities which must be united in a good photographic picture. Taking the same principle of general excellence as our guide in examining the merit of the portraits in the Exhibition, we consider that M. Claudet is entitled to the first place; but we must add that, in delicacy of treatment, nothing can be finer than Mr. Williams’s vignetted portraits. The carte-de~visite portraits of M. Joubert are unsurpassed, we think, by any of that class of pictures. We were also much pleased with the portrait of Thomas Carlisle, by Jeffrey, and with one of the large portraits exhibited by Mr. Voigtlander.” “R. Fenton. J. Durham….”]

“The Photographic Exhibition. Fourth Notice.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:233 (Feb. 20, 1863): 86-87. [“The landscapes in the Exhibition, as we are told by the adjudicators of the medals, present the greatest equality of excellence. It is perfectly true that in no previous exhibition have we noticed such a large number of thoroughly good landscape photographs. Whilst, however, there is so much uniformity of excellence, we have never noticed an occasion in which the distinctive characteristics, or “manner,” of each artist was more broadly marked. Amongst the best as well as largest of the landscapes exhibited, are those of Mr. Annan, of Glasgow….” “…Mr. Bedford exhibits a number of his Eastern views, which we have already noticed, and a few other, of landscapes and interiors in this country. All his pictures have gained immensely by the introduction of skies. Perfect as the photography always was, and characterized as it was by artistic feeling, the harmony of some of his pictures was in former years impaired by the white paper sky. Now we find always a tint or clouds. Mr. Bedford adopts the method perfectly successful in his hands, of painting clouds occasionally at the back of his negatives. In less skilful hands such an attempt would fail in producing good results. But here we never dream of questioning its legitimacy, and we think it a noteworthy circumstance that pictures so treated secured the prize for landscape excellence. It would be difficult to select from these contributions any one excelling the whole, and all are pre-eminently characterized by softness, completeness, and harmony….”]

“Fine Arts.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 42:1190-1191 (Sat., Feb. 28, 1863): 234. [“The Photographic Exhibition closes to-day. The society gave a brilliant soiree yesterday week, in the rooms in Suffolk-street, containing the exhibition; and at the last meeting — it having been determined to offer prize-medals for the best contributions — the following awards were announced:–For portraits, Mr. Claudet; for landscapes, Mr. Bedford; for instantaneous photographs, Lieut-Col. Stuart Wortley; for composition, Mr. P. Robinson (whose chief work we have engraved); for copies of pictures or reproductions, Mr. Thurston Thompson; for best amateur contributions, not instantaneous, Viscountess Hawarden.”]

“Exhibition. The Ninth Annual Exhibition of the Photographic Society (London) [Third Notice.].” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:185 (Mar. 2, 1863): 99-100. [[“Whenever we determine to go regularly through a photographic exhibition the Fates are against us, aud we are sure to find after wards that our examination has been more than usually irregular and discursive. We have just returned from such a visit, and having opened our catalogue at page 1 we soon lighted upon No. 10, — a print upon resined paper, from an enlarged negative of a carte-de-visite portrait, by A. Harman, with a print from the original displayed in the corner for comparison. Much skill has been displayed by the operator…” “…Mr. Stephen Thompson is one of the unhappy victims whose works have been scattered broadcast over the whole area of exhibiting space. We think there are about a dozen and a-half different places where we encountered his pictures, which are worthy of a better fate. Amongst them we note particularly No. 66, Norman Porch, Lindisfarne; No. 156, Cloistered Tower, Magdalen College, Oxford; No. 176, Durham Cathedral; No. 177, Jedburgh Abbey; and No. 226, Interior of Lindisfarne Abbey. Near the last-mentioned picture we noticed a photograph of a spot which we instantly recognised with pleasant recollections the Straits of Dovedale (No. 220), by J. Spode. After again admiring Mr. Bedford’s Eastern views, we examined more particularly those executed by him for the City of London Art Union, with which we were most especially pleased. They are chiefly scenes in the South of Devon, and will be admired by all lovers of our soft English scenery. We allude particularly to Nos. 193, 195, 199, and 211 — the last-named work being very charming. From Mr. Bedford’s productions we started off to examine those of Mr. H. White, with whose works we were also highly gratified. They are principally scenes in North Wales, and we have cast a special eye of affection upon No. 283, the Lledr Cottage, near Bettws-y-Coed; No. 296, the Lledr Bridge; and 297, Fass Nofyn….”]

“Foreign. The Samaritan Pentateuch.” NEW YORK EVANGELIST 33:10 (Mar. 5, 1863): 3. [“…If we mistake not, a photograph of this, taken by the photographer who accompanied the Prince of Wales to Palestine, was exhibited in Bond street not long ago. The manuscript shown by Mr. Mills is of the fourteenth century…” – London Guardian.” (The photographer was Francis Bedford.)]

“Skies in Photographic Landscapes.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:236 (Mar. 13, 1863): 121-122. [“White skies are no longer the “fashion” in photographic landscapes. A few years ago a photographic exhibition scarcely gave us examples of anything else in the shape of landscapes, but a foreground, surmounted by white paper in place of sky, or “buildings,” to use the words of Lady Eastlake, “of rich tone, and elaborate detail, upon a glaring white background, without the slightest form or tint, like a Chinese landscape on a looking-glass.” The “light having burnt out all cloud-form in one blaze of light.” That which originated in a defect soon became a fashion, and the speckless sky, without the suspicion of a tint, was regarded as the pride of the picture. In the last Photographic Exhibition white skies were the exception; natural clouds, or graduated tints, were everywhere present. It is unnecessary here to dwell upon the immense pictorial value thus conferred upon each subject….” “…This plan has been gradually gaining popularity, and is now practised by many of our best photographers, amongst whom we may name Mr. Vernon Heath, Mr. Maxwell Lyte, Mr. Annan, Mr. Archibald Burns, and others. Two or three points demand imperative consideration. The clouds must be lighted in a similar manner to the landscape, and must be of a character to harmonize with it. Nothing would be more incongruous than heavy dark masses of cloud in the sky, when the landscape, perhaps, presents a lake which reflects only bright sunlight. Care must always be taken that the sky be lighter, more atmospheric, and less substantial looking than the foreground. As a general principle, the more light, indefinite, and less pronounced the clouds, the better will be the effect. It is scarcely necessary to say that in using this method immense power is placed in the hands of the artist in balancing his composition, and making a picture out of unpromising materials. The method of painting on the negative has been often attempted, but rarely with complete success. Indeed it can scarcely be expected that it should be successful in other than the hands of an artist. The Eastern pictures of Mr. Francis Bedford afford the best example of successful treatment of this kind that we have seen, and the effect is marvellously fine. It is a necessary condition in this case that the sky of the negative be not too dense; it must print through, giving an appreciable tint. The clouds may then be carefully painted at the back of the negative; or they may be painted on thin semi-transparent paper like tracing paper, which can then be placed at the back of the negative. The safest plan is that adopted by Mr. Mudd who contents himself with a few delicate stratus-like clouds near the horizon, which are just sufficient to break the blank of white paper, and give some gradation….”]

“Talk in the Studio. Photography and the Royal Wedding.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:236 (Mar. 13, 1863): 132. [“Public celebrations in our day are perpetuated by an unerring recorder which the grandest pageants of olden times lacked. Photography is the sworn witness of all public spectacles, and has been very active in all the recent public ceremonials. Many scores of brass tubes took aim at the youthful and fair Dane, who having before invaded many loyal hearts, came on Saturday to take possession of her conquest. Mr. Francis Bedford and Mr. Downes were at Gravesend to photograph the arrival; Mr. Blanchard took some instantaneous stereo negatives of the same ceremony. Many others were engaged in London, with what success we have not heard. The ubiquitous photographer even found his way into St. George’s Chapel, at Windsor, to record the wedding ceremony, Mr. Vernon Heath having, we believe, been honoured with that commission. Not least attractive amongst the many tastefully decorated buildings in the city on Saturday was the Photographic Warehouse of Messrs. Henry Squire and Co., in King William Street, the noble circular front of the building having a fine balcony erected and ornamented with great taste. The warehouse was for the nonce turned into a theatre, with tier above tier of seats, accommodating a hundred persons with a most excellent view of the procession. Mr. Squire had issued photographic tickets, containing portraits of the Prince and Princess, inviting a large number of friends connected with literature, photography, and art, to witness the spectacle. When it had passed, it was announced that a successful instantaneous negative had been obtained from the top of the building, prints from which would be placed in the hand of each guest as a souvenir of the occasion. Of the other interesting parts of the entertainment offered to the guests, in which both wet and dry processes were tried, plates coated and cleaned with amazing rapidity, it is unnecessary to speak here. We need only add, having ourselves been present, that the results were most satisfactory. we learned, from the long examination which a pause in the procession afforded us opportunity for, that the numerous photographs which have crowded shop windows, have not done the young Princess anything like justice. Her fair hair, brilliantly rosy complexion, and the winning grace which lights up her delicate features of pure Scandinavian type, are not fairly rendered in any portrait we have seen.”]

[Advertisement.] “Free Exhibition of Bedford’s Photographs of the East,” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 42:1193 (Sat., Mar. 14, 1863): 266. [“…taken during the trip, in which by request, he accompanied H.R.H. the Prince of Wales in Egypt, the Holy Land and Malta, Constantinople, the Mediterranean, Athens, &c. daily at the German Gallery 128 New Bond street, from [illegible till Dark. Admittance by presentation of address card.”]

Wall, A. H. “Bits of Chat. The Royal Marriage from a Photographic Point of View.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:186 (Mar. 16, 1863): 123-124. [“There was nothing particularly threatening or peculiarly promising to the curious eyes of us photographers in the aspect of the important seventh of this cheerful March, as it stole so quietly out from the East. Knowing how many anxious brethren of the camera had awakened early from dreams of failure or success, and made their way to various chosen points for photographing the royal procession, we shook our heads doubtfully at the mists which shrouded our London sky, until — bravo! — the leaden-hued veils were one by one drawn slowly upwards and away, and we knew that great and glorious old Sol would not entirely desert his modern priests and votaries upon this most auspicious occasion. Now-a-days grand historical events are chronicled by Truth’s own hand. Henceforth History may hope to lead a purer, nobler, and truly more useful life, freed from many of those defects which, having in the course of time clustered so thickly about her, decreased her influence, weakened her power, and marred most of the great lessons it is her lofty mission to convey. Flatterers and time-servers, unreasoning enthusiasts and prejudiced partisans, may vainly attempt to deceive and distort the great facts and influences of our own times. Though backed by all the mighty aids which poets, painters, orators, and sculptors can afford, we have now a means whereby so-termed facts will be tested ere they find a permanent place among the pregnant realities of history. When posterity shall read of that grandly harmonious welcome with which as one man we English of 1863 arose to receive our future Queen, they cannot class such an account with the doubtful records of partial or self-deceived historians; for they will have witnesses which cannot lie in a crowd of honest photographs. The thousands upon thousands of faces animated with but one expression of pleasure and gratification — the sky-tossed caps, the waving handkerchiefs, and every other demonstration of affection ate loyalty shall speak to coming generations as they spoke to us. The banners, flags, and flowers, and the costly magnificence of all the various preparations — the words of solemn blessing or hearty greeting on the house-fronts — the future King and Queen placidly and fearlessly confident, though alone, in the midst of the surging and heaving mob, with rude, strong, dirty hands clutching the very sides of their carriage — the generous army of volunteer soldiers with their mutely eloquent salute — these and such incidents, all doubtless photographed, will be witnesses which none can hereafter dream of disputing or denying, whatever changes may arise, or whatever events may conspire for their production. Doubtless those of our number who prepared their cameras for that day’s work had some such feelings regarding the importance of their labours, and were more than usually anxious lest they should not be crowned with success. To them, the time of year must have been a source of regret, and the weather-glass an oracle of destiny. Their hopes ranged from Gravesend to the city; for, at this time of the year, when the famous firm of Day & Sun have taken to the early-closing movement, there was no chance of success for operations carried on after the procession had passed the city, although some of the nil-desperandum school made futile efforts, in the Strand. At Gravesend report said Mr. Bedford, Mr. Downes, Mr. Harman, and some other photographers were stationed; and from a brewer’s wharf Mr. Blanchard — with whose charming instantaneous pictures we are so familiar — caught pictures full of interest and value, showing the huge sea-castles, whose terrible iron mouths have just roared out their mighty welcome; the clustering crowd of gaily-decked and dangerously-crowded vessels, smart yachts, over-laden boats, and shaky, old, wheezy tubs of river steamers resuscitated for the occasion; the manned yards of the war ships; the densely-crowded shore; and all the bustling activity and joyousness which characterised the aspect of old Father Thames on this eventful morning. These were taken with Squire’s well-known Shepherd’s lenses. In the Dover-road two cameras, at least, were visible; and, from the air of satisfaction and delight with which the presiding deity of one of these instruments was exhibiting a plate exposed just as the royal carriage passed to those about him, we may surmise that at least one of these genuine historical pictures was more or less a success. On the Surrey side of London Bridge another camera was observed; and on the other side, in King William-street, Mr. Sydney Smyth essayed to secure the noisy crowd, moving its myriad heads like corn before the wind as its currents and counter currents swayed this way and that, and its component parts cried lustily for help, or shouted in reckless jollity torrents of coarse chaff and rudely witty observations. One picture of this crowd, if not more, was secured, and photography will, in one sense at least, not often produce its rival. This picture, we believe, was taken just after the short but heavy shower had fallen which drenched, but doubt less also refreshed, the hot and perspiring members of that struggling mob; and the steam, palpably visible as it rose above the densely-packed heads, must have given great indistinctness to the picture. Although the Princess and the Prince were detained by the crowd just eight minutes before the very house whence Mr. Smyth was operating, owing to some one or more of the numerous ills to which all photographic flesh is heir, his efforts secured no picture of the royal pair. Amidst the roaring crowd before the Mansion House, with the blended cries and shrieks of women, and the calls and shouts of men ringing in his ears,* [*The worst possible management created the most terrible danger and confusion at this point.] Mr. England was said to be at work. A camera and a photographer closely resembling that gentleman were certainly visible there as the procession arrived. The light was not favourable at the time, however. In Cheapside another, and doubtless a final, attempt was made, so far as regards the probability of success. On the day before, and on the Monday following, pictures were obtained of the triumphal arches and street decorations; and we have seen a few of the negatives. A goodly array of artists, photographers, and the friends of both, were assembled at Mr. Squire’s photographic warehouse in King William-street, City, in a huge first-floor bower of crimson cloth, laurel leaves, and white and red roses, prominently labelled in large white letters, “Art and Photography” — where matters photographic, an excellent cold collation, and a liberal supply of wine, partially served out in a few dozens of developing measures, were pleasantly discussed; and an excellent view was obtained of the happy pair, and the half-old, half-new, half-grand, and half-comical, halved, and again halved, and otherwise divided and crowd-confused, civic procession. Was it comic to see portly unfortunate common council men, in their purple robes and personal grandeur, remorselessly compelled by an energetic common policeman to descend from their gone-astray carriage, and be hustled and projected about in the vulgar crowd in a manner shockingly detrimental to that dignity of which until then they had been so proudly conscious? Ought not the sight to have been quite painful to a well-regulated mind? Yet I blush to say that there were among the guests of Mr. Squire photographers who laughed — absolutely laughed — at this mournful sight. But photography was no less influential on the night of the 10th than it had been active on the day of the 7th of March. Photographic transparencies, painted from photographs — the worst of which was at Poulton’s, the photographic publisher’s, in the Strand, and the best of which was at Barnard’s photographic establishment, in Regent-street — were displayed in almost every street. Most of the principal portrait establishments were more or less grandly illuminated; and at Carpenter and Westley’s, in Regent-street, there was a magnificent display of beautiful photographs thrown upon a huge screen projecting from the front of the house by a magic-lantern. Hero the constantly-increasing crowd grew gradually motionless — every wedged-in individual, who could spare time from the illuminated pictures before him to think about anything beside, wondering at the compressibility of the human form, and all bursting into a hearty English cheer, heard from no small distance around, as, one after the other, the members of the Royal Family and the residences of her Gracious Majesty appeared upon the screen. In conclusion, let us hope that those whom we have thus enthusiastically and loyally congratulated may have all the happiness the assembled thousands wished them, and that the affectionate feelings of regard with which their union has been celebrated may strengthen that other union by which kings and their subjects secure happiness and prosperity, both for themselves and for each other. “Ich dien” is a good motto for both Prince and People. A. H. W.”]

“The Samaritan Pentateuch.” CHRISTIAN RECORDER 3:12 (Mar. 21, 1863): 47. [“At a meeting of the Syro-Egyptian Society, held on the 13th of January, the Rev. J. Mills read a paper on the copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which he exhibited. He had spent some months at Nablous, and had been allowed to examine the scroll said to have been written by Abishama, the grandson of Aaron. If we mistake not, a photograph of this, taken by the photographer who accompanied the Prince of Wales to Palestine, was exhibited in Bond Street not long ago. The manuscript shown by Mr. Mills is of the fourteenth century, and was lent him by a Samaritan priest. He is collating it with the Hebrew text, and with the Samaritan version as given in “Walton’s Polyglot,” with a view to its publication.- London Guardian.”]

“Art. VIII.–Theological and Literary Intelligence. The Samariatan Pentateuch.” AMERICAN PRESBYTERIAN AND THEOLOGICAL REVIEW (Apr. 1863): 344-345. [At a meeting of the Syro-Egyptian Society,…. Rev. J. Mills read a paper on a copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which he exhibited…If we mistake not, a photograph of this, taken by the photographer who accompanied the Prince of Wales to Palestine, was exhibited on Bond street not long ago. The manuscript shown by Mr. Mills…”]

“Photography.” POPULAR SCIENCE REVIEW 2:7 (Apr. 1863): 440-443. [(Mr. Francis Bedford; M. Claudet; Mr. A. F. Eden (London, England); Viscountess Hawarden; Mr. Mongo Ponton; Mr. Pouncey, (Dorchester, England); Mr. Andrew Pritchard; Mr. H. P. Robinson; Mr. Spiller; Colonel the Honourable Stuart Wortley; Mr. Thurston Thompson; Mr. G. Wharton Simpson; M. Bayard; MM. Davanne & Girard; M. Duboscq; M. Fargier; MM. Gamier & Salmon; M. Meynier; M. Poitevin; mentioned or discussed.) “The adjudicators appointed by the Council of the Photographic Society have awarded the prize medals for the best contributions in six distinct branches of photographic art, as follows…: — M. Claudet, for the best portraits. Mr. Francis Bedford, for the best landscapes. Colonel the Honourable Stuart Wortley, for the best instantaneous pictures. Viscountess Hawarden, for the best amateur contribution. Mr. H. P. Robinson, for the best composition picture from life. Mr. Thurston Thompson, for the best reproduction….”]

“Meetings of Societies. North London Photographic Association.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:187 (Apr. 1, 1863): 148-149. [“The annual general meeting of this Association took place at Myddleton Hall, Islington, on Wednesday evening, the 18th instant, — George Dawson, Esq., M.A., in the chair….” “…Annual Report…” “…After the Report had been read, the members proceeded to elect the officers for the ensuing year. The result of the election was as follows: President. Charles Woodward, Esq., F.R.S., J.P. Vice- Presidents. George Shadbolt, Esq., and George Dawson, Esq., M.A. Treasurer. D. W. Hill, Esq. Committee. Messrs. T. A. Burler, F. Bedford, E. W. Foxlee, W. Hislop, W. W. King, W. J. C. Moens, W. Shave, and G. W. Simpson….”]

“The International Exhibition. Report of the Jury on Photography and Photographic Apparatus.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:239 (Apr. 2, 1863): 166-167. [“…In landscape and architecture the progress of photography is illustrated in a most satisfactory manner, as well as in the results of the wet as the dry collodion processes. The pictures of Mr. Bedford (United Kingdom, 3039) possess a degree of excellence beyond which it would seem impossible to go. In his productions are admirably united great artistic excellence with perfect command of his materials. His interiors are probably the finest which have ever been obtained by photography, and illustrate the importance of a cultivated knowledge in the selection of time, light, and position. Mr. Henry White’s (United Kingdom, 3179) are perfect landscapes, strongly exemplifying the value of artistic feeling in the prosecution of the art. Mr. Vernon Heath’s (United Kingdom, 3091) photographs show the high degree of excellence attained by studying the manipulatory details of the process. Mr. Dixon Piper’s (United Kingdom, 3135) views have all those charming characteristics which give value to pictures of English landscape scenery. Dr. Hemphill’s (United Kingdom, 3092) photographs relating to Irish antiquities are highly interesting. The Viscountess Jocelyn, Sir A. K. Macdonald, and the Earl of Caithness, send contributions which illustrate that in the amateur pursuit of an elegant accomplishment results may be obtained which rival in all excellence the works of the most able of those who practice the art as a profession. In many of the contributions of the Amateur Photographic Association the same fact is illustrated. Amongst the contributors who practise dry photography are many whose pictures show that dry plates in skilful hands yield results equal to wet collodion. Menu, Sidebotham, and Wardley, send illustrations of this kind, in which delicacy and softness are secured without any sacrifice of vigour and effect. Without entering into lengthy detail or comparison where so much excellence exists, the names of Roger Fenton, Frith, Stuart- Wortley, D. Campbell, Lyndon Smith, B. B. Turner, and others, may all be mentioned as admirable illustrations of the excellence which has been attained in the branch of landscape photography.]

“Minor Topics of the Month. Panorama of the Prince of Wales’s Tour.” ART JOURNAL 25:5 (May 1, 1863): 101. [(Background.) “The Easter novelty at the Haymarket Theatre is the production of a series of panoramic views, illustrative of the tour made in the East by the Prince of Wales. To ensure the utmost accuracy, Mr. Buckstone sent his scene-painters — Mr. Telbin and his son — the same journey, and the result has been a series of pictures of singular fidelity and beauty. The series begins at Cairo and ends at Constantinople, including the sacred Island of Philae on the Nile, Jerusalem, the Jordan, the Dead Sea, Nazareth, Mount Hormon, Damascus, Beyrout, and other interesting localities. It is an especial merit in these pictures that they are quite free of all conventionalism, and the artist has boldly delineated the atmospheric and topographical peculiarities of the Holy Land. The glaring sunlight, the arid desert, the deep green foliage, the gorgeously tinted sunsets, the brilliant moonlights, the sky studded with lamp-like stars, is all reproduced in these clever pictures. We may especially note the grand and comprehensive view of Cairo as an admirable day-scene, and that of the Dead Sea as an equally good picture of evening in the East The deep shadows and blood-red lights from the setting sun, the fleecy clouds of rosy hue in a sky of gold, could only be painted by an Eastern traveller, and certainly not appreciated by any one who knows no other than an English autumn evening. The beauty of Mr. Tolbin’s work will appeal to all, but his true critics must be few — the few who have travelled where he has travelled. In truth, to the large mass of theatre-goers the whole series may have little attraction; indeed the interest of many of these views depends on associations, which render them more fitted for a lecture-room, in which we some day hope to see them, with more views added, and a sensible description in place of the dramatic trash that now introduces them so unfitly. It is due, however, to the public to say, that they fully appreciated what they entirely understood; and the wonderful reality of the water in the scene on the river Jordon was rapturously applauded; it was almost impossible to divest the mind of the idea that the eye rested on glass. The night entertainment in a Turkish kiosk on the banks of the river, near Damascus, was also a great popular success; here the combined effects of lamplight and moonlight were most happily given. It was a veritable Arabian night’s entertainment, and for the moment the spectator was fairly carried away by the illusion of the scene. The intended grand climax — the marriage scene at Windsor — was flat after all this; it was “of the stage — stagey,” and had not the truth and freshness of the Eastern series.”]

  1. A. S. “Reply to Mr. W. D. Clark.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:247 (June 5, 1863): 268-269. [“Mr. Clark commences his paper with a complaint. “The discussion ‘On Photography as a Fine Art,’ has been conducted with too great a display of temper.” I rather think Mr. Clark has mistaken for temper what impartial observers would characterize as simple earnestness and enthusiasm. I am not aware of any case in which the advocates of photography, either as a fine, or, as a mechanical art, have overstepped the bounds of legitimate and logical discussion, unless indeed, Mr. Clark’s own paper may be considered an exception, or Mr. Sutton’s recent attack upon Mr. Rejlander can be so regarded; on which points however, lest I should offend, I will not venture to give an opinion. Photography “looked upon as an intellectual pursuit is far inferior to that noble art,” painting, because it is “entirely devoid of the beauty and expression to be got from the use of colour.” Thus runs Mr. Clark’s argument, No. 1. But what has this to do with photography as a fine art? Are Turner’s monochrome sketches, Hogarth’s engravings, Raphael’s ink studies, and all those numerous works without colour, which are the pride of our museums and fine art collections, to be swept down from the lofty position awarded them by generations of artists and critics, because they ‘‘are entirely devoid of the beauty and expression to be got from the use of colour?” Argument No. 1 will not hold water, Mr. Clark. “But this is not the chief disadvantage under which photography labours,” says Mr. Clark, for the photographer cannot give expression to his subject, be it model or landscape, or, in other words, cannot convey “his own feelings and emotions” through the agency of his productions. Now, what can a lover of art-photography, who is familiar with the productions of Wilson, Bedford, Lake Price, Rejlander, &c., say to such an argument as this? He may point out the poetic grandeur and the romantic sentiments with which this, or that glorious photograph is overflowing, and he may turn over a folio of Rejlander’s exquisite productions, in which the very expression, pose, chiaroscuro and sentiments of figures in the works of the best masters are faithfully reproduced from living models….”]

“Critical Notices.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:253 (July 10, 1863): 328. [“Book review. The Wye: Its Abbeys and Castles. By William and Mary Howitt. The Photographic Illustrations by Bedford and Sedgefield. London; Alfred W. Bennett. The text of this little work is extracted from the well-known volume by William and Mary Howitt, “The Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain.” There are half a dozen excellent photographs — four by Bedford and two by Sedgefield — of scenes which have become almost the property of photography — Chepstow Castle, Tintern Abbey, Raglan Castle, Goodrich Castle, the Wye, &c. The volume will form a most elegant gift-book, and we heartily recommend it.”]

Wall, Alfred H. “In Search of Truth.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:194 (July 15, 1863): 285-286. [“Read at a meeting of the Edinburgh Photographic Society, July 1st, 1868.” “Your energetic and valuable Secretary, Mr. J. T. Taylor, having suggested that a paper by your honorary member, my humble se!f, would be kindly welcomed, I hastened to secure the honour of placing one before you. As the claims of art- photography are now receiving attention in so many quarters, I propose that we devote the present evening to fairly and honestly discussing the same. Let us, in so doing, avoid prejudices, put aside feeling, and array ourselves on this side or on that — separated perhaps in opinion, but most harmoniously united in the desire for Truth. It has been urged that photography cannot be a fine art, and for various reasons. One opponent (as representative of many others) asserts that the want of colour in its productions is fatal to its claims in this direction. This is a trifling and very weak objection, inasmuch as a single thought tells us that some of the greatest masters’ works, now preserved with careful pride by the most refined nations, are without colour, having been executed in black or brown and white only. Besides — to clench my argument — engraving is an acknowledged fine art. Another representative opponent urges that no real work of art is so scrupulously truthful as photographic productions must necessarily be….” “…Some seem to think there can be no pictures but such as are produced by brushes and colours. A picture is no more produced by colours and brushes than by cameras and chemicals; it springs from a refined and cultivated intellect, and is as distinct from the mechanical mediums through which it finds expression as my soul is from my body. Pictures have been produced by all sorts of tools and in all sorts of ways, but never were these ways and tools successful save in an artist’s hands. Let photographers take this fact to heart; for, perfect as their various means now are, and still more perfect as they may become, the pictorial value of their productions will depend wholly and solely upon their acquirements as artists. Other arguments have been advanced, based upon the fact that photography cannot reject, create, nor combine objects and circumstances selected from Nature at different times and from different places. This is quite true, and, for my own poor part, I think it very frequently a sad thing that most of our painters are not in the same predicament. But, granting this, in what way does it affect the claims of photography as n fine art?…” “…Once again: arguments against photography as a fine art have been based upon the scientific nature of its processes. But this fact, it seems to me, has just nothing at all to do with the question. It is not how I do my work, but what my work is when done, that should decide its claim to admiration and respect….” “…For photography, then, in both facts and theory, we have able advocates, and ultimately the rank it claims must be awarded to it; and I trust, when that day comes, we shall not forget the pioneers without whom such crowning honour and distinction might never have been obtained. Of what use would be my assertions or arguments, or those of “any other man,” if we could claim no Rejlander, no Robinson, no Lake Price, no Bedford, and no Wilson? Who would have dared, in the absence of their works, to make for photography the claim now occupying our attention? For myself I can assert that, had I never seen such pictures as have been produced by the real artist-photographers, I should never have ventured to use either pen or voice in support of the art’s most ambitious and honourable aspirations. And now I will retire from the field, Gentlemen, leaving in your hands the discussion of all I have advanced in this unpretending paper. Those who support me — if any do so — will, I hope, be strong and able, inasmuch as I should not like the ignominy of a fall; and those who oppose me will, I also hope, produce stronger arguments than those it has been my task to deal so briefly with this evening. And so — Heaven defend the right!…”]

“Home Correspondence. Photoelectric Engraving.” JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF ARTS, AND OF THE INSTITUTIONS IN UNION 11:557 (July 24, 1863): 606-607. [“Sir, — In bringing my process of engraving photographs, Photoelectric Engraving, before the notice of your Society, I am desirous of making a few observations of a general nature. In consequence of the very questionable protection afforded by the Patent Laws, I deem it advisable at present not to publish the details of my process. I have already sacrificed much to the “idea” of engraving photographs, and as I believe I have now solved the problem in a satisfactory manner. I am naturally anxious to remunerate myself. At a future time I may make a proposal, the effect of which, if agreed to, will be to enable others to work my process. From the encomiums passed by highly qualified judges on the specimen I now submit* (*The specimen may be seen at the Society’s House, on application to the Secretary.) — Kenilworth Banqueting Hall, from a photograph by Bedford — I think I am warranted in saying that I have solved the problem of successfully engraving photographs. But I should not consider myself entitled to the merit of this discovery were the specimen above mentioned touched up by the graver, or oven the result of a happy chance. I am glad to be in a position to say that the specimen has only required careful cleaning, and that unless my head and my hands fail me, the result is certain. I can guarantee to produce, in a period varying from one to three weeks, an engraved plate from a photograph. In this plate, that which constitutes the essence of the photograph and the despair of hand labour — fac simile even to minute and almost microscopic detail — shall be present. To attain this result, all that I require is a good reversed negative (easily produced by revising the glass), and a positive print merely fixed with hypo, not toned. The methods which have hitherto given most promise are the bitumen process, photoglyphy, and photogalvanography. The other processes of photolithography and | photozincography, from their very nature, cannot rival the richness of plate printing. The bitumen process and photoglyphy are essentially etching processes, and involve much hand labour and consequent loss of fidelity. Photoglyphy is the least satisfactory of the two, as the etching ground employed is of a very delicate nature, and the photographic chemical, bichromate of potash, has the unfortunate quality of destroying detail, the longer it is submitted to actinic influence. The most important step in advance was photogalvanography. This process came into my hands when in a most crude and impracticable condition, and after it had been given up as useless by others. By much patient labour I succeeded in making it practical, and the process has ever since been worked with the improvements which I effected. I was not permitted to reap the fruit of my labours, and after a considerable sum had been expended, by my then partners, to develop the process in a direction to which it was wholly unsuitable, the process has been almost abandoned. Photogalvanography, like photoglyphy, depends on the peculiar action of bichromate of jwtasli, in combination with gelatine. In this lies its weakness. It loses detail — the more so as it requires a very long exposure, sometimes upwards of six hours, and then without any certainty that the right exposure has been attained. There are consequently numerous failures from this one cause alone. I experimented long with this process, and found that the result was due to chromic acid. In other words, that with a composition merely of chromic acid and gelatine, a raised image with granulation could be produced. From this raised image the electrotype plate was subsequently made. Independently of the loss of detail, and the uncertainty in the exposure — both defects inherent in the process — the. granulation was of a peculiar zig-zag and wiry character, which was of great value in the vigorous parts of the picture, but became broken or unconnected in the half tones and fine details. This led to a pretty free employment of the graver and roulette, just in the very parts which made hand-labour expensive. The process, indeed, was never capable of the high flight which was attempted, and, as 1 predicted, it broke down. Where expense was no object, the graver was a great assistance, but it lessened the value of the fac simile. In photoglyphy and photogalvanography, the results are obtained from a positive impression. It was after experimenting some time with photogalvanography that it occurred to me to strike out in a different direction. Anyone acquainted with engraving is aware that aqua-tint and “chalk,” or stippling, produce tine grain, half tones, and detail. The problem I set myself was how to imitate this combination. The aquatinter employs common resin dissolved in spirits of wine. This poured over his plate evaporates, and leaves numerous globules of resin attached to the surface. The size of these globules depends on the proportion of resin to spirit. When the acid is put on the plate the resin acts as a resist, and a tint is produced in the intermediate parts. If the plate were now electrotyped before the removal of the resin, and a print taken from the electrotype, the resin parts would give a kind of stipple or “chalk” marks, interspersed with tint. It is something similar to this which I have succeeded in imitating, with peculiarities sui generis, by photography and the electrotype. I can also, as it were, modify the size of the dots, obtaining them so fine as to carry almost microscopic detail; but if too tine there will be deficient depth in the dark. In this as in all things there is the happy medium, and this I believe I have secured. I commence with the negative. This should be reversed. From the negative a positive proof is taken; this I prefer not toned but merely fixed in the sepia colour by the “hypo.” I cover the negative, which must be varnished with a material from which I obtain a latent positive. This latent positive I turn by a simple process into a suitable negative, and it is with this negative that I subsequently manipulate. I can time the exposure to a nicety, a few seconds over or under making an inappreciable difference. The excess or deficiency must not however extend to minutes. If necessary I can electrotype direct upon my material; but as this might lead to the discovery of part of my process, I prefer to make a different kind of matrix. I should have been glad to have taken out a Patent in order to grant licences, but as the lawyers say no Patent is valid till well litigated, I prefer to run the risk of competition, which after all is of more benefit to the Arts than monopolies such as the present Patent Laws permit. Trusting I have not trespassed unduly on your space, I am, &c, Duncan C. Dallas.”]

“Photo-Engraving.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:256 (July 31, 1863): 363-364. [“The vast economic value of a thoroughly good .and simple method of photographic engraving can scarcely be overestimated, and from the earliest history of photography efforts have been made, with more or less of success, to secure such a process. Most of our readers are familiar with the various methods attempted, from Fizeau’s process of etching Daguerreotype plates down to a recent date. Whilst recently in Paris we saw specimens, apparently of much promise, of two new processes of photographic engraving, the details of which, however, were not stated. A month or two ago we were favoured by a visit from M. De la Blanchere, who showed us a number of exceedingly fine proofs from plates produced by his “heliographic machine.”…” “…The best example of photo-engraving which we have yet seen, however, isby a process invented by Mr. D. C. Dallas, a gentleman who was associated at one time — to his cost, as he informs us — with the Photogalvanographic Company, which came to grief some years ago. A specimen before us, “Kenilworth Banqueting Hall.” from a negative taken expressly for the purpose by Mr. Bedford, is, we are assured — and the print bears evidence to the fact — from an entirely untouched plate. It has excellent gradation of half-tone, and is bold and vigorous. A few touches by a skilled engraver would make it a perfect picture. We have it here exactly as produced by chemical action, in order to illustrate the capabilities of the process. We regret that, owing to the unsatisfactory protection afforded by the existing Patent Laws, Mr. Dallas, at present, does not perceive any method of reimbursing himself for the cost — some thousands of pounds — of his initiatory labours, except in keeping the working and secret of his process in his own hands. We subjoin his communication on the subject: — In consequence of the very questionable protection afforded by the Patent Laws, I deem it advisable at present not to publish the details of my process. I have already sacrificed much to the “idea” of engraving photographs, and as I believe I have now solved the problem in a satisfactory manner, I am naturally anxious to remunerate myself. At a future time I may make a proposal the effect of which, if agreed to, will be to enable others to work my process. From the encomiums passed by highly qualified judges on the specimen I now submit — Kenilworth Banqueting Hall, from a photograph by Bedford — I think I am warranted in saying that I have solved the problem of successfully engraving photographs. But I should not consider myself entitled to the merit of this discovery were the specimen above mentioned touched up by the graver, or even the result of a happy chance. I am glad to be in a position to say that the specimen has only required careful cleaning, and that unless my head and my hands fail me the result is certain….”]

“Photography Applied to Book Illustration.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:195 (Aug. 1, 1863): 309. [“Mr. A. W. Bennett, of Bishopsgate-street Without, London, has recently published two works connected with our art which deserve notice at our hands. The first consists of twenty-four photographs in a neat album, intended to accompany Sir Walter Scott’s poem of The lady of the Lake, the scenes described therein being illustrated by photographs, the negatives of which were taken by Mr. Thomas Ogle, of Preston. The idea itself is an excellent one, and no less excellent are the specimens, the single drawback consisting in the fact that the album is fitted only for those of the size of the carte de visite, whilst the proofs are evidently printed from negatives of stereoscopic size, thus involving a sacrifice of a portion of the view either in the sky or at the sides of each picture. We have before now suggested the formation of albums made specially for the reception of one of a pair of stereographs on each page. We have no doubt that whoever first introduces such convenient articles will meet with an extensive sale for them, for there are many persons who do not care for stereographs as such, but who would eagerly purchase the small views, if adapted for an album; while, on the other hand, an immense number of stereoscopic negatives now almost useless would be again made serviceable, and some in which one of the pair of pictures only is perfect would be capable of conversion to a useful purpose that have hitherto been unavailable altogether. Those familiar with Mr. Ogle’s works need not to be told that they are good, but from the cause above specified, viz., a curtailment of their fair proportions, we must admit that they suffer somewhat in artistic value; still they are such as lovers of the sentimental and picturesque will desire to possess. Amongst those specially deserving of notice are The Brig of Turk (No. 3); Glenfinlas (No. 10), a charming composition, in which the distance is beautifully rendered; Beal-nam-bo (No. 17), the pass of the cattle; The Hero’s Targe (No. 18), in which the foliage is very good and atmospheric effect well suggested; Gouge below the Hero’s Targe (No. 19), a picturesque combination of rocks, wood, and water, splendidly executed — indeed we regard this as the gem of the series; Coilantogle’s Ford (No. 23) is also a pleasing subject, but the sky is a little too hard. The second work is entitled The Wye: its Ruined Abbeys and Castles, extracted from the larger work on the ruined abbeys and castles of Great Britain, by William and Mary Howitt, the peculiarity of the present issue consisting in the photographic illustrations by Francis Bedford and Russell Sedgfield — names that are of themselves guarantees for valuable productions. The frontispiece on the cover is a view of the Wye from the Chapel Hill, by Sedgfield, of stereoscopic size and cut into a circular form, which is very effective, some useless angles of sky and foreground only being, not sacrificed, but removed. Mr. Sedgfield also contributes an interior of Tintern Abbey. The illustrations by Mr. Bedford are — Chepstow Castle, Raglan Castle, Goodrich Castle, and Lanthony Abbey; and of these Goodrich Castle is a perfect gem. With the single exception of the frontispiece, all the illustrations in this work are from negatives of the size used for stereographs, and are not cut down even so much as when mounted for the stereoscope. We are of opinion that no unprejudiced person can compare the two methods of illustration named without pronouncing in favour of the preservation intact of the subjects as originally taken. For the rest, Mr. Bennett deserves the thanks both of photographers and the public generally for his enterprise in carrying out an arrangement that cannot fail to be mutually beneficial, and which we trust will also prove remunerative to himself.”]

“Literary Items.” LITTELL’S LIVING AGE 78:1001 (Aug. 8, 1863): 286. [Book notices. “Mr. Alfred W. Bennett of Bishopsgate Street, who is availing himself to a considerable extent to the use of photography as a medium for landscape illustrations of our descriptive poets, has just issued the “Bijou Photograph Album,” containing twenty-four photographs of the scenery of the “Lady of the Lake,” most admirably executed by Thomas Ogle in carte de visite size, and elegantly bound in morocco or in gilt cloth. It is a pretty gift-book, and one that is sure to be appreciated. Mr. Bennett has also published the poem itself in small quarto, with fourteen photographs by the same artist, and a view of the poet’s tomb at Dryburgh Abbey, by G. W. Wilson. From that charming book, “Ruined Castles and Abbeys of Great Britain,” by William and Mary Howitt, for the benefit of summer tourists he has struck off separately “The Wye: its Abbeys and Castles,” with six photographs by Bedford and Sedgfield.]

“Photo-electric Engraving.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:196 (Aug. 15, 1863): 321-322. [“While on the subject of producing copies from photographic originals by means of the printing-press in some form or other, we would draw the attention of our readers to the results of a process termed “Photo-electric Engraving,” carried out by Mr. Duncan C. Dallas, a specimen of which is now before us, and is, without exception, by far the best attempt we have seen to render photography available for the purpose of book illustration. Of the process itself we have no further partculars than are contained in the annexed prospectus; but the  specimen engraving, labelled “untouched by the graver,” is truly excellent. The subject is the Banqueting Hall at Kenilworth, and is from a photograph by Francis Bedford. We are particularly struck with the transparency of the shadows, which are apt to be opaque in most specimens of this kind. There is a little heaviness of appearance in the ivy, but evidently not more than exists in the negative itself — a proof of the close approximation of the engraving to its original. The blank whiteness of the sky would be improved by being manipulated or somewhat toned down, but the entire preservation of the spirit and vigour of the original is unquestionable. The following is a copy of the prospectus to which we have referred above: —
“This art, the result of much patient thought and labour, affords a means of producing engravings from photographs or the designs of the artist without the aid of the graver. Photography, beautiful as it is, lacks permanence. Its value is thus seriously deteriorated. Our leading photographers are unable to say with certainty that their exquisite productions will endure unchanged. Black printing-ink, on the other hand, has stood the test of centuries, retaining its quality even when the paper on which it has been impressed has altered in colour. Printing-ink, though it may never rival photographic chemistry in producing softness or flatness and delicate gradations of half-tone, yet its permanence and its own peculiar effects render it valuable and agreeable as an agent in the delineation of objects. The same causes operate to give printing-ink an advantage over photography in reproducing and multiplying the designs of the artist. These advantages, however, are greatly outweighed when it becomes necessary to employ the hand even of moderate skill to reproduce the photograph or design by engraving upon steel or copper. The result is an interpretation more or less accurate — not a facsimile of touch and detail. The process which I have now the pleasure to introduce, though not as perfect as I hope to make it, preserves the detail and touch to an extent which no engraving process has hitherto attained. I do not profess to produce a photograph, but an engraving — an engraving possessing a softness, detail, and vigour of its own; depending, however, on the quality of the original. I shall not attempt to deceive the public by saying that my results are absolutely untouched by the engraver. The plates pass into the hands of a skilled engraver to be cleaned, and to have defects removed which arise from purely accidental causes, and are not inherent in the process. The cost of the engraver’s work is generally a few shillings, except when the plates are large, in which case the expense is proportionately greater. If there were radical deficiencies to be supplied, such as filling in details, the expense would be great, to say nothing of diminished value as a facsimile. I do not pretend that my process is so perfect as to secure what I may term the microscopic or very minute details of a good photograph. For general practical purposes it gives all that is required. Still I have produced results which, under a powerful magnifier, show details not seen by the unaided eye. The process is adapted for obtaining engravings suitable for book illustration, decoration, manufacturers’ pattern-books, stereoscopic slides, cartes de visite, reduced or enlarged copies of maps, plans, old engravings, manuscripts, and the various objects of manufacture, art, or vertu to which photography or drawing can be applied…. As a considerable saving is effected in the cost of engraving, independently of capability of producing results hitherto unattainable by the engraver, I am enabled to quote moderate prices without injury to the quality. For limited numbers the saving will be very apparent. In the generality of cases an order can be executed within one month from the date of its receipt, unless press of work prevent.”]

“Photographically Illustrated Books.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:196 (Aug. 15, 1863): 324. [“A History of the Recent Discoveries at Cyrene, made during the expedition of Lieut. Smith and Commander Porchor, is announced for publication by Messrs. Day and Son. Our readers will remember that the officers named began their researches at their own expense; but, being highly successful, the Trustees of the British Museum and the Admiralty gave important aid in their extended prosecution. The marbles recovered are reported to be sufficient to form a gallery in the British Museum, and to be the only known specimens of the art of Cyrene, a city renowned in ancient history. Photographs, by Mr. F. Bedford, will accompany the text, with maps, plans, and woodcuts. — Athenaeum.”]

Highley, Samuel, F.G.S., F.C.S, etc. “Notices of Photographic Inventions. Dallas’s Photo-Electric Engraving.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:196 (Aug. 15, 1863): 330-331. [“Our attention has lately been drawn to a new process for producing engraved plates, by the joint agency of photography and galvanography, the results of which far exceed anything of the kind that has yet come under our notice. We happen to know that the acieraged plates, from which the printed specimens have been worked, have not been tampered with by the engraver, further than cleaning the large flat surfaces that produce the sky and other high lights. Evidence of this statement is apparent in some want of power in the deep shadows of the arched vault in the right-hand corner of the view of the Banqueting Hall at Kenilworth Castle, produced from a negative taken by Bedford expressly for the inventor — a defect which could readily have been corrected by the engraver if other than an untouched specimen had been desired. Specimens of this subject may be seen at the rooms of the Society of Arts; so that those interested in the matter may judge for themselves as to the capabilities of this process. Those conversant with publishing matters ever look in the future of photography, as far as book illustration is concerned, for some process that shall be independent of silver printing, not only on account of the expense, but also on account of the comparative productive slowness, of such methods compared with those of plate and surface printing. It is to such processes as that to which we are now calling the attention of our readers — and to Pretsch’s method for producing the counterparts of wood blocks described and illustrated at pages 326 and 347, Vol. VII., of this Journal — that authors and publishers look with hopes of success, not forgetting the photolithographic and photozincographic processes that likewise have their special fields of utility. Nor is the educationist forgetful of the value of such a process as that now introduced by Mr. Dallas; for, though stereographs as at present used are cheap enough, yet if they could be supplied at the cost of pence instead of shillings, they might, and would be, extensively used as instruments of historical, topographical, and scientific instruction, especially in the  branches of natural history, where truthful delineation, even to points of the  minutest detail, arc essential for successful teaching….”]

Dallas, Duncan. “Photo-Electric Engraving and Observations upon Sundry Processes of Photographic Engraving.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:262 (Sept. 11, 1863): 439-441. [“…The specimens I now submit must speak for themselves. They have received no aid from the graver. Each plate has passed under the hands of a skilled engraver, but merely for the purpose of careful cleaning. Not a single detail, or halftone, has been introduced by tool work, nor have the vigorous parts been “doctored” with acid or the roulette….” “…Having but lately emerged from the purely experimental stage — for I still experiment — I have not had time to get up many specimens. Beside the “Banqueting Hall, Kenilworth,” (kindly taken for me, on purpose, by Mr. Bedford,) I should have been glad to have placed a reproduction of a good drawing or a highly-finished sketch — something done by a Landseer, a Millais, or other eminent artist….”]
Dallas, Duncan C. “Photo-Electric Engraving and Observations upon Sundry Processes of Photographic Engraving.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:198 (Sept. 15, 1863): 370-371 [“The following is an abstract of a paper intended to have been read in Section B of the British Association on Tuesday, September 1st. The President, however, prevented its being read, for reasons stated in another column.” “I feel that an a “I feel that an apology is due to the Association for bringing under their notice some results of my process of photo-electric engraving without, at the same time, describing in full detail the method by which the results have been obtained….” “…The specimens I now submit must speak for themselves. They have received no aid from the graver. Each plate has passed under the hands of a skilled engraver, but merely for the purpose of careful cleaning. Not a single detail, or half-tone, has been introduced by tool work, nor have the vigorous parts been “doctored” with acid or the roulette. The impressions show honestly the result of the process. I am glad to be in a position to say that, unless my head or my hands fail me, the system is certain. I can guarantee to produce, in a period varying from one to three weeks, an engraved plate, either from a photograph or the design of the artist. In this plate, that which constitutes the essence of the original and the despair of hand labour — facsimile, even for minute and almost microscopic detail — should be present. To attain this result, all that I require is a good reversed negative — easily produced by reversing the glass — and a positive print, merely fixed in the hypo., not toned. Having but lately emerged from the purely experimental stage — for I still experiment — I have not had time to get up many specimens. Beside the Banqueting Hall, Kenilworth (kindly taken for me, on purpose, by Mr. Bedford), I should have been glad to have placed a reproduction of a good drawing or a highly-finished sketch — something done by a Landseer, a Millais, or other eminent artist. I have just commenced a subject of the kind, viz., a sepia drawing by a well-known artist, who takes an interest in my operations. I do not fear but that I shall reproduce his drawing, touch for touch, preserving the spirit and beauty of the original — a result impossible to hand engraving…”]

“Photography as an Industry.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:137. (Sept. 15, 1863): 361-364. [(From London Review. London Stereoscopic Co.; Mayall; Bedford; De la Rue; Bisson Freres; others mentioned.) “Almost as numerous and as various as the scenes that the orb of day itself shines upon are the sun pictures we see in our stationers’ windows and in every house we visit. How few of us who remember distinctly the first efforts of photography in taking the imprints of feathers, leaves, and bits of lace, would have predicted from those childish essays, so great, so wonderful, so rapidly produced, an industry as photography has now become! Not that we are at all disposed to sing an unmitigated praise of photographers or their pictures, for with thorough artist’s feelings we see in their ordinary productions the defects of composition, the absence of that picture-painting of unspoken thoughts, and the want of many an other quality that goes to make a perfect picture, while we as painfully perceive in many a way the deleterious effects of their productions on the prospects and qualities of painter-artists; but its good outbalances its evils, and photography flourishes and increases. A portrait is, however, not a likeness became it is taken with a lens on a chemical preparation….” “…There is nothing perhaps more laborious than drawing architectural details, and there are few things that people generally feel more interest in than ancient buildings. The fine cathedral and the beautiful church — built in days when, whatever the faults of the monks, men strove earnestly and well to make their houses of religious worship as worthy as human art and human hands could make them of the great Being to whose honour they are dedicated — are the first-sought objects of the tourist; the ancient castle, with weather-beaten battlements and towers exciting memories of past history, comes next; while a mouldering house of three or four centuries ago is cherished as a domestic relic of our ancestors in an age when tables and chairs were stouter than cabinet-makers now produce, and photographers were not. These all require in their pictures thousands of details, from the form, size, and aspect of a stone or brick, to every cankering touch Time’s ruthless hand has put to the florid sculpturing of the lofty facade and the innumerable chisellings of the mouldings. Such labour and such skill as this requires was rarely bestowed, and if bestowed was costly in the extreme and ranked amongst the highest efforts of art in the hands of Roberts and such like men. Here and there and now and then some enthusiastic architect made sketches of some bit or portion as an example of the rest, but all this was desultory and fragmentary; we were never sure that the face or form of the statue was correctly given, the tracery exactly outlined, or the mere builder’s work truthfully rendered. And here photography has done real good service. We may regret the sudden blackness of the shadows -under arches and doorways, the want of perfect clearness in the half-lights, but the main mass of the portion of building taken in by the camera is rendered in the photograph with such perfection of detail as no human patience could attain to, no hand acquire the power of rendering. The exact symmetry and proportions are retained; every film flaked by the winds and weather from the once smooth stone, every roughness, every joint, crevice, and cranny comes out, and half-effaced bas-reliefs often appear with more distinctness than in the object itself, the slight condensing of the rays of light by the lens, and their consequent stronger action on the silver-salt, producing intenser chemical action, and consequently more power of defining shadow. The smaller views of buildings are of course no more than other views; but to these the stereoscope gives advantages no mere artist’s sketch could possibly possess; while the larger photographs by the Bissons and others — such as the Escalier de Francois Premier in the Chateau de Blois, the Hotel de Ville of Louvain, the Church of St. Ouen, and the pinnacles of the Palais de Justice at Rouen, the apsides of Bayeux and Caen Cathedrals are not only works of art, but transcripts of the highest interest and value to architects and antiquaries, so much so as to have given rise to a special society for their production and distribution. The still larger details of the statues over the central doorway of Notre Dame, by Bisson, in which the figures are 13 inches in absolute height, even more decisively show how appropriate and useful the photographer’s art is for such purposes. In Mr. Bedford’s charming scenes in Egypt and the Holy Land, taken during the travels of the Prince of Wales, there is the same remarkable clearness and precision of architectural details, although his pictures are on a fur smaller scale than those we have referred to, and this notwithstanding his great and successful efforts to pictorialize his views. In this latter respect his use of his optical instrument, his judicious choice of figures and selections of their positions, with the various delicate and unexposed manoeuvres to produce effects, and the tender manipulation of his pictures, render them really works of art, and take Mr. Bedford out of the ranks of mere manipulators, and place him in that of true artists….” p. 363. “….Pictures, too, have been already subjects for photographers. It is true we only get a sepia-like sketch of that which is gorgeous or sombre with colour in the original painting, according to the subject, and thus lose half the effect the artists had produced. But even this is much. Engravings, whether on metal or wood, are costly, and, like photographs, deal only in black and white; moreover the copyist has to reduce in size, and his drawing is therefore very likely to be inaccurate and out of proportion. So far, then, in this respect photography is a gain….” “… Prize pictures and the new works of modern painters, as well as the pictures of the old masters, may thus be rendered familiar in every household where the inmates are educated; and controversy with the finer and more subtle picturings of the human imagination can but be conducive to intellectual habits, and to the development of those finer and more sensitive feelings which are the priceless pearls and ornaments of human existence. — London Review.”]

“Mr. Blanchard’s Manipulating Box.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:264 (Sept. 25, 1863): 458-459 3 illus. [“We have frequently been asked by readers to describe the tents or portable laboratories used by different professional photographers who have distinguished themselves by open air photography. These differ according to the tastes and necessities of the operators. Mr. Bedford has a carriage fitted up as a dark room. For London street work, Mr. Blanchard frequently uses a cab, its windows covered with yellow calico. Mr. Wilson uses a very primitive and simple tent. Except for London streets, Mr. Blanchard uses a dark-box, or manipulating chamber, which does not envelope the head, and the majority of his fine instantaneous pictures have been produced in it. Mr. Samuel Fry uses one of very similar construction. As Mr. Blanchard’s box is especially distinguished by simplicity, portability, and convenience, we have asked him to describe it for the benefit of our readers….”]

Wortley, Lieut-Col. Stuart. “On Photography in connexion with Art.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:138 (Oct. 15, 1863): 365-368. [[“Read before the Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society.” “In the paper I am about to read to you, I shall avoid, as much as possible, wearying you with any of the technicalities of the various processes of photography, being more anxious to draw your attention to the position which photography does hold, and is capable of holding, in connexion with the fine arts….” “…To give an illustration of my meaning: — A view may be very beautiful from a certain point, but it might happen that by moving two or three yards one way or the other you may make exactly the same view more available, as a picture, by including some object for the foreground, such as a mass of rock, an old gate, the trunk of a tree, or any object that may happen to be within reach. Attention to this is conspicuous in the works of a talented photographer, whose name you doubtless know, Mr. Bedford. There are many other branches of photography to which I might call your attention — the copying of pictures, photolithography and its various processes, and composition photography. But I am, in this paper, anxious to confine myself to photography in connexion with its claims to be considered as a fine art….” p. 367.]

“Reviews. Books illustrated by Photographs.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:138 (Oct. 15, 1863): 381. [“Mr. Bennett, of Bishopsgate-street, has published two works deserving every commendation — “The Lady of the Lake,” and “The Wye, its Abbeys and Castles.” The first contains a series of twenty-four views, illustrating most admirably Sir Walter Scott’s beautiful poem, — the photographs being taken by Mr. Thomas Ogle, whose success in such views is always to be commended. William and Mary Howitt’s description of the Ruined Abbeys and Castles, in the second work, contains half a dozen choice little views from the cameras of Mr. Bedford and Mr. Sedgfield — such pictures – that need only to be seen to be coveted. That Mr. Bennett has met with the encouragement which he so well deserves may be inferred from his announcement that he is about to publish a second volume of the ‘Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain and Ireland,’ one of its chief features being Kenilworth Castle; also a volume of Wordsworth’s poetical descriptions of the scenery of the English lake-country, illustrated by photographs, as a companion volume to the “Lady of the Lake.” Mr. Bennett, we hope, will not stop here, but give us as faithful pictures of Killarney and other wonderful pieces of Irish scenery as he has done in the volumes already to be obtained.”]

Wortley, The Hon- Lieut.-Col. Stuart. “On Photography in Connection with Art.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:267 (Oct. 16, 1863): 496-498. [“In the paper I am about to read to you, I shall avoid, as much as possible, wearying you with any of the technicalities of the various processes of photography, being more anxious to draw your attention to the position which photography does hold, and is capable of holding, in connection with the fine arts. To begin,…” “…To give an illustration of my meaning: — A view may be very beautiful from a certain point, but it might happen that by moving two or three yards one way or the other, you may make exactly the same view more available, as a picture, by including some object for the foreground, such as a mass of rock, an old gate, the trunk of a tree, or any object that may happen to be within reach. Attention to this is conspicuous in the works of a talented photographer, whose name you doubtless know, Mr. Bedford….”]

“To Correspondents.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:267 (Oct. 16, 1863): 504. [“J. Gilbert. — Mr. Williams has given up publishing stereoscopic slides for many years. We think it is probable that the last stereos of Warwick Castle and neighbourhood are by Mr. Bedford, published by Messrs. Catherall and Pritchard, Chester. We cannot tell you how many sheets of paper 20 ounces of albumen will coat. The albumen, of course, gets gradually thicker from evaporation, and each sheet will vary very slightly. The keeping qualities of albumen vary with temperature and other circumstances. Nothing is better than pure albumen for giving a good surface. Float the paper, and remove as quickly as possible. We believe albumenizing twice will give a higher surface, but increases danger of streaks.”]

“Bromo-Iodized Collodion and Pyro Development.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:268 (Oct. 23, 1863): 516. [“We extract the following from an interesting private letter from Dr. Hemphill: — “I have read with a great deal of pleasure, and I hope with profit, the long correspondence in your journal about the advantage of iron over pyrogallic acid in the developer, but it seems strange to me that the use of bromo-iodized collodion, with pyrogallic development, appears all but ignored amongst photographers, although the beautiful Eastern views by Mr. Bedford were produced in that way. I have long used for landscape work bromo-iodized collodion (latterly Ponting’s or Thomas’s), with a developer of pyrogallic acid with acetic and formic acids, the latter not always, and the advantages I supposed to be derived from it were greater rapidity and softness than with iodized collodion and pyro, and greater intensity than with iron; but this year I have used Ponting’s bromoiodized collodion, with a strong iron developer, both for views and portraits, and find that in most cases in a good light I can produce sufficient intensity with the first application only: 30 grains of sulphate of iron, or 40 of the double salt to the ounce. Should you think them worth your acceptance, I will send you in a little time copies of some portraits and landscapes taken in that way for next year’s Amateur Photographic Association.”]

“Edinburgh Photographic Society.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:201 (Nov. 2, 1863): 428-429. [“This Society met on the 21st ult. The President (J. D. Marwick, Esq.) occupied the chair. There was a large attendance of members. Messrs. Ritchie, Princes-street, and A. Smith, 105, Southbridge, were balloted for and admitted as members. The President said he had received from Mr. Bedford twelve magnificent pictures for presentation to the Society’s album. These were handed round for inspection, and a cordial vote of thanks was awarded to Mr. Bedford. Besides the above there was on the table a large collection of pictures by Messrs. Vernon Heath, Mudd, and others. An album containing a choice collection of photographs of various sizes, lent by Mr. Thomas Ross, of London; some apparatus of good construction, by Mr. Dallmeyer; together with a collection of transparencies by Mr. Breese, were also exhibited. These articles formed part of the collection which was exhibited at the conversazione recently held at the University, on which occasion, as previously intimated in these pages, this Society made its first appearance in public — an appearance which the kindness of its honorary and corresponding members enabled the office-bearers to make highly creditable alike to the art and the Society….”]

“Meetings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:270 (Nov. 6, 1863): 536-538. [“The first meeting of the winter session was held on the evening of Tuesday, the 3rd inst., the Lord Chief Baron in the chair. The audience was unusually large and animated. After a few observations from the Lord Chief Baron, the minutes of a former meeting were read and confirmed. A variety of interesting objects were laid on the table — negatives from rapid dry plates, by Mrs. Spottiswoode; illustrations of the working of Dallmeyer’s triple lens, by Mr. Hughes; specimens by Ross; the presentation print of Mr. Robinson; the presentation print of Mr. Williams; Mr. Hart’s volumetric apparatus, &c. From the all-absorbing interest of Mr. Smith’s paper and specimen pictures, other objects obtained but little attention, and were not, in fact, brought before the meeting. Mr. Smith then proceeded to detail the history of the alleged photographs of the last century, explaining how the matter first came under his attention, and the evidence li9 had been able to collect of their production, and reading extracts from the various documents having any bearing on the subject….” “…The Chairman in proposing a vote of thanks, which was carried by acclamation, made a few observations on the slow progress of a new discovery until experience had developed its useful application. After which he retired, and the chair was taken by Mr. Bedford….”]

Warner, W. H. “On Photography in India.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:271 (Nov. 13, 1863): 548-549. [“It is with a feeling of diffidence I come before you this evening to discuss the difficulties and trials which beset the path of the photographer (whether he be professional or not) in a far-off land — a land about which, what little is known photographically, has only lately been brought home to us by a few of those ardent amateurs who have been determined, notwithstanding all trials and troubles, to succeed — a land that teems with beautiful temples, constant and ever- varying foliage, and with people and animals that are interesting in themselves. Having lately been occupied in printing large numbers of these very subjects for a celebrated amateur, they have led me to make many observations, which, without seeing the negatives themselves, I should never have had the opportunity of doing….” “…Lastly, that evil, which in Europe is bad enough, but in India is a million times worse — I mean heat — which dries up the plate, rendering it more and more insensitive every moment, and also communicates to the operator a lassitude which almost wholly unfits him for the duties of the day. These are some of the pleasures of photography in the East; pleasures, or rather vexations, which have bothered wiser heads than ours to overcome; and yet, looking at them fairly and steadily, I do not see but what they might be not only conquered, but actually made use of in the production of subjects. Let us, therefore, this evening discuss how these difficulties may be overcome….” “…Light, or the actinic force by which all pictures taken by the rays of the sun are formed, is, in my opinion, from what I have read and seen, but imperfectly understood in India, and, indeed, in many parts of our own country. Take, for instance, the usual run of large landscape pictures throughout England. Every operator has a different idea upon the subject of exposure: one considers it should be short, the other long; yet at the particular minute at which the picture was taken, there was only one proper time of exposure. How rarely do we see a picture perfect in every part; I am speaking generally. There are some gentlemen whose pictures always resemble the motto which accompanies Horniman’s tea. Such are Wilson, England, Blanchard, Thompson, Bedford, Sedgfield, Breeze, Rejlander, and Robinson; but all these talented men will tell us that they, too, each and all, find a difficulty in deciding, at some time or another, what exposure to give certain pictures. They, too, have their failures along with others. If, therefore, this is the state of things here, how much more difficult is it for the amateur to arrive at the proper exposure in a country like India?…” “…The remark so aptly made by Mr. T. R. Williams this summer, that it was the dryness of the atmosphere, and not the light, was perfectly correct; and were we to carefully observe the various atmospheric changes, we should see that cold and damp induce to sensitiveness and rapidity of operation, while heat and dryness are the opposite. Dry and cold is good because it is clear and bright. Take, for instance, an October morning, or an April day — sun and shower’s. Contrast these with a hot sultry July and August day. Compare the results, and you will find in the one case points of light sparkling like diamonds here and there all over the plate, while the half-tone and the shadows have brilliancy and detail. In the other, although fine, there is a want — a something not easily definable, yet at the same time there. I was much struck the other day with the force and truth of these observations. Being professionally engaged in illustrating a celebrated waterfall in South Wales, and having fallen in with what all would term “abominable weather” — damp and rainy to a degree — I found I could, with a compound lens well stopped down, get most exquisite effects, while on those days when we had the most brilliant sunshine and heat, the results were poor and meagre. One day that l spent at the Abbey of Strata Florida, it rained (without fog), slightly all day, yet I got most exquisite pictures with moderate exposure. Another that I spent at Pontrhydyreos, brilliant and lovely though the scene looked to the eye, yet in the camera, the results were poor. I also compared the pictures of Bedford, taken in the winter with, I think, a single lens (Ross’s), with those of Pumphry, taken in the summer with the same or a similar lens. In the former, there was detail and brilliancy; in the other, there was the hazy, snowy appearance so often got when the light and atmosphere appear to dance before one. Much, I admit, depends upon the manipulation in both cases….”]

“To Correspondents.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:271 (Nov. 13, 1863): 552. [“Presentation Print. — We have pleasure in announcing to our readers that we have just completed arrangements for presenting to our subscribers, at an early date, a copy of Kenilworth Banqueting Hall, by the photo-electric engraving process of Mr. Duncan Dallas, from a negative by Mr. Francis Bedford. The print will be on tinted paper, the size of a page of the News, from a plate untouched by the hands of the engraver. It is unquestionably the finest specimen of heliographic engraving which has ever been issued.”]

Warner, W. H. “On Photography in India.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:202 (Nov. 16, 1863): 444-445. [“Read at a meeting of the South London Photographic Society, Nov. 12th, 1863.” “I come before you this evening to discuss the difficulties and trials which beset the path of the photographer (whether he be professional or not) in a far off land — a land about which what little is known photographically has only lately been brought home to us by a few of those ardent amateurs who have been determined, notwithstanding all trials and troubles, to succeed — a land that teems with beautiful temples, constant and ever-varying foliage, and with people and animals that are interesting in themselves. Having lately been occupied in printing large numbers of these very subjects for a celebrated amateur, they have led me to make many observations, which, without seeing the negatives themselves, I should never have had the opportunity of doing….” “…Light, or the actinic force by which all pictures taken by the rays of the sun are formed, is, in my opinion, from what I have read and seen, but imperfectly understood in India, and indeed in many parts of our own country. Take, for instance, the usual run of large landscape pictures throughout England. Every operator has a different idea upon the subject of exposure. One considers it should be short, another long; yet at the particular minute at which the picture was taken, there was only one proper time of exposure. How rarely do we see a picture perfect in every part. I am speaking generally. There are some gentlemen whose pictures always resemble the motto which accompanies Horniman’s tea. Such are Wilson, England, Blanchard, Thompson, Bedford, Sedgfield, Breese, Rejlander, and Robinson; but all these talented men will tell us that they too, each and all, find a difficulty in deciding, at some time or another, what exposure to give certain pictures. They too have their failures along with others. If, therefore, this is the state of things here, how much more difficult is it for the amateur to arrive at the proper exposure in a country like India!…”]

“Photographic Society of London. Ordinary General Meeting. King’s College, London. Tuesday, November 3, 1863.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:139 (Nov. 16, 1863): 385-403. 3 illus. [“The Lord Chief Baron, F.R.S., President, in the Chair….” ‘…The Chairman said: They met that evening, the first in the Winter Session, under very favourable auspices, to examine a most interesting subject, and to listen to the history of those photographs of an early period which Mr. Smith had rescued from oblivion. They had been found amongst some tons of waste papers in the library of Matthew Boulton, a gentleman whose name was known to the country in connexion with various valuable inventions and discoveries….” “…The Chairman said that, like the Ghost in “Hamlet,” his hour was almost come; and he would, by the permission of the Meeting, ask Mr. Bedford to fill his place, and would then retire. Mr. Bedford then took the Chair, and invited discussion. The pictures, which were laid on the table, were passed round for the examination of Members….”]

“Meetings of Societies. Edinburgh Photographic Society.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 10:20 (Dec. 15, 1863): 491. [“The annual meeting of this Society was held on the 2nd instant, the President occupying the chair. The Secretary read the Council’s Report for the past year as follows: —
Report. At the close of the third year of the Society’s existence the Council has again to congratulate the members on the uniform success and prosperity which has attended it since its formation, and which has continued up to the present moment. During the past year eighteen meetings have been held, at which the following communications have been read: — On the Position of Photography as a Fine Art. By William Traquair. On Enlarging. By J. T. Taylor. On Printing Transparencies by Means of the Camera and Wet Collodion. By John Nicol. On the Manufacture of Magic Lantern Slides by Means of Superposition. By J. T. Taylor. On the Advantages of Transparencies on Glass over Paper Prints. By E. H. Bow, C.E. On Photolithography. By W. H. Davies. On the Law of Copyright. By Andrew Mure. On Portrait Lenses. By J. T. Taylor. On Electricity and Ozone. By Alexander Ballantyne. On the Curvature of the Image. By E. H. Bow, C.E. On the Assistance Photographers may derive from a Knowledge of Fine Art. By John Crawford. On Photography as a Fine Art. By A. H. Wall. On Recent Discoveries in Photographic Science. By J. T. Taylor. On the Application of Photography to Art Manufactures. By W. H. Davies. On Making an Absolutely Correct Camera Copy of a Chart by Means of a Single Distorting Lens. By E. H. Bow, C.E. On the Use of Methylated Spirits in Photographic Preparations. By John Nicol. On the Future of Photography. By John Crawford. In addition to these, a lecture was delivered by Mr. Wm. Chambers, On an Italian Tour, which was illustrated by means of photographic transparencies in the magic lantern. A number of beautiful photographs have been presented by Messrs. Rejlander and Bedford, and a fine album by Mr. Waterston. To all the gentlemen above-named the Council returns its warm thanks….”]

“Presentation Print.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 7:277 (Dec. 24, 1863): 618. [“With the Photographic News of January 1st, 1864, we shall present each of our subscribers with a beautiful specimen of Mr. Duncan Dallas’s process of photo-electric engraving. This process has been universally acknowledged to be the most perfect method of photographic engraving yet discovered, possessing perfect half-tone and gradation with great force and vigour. The subject is the “Banqueting Hall, Kenilworth,” from a negative by Mr. Francis Bedford, the size of the print just permitting it to he used as a page of the Photographic News. The print will be from a plate untouched by the graver. It will be printed on toned plate paper, and will be valued as a charming picture, as well as an interesting illustration of a valuable process.”]
1864

1 b & w (“Kenilworth Banqueting Hall.”) as frontispiece in: “Our Photo-Electric Engraving.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:278 (Jan. 1, 1864): 1-2. [“With each copy of the present number we present our readers with a view of Kenilworth Banqueting Hall, the combined work of photography, the electrotype process, and the printing-press. The negative was taken from nature, by Mr. Francis Bedford, the engraving was effected by Mr. Duncan C. Dallas, by what he terms his photo-electric, or photelectric process. The plate is altogether untouched by the graver, so that the result reaching the hands of our readers is due solely to science; nature is her own limner throughout, and presents her own work without the finishing touches of man. We believe the specimen we now issue to be the very best result of the kind ever produced: we have seen no untouched photo-engraving which can in any degree compare to it, either in pictorial effect or in the probability of economic value. Of the immense importance and varied use of a simple and efficient system of multiplying the drawings of the sunbeam, by means of the printing-press, itis unnecessary to say many words. To be able thus to multiply the absolute transcripts of nature rendered by photography; to be able to reproduce on the engraved plate every touch of the painter, without the intervention of the engraver; to perpetuate the fac-simile of the draughtsman’s design, or the penman’s writing, with the truth of photography, and the rapidity of the printing-press, was always an object pre-eminently worth searching for. To obtain such a method has been the darling ambition of many of the ablest experimentalists in photography, from the earliest days of its history, and we find many of the most honoured names associated with important contributions to the accomplishment of such an idea. Almost every mode of producing a printing surface has been tried: etching in various ways, photogalvanography, photoglyphy, photolithography, photozincography, photo-block printing. By each method something has been done, and in reproductions of subjects where the delineation consisted of lines and points, gradation being secured by the conventional rendering of hatching and stippling, a considerable amount of success has been secured. But where the subtle gradations given by nature in a photograph, or the flat tints and soft blendings of tone of the painter are to be reproduced, most processes have hitherto failed. The reason for this is very simple. Gradation of monochrome, when produced without lines or points by the painter, is generally produced by the differences in quantity applied of a semitransparent pigment; in the deeper tones, sufficient of the pigment is applied to cover up the light ground underneath; in the half shadows and lighter tints, thicker or thinner washes are applied, having greater or less transparency, and so producing gradation and half-tone. In the photograph, gradation of tint is obtained somewhat similarly, by the gradation of metallic deposit more or less covering the white ground of the paper. It has been found impossible to produce a printing surface, to be worked at the printing-press, which should imitate this process, and obtain gradation by the varied thickness of the ink deposited. To surmount the difficulty thus presented, it has been found desirable to imitate, by some means, the conventional method of obtaining gradation, to produce, in short, a grain somewhat after the fashion of aqua-tint grain on a metal plate, or the lithographic grain on a stone….” “…Regarding the picture itself, we may simply remark that the subject chosen, and the treatment, are worthy of Bedford, the figures admirably aiding in giving life to the picture and relative size to the objects. For those who wish to bind it with the Photographic News, it is now the right size. For those who wish to preserve it in a portfolio, we should recommend that it be cut to retain an inch all round of the present margin, and then mounted on a white board, a plan which will materially enhance the effect of the picture.”]

Dallas, Duncan C. “A Few Words on Delineation.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:278 (Jan. 1, 1864): 5-6. [“In the science of delineation, pure Nature is one thing, pure Art another; and quite dissimilar from either is the happy union of Nature and Art. Hence we have three distinct principles to guide us — the literal, the formal, and the artistic. I use the two first of these expressions in no inferior sense. For, to represent Nature as she is — literally — is no mean acquirement. And, again, is not pure Art the very poetry of form — Imagination, expressing in fittest way her great inspirations? In employing as above the term artistic, I wish to indicate not merely pure art delineation, but rather that delightful combination of nature and art, in which pictures of nature become not merely literal translations but poetical renderings; and, conversely, that combination of art and nature in which the forms of pure art are not merely poetry, but poetry with that exquisite touch of natural, which makes us feel akin with the artist….” “…Nothing has been done to render the plate anything else than a reproduction of the original photograph by means of carbon ink and the copper-plate press. In all respects save one, viz., the very extreme darks — in this photograph very dense — I believe I may safely say that nothing appreciable has been lost. Under the arch the original photograph is a black mass by reflected light, but showing by transmitted light the details seen in my reproduction. I have since overcome the difficulty of obtaining an absolutely dense black. I issue this specimen free from all touching-up. Beautiful, and almost perfect, as the original photograph by Mr. Bedford undoubtedly is, it is incomplete as a work of art nature. A great improvement would be the introduction of sky and clouds. A few artistic touches would render the thing perfect. Having got so nearly perfect a result, would it be heresy to do what is required with the brush? Or, having got the picture in aere perpetuo, would it detract in the least from its value if the aid of the engraver were called in to make it really a work of art-nature? For my part, I think we may, if we wish photographic things of beauty to be joys forever. It is always possible to avoid the meretricious, and that is the only danger to be shunned. The object to be sought is to produce something beautiful, as well as true. I consider it no slight advantage of my own process that the plates can serve as a basis for the artist engraver to introduce special engraved effects, or to remedy the acknowledged deficiencies in photography….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:279 (Jan. 8, 1864): 19-20. [“The usual monthly meeting was hold on the evening of Tuesday, January the 5th; the Hon. Col. Stuart Wortley in the chair….” “…The Secretary read a letter from Mr. Hughes, addressed to the council, asking their official aid in behalf of the Goddard Fund. The council had ordered the letter to be read, and members, as individuals, might contribute. Mr. Bedford had commenced by giving two guineas….”]

commenced by giving two guineas….”]

“The Goddard Testimonial Fund.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:280 (Jan. 15, 1864): 36.
[“                                                                                                                        £    s.   d.
Subscriptions already received                                                                           110  5 10
Silas Eastham, Esq., Manchester                                                                           5  5   0
John Eastham, Esq,                                                                                              5  5   0
Francis Bedford, Esq.                                                                                           2  2   0
Chas. Heisch, Esq.                                                                                               2  2   0
Valentine Blanchard, Esq.                                                                                     1  1   0
F. W. Hart, Esq.                                                                                                    1  1   0
__ Mainwaring, Esq.                                                                                              1  1   0
W. E. Debenham, Esq.                                                                                          1  1   0
A. H.                                                                                                                     1  0   0
W. R. B.                                                                                                                0 19  4
H. W. D.                                                                                                               0 10  0
Chas. Corey, Esq.                                                                                                 0 10  0
Mr. Beecroft                                                                                                          0 10  0
Chas. Newman, Esq.                                                                                            0 10  0
J. S.                                                                                                                     0  2   6
H.                                                                                                                         0  2   6
Mr. Gabell.                                                                                                            0  5   0
Anonymous                                                                                                          0  2   6
J. Solomon, Esq.                                                                                                  0  5   0
A Grateful Photographer                                                                                        0  5   0
J. Pillans, Esq.                                                                                                      2  2   0
John G. Livesay, Esq.                                                                                           1  1   0
W. England, Esq.                                                                                                  2  2   0
W. W. Rouch, Esq.                                                                                                2  2   0
£141 12 8 “]

“Goddard Testimonial Fund.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 8:141 (Jan. 15, 1864): 446-447. [“Subscriptions already received. .
£          s.         d.
J. E. Mayall, Esq. . . . . . . . . . . . .                                                10         10         0
T. Ross, Esq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                              10         10         0
J. H. Dallmeyer, Esq. . . . . . . . .                                                  10         10         0
Photographic News . . . . . . . . . . . .                                               5           5         0
British Journal of Photography . .                                                  5           5         0
A. Claudet, Esq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                               5           5         0
T. R. Williams, Esq . . . . . . . . . . .                                                  5           5         0
Jabez Hughes, Esq. . . . . . . . . . .                                                  5           5         0
A. Brothers, Esq. . . . . . . . . . . ..                                                  5           5         0
Silas Eastham, Esq. . . . . . . . . . .                                                  5           5         0
John Eastham, Esq. . . . . . . . . . .                                                ..5          5         0
Messrs. Carpenter and Westley . .                                                5           5         0
G. Nottage, Esq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                            ..5          5         0
Messrs. Lock and Whitfield . . . .                                                   5           5         0
H. P. Robinson, Esq . . . . . . . . . . .                                                3           3         0
James Mudd, Esq. . . . . . . . . . .                                                    3           3         0
W. England, Esq. . . . . . . . . . . . .                                                  2           2         0
G. Wharton Simpson, Esq.. . . . . .                                                2           2         0
George Shadbolt, Esq.                                                                2           2         0
Francis Bedford, Esq . . . . . . . . . . .                                               2           2         0
Etc…. ]

“Minor Topics of the Month. Stratford-on-Avon.” ART JOURNAL 26:2 (Feb. 1, 1864): 58. [“… and whatever other place is in any peculiar manner associated with Shakspere, will this year be certainly regarded with even unusual interest, and consequently good photographs, whether for the stereoscope or not, which represent Stratford itself and its neighbourhood, will not fail to be in great request, and to receive a cordial welcome. Mr. Francis Bedford, the photographer to his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, has very opportunely published a series of stereoscopic pictures, which are exactly such as will be in harmony with the public feeling; they are of the highest order of excellence as photographs, and possess all the best qualities for which Mr. Bedford’s works are justly celebrated, and they also are as varied as they are excellent. The Stratford-on-Avon group comprises seventeen pictures; there are four exterior, and as many interior, views of the church, the latter showing the Shakspere monument; the House of the Poet is represented in two other pictures, and another pair are devoted to Ann Hathaway’s Cottage; the remaining pictures are views of the Room in which Shakspere was born, the Grammar School, the Guild Chapel, with the vestiges that yet remain of Now Place, the High Street and Town Hall, and the Old Bridge. The other groups —, kindred groups they may be styled — which Mr. Bedford has included in his series, consist of twenty-seven views of Kenilworth Castle, with five others of the Church, and of other points of especial interest in the immediate neighbourhood of the famed castle; thirty-seven views of Warwick Castle, and fifteen others in Warwick, which include the Monuments of the Beauchamp Chapel and St. Mary’s Church; twenty-one views of Guy’s Cliff; twenty-five views of Coventry; six of Charlecote; ten of Stoneleigh Abbey; twenty-seven of Leamington; fifty of Cheltenham; and six of Tewkesbury Abbey — in all 247 stereoscopic pictures, which are published by Messrs. Catherall and Prichard, of Chester, and may be obtained of the London Stereoscopic Company, and of other eminent dealers in photographs in London.”]
“A Good Plan.” NEW YORK EVANGELIST 35:7 (Feb. 18, 1864): 6. [“ — The Prince of Wales has presented to the library of Harvard College copies of the photographs of the Samaritan Pentateuch preserved in the Monastery of Mount Gerizim, the oldest manuscript in the world, and said to have been written by a grandson of Aaron.” (These photographs taken by Francis Bedford. See NYE 33:10 (Mar. 5, 1863): 3.)]

“Fine Arts.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 44:1246 (Sat., Feb. 20, 1864): 194. [“Mr. Francis Bedford, the well-known photographer, has published a set of photographs for the stereoscope, which will be acceptable to many at the present time. These are seventeen views of scenes and localities at Stratford-on-Avon connected with the memory of Shakspeare. They comprise four exterior, and as many interior, views of the church – the latter showing the Shakspeare monument – two of the poet’s house, and two more of Ann Hathaway’s cottage. The remaining are views of the room in which Shakspeare was born, the grammar-school, the Guild Chapel, with the vestiges that yet remain of New-place, the High-street, and Townhall, and the old bridge.”]

“Talk in the Studio. Medals of the Photographic Society of Scotland.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:286 (Feb. 26, 1864): 107-108. [“The committee appointed to make the awards at the competing exhibition of this society have just given in their report….” “…Mr. Robinson has, we believe, on four previous occasions, taken prizes for pictures exhibited in the Scottish metropolis, and last year it was suggested that, as there were no other competitors in composition photography, it should be made a condition at the next competition, in order to extend the chances, that the medal for the best group should be given for a picture from one negative — thus excluding composition photographs from competitive exhibition. These conditions obtained, therefore, this year. Mr. Robinson has, however, again secured the prize for the best group, his “Somebody Coming,” which we have before described, having obtained the silver medal. He has also received a silver medal for the best landscape, the charming view of Stoneleigh Deer Park securing the award. The other medals are awarded for pictures we have not seen, to Mr. John Moffat, of Edinburgh, for his portrait of George Harvey, R.S.A. a silver medal; to Mr. Thomas Rodger, of St. Andrews, for his portrait group of Colonel and Mrs. Maitland Dougal, a bronze medal; and to Mr. Francis Bedford for his view of Warwick Castle, a bronze medal. The Society have determined to distribute Mr. Robinson’s “Somebody Coming” to the members as a presentation print.”]

“Stereographs: English Scenery. Photographed by Francis Bedford.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 11:210 (Mar.15, 1864): 99-100.

“Photographic Society of Scotland. Ordinary Meeting. March 8th, 1864.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 9:143 (Mar. 15, 1864): 5-9. [“…Report of the Prize-Committee.
The Committee to award the Society’s medals, for this season met on the 16th of February; and after each had individually gone over the photographs sent for competition, they were unanimous in their selection in every class, viz., the best portrait, that of George Harvey, R.S.A., by Mr. Moffat, of Edinburgh; the best group, “Somebody ‘s Coming,” by Mr. H. P. Robinson, of Leamington; and the best landscape, “Deer-Park, Stonleigh,” also by Mr. Robinson: and to these they accordingly awarded the Silver Medals offered by the Society. Besides being unanimous in this decision, the members of the Committee were equally agreed as to the great excellence of those photographs which in their estimation rank next in order of merit, — in landscapes particularly noticing those of Warwick Castle, by Mr. Francis Bedford, of London, to one of which, “Warwick Castle from the Avon,” they awarded a Bronze Medal; while some of the landscapes by Messrs. Annan, Gillis, Mudd, and Thompson they note as deserving of special commendation….”]

“Review.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 9:143. (Mar. 15, 1864): 16. [Review. Stereographs of English Scenery. By Francis Bedford. Chester: Catherill and Pritchard. “Mr. Bedford has just issued a further series of his charming stereographs, these consisting chiefly of Warwickshire scenery. Warwick Castle presents some fine views and valuable interiors. Stratford abounds with interesting subjects. Coventry has many rare architectural beauties. Leamington is surrounded by many pretty views. The whole district, in fact, abounds with choice photographic subjects, to the whole of which Mr. Bedford has done full justice.”]

“Critical Notices.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:289 (Mar. 18, 1864): 136. [“Stereographs of English Scenery. By Frances Bedford. Chester: Catheral and Pritchard. “Mr. Bedford’s last issue of stereographs is timely, consisting, as the views do, chiefly of scenes in Warwickshire, a county abounding at once in natural and in architectural beauties, and in hallowed and venerable associations. Perhaps no spot in England possesses, within the area of a few miles, so much to please the eye, and call up eventful memories. Stratford on-Avon, with its homely cottage in Henley Street, and noble Church, together with the neighbouring Shottery and Charlecote — the goal of many a pilgrimage; Warwick Castle, Guy’s Cliff’, and Kenilworth; Stoneleigh and its noble deer-park, and the Forest of Arden; and quaint old Coventry, with its three tall spires, its treasures of ancient and modern architecture, and its legends; pretty and fashionable Leamington, with its urban charms. The county abounds with scenes famous in English history, and Nature has been prodigal of those calm beauties which constitute the genuine English landscape. Mr. Bedford has produced nearly two hundred stereographs of the scenes of chief importance in the country. In such a number we might naturally expect to find varying degrees of excellence and interest, but by far the greater number are very perfect indeed, good alike in photography and in pictorial qualities. No. 11, a view in Leamington, is a charming composition: No. 83, a view of the Avon from the balcony of Warwick Castle, is a very perfect picture, with fine atmospheric qualities; the water is transparent; the foliage well detailed; a warm sky takes the place of the usual mass of white paper; the whole is at once broad and delicate. Of course we have various views of the old house in Henley Street, inside and out, amongst which is an excellent interior of the room where the great poet was born. Various views also of the church, inside and out, some of the former including the bust. Perhaps we are hypercritical in saying that some of the views intended merely to reproduce scenes interesting from association might have been made more pictorially perfect by a little attention to the grouping of the figures present, as in No. 183, “Ann Hathaway’s Cottage.” As a whole, we repeat the series is excellent, and worthy of Mr. Bedford.”]

“Photography as an Industry.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:290 (Mar. 24, 1864): 153-154. [“From the “London Review.” “Almost as numerous and as various as the scenes that the orb of day itself shines upon are the sun-pictures we see in our stationers’ windows and in every house we visit. How few of us who remember distinctly the first efforts of photography in taking the imprints of feathers, leaves, and bits of lace would have predicted from those childish essays, so great, so wonderful, so rapidly produced, an industry as photography has now become! Not that we are at all disposed to sing an unmitigated praise of photographers or their pictures, for with thorough artist’s feelings we see in their ordinary productions the defects of composition, the absence of that picture-painting of unspoken thoughts, and the want of many another quality that goes to make a perfect picture, while we as painfully perceive in many a way the deleterious effects of their productions on the prospects and qualities of painter-artists; but its good outbalances its evils, and photography flourishes and increases. A portrait is, however, not a likeness, because it is taken with a lens on a chemical preparation. The so-called portrait may be, often is — oftener perhaps is than not — a greater or less distortion. Strong lenses are used for portraits to make the figure stand sharply from the background, and these, unless worked by the best opticians (and there are far more bad lenses than good ones), distort the features, especially in making the nose and other prominences improperly large in respect to the rest of the face, such as we may see in caricature proportions by looking at our own on the back of a spoon. Landscapes, for which flatter lenses are used, fail more generally for want of delicate chemical manipulation, which shows itself in the absence of those slight gradations of tint that give air and distance to all natural scenery. It is not, however, our intention or our wish to dwell on the difficulties of photography; we admit them to be very great. The most beautiful face may be spoilt by a very little distortion, and the finest landscape as we see it may be marred by some slight defect, defaced by a single blot. The painter-artist, too, draws on his imagination, and puts in groups of pleasing figures where no figures were, and adds to the scenery he copies thoughts and fancies not less charming of his own. But the photographer has before him Nature as she is. The clouds may blacken the landscape where he wants it pale, or the sunlight may not fall exactly as he wishes; some ugly object may come full in sight, or some slight projection obscure a telling point of the view; he cannot leave the ugly object out, he cannot raise his instrument as he could his head above the obstruction; the camera is his brush, and the sensitized paper his solitary colour; and neither his brush can he handle, nor his colour can he mix, as he wishes or as he likes. Each has a way of its own: each is inflexible, intractable, and cannot be bent or turned from its rigid exactness. What is bad the photographer must hide or put out; and this, too, with whatever materials or means may be at hand. With such difficulties in his way, and besotting him at every turn, the wonder is how much that is really artistic has been done. We now have most admirable works by Mayall, Claudet, and some few others, in whose miniature portraits we see every feature charmingly portrayed, and the characteristic action or the familiar look, even to a smile or a frown, successfully caught by the operator, who must not only be a good artist but a good chemist to achieve such results. It is not a little curious to observe the social effects of these solar-chemical operations in portrait-taking in the world at large. The old miniature painters, as a class, have already died out, and the like of the exquisite stipplings of Ross, Andrew Robertson, Chalon, Stuart, Thorburn, and Newton are now nowhere to be seen; and, although one cannot regret that the race of daubers of both great and small deformations of the “human face divine,” who in the days of our youth earned competent incomes by the practice of their worthless, un-pictorial libels, should be extinct, one can but grieve that there should be no encouragement at all for the production of such exquisite gems as those of Miss Coutts by Ross, the Empress of Russia by Mrs. Robertson, cum multis aliis of our nobility by those exquisite artists we have named. But if we have lost something in artists, we have gained something in gratification. If our curiosity be excited by daring deeds or prominent actions, the lens and the chemical paper present the doer and the place to our eyes, and we see what manner of man he is and where the event took place. Our kings, queens, and princes, our statesmen and scholars, our pretty women and our mountebanks, may be bought for eighteenpence a piece — genuine likenesses; for the lower-priced articles may or may not be such. Is there a Royal marriage, instantly a Mayall produces cartes de visite of the Prince, his bride, and all the bridesmaids; and in the provinces Burton and Sons, of Leicester, rival the best of London houses with pictures of presents to the Princess — his exquisite photograph of the Birmingham silver table falling short in colour only of more than could be done by Lance’s inimitable skill. Is there a “world’s fair” at Kensington, the London Stereoscopic Company gives us mementos of every department of the busy scene, and of the machinery, sculptures, wares, and pictures in it. Or their artists follow our future king to his private retreat, and send amongst his people’s homes thousands of views of Sandringham. Every kind of scene, every sort of being, from man to oysters, and seaweeds to monkeys, from ripples on the shore to palaces and churches, are thus produced not only in our own and in lands around, but in countries far away. the scenes of ancient grandeur that Karnak and Thebes present in ruins, and those in Palestine made holy by the memory of the presence of the Divine founder of our faith, are laid before us with the most marvellous fidelity and the utmost pictorial beauty by a Bedford; while the faithful transcripts of wonderful scenery of Switzerland and the Alps, delicately rendered by the Parisian Bissons, are imported by hundreds by Mr. De la Rue. Nor are these recordings of scenes and scenery left solely to artist-traders or traders in art. Amateurs bring home from their travels not the least valuable — perhaps the most so — of these nature-records. From tropical Africa and polar Spitzbergen alike these pictures come. Pictures of mountain and moor, of desert, ruin, and forest, of mountain peak and pass of glaciers and flowing river, of savage chieftain and unclad aboriginal, and samples of the many kinds of man, and these the works of many a traveller, usefully find a way into the world through the Amateurs’ Society. There is nothing perhaps more laborious than drawing architectural details, and there are few things that people generally feel more interest in than ancient buildings. The fine cathedral and the beautiful church — built in days when, whatever the faults of the monks, men strove earnestly and well to make their houses of religious worship as worthy as human art and human hands could make them of the great Being to whose honour they are dedicated — are the first-sought objects of the tourist; the ancient castle, with weather-beaten battlements and towers exciting memories of past history, comes next; while a mouldering house of three or four centuries ago is cherished as a domestic relic of our ancestors in an ago when tables and chairs were stouter than cabinetmakers now produce, and photographers were not. These all require in their pictures thousands of details, from the form, size, and aspect of a stone or brick, to every cankering touch Time’s ruthless hand has put to the florid sculpturing of the lofty facade and the innumerable chisellings of the mouldings. Such labour and such skill as this requires was rarely bestowed, and if bestowed was costly in the extreme and ranked amongst the highest efforts of art in the hands of Roberts and such like men. Here and there and now and then some enthusiastic architect made sketches of some bit or portion as an example of the rest, but all this was desultory and fragmentary; we were never sure that the face or form of the statue was correctly given, the tracery exactly outlined, or the mere builder’s work truthfully rendered. And here photography has done real good service. We may regret the sudden blackness of the shadows under arches and doorways, the want of perfect clearness in the half-lights, but the main mass of the portion of building taken in by the camera is rendered in the photograph with such perfection of detail, as no human patience could attain to, no hand acquire the power of rendering. The exact symmetry and proportions are retained: every film flaked by the winds and weather from the once smooth stone, every roughness, every joint, crevice, and cranny comes out, and half effaced bas-reliefs often appear with more distinctness than in the object itself, the slight condensing of the rays of light by the lens, and their consequent stronger action on the silver salt producing intenser chemical action, and consequently more power of defining shadow. The smaller views of buildings are of course no more than other views; but to these the stereoscope gives advantages no mere artist’s sketch could possibly possess; while the larger photographs by the Bissons and others — such as the Escalier de Francois Premier in the Chateau de Blois, the Hotel de Ville of Louvain, the Church of St. Ouen, and the pinnacles of the Palais de Justice at Rouen, the apsides of Bayeux and Caen Cathedrals — are not only works of art, but transcripts of the highest interest and value to architects and antiquaries, so much so as to have given rise to a special society for their production and distribution. The still larger details of the statues over the central doorway of Notre Dame, by Bisson, in which the figures are 13 inches in absolute height, even more decisively show how appropriate and useful the photographer’s art is for such purposes. In Mr. Bedford’s charming scenes in Egypt and the Holy Land, taken during the travels of the Prince of Wales, there is the same remarkable clearness and precision of architectural details, although his pictures are on a far smaller scale than those we have referred to, and this notwithstanding his great and successful efforts to pictorialize his views. In this latter respect his use of his optical instrument, his judicious choice of figures and selections of their positions, with the various delicate and unexposed manoeuvres to produce effects, and the tender manipulation of his pictures, render them merely works of art, and take Mr. Bedford out of the ranks of manipulators, and place him in that of true artists. Pictures, too, have been already subjects for photographers. It is true we only get a sepia-like sketch of that which is gorgeous or sombre with colour in the original painting, according to the subject, and thus lose half the effect the artists had produced. But even this is much. Engravings, whether on metal or wood, are costly, and, like photographs, deal only in black and white; moreover, the copyist has to reduce in size; and his drawing is therefore very likely to be inaccurate and out of production. So far, then, in this respect, photography is a gain. If the more sight-seer enters a picture-gallery, and wishes to bring away some mementos of what he has seen, he cannot have them in a more accurate, cheaper, or more convenient form than as photographs on paper. For the artist such photographs would convey all that perhaps he wanted to remember, except colour, which a few pencil-notes would supply sufficiently for him. Engravings, too, are costly, and must be good and careful to be of value; so that, for pictures, photography seems a highly fitting means of illustration. In proof of this, we have but to show the photographs of Bingham or Michelez. The copies of “Le Rencontre de Faust et Marguerite,” by Tissot, the “Et in Arcadia Ego,” by Boulanger, “Les Sirinès,” by Barrias; the “Madame Mère,” by Müller; the “Au Bord de la Mer,” by Lehmann; the “Traverseè du Havre à Honfleur,” by Biard; the “Chien de Temps,” by Horace Vernet; “Les Joueurs d’Echecs,” and “La Rixe,” by Meissonier, photographed by Bingham, are equal in their pictorial results to engravings, and preferable in many other respects, especially in that they give us something evident of the feeling, touch, expression, and peculiarity of the artist’s pencillings in the original pictures, and which are more or less always lost in the individuality of the engraver’s touch. Equally good are the photographs by Michelez of “The Stolen Child,” by Schlesinger; the “Promenade du Luxembourg au XVIIIe Sicèle,” by Monfullet; “Une Lessive à la Cervara,” by Curzon; the “Manon Lescaut,” by Charles Hue; the “Troupeau de Moutons,” by Jacque; the “Norwegian Bride,” by Tidemann; and “A Street in Antwerp,” by Jules Noel. Prize pictures and the new works of modern painters, as well as the pictures of the old masters, may thus be rendered familiar in every household where the inmates are educated: and controversy with the fine and more subtle picturings of the human imagination can but be conducive to intellectual habits, and to the development of those finer and more sensitive feelings which are the priceless pearls and ornaments of human existence.”]

“Water Supply of Jerusalem–Ancient and Modern.” JOURNAL OF SACRED LITERATURE AND BIBLICAL RECORD 4th s 5:9 (Apr. 1864): 133-157. Illus. [(Throughout this article this author mentions traveling with the Prince of Wales on his trip to Palestine. Then he mentions using a photograph of Jerusalem for his measurements. Francis Bedford was the photographer who accompanied the Prince of Wales on that trip. On the other hand, both a British team, under the Rev. H. B. Tristram, and a French team of archeologists, led by the Count Melchior de Vogue, was also photographing in Jerusalem at this time.) “The immortal interest attaching to the city of God from its sacred-historic associations, will naturally elicit attention to a proposal for the benefit of its present inhabitants. Jerusalem, once the City of the Great King, and hereafter to be the joy of the whole earth, is notoriously, at the present period of its degradation, rendered insalubrious and defiling to the senses by the absence, comparatively of water. The consequences of such a privation to a large population in a torrid climate, surpass any description….” “…For the discovery of the “springing” of the arch of the eastern abutment of this bridge we are indebted to Dr. Robinson; but the abutment itself, which formed part of the temple wall, is buried in the ground, beneath the detritus and ruins of many Jerusalems. I have marked upon the map the position of the bridge, restored. Its southern side was thirty-nine feet from the S.W. corner of the Haram wall, and its breadth was fifty-one feet. Part of the first arch still remains protruding from the wall. It consists of three courses of immense stones: one stone being twenty-four and a half feet in length, and another twenty and a half; and, measuring from a photograph, each of them is about six feet in height…. p. 153.]

“Mr. Swan’s New Carbon Process.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:292 (Apr. 8, 1864): 169-170. [“We are now in a position to place the details of Mr. Swan’s new carbon printing process before our readers. A complete description, with working details, was given to one of the fullest meetings of the Photographic Society we remember to have seen, on Tuesday evening last, and the capabilities of the system illustrated by a few dozens of specimens, all of first class excellence, including portraiture, landscape, and marine subjects, from card size to ten by eight. Every specimen exhibited fully justified the admiration we have already expressed in regard to the productions of the process. Some of the delicate instantaneous sea views from negatives by Mr. Wilson were exquisitely beautiful, as were also the portraits. Of the large pictures, Mr. Bedford, who was in the chair, remarked that they were as perfect as it was possible for photographs to be, possessing every quality which could be desired, and, as he added to us personally after the meeting, they were not simply equal to silver prints, but superior to them, possessing a general brilliancy, a delicacy of detail and transparency not to be found in the best silver prints. The description of the process was lucid and simple, and was received with attention and frequent applause. A severe fusillade of questions from various persons, some of which at times assumed an unnecessary air of antagonism, only served to elucidate the subject and confirm the general high appreciation of the process…”]

“Proceedings of Societies. London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:292 (Apr. 8, 1864): 175-176. [“The usual monthly meeting of this society was held on the evening of Tuesday, April 5th, in King’s College, Mr. Francis Bedford in the Chair. The minutes of a previous meeting having been read and confirmed, the following gentlemen were elected members of the Society: …”]

“London Photographic Society. Ordinary General Meeting. King’s College, London. Tuesday, April 5th, 1864.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 9:144 (Apr. 15, 1864): 18-25. [“Francis Bedford, Esq., in the Chair….”]

“A Photographers’ Relief Fund and Cheapness in Photography.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:293 (Apr. 15, 1864): 189-190. [“Dear Sir, — In accordance with your suggestion, I beg to offer a few remarks. Firstly, I fully endorse Mr. Beattie’s observations as to an examination before admission to any benevolent fund or provident institution. It would be the only guard against the numerous Tom, Dick, and Harrys who now practice our noble art, and who, by their debasing productions, tend to lower it and to make it “cheap.” As a practical photographer, in order to avoid and soften down many of the rubs and occasionally serious knocks and accidents which one meets with in daily life, I have taken the precaution to insure myself in the Accidental Death Insurance Company, the only company on a moderate scale in which a photographer or working man can get a remuneration in case of accident during life, and a sum at death in case it should have been so caused. But this does not meet the case in question. A fund is wanted from which aged and deserving photographers may obtain assistance in time of need, misfortunes arise from various sources, and none are more prone or liable to accident than the hard worked, practical photographer. As, however, nothing can be done without a movement at headquarters, I would suggest that some leading photographer, such as Mr. F. Bedford, do call a meeting of his confrères in London, and carefully consider the matter. The fact is apparent to all, that while other professions have their provident institutions, we are without. Thus, an institution founded upon these principles would be a bar to the very cheapness which is now our bane; and we should obtain a firmer and more social standing in society. — I am, dear sir, yours faithfully, W. H. Warner.”]

“Proceedings of Societies. North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:294 (Apr. 29, 1864): 211-212. [“The usual monthly meeting of this association was held in Myddelton Hall, on Wednesday evening, April 20th. Mr. G. Dawson in the chair. The minutes of a former meeting were read and confirmed, after which the following gentlemen were elected members of the society: Mr. W. Sandford, and G. W. Berridge. The Chairman stated that Mr. Bedford had presented 20 very choice photographs to the Society, which would be ready for inspection in the album of the Society at the next meeting. He also announced that the presentation print would be ready at the next meeting; the photograph selected was The Brook at Kenilworth, by Mr. Bedford….”]

“Photographic Society of Scotland. Annual General Meeting, held in the Society’s Hall, 117 George Street, May 10, 1864.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 9:145 (May 16, 1864): 40-44. 1 illus. [“C. G. H. Kinnear, Vice-President, in the Chair….” “…The Competitive Exhibition of this season was the means of bringing together a number of beautiful prints, sent from every part of the country — a proof that a medal from this Society is valued as one of the highest rewards a photographer can attain. The Exhibition was open for one month to the public, free of charge; and it must be gratifying to the Society that the Exhibition Rooms were well attended, and that many regrets were expressed when the Exhibition was closed. The gentlemen appointed by the Council to award the prizes were unanimous in their opinion as to the merits of the pictures selected for rewards, which were as follows: — For the best Landscape the Silver Medal was awarded to Mr. P. Robinson, of Leamington, for the “Deer Park, Stonleigh; ” and Mr. Robinson also carried off another Medal for the best Group, “Somebody’s Coming.” Mr. Moffat, of Edinburgh, was the successful competitor for the best Portrait, that of “George Harvey, R.S.A.,” for which he received a Silver Medal. A Bronze Medal was awarded to Mr. F. Bedford, of London, for his view of “Warwick Castle;” and another Bronze Medal to Mr. Rodger, St. Andrews, for his Group of “Colonel and Mrs. Maitland Dougal….”]

“Proceedings of Societies. North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:29 (May 27, 1864): 259-260. [“The last meeting of the present was held in Myddelton Hall, on Wednesday evening, May 18thth. Mr. G. S. Shadbolt in the chair….” “The presentation print, which consisted of a very fine view of Bedford, entitled ‘‘The Brook, Kenilworth,” was then distributed. After some votes of thanks, the meeting adjourned until the 21st of September next.”]

“Proceedings of Societies. Photographic Society of Scotland.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:299 (May 27, 1864): 260-261. [“We find from the Society’ s Journal that the new carbon process was discussed at the last meeting of this society, held on the 10th inst. Mr. O. G. H. Kinnear in the chair. After a paper describing a method of washing, by Mr. Abbott, Mr. T. B. Johnston read some “Notes on Carbon Printing,” as follows: — …” “…The competitive exhibition of this season was the means of bringing together a number of beautiful prints, sent from every part of the country — a proof that a medal from this society is valued as one of the highest rewards a photographer can attain….” “…For the best landscape, the silver medal was awarded to Mr. P. Robinson, of Leamington, for the “Deer Park, Stonleigh;” and Mr, Robinson also carried off another medal, for the best group, “Somebody’s Coming.” Mr. Moffat, of Edinburgh, was the successful competitor for the best portrait, that of “George Harvey, R.S.A.,” for which he received a silver medal. A bronze medal was awarded to Mr. F. Bedford, of London, for his view of “Warwick Castle;” and another bronze medal to Mr. Rodger, St. Andrews, for his group of “Colonel and Mrs. Maitland Dougal.”…”]

“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL 26:6 (June 1, 1864): 192. [Reviews. Photographs. Printed and published by F. Frith, Reigate. A printed notice accompanying these pictures informs us that Mr. Frith proposes to issue to subscribers of one guinea annually, for four years, a series of fifteen photographs, “by the best artists of the day.” The first instalment is now on our table: a set of very beautiful views, selected with much judgment, and varied in character. Canterbury affords two, the fine old Christchurch Gateway, and the equally fine old Norman exterior staircase, leading, if we remember rightly, to what is now used as a grammar school. Another specimen of ancient architecture is the doorway of Barfreystone Church, Kent, one of the most striking photographs of the series. These three were photographed by Mr. Bedford. An interior view of a portion of Tintern Abbey, by Mr. Roger Fenton, though a little “foggy” in some of its details, is a forcible representation of that noble ruin. Mr. Rosling’s view of Conway Castle is brilliant and picturesque, and his Falls of the Ogwen, North Wales, has a rugged grandeur about it which is most impressive. A doorway in Riveaux Abbey, and an interior view of the same venerable ruin, by Mr. Bedford — but especially the latter, show his perfect mastery over the processes employed to produce the pictures. There are three Yorkshire ruins by Mr. Fenton — all good, but the first supremely so: the Wharfe at Bolton Bridge, the “Stepping-Stones,” Bolton Abbey, and a view on the Ribble. We have next three scenes by Mr. Rosling, in one of the most beautiful of our home counties, Surrey: — Betchworth Park, a closely-wooded kind of dell in winter-time, exquisitely manipulated; a view near Reigate, and another on the river Mole; the last beautiful in light and shade. ‘The Confessional,’ photographed by Mr. Goodman, is, we presume, from a painting. The priest is sitting in a recess of richly ornamented architecture, at the side of which, and seen through some open columnar work, is a young penitent on her knees. The composition is well put together. The photographs are about eight inches by six in size, and are carefully mounted. When the whole sixty are complete, they will form a truly acceptable series, provided they are continued as begun, of which no doubt need be entertained.”]

“The Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:300 (June 3, 1864): 265-266. [“The tenth exhibition of photographs, in connection with the Photographic Society of London, was opened for private view on Saturday last, and is now open to the public. Although there is no lack of good photographs, we fear that the first impression with many visitors will be one of disappointment. The room in which it is held — the Gallery of Female Artists, 48, Pall Mall — is very small, and gives an air of insignificance to the exhibition. The exclusion of coloured works, necessary in space so limited, removes one of the sources of variety and of interest; and some other causes tend towards producing on the mind of the general visitor a sense of monotony. Nevertheless, the exhibition is in many respects a good one; and the banging committee have executed their delicate ta.sk with great judgment and fairness….” “…The landscape contributions are numerous and very fine, and comprise so many first-class works that the award of a prize for the chief excellence will be a difficult task. Mr. Bedford fully maintains his reputation, and exhibits some most charming pictures. Mr. H. P. Robinson exhibits some landscapes which are equal to his portraits and compositions, and we cannot use higher praise to any pictures. Major Gresley has some landscapes and figures for surpassing anything we have before seen from him. Mr. Gillis sends some wondrously fine pictures of difficult subjects. Mr. Annan sends some of the most beautiful landscapes in the exhibition. Some of Mr. Frank Good’s pictures leave nothing to desire. The Hon. Warren Vernon, the Earl of Caithness, Col. Verschoyle, Mr. Spode, Mr. Cole, Mr. Macfarlane, Mr. S. Thompson, Mr. P. Parsons, and some others, have landscapes of which we shall have to speak more fully. The stereoscopic contributions are not numerous, the most noticeable being those of Mr. C. A. D. Halford, which contain many fine pictures. There are not many architectural subjects to compete for the prize, and these of not more than average excellence, nothing in size, subject, or grandeur equal to some of the continental pictures of former years being exhibited here. Mr. Bedford has a few of those unsurpassed interiors with which photographers are familiar in his works, and these appear to be the most noticeable architectural pictures contributed. There are no transparencies of any kind, nor enamels, nor applications of photography to decorative and ornamental purposes. The contributions generally are such as belong to photography in its most obvious and most restricted sense, but these are, in the main, very excellent; and whilst the exhibition, at the first glance, lacks variety and interest, it is found to be worthy of prolonged and careful examination for the full realization of the minute and varied beauties of a large number of the individual contributions. In our next we shall give more detailed notice of some of the pictures.”]

“Fine Arts. The Photographic Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 44:1262 (Sat., June 4, 1864): 554. [“This exhibition opened on Monday at the gallery lately occupied by the Female Artists, 48, Pall-mall. We regret to find that the display is limited in interest, more even, in proportion, than the space for exhibition is curtailed, compared with that so well filled in Suffolk-street last year. We must postpone a detailed notice till next week, but we may mention that the most important novelty is Swan’s carbon process. The landscape specimens of this process retain far more of the best qualities of photography than any examples of “permanent” printing, either English or foreign, hitherto produced….” “…The best landscapes and architectural subjects are those by Bedford (a splendid series.), Cundall and Downes, Macfarlane (Indian), S. Thompson, the Hon. W. W. Vernon, J. Hubbard, Munroe (with panoramic lenses), Lieutenant-Colonel Verschoyle, T. Good, and C. A. D. Halford….”]

“Fine Arts. The Photographic Exhibition – Photosculpture, &c.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 44:1263 (Sat., June 11, 1864): 575. [“The Photographic Society acted wisely in excluding from this exhibition “touched” and all coloured photographs. The first are little better than frauds; the second conceal the true photograph. It was advisable, also, to open the exhibition later in the season than in former years. We cannot, however, congratulate the society upon the removal to the gallery in Pall-mall, lately occupied by the Female Artists, seeing it is so small that not only is the collection greatly diminished, but there is no space for stereoscopes, photo-microscopes, enamel-photographs, and many applications of photography of popular interest. For this and–it is only fair to say- for other reasons, many well-known names are dropped out of the catalogue — such as those of Rejlander, Delamotte, Lake Price, Mudd, &c. We miss also the fine copies of works of art by Thurston Thompson, Caldesi, and the London Stereoscopic Company. Wynfield’s very remarkable series of portraits of artists, called “The Studio,” are not here, nor the holographs lately taken by Hering from Dyce’s frescoes. Colonel Stuart Wortley, whose views, last year, of the eruption of Vesuvius were of such interest, contributes nothing of importance. What would strike a gossiping chronicler most is the number and merit of the amateur exhibitors. Scions of the aristocracy and veteran officers win even greater triumphs in this art than the “Wandering Minstrels” gain in music; and ladies of rank, so far from fearing to stain their delicate fingers, achieve the greatest successes of all….” “…For landscape photographs Mr. Bedford carries off the palm. His views of old cedars and oaks, and of Kenilworth and Warwick Castles, are scarcely equalled, and could not be surpassed, except in the colour. His view of “Warwick Castle from the Avon” is the most exquisite landscape photograph in this exhibition. Next to these, we must select for special commendation the woodland and other studies by the Hon. Warren Vernon, one of our most enthusiastic and successful amateurs, and whose photograph of the international rifle match at Lord Vernon’s famous range at Sudbury we engraved. Among the architectural subjects (by-the-way, perhaps the most valuable application of photography) the photographs of cathedrals, &c., in the south of France, taken by Cundall and Downs for the Architectural Photographic Society, and already reviewed in our columns, are the most important. The same photographers exhibit some good stereographs, together with views in Cliefden House and of other interiors, which, making allowance for the necessary forcing of the power of the lenses in such sudden perspectives, have much merit. On a table in the room there is a photographic copy of the famous Grimani Breviary, to which we recently alluded.”]

Diamond, Hugh Welsh. “Report of Jurors. (Concluded from p. 50.).” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 9:146. (June 16, 1864): 62-68. [(The International Exhibition, held in London in 1862, was a very large exposition of all sorts of goods, modeled after the Crystal Palace Exhibition of 1851. The 1862 exhibition created a storm of controversy in the photographic community because “Photography” was classed as a “Useful Art,” rather than a “Fine Art,” which strongly divided the photographic community for and against exhibiting. Nevertheless many photographers contributed and when the official report of the Photographic Jurors was finally released in 1863, the Photographic Journal published it in parts over several issues in 1863 and 1864. Bedford was discussed in the final part, two years after the exhibition opened.) “We have already seen that great strides have been made in photography in the superiority of its processes, in the increased certainty which has been obtained by regard to the chemical condition upon which success depends, in the improvement of its apparatus, and the widened scope of its appliances, aided by increased skill in the manipulatory details.’ We now proceed briefly to refer to some of the examples of the various applications in which this progress is strikingly manifest….” p. 62.  “…In landscape and architecture the progress of photography is illustrated in a most satisfactory manner, as well in the results of the wet- as the dry-collodion processes. The pictures of Mr. Bedford (United Kingdom, 3039) possess a degree of excellence beyond which it would seem impossible to go. In his productions are admirably united great artistic excellence with perfect command of his materials. His interiors are probably the finest which have ever been obtained by photography, and illustrate the importance of a cultivated knowledge in the selection of time, light, and position….” p. 65.]

“Proceedings of Societies. South London Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:302 (June 17, 1864): 295-296. [“The Annual Meeting, and last of the present session, was held in the City of London College on the evening of Thursday the 9th instant. The Rev. F. F. Statham, M.A., F.G.S., occupied the chair. Prior to entering upon the business proceedings of the evening, a conversational discussion on several topics was held…” “…The Chairman then said that members would be glad to learn that the committee had selected two prints for presentation to the members, which would probably be ready for distribution at the first meeting of the winter session. They consisted of Mr. Robinson’s “Somebody Coming,” and a landscape by Mr. Bedford….”]

“The Photographic Exhibition.” ART JOURNAL 26:7 (July 1, 1864): 210. [“With respect to the number of the works this exhibition is by no means so full as others that have preceded it. This arises from resolutions passed by the Council that nothing but pure photography should be admitted, — that is to say, that all painted photographs, and those that were touched upon in anyway, should be rejected; and moreover, that all — such, we believe, was the determination — should be subjected to the test of washing: and it must be said that these resolutions are highly commendable, as in former exhibitions it was most difficult to determine the merits of personal photographs; and with respect to those that were painted, a great show was made by the employment of a skilful artist. We look, therefore, upon the selection as a concentration of rare excellence. Mr. Robinson, of Leamington, sends a composition of figures and landscape, which he calls ‘Autumn,’ excelling beyond all description his former photographs of this kind. Besides this, Mr. Robinson has sent ‘Interior of a Study, from Nature.’ and also a ‘Portrait,’ both of which are veritable pictures. Many of the small and larger vignette heads are very beautiful, being a great improvement on everything that has hitherto appeared in this way; they are extremely delicate, so much so that in some a little more force in the markings would be desirable. Those that most strike the visitor are (4) ‘Six Portraits,’ T. R. Williams; (5) ‘Twenty-five Portraits, &c.,’ F. Joubert; (3) ‘Ten Vignette Portraits,’ no name; ‘Portraits of Children’ (13), Claudet; and others by Lucas Brothers, Debenham, Rolf, and D. F. Winser. By the Viscountess Hawarden there is a study (187) of which the pictorial effect and arrangement are excellent. But the strength of the exhibition lies in its landscapes, and in these there is observable even a greater advance than in portraiture. Those noted are a few that are remarkably prominent: T. Annan (207), ‘Willows by the Watercourses;’ (203) ‘Studies from Nature,’ Lt.-Col. Verschoyle; (197) ‘Banyan Tree, Barrackpore,’ D. K. Macfarlane; (193) ‘The Path through the Woods,’ Brownrigg; (188) ‘Mill at Ambleside,” J. Spode; (179) nine plates by the Hon. W. W. Vernon; (212) ‘Old Bridge of Saulve Terre,’ T. Gilles; (53) ‘Water Lily Tank, Barrackpore,’ T. Macfarlane; (96) ‘ Old Cedar,’ and many others, by F. Bedford; (110) ‘Path cut out of the Rock,’ Major Gresley, &c. The exhibition is held in the Gallery of the Society of Female Artists, 48, Pall Mall.”]

“The Photographic Exhibition.” ART JOURNAL 26:7 (July 1, 1864): 210. [“With respect to the number of the works this exhibition is by no means so full as others that have preceded it. This arises from resolutions passed by the Council that nothing but pure photography should be admitted, — that is to say, that all painted photographs, and those that were touched upon in anyway, should be rejected; and moreover, that all — such, we believe, was the determination — should be subjected to the test of washing: and it must be said that these resolutions are highly commendable, as in former exhibitions it was most difficult to determine the merits of personal photographs; and with respect to those that were painted, a great show was made by the employment of a skillful artist. We look, therefore, upon the selection as a concentration of rare excellence. Mr. Robinson, of Leamington, sends a composition of figures and landscape, which he calls ‘Autumn,’ excelling beyond all description his former photographs of this kind. Besides this, Mr. Robinson has sent ‘Interior of a Study, from Nature.’ and also a ‘Portrait,’ both of which are veritable pictures. Many of the small and larger vignette heads are very beautiful, being a great improvement on everything that has hitherto appeared in this way; they are extremely delicate, so much so that in some a little more force in the markings would be desirable. Those that most strike the visitor are (4) ‘Six Portraits,’ T. R. Williams; (5) ‘Twenty-five Portraits, &c.,’ F. Joubert; (3) ‘Ten Vignette Portraits,’ no name; ‘Portraits of Children’ (13), Claudet; and others by Lucas Brothers, Debenham, Rolf, and D. F. Winser. By the Viscountess Hawarden there is a study (187) of which the pictorial effect and arrangement are excellent. But the strength of the exhibition lies in its landscapes, and in these there is observable even a greater advance than in portraiture. Those noted are a few that are remarkably prominent: T. Annan (207), ‘Willows by the Watercourses;’ (203) ‘Studies from Nature,’ Lt.-Col. Verschoyle; (197) ‘Banyan Tree, Barrackpore,’ D. K. Macfarlane; (193) ‘The Path through the Woods,’ Brownrigg; (188) ‘Mill at Ambleside,” J. Spode; (179) nine plates by the Hon. W. W. Vernon; (212) ‘Old Bridge of Saulve Terre,’ T. Gilles; (53) ‘Water Lily Tank, Barrackpore,’ T. Macfarlane; (96) ‘ Old Cedar,’ and many others, by F. Bedford; (110) ‘Path cut out of the Rock,’ Major Gresley, &c. The exhibition is held in the Gallery of the Society of Female Artists, 48, Pall Mall.”]

King, W. Warwick. “Hints for a Photographic Excursion.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:305 (July 8, 1864): 329. [“The observations I have to make will, I trust, be deemed acceptable at this season of the year; this windy month of June, so unfavourable to photographers, is drawing to an end, and leading one to hope that we may have some settled weather, so that the trees in our landscape negatives may not present the appearance of continuous blurring. We have been deluged with beautiful photographs of Tintern Abbey, Kenilworth, and other well-known spots. People, of course, are ready buyers of these productions, reflecting, as they do, the greatest credit on the artists, especially Mr. Bedford and Mr. Stephen Thompson; but their repetition is wearisome; I therefore wish to advise photographers to take the trip I am about to describe, as it is, I believe, new. I first discovered its beauties on a pleasant excursion with the Surrey Archaeological Society, and hope to go over the ground again with my camera. There is another recommendation, viz., that the places being so easily accessible from London, the journey may be taken at a comparatively trifling expense. First, then, take a South Eastern Railway ticket to the Chilworth Station; not far from this are many “bits” of country lands peculiar to our English landscape. Bearing off a little to the left, you come to a half-timbered building, with quaint gables and bargeboards, named Tangley Manor. This would form an exquisite subject for a plate….”]

[“Talk in the Studio. The Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:305 (July 8, 1864): 336. [“The London correspondent of Le Moniteur de la Photographie, reviewing the exhibition now open in Pall Mall, gives to Lady Hawarden, and to Mr. H. P. Robinson, the credit of having produced the chefs-d’oeuvres of the exhibition. Of Lady Hawarden’s best picture, he says, “I have never seen in any collection, French, Belgian, German, Italian or English, anything which can be compared with this study, unless it be a portrait of M. Silvy, by himself, once exhibited in Paris.” Of Mr. Robinson’s pictures, he says: “They are large and beautiful; photographic landscape has never before attained such a degree of perfection. Two of Mr. Robinson’s studies are not only the most beautiful landscapes, but amongst the largest photographs in the exhibition.” Excepting the works of Bedford, Claudet, Warren Vernon, Major Gresley, Mr. Annan, and a few others, which are duly appreciated, he regards the bulk of the ordinary photographs as beneath mediocrity.”]

“Jottings for July. From the Mental Sketch-Book of a Photographer’s Assistant.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:306 (July 15, 1864): 342-343. [“In days of yore, the soft breezes of July that fanned the smiling face of Nature afforded a glowing theme for poetic fancy; but in these degenerate days. Nature, with lowering brow and windy wailings seems to mourn o’er the dark deeds of blood that are being perpetrated on this our earth; for, whilst we write, John Bull’s never-failing topic — the weather — is such as the most sanguine photographer would pronounce too bad for business. Black as the clouds that hover o’er the political horizon, and cold as the charity that permits poor creatures to starve in this luxurious Babylon, whilst ever and anon showers of rain descend as searching and irritating as the cry of injustice when it reaches the sympathising ear of genuine philanthrophy, the July of the present cannot claim kindredship with those of the past. But we are opening an uncongenial track, so will turn into another path. The photographer’s motto is progress, and those who have been privileged to witness the present photographic exhibition must admit that motto has not been disgraced….” “…If photography does not in that exhibition assert her right to be regarded as a legitimate sister of the fine arts, ye knowing ones expound to our benighted understanding the meaning of that exclusive mystery. Is it art to copy faithfully the glowing scenes from Nature, which, in soft silent moments emit in ever-glancing rays of beauty reflective images that float on golden beams of light? The luxuriant verdure of India’s sultry clime, or the more chastened landscape of our own beloved land? Then we have it there with all your boasted laws of composition obeyed. Is it art to transcribe well the human face divine, with the touch of genius faithfully imparted, that brightens up the countenance, causing the eye to gleam with the fire of intelligence, and the lofty brow to bear evidence of its Creator — God? Then we have it there with flowing lines and balanced parts which challenge criticism — that glorious composition wrought by Robinson; the chaste productions of Bedford; the delicate portraiture of Williams, and many exquisite works from other hands that space forbids us to enumerate. Do they bear impress of mind? If these are simply mechanical, again we inquire. What is art? As our pen is now being guided to record thoughts emanating from the mind, so is the camera adjusted as suggested by the intelligence and artistic conceptions of the photographer…”]

“The Photographic Exhibition. Final Notice.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:310 (Aug. 12, 1864): 385-386. [“The tenth exhibition of the Photographic Society is now closed, and, we regret to state, that as regards attendance and pecuniary results, it must be regarded as a failure. Various causes have, doubtless, tended to this end: the smallness of the room, which limited the display to examples of pure photography only, which, as such, we fear, are of very little interest to the general public, whose attendance was especially contemplated in holding a summer exhibition, instead of one in the winter months, as heretofore….” “…Photography has now become so widely spread and so familiar, that interest in it as a novel art has ceased, most persons of taste have at home, in various forms, good specimens of landscape and architectural photography, which have to them, besides such value as they may possess as works of art or photographic specimens, the added interest of being memorials of some tour or visit. The delightful autumn spent in the Scotch Highlands is associated with the charming photographs of Wilson or Annan. Of the honeymoon spent in Switzerland, almost every day has its memento in the shape of a view of the scene by England, Ferrier, Braun, or Bisson Freres. The summer trip to Brighton, Ryde, Margate, &c., are each distinctly memorized by Mr. Blanchard’s instantaneous slides. The visits to English churches and castles of the general rambler, and especially of the archaeologist, are brought back vividly by some of the grand architectural pictures of Bedford; and so we might pursue the association of photography with the pleasures of memory in the home of most cultivated Englishmen. Then, as for portraits, has not every family its album, or series of albums? Does not her Majesty the Queen, and all the. rest of the royal family down to the last baby, grace the portrait galleries of almost every loyal subject, to say nothing of family friends, and of popular painters, poets, politicians, preachers, and prizefighters; stars of the stage, opera, and ballet, and a host of others? One of the most natural results, then, of this wide-spread distribution of photographs in every family is a decline in the interest in photographic exhibitions….”]

“Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 9:148 (Aug. 15, 1864): 86-88. [“If the progress and prospects of photography should be estimated by this, the tenth Exhibition of the Photographic Society, they would appear to be very unsatisfactory indeed. It is decidedly the least interesting display that has yet been set before the London public. There is no new application of the principles of the art, nor is there anything remarkable in the practice or manipulation of those whose specimens make up the contents of the Exhibition. As compared even with that of last year, the present collection is dull and dreary in the extreme….” “…We take Mr. Bedford’s views to be amongst the best examples of what is called good photography; but, although they give abundance of detail, they fail to express, in any appreciable degree, the more important effects of atmosphere. Lieut.-Col. Verschoyle has made some attempts to photograph atmospheric effects — not altogether without success; but the powers of photography are at present limited in this direction, so far as we know, and we are only reminded of the suggestiveness and mystery of nature by impressions which, photographically speaking, are failures. After all, the process, invaluable though it be as an aid to the artist, conveys a very limited amount of truth to the mind: it gives the true impression of neither persons nor places; and, unless we have some previous knowledge of the scenes or of the individuals that it professes to represent, we almost invariably conceive a false notion about them….” “…[We have inserted the above cleverly written notice of the Exhibition, taken from the Reader; for although we cannot agree in many of the observations of the writer, yet we believe that photographers may read it with some interest. — Ed.]

“Critical Notices.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:312 (Aug. 26, 1864): 411. [Book review. The Amateur’s Manual of Photography. Edited by Richard Kingham. London: Thomas Kingham. “This is a very respectable book for beginners, and contains some chapters which will be read with interest by the advanced student. The best chapter is on “Instantaneous Photographs,” from which we make one or two extracts. The chapter commences by enforcing the old doctrine, that no new secret is to be detailed: — …” “…The pupil would do well, therefore, in purchasing every now and then some of the photographs of our best artists — Wilson, Bedford, and others — when he will find almost as strong an individuality in their productions as is to be found in the works of the best painters. He will also have a standard of excellence before him, which will inevitably act as a spur to urge him on from good to better. Finally, let him remember that besides all the art-education necessary to produce really good works, nothing great will be done without painful, plodding perseverance, and an inexhaustible stock of patience. Failure must ever act as the whetstone on which to sharpen up his flagging zeal, and if he work in the right spirit it will be worth more to him than his greatest success.”]

“Photography: What has been Its Influence on Modern Art?” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:314 (Sept. 9, 1864): 439-440. [“We extract from our interesting contemporary, the Art-Student, the following discussion at a meeting of gentlemen designating themselves “The Society of Art-Quibblers.” The subject, which was the Influence of Photography on Modern Art, was opened by Mr. Holyoake, a gentleman officially connected with the Royal Academy. Although some of his remarks are inappreciative and unjust to photography, there are others well worthy of the attention of photographers. This, said Mr. Holyoake, is an important question, and we cannot err in devoting attention to it, more especially as it affords great scope for debate. That modern art has been largely influenced by the introduction of photography, few will deny, and then comes the question — has that influence been good or bad?…” “…Mr. Wall, in opening the discussion, said, although agreeing with much that had fallen from their excellent chairman, he thought the faults pointed out as the necessary results of the photographic process could be, and indeed were, sometimes overcome by the artistic knowledge which Mr. Holyoake had rightly described as being in the photographic world so “conspicuous by its absence.” Only those artists who, like himself, had a practical acquaintance with this art-science, could understand this….” “….So you see I hope, gentlemen, how an art may be theoretically very defective and uncertain, and yet, in practice, under the guidance of talent and knowledge, produce perfect and certain results. But this only tends to enforce Mr. Holyoake’s assertion of the necessity of photographers acquiring an appreciative taste for, and knowledge of, true art. He (Mr. Wall) regretted greatly that he was not aware that the present subject would be discussed that evening, or he would have produced specimens by Rejlander, Bedford, Robinson, Wilson, and others, in illustration of his views, and in support of his assertions. With reference to figure subjects, Mr. Holyoake laboured, he thought, under a somewhat false, although excessively common error, in arguing that because all the superior artistic elements of such pictures must be supplied rather by the model than by the artist, that, therefore, no real valuable success could be attained in this direction…..”]

“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL 26:10 (Oct. 1864): 316. [Book review. The Ruined Castles of North Wales. With Photographic Illustrations. Published by A. W. Bennett, Bishopsgate Street Without. “A charming little book — a “gem” for a drawing-room table. The photographic illustrations are in the best style, by Bedford, Sedgfield, and Ambrose, and we can testify to their fidelity. The letterpress owes its interest to extensive quotations from William Howitt’s Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain, and the volume closes with Mary Howitt’s pleasant account of the Eisteddfod. The author (?) has the somewhat rare merit of honesty, for he acknowledges the source from whence he draws his information. The work should be followed by the Ruined Castles of South Wales, such as Piaglan, Pembroke, and Carew.”]

“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL 26:10 (Oct. 1, 1864): 316. [Book review. The Ruined Castles of North Wales. With Photographic Illustrations. Published by A. W. Bennett, Bishopsgate Street Without. “A charming little book — a “gem” for a drawing-room table. The photographic illustrations are in the best style, by Bedford, Sedgfield, and Ambrose, and we can testify to their fidelity. The letterpress owes its interest to extensive quotations from William Howitt’s Ruined Abbeys and Castles of Great Britain, and the volume closes with Mary Howitt’s pleasant account of the Eisteddfod. The author (?) has the somewhat rare merit of honesty, for he acknowledges the source from whence he draws his information. The work should be followed by the Ruined Castles of South Wales, such as Piaglan, Pembroke, and Carew.”]

[Salsbury, Lord.] “Art. VII. Photography:” ” QUARTERLY REVIEW 116:232 (Oct. 1864): 482-519. [Book review. 1. A Manual of Photographic Chemistry, by T. Hardwich. 2. The Tannin Process, by C. Russell. (Review of the books listed expands into an extensive discussion of the role of photography in society, its aesthetic potential, etc.) “Of all the marvellous discoveries which have marked the last hundred years, Photography is entitled in many respects to take its rank among the most remarkable….” “…Practically they have been sufficient to deter photographers generally from carrying the wet process into distant fields. Occasionally an opportunity occurs when it can be done with comparative facility. Mr. Bedford, for instance, followed the Prince of Wales to the Holy Land, and produced a number of pictures upon wet collodion of the scenes through which he passed. The specimens that were shown in London leave no doubt that he was perfectly successful in conquering the difficulties with which he had to contend. The American photographers following in the rear of the Federal troops have also, it is said, been very successful in out of the way places….”]

“Notices of Books.” CHEMICAL NEWS AND JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL SCIENCE vol. 10 (Dec. 17, 1864): 296-298. [Book review. Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid. By Professor C. Piazzi Smyth, Astronomer Royal for Scotland. Alexander Stratum and Co., London. 1864. Pp. 400. “This book will be read with interest by the general public, but for the scientific reader it possesses unusual charms, on account of the depth of its information, the mathematical ingenuity displayed in its leading arguments, and the interesting historical references to problems in the way of standard weights and measures, and to the discussion of metrical systems which have lately been puzzling the House of Commons, the British Association, and other learned bodies. The frontispiece is a reduction from the excellent original photograph of Mr. Francis Bedford, representing a good view of the Great Pyramid of Jizeh, and there is a coloured map of the ancient pyramid-field in Egypt, besides several well-executed diagrams illustrating points of construction. The work is dedicated to the late John Taylor, Esq., of London, who appears to have devoted his life to the study of everything relating to the Great Pyramid, and upon whose previous literary inquiries in the form of the book entitled The Great Pyramid: why was it built? the argument of Professor Smyth is mainly founded….”]

King, W. Warwick. “Neglected Art-Fields for Photography.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 8:330 (Dec. 30, 1864): 625-627. [“Read at a meeting of the North London Photographic Association December 21st.” “Photographers, it must be admitted, following the generality of Englishmen, exhibit a tendency to keep in one groove. This remark especially applies to landscape photography. Take two examples. Tintern Abbey, and Kenilworth Castle. First Dr. Diamond led the van, with some beautiful calotypes of these places. He was followed by Mr. H. P. Robinson, Mr. Bedford, and Mr. S. Thompson, and if their productions were not enough, a host of others were attracted to the same spots, which I think must have seen the camera more often than any other places in England, numbers of prints were visible in the shop windows, and even our own Society could not escape the vortex, for it actually, on two occasions, selected prints of Tintern and Kenilworth, for distribution among its own members, in fact, we feel that we could not say with the poet,
“Oft for some old familiar strain,
Untired we ask and ask again,
Ever in its melodious store
Finding a spell unheard before.”
but we were positively tired of the subjects, so frequently presented to our view, and are obliged to banish them from our portfolios….”]

1865

[Advertisement.] YEAR-BOOK OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS ALMANAC FOR 1865. (1865): viii. 1 illus. [“W. W. Rouch & Co., Wholesale Collodion Makers, Prize Medal International 180, Strand, 1862. and Exhibition. 43, Norfolk Street, Strand, London. Rouch’s (Edwards’) Improved Model Photographic Tent, (Registered)…” … Mr. F. Bedford (Photographer to H.R.H. the Prince of Wales in the East) writes — “I shall be able quite conscientiously to recommend your new tent to any of my friends.” (The illustration is a woodcut depicting a photographer inside the portable tent. Francis Bedford is briefly quoted in various ads for tents, collodion, lenses, etc. in the advertisement section of this annual and many other of these annuals throughout the period.)]

[Advertisement.] YEAR-BOOK OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS ALMANAC FOR 1865. (1865): xi. [“Landscape Photography. Mr. Rouch has much pleasure in announcing that he has devised three new forms of Operating Chamber, Dark Box, and Tent, all of which possess separate and distinct advantages. The well-known “Edwards'” Registered Tent is in daily use by the most eminent Photographers, including F. Bedford, Esq., who, during the past summer, has used it with the greatest success. The whole of the above may be seen At Messrs. Rouch and Co.’s Spacious Show Rooms, 180, Strand, London.”]

“Photographic Societies. The Photographic Society of London.” YEAR-BOOK OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS ALMANAC FOR 1865. (1865): 14. [“Founded 1853. Patron — Her Majesty The Queen. Council and Officers. President — The Right Hon. Sir Frederick Pollock (Lord Chief Baron). Vice-Presidents — Lieut.-Col. Stuart Wortley, James Glaisher, F.R.S., and Francis Bedford, F.R.S. Members of Council — -C. Thurston Thompson, Henry White, Joseph Durham, F.S.A.,, The Earl of Caithness, T. R. Williams, Dr. H. G. Wright, J. B. Sedgwick, F. Joubert, H. P. Robinson, E. Underwood, Hon. W. W. Vernon, J. P. Gassiot, F.R.S., J. Spode, Sebastian Davis, Henry Pollock, J. J. Cole, A. Claudet, F.R.S, and T. H. Hennah. Treasurer — Arthur R. Hamilton, Esq. -Secretary- H. W. Diamond, M.D., F.S.A. The ordinary Meetings of the Society are held at King’s College, on the first Tuesday of each month, with the exception of July, August, September, and October. The Annual General Meeting is held on the first Tuesday in February. The Chair is taken at Eight, p.m. There is no announcement of any Exhibition to be held in 1865.”
(This listing of the Officers of the Photographic Society was printed every year, and Francis Bedford held the offices of Vice-President, or Council Member in most of the years through the 1860s through the early 1880s. His son William is also frequently listed on the Council throughout this period.)]

Macleod, Norman, D. D. “Eastward.” GOOD WORDS 6:1-12 (Jan.-Dec. 1865): 33-40, 113-123, 233-241, 286-295, 389-396, 525-542, 587-601, 665-677, 753-764, 823-834, 914-924. 70 illus. [(The editor of Good Words, Norman Macleod, toured the Near East and published reports of his travels through Malta, Egypt, Jerusalem and Palestine. Reports were illustrated with maps and with woodcuts credited “From a Photograph.” In some cases the individual views were credited to specific photographers, i.e. “Jaffa from the South. ‘From a Photograph by James Graham.'” on p. 289 and “From a Photograph by Francis Bedford” on p. 393. There are several panoramic views of Jerusalem credited to James Graham and the majority of the Palestine photos are so credited.) [“We embarked at Alexandria on Sunday evening* in a Russian steamer which was to start at early dawn for Jaffa. When I say we, I do not at present use Macleod, normanial, or the modest “we,” instead of the too personal and obtrusive “I.” It is intended to express the party which embarked at Alexandria to visit Palestine together.” p. 286. “”The illustration of El-Jib (Gibeon) is copied from a photograph by Nr. Francis Bedford, taken during the tour of H. R. H. the Prince of Wales, and published by Messrs. Day and Son. I have pleasure in directing attention to this magnificent series of photographic views.” Footnote, p. 396. “I have already stated that there are two great thoroughfares from Jaffa to Jerusalem-the one by Ramleh, and the other by the Beth-horons and Gibeon-and that we chose the latter. We did so that we might traverse the scene of Joshua’s great battle with the “five kings,” and also obtain our first general view of Palestine, including Jerusalem, from Neby Samwil.” p. 399.]

“Contemporary Literature.” WESTMINSTER REVIEW (NEW YORK, NY) 83:163 (Jan. 1865): 117-160. [Book review. The Lake Country. By E. Lynn Linton. With a Map, and one hundred Illustrations, drawn and engraved by W. J. Linton. London: Smith and Elder. 1864. [No photographs.] “Hyperion: a Romance.” By Henry W. Longfellow. Illustrated with twenty-four Photographs by Francis Frith. London: Alfred William Bennett. 1865. The Gossiping Photographer on the Rhine. Frith. London: Bennett. 1864. The Gossiping Photographer at Hastings.” Frith. London: Bennett. 1864. Normandy: its Gothic Architecture and History. A Sketch. By F. G. Stephens, London: Alfred W. Bennett. 1865. The Ruined Castles of North Wales. With Photographic Illustrations by Bedford, Sedgwick, and Ambrose. London: Alfred W. Bennett 1864. “…A beautiful volume on the Westmoreland Lakes'” is the joint production of Mr. and Mrs. Linton; the lady contributing the letter-press, and her husband the illustrations — one hundred in number. The nature of the book will best be described in the words of her own preface: — ” It seemed to my husband and myself that a pleasant book could be made by treating the lake country with the love and knowledge — artistic and local — belonging of right to natives and old inhabitants. We hope that what we have done will bear out our design. Though a faithful description of scenes and places, it is not a tour made up of personal adventures; neither is it a handbook, telling what inns to go to, and how much to pay for breakfast and dinner; nor yet an exhaustive monograph, for which we should have needed thrice the time and space afforded; but it is merely a book on the lakes, giving such of the general and local history as fell in with our plan, and what we thought would interest the reader, while doing our best to worthily illustrate and describe the most beautiful places — both those popularly known, and those which only the residents ever find out” How completely this excellent purpose has been carried out will be readily admitted by anyone who merely skims these delightful pages, in which pen and pencil have so happily united to aid each other in making the record as perfect as possible. The descriptive writing is both accurate and picturesque, and is greatly set off by the little drawings which represent some favourite mountain scene or lovely sequestered dell, and the strictly scientific portion is relegated to an appendix containing the botany geology, mountain altitudes, and rainfall of the lake district So long as such illustrated works are produced, photography can hardly win the first place in public favour, though it appear; to great advantage in some of the Christmas books, more especially in those of Mr. Frith, whose three volumes contain some admirable examples of what the camera can achieve, A sumptuous edition of Longfellow’s Hyperion, contains twenty-four photographs taken in Switzerland, the Tyrol, and on the Rhine, and the result is a volume that not inappropriately calls itself the Giftbook of the season. The subjects are as well chosen for pictorial effect as for their association with the wanderings of Paul Flemming, and those of the “Entrance to the Valley of Birkenau.” “The Staubbach,” and “Landeck,” are as truly beautiful specimens of landscape, as “The Market-place, Stuttgard,” “Tomb of Maximilian, Innspruck,” and “Stolzenfels ” are of architecture. Mr. Frith publishes on his own account a series of the better-known views on the Rhine, to which he adds descriptive and explanatory matter sufficient for a thin volume,’ in the funny, confidently confidential tourist’s style; and another series, similar in size and composition, of some of the most interesting places about Hastings and its environs. Both volumes deserve the good word of those who give and those who receive a present for the drawing-room table. Of smaller dimensions, but of equal beauty, is the volume modestly styled “A Sketch,” by Mr. Stephens,” containing twenty-fire exquisite small photographs of some of the finest buildings of Normandy, and a concise well-compiled summary of the historical events connected with them, and a short account of their architectural history. For the representation of rich and florid ornament, such as that of the West front of Rouen Cathedral, or the marvellous decorations of St. Ouen, science and art combined have invented no more perfect method than that of photography as now practised. Another sample of the art, though small, must not he overlooked, namely a pretty little volume upon the Ruined Castles of North Wales, decorated within and without with photographs, and obtainable for the small sum of three-and-six-pence….” p. 156.]

“Exhibition of the Photographic Society of Scotland.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:331 (Jan. 6, 1865): 4. [“The ninth exhibition in connection with this society was opened to the public on the 20th ult. The two last years a competitive exhibition only, not challenging public attention, was held; but on the present occasion the society have resolved to call in the public to inspect the progress of the art. So far as the extent and excellence of the contributions are concerned, the resolve of the society appears to have been a wise one, and the exhibition ought to be a success. Very rarely has it happened that an exhibition of a similar kind has been so rich in the variety, excellence, and number of its contributions, the latter, according to the catalogue, reaching 671, one number frequently representing many pictures….” “…We miss with regret some of the names which have appeared in the Scottish Exhibition before, and have often graced others, we may mention those of Bedford, T. R. Williams, Blanchard, England, Rejlander, Joubert, Gresley, Swan, Thurston Thompson, and others, all of whose works shed a lustre on the art, and which we should have gladly seen displayed in the best exhibition yet held in the modern Athens.”]

King, W. Warwick. “Appreciation of Art in Photography.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:337 (Feb. 17, 1865): 74-75. [“At a recent meeting of the North London Photographic Society, when Mr. Highley was exhibiting some transparencies, by means of the magic lantern and light (the subjects being most successful reproductions of some of Julius Schnorr’s Bible prints),…” “…To come more closely to our subject. When stereoscopic slides were first introduced, the most popular subjects were wretched groups of figures, but soon, fortunately, the late Mr. Grundy produced some slides with figures arranged in an artistic manner; next came!Mr. Bedford with his architectural views, and Mr. Russell Sedgfield with what were then considered marvels, interiors of our minsters and cathedrals. Now we have such views as Mr. Bedford’s perfect interiors of Hereford Cathedral and Ludlow Church, without mentioning Mr. Wilson’s most successful works. The popularity which these late productions have achieved, shows that they are appreciated, and what is better still, the wretched groups, through the happy influence of old hypo and better taste, are now “fading away!”…”]

“Talk in the Studio. Photography and Archaeology.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:337 (Feb. 17, 1865): 84. [“At the meeting of the Archeological Institute, on 2ud Feb. instant, Mr. F. Bedford exhibited some beautiful photographs of the interior of the Beauchamp Chapel, in St. Mary’s Church, Warwick. There were also on the table some large photographs of Maxstoke Castle, Warwick. M. Du Sommerard, Curator of Museum, at the Hotel Cluny, Paris, presented a set of photographs of the Gothic crowns, discovered a few years since in the north of Spain.”]

“Proceedings of Societies. North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:338 (Feb. 24, 1865): 91-92. [“The usual monthly meeting was held on the evening of Wednesday, the fifteenth instant, Mr, W. Hislop, F.R.A.S., in the chair. The minutes of a former meeting were read and confirmed, after which the following gentlemen were elected members of the Society: — H. W. Diamond, M.D., F.S.A., &c„ H. P. Robinson, H. Cooper, jun., W. Ackland, and J. Werge. The Chairman then said, that as the annual meeting of the Society would take place next month, the committee suggested that the number of vice-presidents be increased to four instead of two; also taking into consideration the inconvenience of having the meetings held on the third Wednesday in the month, they suggested that it be changed to the first Wednesday in each month; and further, that considering the expense incurred by the Society in supplying each member with a copy of a weekly journal, it would be discontinued, and a monthly one — the journal of the Photographic Society, which had been secured on favourable terms — would be supplied in its stead….” “…Mr. F. Bedford exhibited some 10 by 8 views of Welsh scenery, also of Warwick Castle, &c., which he had produced for the City of London and National Art Union. One view of Warwick Castle from the garden near the bridge, was most beautiful. It is to be regretted that such subjects as these should be in the hands of a society for distribution to prizeholders instead of being accessible to the general public. We must not omit to mention one which was not among the set last mentioned, viz., that of the choir screen of Hereford. This wonderful piece of metal work, by Mr. Skidmore, after the designs of G. G. Scott, Esq., R.A., is doubtless familiar to most of our readers, from its having occupied a conspicuous position in the eastern transept of the International Exhibition. Mr. Bedford seems to have overcome the difficulty of getting a photograph of the screen in situ, and to have produced one which recalls the loveliness of the original in a most perfect manner; even the background of the Vescica, from which the figure of our Lord projects, is clearly visible, and with the view of the altar seen through the entrance gates, makes one of the finest views we have seen. He also exhibited a very charming series by Dallmeyer’s No. 1 triple….” “…A vote of thanks was passed to Mr. Bedford for exhibiting the views which were universally admired, and to Mr. How for exhibiting the Harrison’s lens with the expanding stop….”]

“Antiquarian and Literary Intelligencer. Archaeological Institute.” GENTLEMAN’S MAGAZINE (Mar. 1865): 324-327. [“Feb. 2. The Very Rev. Canon Rock, D.D., in the chair…” “… Dr. Wynn Williams exhibited a Flemish mortar of bronze, from Caernarvon Castle, bearing the date 1598. Photographs of Maxstoke Castle, Warwickshire, were brought by Mr. Fetherston, and a series of photographs of the Beauchamp Chapel and monuments, by Mr. Bedford. Some fine photographs also of the Gothic crowns discovered near Toledo, and now in the Musee de Cluny at Paris, were exhibited by Mr. Burtt; they had been presented by the Director of the Museum, M. du Sommerard….” p. 326.]

“Echoes of the Month. By an Old Photographer.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:339 (Mar. 3, 1865): 99-101. [“Glass Houses. — The Copyright Question. — Double Imaged Cartes de Visite. — Exhibition of the Photographic Society of Scotland. — The Guarantee Fund. — The Societies. — The Photographic Field Club.” “The subject of glass houses is one of vital importance to photographers, and one upon which much has been written. As this is a growing time of year for this sort of produce — preparations being now made for the coming photographic campaign — I take the opportunity of having my say on the subject….” “…The North London Society had no paper, owing to the gentleman who had promised one not being forthcoming. This is a nuisance that societies should strive hard to guard against, and it would be only fair for defaulters to give as long a notice as possible of their inability to attend. This being the meeting preceding the annual gathering, officers were proposed for the coming year. It gives interest to the proceedings when members elect their own officers, and I am glad to see that an election will take place next month, more names being proposed on the list of Vice-Presidents and the Committee, than there are vacancies. Mr. Bedford sent a superb collection of his landscape photographs, for exhibition; which more than compensated for the absence of the promised paper. Nothing of any importance has occurred in the provincial societies during the month, annual meetings being very prevalent….”]

“The Photographic Society of London.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:155 (Mar. 15, 1865): i-viii, before p. 1. [“List of Council and Officers, Rules of the Society, and list of current members.
Council and Officers.
President
The Right Hon. The Lord Chief Baron, F.R.S.
Vice-Presidents
Francis Bedford, Esq., James Glaisher, Esq., F.R.S., Dr. H. G. Wright.
Treasurer.
H. White, Esq.
Members of Council
Caithness, The Earl of.
Claudet, A., Esq., F.R.S.
Cole, J. J., Esq., F.R.A.S.
Davis, T. Sebastian, Esq.
Durham, J., Esq., F.S.A.
Gordon, R. Manners, Esq.
Hamilton, A. R., Esq.
Hughes, Jabez, Esq.
Joubert, F., Esq.
Kater, Edward, Esq., F.R.S.
King, W. Warwick, Esq.
Mayall, J. E., Esq.
Robinson, H. P., Esq.
Sedgwick, John Bell, Esq., M.R.I.
Spode, Josiah, Esq.
Thompson, C. Thurston, Esq.
Underwood, Elphinstone, Esq.
Williams, T. R., Esq.
Secretary.
Hugh W. Diamond, Esq., M.D., F.S.A.”]
List of Members.
Bedford, Francis, Esq., 326 Camden Road, N.”]

“Medical News. Guy’s Hospital.” LANCET 85:2170 (Apr. 1, 1865): 353-354. [“The treasurer of this hospital held a conversazione on the evening of the 28th ult., at which a large number of persons eminent in the literary and scientific world were present. Amongst the distinguished visitors were the President of the hospital, Sir Lawrence Peel, the Earl of Harrowby, Lord and Lady Sandon, Lord Kirkaldie, Sir William Page Wood, the Treasurers of St. Bartholomew’s and St. Thomas’s Hospitals, Archdeacon Hale, and many of the governors and medical officers of the hospital. Several of the large rooms in the new wing ware thrown open and filled with numerous and well-selected objects of interest. The magnesium light was shown at intervals at different parts of the room; and a photograph of the assembly was taken by its assistance in the course of the evening. A large collection of microscopes and scientific instruments were exhibited by Messrs. Smith and Beck, Casella, Highley, How, Browning, Marratt and Short, Novra, Baker, Home and Thornthwaite, Powell and Lealand. Some magnificent jewellery, and the well-known original piping bulltiuch, now 200 years old, were sent by Mr. Ëmanuel, and some splendid electroplate by Elkington. One room was filled with the celebrated anatomical models made for the hospital by Mr. Towne. A large number of most brilliant electrical experiments were shown by Mr. Atkinson, and also by Mr. Browning. The photomicrographs of Dr. Maddox were exhibited on a screen by Mr. How, and the process of photomicrography by the magnesium light was practically illustrated. On the walls were some splendid horns, antlers, and stuffed animals, exhibited by Mr. Leadbeater and Mr. Sowerby, and many pictures and some beautiful photographs by Mr. Francis Bedford. About 1500 persons were present, including many ladies, and most of the students. Altogether the soirée was a most interesting one.”]

“North London Photographic Association.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:156 (Apr. 15, 1865): 41. [“The Annual Meeting of this Association was held in Myddelton Hall, Islington, on Wednesday evening, March 22, G. Dawson, Esq., in the Chair. The Minutes of the last Meeting having been read and confirmed, the following Gentlemen were elected by ballot Members of the Association: — Mr. R. Temple, Mr. W. A. Clark, Mr. W. Bedford, Mr. H. Smith, Mr. W. Malby, and Mr. R. M. Gordon. Mr. W. W. King then read the Annual Report of the Committee for the past year. Your Committee have great pleasure in reporting the continued prosperity of the North London Photographic Association, and the addition of several new Members, amongst whom are photographers of the highest eminence. Although papers have not always been forthcoming, yet the following subjects will prove that there has been no lack of interesting matter for discussion at the various Meetings … Several manufacturers have contributed new apparatus,… To Mr. Francis Bedford the Society has been much indebted for the occasional exhibition of some of his finest photographs, especially those illustrative of our national antiquities. Allusion has been made to the want of papers at our Meetings. Your Committee have good reason to hope that this for the ensuing year will be fully supplied, as they have received several promises of papers from Members and others well known in the photographic world….”]

“The Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:348-349 (May 5 – May 12, 1865): 205-206, 217-218. [11th annual exhibition. H. P. Robinson; Twyman; Blanchard; Silas Eastham; James Ross; Dr. Hemphill; H. Cooper; F. Bedford; J. Mudd; Wm. England; MacFarlane; Buxton; Dr. Maddox; G. Wharton Simpson; others mentioned.]

Hughes, Jabez. “About Light, and About Lighting the Sitter; With some Reflections about the Room is which He is Lighted.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:348 (May 5, 1865): 211-212. [“…I think the true test of good lighting is the preservation of delicacy of half-tone. Ruskin says, that he can only find one thing common to all great artists, delicacy. May we not say the same of our clever photographers. Consider the works of Bedford, Robinson, Williams, England, Wilson, Blanchard, Mudd, Heath, Thurston Thompson, and the many others equally skilful, and in what do they excel so much as in their wondrous delicacy? And what is delicacy but another name for soft and tender half-tone? Remember there is quite as much beautiful and delicate half-tone in the deepest shades as in the highest lights, and all is produced by a harmony of opposing lights. The first condition however, is for a person to feel and love these delicate i gradations, to be happy when they are present, and miserable when they are absent. When this condition of mind is produced, the quick hand and sensitive eye will find means to register them on the plate. The first claim of photography is, that it is true. Deprive itof this virtue and all its other merits are valueless. But the presence or absence of half-tone is the principal element of photographic truth. It is not usually thought so, but it’s a fact….”]

“Echoes of the Week.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 46:1314 (Sat., May 6, 1865): 438. [“…As the warm weather sets in, exhibitions open and novels die out. If anyone wishes to see how truly Shakespeare has described photography, let him go to the Architectural and Photographic Exhibition, in Conduit-street. Our operators are no longer mere mechanics. Mr. Robinson, in his “Brenda,” and “Evening,” really enters — and that as no novice, but a master — the domain of art. There are some fine examples of permanent pictures on opal glass, which has been named, from its inventor, Mr. G. Wharton Simpson, the Simpsontype. Messrs. Mudd and Bedford have some very fine landscapes, charming in their soft detail and brilliance; and Mr. Blanchard some remarkable instantaneous views, wherein the very bursting of a wave has been rendered; and there are some large compositions, especially one of a musical party, which, for arrangements and accessories, are lessons to our best oil painters….”]

“Soiree of the Photographic Society.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 12:262 (May 12, 1865): 249. [Soiree held by Photographic Society, awarded medals to Bedford, Buxton, England, Macfarlane, Mudd and H. P. Robinson. Quote from a statement by the Committee, disapproving of the careless technique of J. M. Cameron.]

“The Photographic Exhibition. Second Notice.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:349 (May 12, 1865): 217-218. [“The committee appointed by the council of the Society to superintend the general arrangements of the exhibition, and to award the medals for the most meritorious pictures have completed their work, and rendered a very interesting and discriminating report, which will be found in detail on another page. Six medals were placed at their disposal, without restriction as to the objects for which they were to be awarded; the chief excellence in any department was to be recognized. The committee have, however, awarded seven medals for pictures, and added their unhesitating recommendation for the award of the first of a new medal, to be called the President’s Medal, and bestowed as a distinction for meritorious discoveries; and the council of the society has sanctioned their decisions. The medals are awarded as follows: — To Mr. Bedford, Mr. Mudd, Mr. England, Mr. Macfarlane, and Mr. Buxton for landscapes; to Dr. Maddox, for enlargements of microscopic objects; to Mr. H. P. Robinson, for general artistic excellence; and to Mr. G. Wharton Simpson the recommendation of the President’s Medal, for his new printing process with collodio-chloride of silver. Considering their recommendation of a very distinctive honour to ourselves, in the shape of the first President’s Medal yet awarded, and the handsome terms in which it is done, it seems an ungracious task to challenge in any way the decisions of the committee. For our own part, we can only thank them for the distinction conferred, and the kind words which accompany it; but there is another part of their labours on which it is our duty as journalists to offer one or two remarks. We refer to the impolicy of awarding five medals of equal value for landscapes alone. We should be sorry, indeed, to deprive one of the gentlemen who have received these medals of his honour, — the pictures of all possess a very high degree of excellence, and we do not here question the right of any one of these gentlemen to a medal. But we submit that in no one instance is the honour sufficiently distinctive. When medals are scattered broadcast they begin to lose value, and that which was originally intended as a special distinction becomes a general compliment….” “…It is somewhat difficult we must admit, to award the absolute place of honour to landscapes in this exhibition, and we shall not attempt a task which the committee have evaded. In our notice, therefore, of the landscapes, we shall refer to them in the order in which they have come under our notice, rather than attempt to indicate merit by priority. Prominent, however, in position, numbers, and excellence, are the works of Francis Bedford. Rarely have we met with a photographic landscape, which for all qualities of pictorial excellence, equals his view at Bournmouth; soft without tameness, brilliant without hardness, it is a perfect example of good photography. A perfectly defined and forcible foreground stands in bold relief, but without any approach to blackness or hardness, against a fine atmospheric middle distance, and a tender and delicate extreme distance, the whole picture being full of colour. “Glen Lledr’’ is another charming example of Mr. Bedford’s mastery over landscape photography. “A Warwickshire Lane,” — a scene in the neighbourhood of Kenilworth, is another of those pictures by which Mr. Bedford puzzles even skilled photographers. The exquisite luminous character of the picture, is difficult to account for. There is no extreme softness, still less any approach to hardness, but the quality of brilliancy is admirably secured. We commend Mr. Bedford’s pictures to the especial study of landscape photographers; he has never been seduced into feebleness or tameness by a desire for factitious softness, he secures brilliancy and softness at the same time by a careful regard to the lighting of his subjects, and not by over-intensification on the one hand, or overexposure and lack of vigour on the other. Mr. Bedford’s No. 1 Triple pictures, will well repay careful examination….”]

“Photographic Exhibition — Report of the Exhibition Committee.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:349 (May 12, 1865): 221-222. [“The committee appointed by the council of the Society to award the medals to those pictures in their exhibition they thought worthy of receiving that honour, and to superintend the arrangements of the exhibition, beg to make the following report: — Your committee have pleasure in congratulating the council on the numerous and beautiful pictures which form their exhibition, and which are equal to, and in some instances excel, those of any former year, notwithstanding the numerous photographic exhibitions open in Dublin, Berlin, and elsewhere, and which must have absorbed a large number of the best productions of the year. Although the available space has been somewhat limited, sufficient room has been afforded to enable them to do justice to the many fine works sent for exhibition in every branch of the art. Your committee regret that one of the most important applications of the art — that of reproduction — is not adequately represented; and they also remark that portraiture, in its conventional and routine aspect, forms a loss prominent feature in this exhibition than in those of former years. Coloured miniatures are not numerous, but some very excellent specimens are exhibited, one by Madame Brunner, a member of the Society, may be especially mentioned as worthy of attention. Landscape photography has taken the lead in quantity, and there are so many landscape photographs of such great excellence, that your committee have felt bound to award no less than five medals to that department alone. Each of the exhibitors in this department produce pictures so essentially different from each other that they must not be considered as to their relative excellence. Prominently must be mentioned the wonderful series contributed by Mr. Bedford, whose marvellously beautiful transcripts of English and Eastern scenery have been the admiration of all photographers, as well as the public, for many years; while those by Mr. England, although of a smaller size, deserve no less praise — his series of views in Switzerland far surpassing anything that has ever been done before in that country. Your committee have therefore awarded to each of these gentlemen a medal. Two gentlemen, Mr. Buxton and Mr. Macfarlane, exhibit views taken by themselves in India. These pictures are so different from any which have been produced in that country, and exhibited as specimens of photography in India, being free from the chalky high lights and black shadows hitherto regarded as inseparable from the results obtained in tropical climates, that the committee felt it would be injustice to give a medal to one without making a similar award to the other: each of these gentlemen, therefore, has been awarded a medal. To Mr. Mudd, as the ablest exponent of dry-plate photography in the exhibition, the committee have awarded a medal….”]

“The New Testament.” LITTELL’S LIVING AGE 85:1093 (May 13, 1865): 324-326. [From the Athenaeum. Book review. The New Testament. Illustrated by a Plain Explanatory Comment, and by Authentic Views of Places mentioned in the Sacred Text from Sketches and Photographs taken on the spot. Edited by E. Churton and W. R. Jones. 2 vols. (Murray.) (This is possibly the only instance, or certainly a very rare instance, that I have seen in the literature of this era, of a critic privileging photography over the other visual arts.) “The noblest art, the keenest criticism, the amplest scholarship have all been lavished without stint on the sacred story; yet the glorious theme is so far from being exhausted by this splendid treatment, that we may safely assert, as a position capable of immediate proof; that the illustration of this story has, for Europeans and Americans, only just commenced. The gospel histories are peculiar even among histories. Setting aside for a moment (as not necessary to be considered in pure lay criticism, which treats a book only so far as it is a product of human effort) the great fact of their being inspired, the gospel narratives have this striking peculiarity — that while the scenery, the manners and customs, the politics, the popular opinions, and the current events, are all implied in the story, — influencing its progress, modifying its meaning, pointing its lessens, — the scenery, manners, opinions and events, are not described by the evangelists, to whom they were familiar as the light of day and the stars of night… Scenery and manners make the background on which the sacred history is limned. The great events of this history grow out of the common politics of the time, — out of the debates in Jewish schools, the conflicts in Roman councils; and its personal incidents are moulded by such things as the Flora and Fauna, the domestic architecture, the customs and habits of the country. There is probably no other book in literature in which common things have so much to do with the actual text, in which the reader’s acquaintance with these common things is so completely taken on trust…. Yet, unless we possess some true knowledge of these things the lesson of the text will be lost upon us. Here, then, we find an office for the-illustrator; both the artistic and the literary illustrator; each of whom has a function to discharge. Let us take the artist first. A mighty corpus of illustration has sprung from the pencil, a small but choice selection from which has recently been made available to the English public by Lady Eastlake. The greatest painters have devoted their highest efforts to this task of pictorial representation;… Raphael and Da Vinci were painters. They felt an artistic interest in their themes. They were in love with beauty. But they were strangers to the supreme sentiment of truth, whether that truth were general or local. Thus, they made the Virgin a young and beautiful woman, even at the foot of the Cross, though she was then fifty years old; an age at which a Syrian female, a mother at fifteen, usually a grand-mother at thirty, is a worn and ancient dame. They painted her of an Italian, not of a Hebrew, type. Their landscapes were Italian, their edifices Italian, their viands Italian…. In short, they painted their own life in a series of allegories, which are not only worthless to the student of the sacred story, but positively injurious to his eye and mind. All that artistic frippery must be rooted out of the memory before a man can begin to study with benefit, and enjoy with profit, the actual life of Our Saviour on the earth. Of late years, we have begun to feel the need of a more serious study; and our younger race of painters have travelled into the Holy Land before presuming to paint sacred subjects. Mr. Holman Hunt set a good example of serious study; Mr. Seddon and others followed in his wake; and the consequence is, that our public, taught by example, are beginning to demand that illustrations of the Gospel narratives shall be true…. But while waiting for a new body of Sacred Art to appear, — Art that shall not sacrifice truth to beauty, — we must take what we can get. Art, in its many capacities, has recently put out a new branch — photography; and in this new form of copying nature we may look for some real addition to our stock of knowledge respecting the Holy Land. Scenery, costume, physiognomy, at least we may now obtain of a kind to satisfy all our doubts. The most faithful sketchers in the past could not resist helping nature. We never look at David Roberts’s drawings in Palestine without vexation of spirit; for the artist will give you a picture where you ask him for a fact; show you the Dead Sea when it is out of sight; stain the gray limestone with the tints of marble; mottle his blue sky with clouds…. Tipping and Catherwood may be excepted from a general censure; yet even their very careful drawing is far from the stern accuracy of line with which the sun copies a building and a landscape. For some time to come we shall put the sketchers on one side, and put our trust in Bedford, Robertson and Graham. Mr. Murray’s New Testament is a noble commencement of the new era of illustration which we desire for the Scriptures. The plan allows of both photographic and pictorial explanation, so as to illustrate events as well as scenery. Overbeck, Laborde, Mrs. Walker, Texier, and Bartlett supply the subjects, Mr. Malan and Mr. Graham the sceneries. The former series of artists work upon a rather dangerous plan; for the subjects are often fanciful in choice, and the surroundings are not always Syrian. Yet, on the whole, this peril is pretty well avoided; a vague general truth being substituted by Overbeck for that particular truth of which he had no knowledge. Of Mr. Malan and Mr. Graham we can speak with greater confidence. The latter supplies an incomparable series of photographic studies, in which the actual places — Bethlehem, the Jordan, the Sea of Galilee, Jerusalem — stand before the reader visible, bright in colour, sharp in outline, like themselves, and unlike anything else on earth. Mr. Malan’s drawings are often excellent; but we cannot trust them as we trust the sun. Compare his sketch of Nazareth against Mr. Graham’s photograph of Bethany; how vague and indistinct the human sketch, how detailed and direct the sun-picture! Still, it is only in comparison with the fine truth of the photograph that we should lower the labours of Mr. Malan; his drawings have many good points, and if. Mr. Graham were absent we should be quite content with Mr. Malan…. This edition is meant to be popular rather than critical; to be a book for the fireside, the summer lawn, and the autumnal shore. Mr. Murray’s editors and illustrators bethought them of the wants of those busy men who desire to know the latest thoughts of the best scholars, and to possess the last results of travel and discovery; they provided for these wants, and this edition is, therefore, the New Testament for the general reader.”]

“Photographic Society of London. Report of the Exhibition Committee.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:157 (May 15, 1865): 62-64. [“Ordinary General Meeting. King’s College, London. Tuesday, May 9, 1865. J. Glaisher, Esq., F.R.S., V.P., in the Chair….” “…The Committee appointed by the Council of the Society to award the Medals to those pictures in their Exhibition they thought worthy of receiving that honour, and to superintend the arrangements of the Exhibition, beg to make the following report: — Your Committee have pleasure in congratulating the Council on the numerous and beautiful pictures which form their Exhibition, and which are equal to, and in some instances excel, those of any former year, notwithstanding the numerous Photographic Exhibitions open in Dublin, Berlin, and elsewhere, and which must have absorbed a large number of the best productions of the year. Although the available space has been somewhat limited, sufficient room has been afforded to enable them to do justice to the many fine works sent for exhibition in every branch of the art…” “…Landscape-photography has taken the lead in quantity; and there are so many landscape photographs of such great excellence, that your Committee have felt bound to award no less than five Medals to that department alone. Each of the exhibitors in this department produce pictures so essentially different from each other that they must not be considered as to their relative excellence. Prominently must be mentioned the wonderful series contributed by Mr. Bedford, whose marvellously beautiful transcripts of English and Eastern; scenery have been the admiration of all photographers, as well as the public, for many years; while those by Mr. England, although of a smaller size, deserve no less praise, his series of views in Switzerland far surpassing anything that has ever been done before in that country. Your Committee have therefore awarded to each of these gentlemen a Medal. Two gentlemen, Mr. Buxton and Mr. Macfarlane, exhibit views taken by themselves in India. These pictures are so different from any which have been produced in that country, and exhibited ns specimens of photography in India, being free from the chalky high lights and black shadows hitherto regarded as inseparable from the results obtained in tropical climates, that the Committee felt it would be injustice to give a Medal to one without making a similar award to the other; each of these gentlemen, therefore, has been awarded a Medal. To Mr. Mudd, as the ablest exponent of dry-plate photography in the Exhibition, the Committee have awarded a Medal. This gentleman has worked out the process of M. Taupenot with a commendable degree of pains and assiduity, and has obtained results commensurate with the excellence of the process and the care and skill brought to bear upon the method to which he has devoted himself, his large pictures especially having an amount of force, free from much of the hardness which has usually characterized the pictures obtained by dry plates, which is worthy of attention….”

“Talk in the Studio. The Press and Photography.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:350 (May 19, 1865): 239. [“The press generally has given but little attention ns yet to the photographic exhibition open in Conduit Street. The Illustrated London News, speaking in favourable terms of it, says: — “Our operators are no longer mere mechanics. Mr. Robinson, in his “Brenda” and “Evening,” really enters — and that as no novice, but a master — the domain of art. There are some fine examples of permanent pictures on opal glass, by a process which has been named, from its inventor, Mr. G. Wharton Simpson, the Simpsontype. Messrs. Mudd and Bedford have some very fine landscapes, charming in their soft detail and brilliance; and Mr. Blanchard some remarkable instantaneous views, wherein the very bursting of a wave has been rendered; and there are some large compositions, especially one of a musical party, which, for arrangement and accessories, are lessons to our best oil painters.”]

“The New Wide-Angle Landscape Lens.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:351 (May 26, 1865): 250-251. [“Sir, — The first portion of Mr. Grubb’s letter, contained in your last issue, needs no reply. If that gentleman conceived the idea, and actually constructed a landscape lens composed of three lenses, and in this respect similar to mine, I certainly, never heard of it until I read his statement. With regard to the second portion of that letter, in which Mr. Grubb refers to my not having given the reasons for the superiority of my new landscape lens, I may observe that the paper read by me at the meeting of the parent society, was simply descriptive of the instrument I then exhibited, and the use for which it was intended, added to which was a brief account of its origin….” “…I now add the opinions referred to. Mr. Bedford, who tried one of my new lenses, against one of Mr. Grubb’s, pronounced the instrument a success, and a most useful addition to his stock of lenses. Mr. Wilson, of Aberdeen, writes: — “As yet, so far as I can see, it is the best landscape lens out.” Mr. England, who tried one the other day. Immediately ordered three, for use on his tour abroad. Mr. Robinson writes: — “The new lens is a marvel. The largest stop might be used for an 8 x 5 plate, without any great loss of sharpness.” I might quote others, but think the above sufficient to show that the new lens is already appreciated as a wide-angle landscape lens by some of our best artists; and the opinion of these gentlemen will probably have more weight with photographers than anything I could say for, or Mr. Grubb urge against, my new landscape lens on theoretical grounds. I am, sir, your obedient servant, J. H. Dallmeyer. 19, Bloomsbury Street, W.C., May 23, 1865.”]

“Minor Topics of the Month.” ART JOURNAL 27:6 (June 1, 1865): 194. [“Messrs. Catterall and Pritchard, of Chester, have sent us some photographs and stereoscopic slides, the productions of the eminent photographer, Bedford, which we have examined with exceeding pleasure. Those of size represent interiors in Hereford Cathedral; more especially views of the rood-screen and reredos, manufactured by Skidmore, of Coventry, which attracted so much attention at the International Exhibition in 1862. The smaller views are very varied: they represent the more attractive objects to be found at Hereford, Warwick, Cheltenham, Gloucester, Malvern, Coventry, Stratford-on-Avon, Kenilworth, and Chester. The points are in all cases well chosen. They thoroughly exhibit several of the most interesting “historic” cities and towns of England. In execution, the stereoscopic slides are clear, sharp, and of great excellence in all respects. The publishers have our thanks for the instruction and enjoyment they have thus afforded us.”]

“Fine Arts. The Photographic Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 46:1320 (Sat., June 17, 1865): 594. [“(See PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:159 (July 15, 1865) for the text of this review.)]
“The Dublin Exhibition — Photographic Department.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:158 (June 15, 1865): 93-94. [“The Exhibition was opened in state on the day appointed, the 9th of May, by His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. Notwithstanding the immense exertions that had been made to bring the contents of the building into something like order, the state of chaos that reigned during our visit immediately after the opening day (although greater progress seemed to have been made in the photographic department than in any other) rendered an earlier review of the photographs exhibited impossible. We have therefore considered it more just to the exhibitors to delay our notice of the principal contents of the photographic department of this Exhibition until next month, when we shall be able to make it much more perfect and complete. We have very great satisfaction in noticing that photography has had greater justice done to it in this Exhibition than in the International of 1862. It is classed amongst the Fine Arts, and at the same time it retains the medals not awarded to other departments of the same class — painting, sculpture, and engraving. It is respectably lodged in three well-lighted rooms, about 30 feet square, and, being on the ground-floor, a tedious staircase like that which led to the photographs in the central tower of the 1862 Exhibition has not to be climbed to reach them, acting, as it then did, as an insurmountable barrier between the photographs and the public. For all these advantages photographers have to be grateful to the indomitable perseverance and indefatigable energy of the principal manager of this portion of the Exhibition, Sir J. Joscelyn Coghill, whose gentle courtesy in his communications with photographers when he was collecting specimens won the goodwill of all, and secured many works for the Exhibition which would not otherwise have been sent. The catalogue (the first editions of which, by the-by, were not so complete or instructive as they might have been) contains the best names in the art, with scarcely an exception. Mr. Bedford exhibits a splendid collection of his inimitable landscapes. Mr. Robinson has sent a complete series of his well-known works, pictures that will be mentioned when the history of photography comes to be written in future time. Mr. Mudd has a series of prints from collodio-albumen negatives, superior to the results of any other dry process yet invented. Mr. England’s pictures in Savoy and Switzerland will attract much attention. Messrs. Joubert, Claudet, Mayall, Silvy, and others worthily represent portraiture. Messrs. Lock and Whitfield exhibit some Royal portraits; one, probably from the fact of its being a portrait of the Prince of Wales, has obtained the post of honour. Mr. Rejlander exhibits a large number of studios from life, which, we are sorry to find, do little towards securing the high reputation his first works promised him. Mrs. Cameron’s poetical but badly manipulated portraits and groups occupy a considerable space. Mr. Brothers exhibits some interesting specimens taken by the aid of the magnesium light; and Messrs. Marion and Son send some of Mr. Thurston Thompson’s superb copies of Turner’s pictures….”

“The International Photographic Exhibition at Berlin.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:355 (June 23, 1865): 291-292. [“English contributors to the Berlin Exhibition, and photographers generally, will read with pleasure the interesting particular’s which we have received in a letter from Dr. Vogel, to whose assiduous efforts much of the success of the exhibition is due. He accompanies the letter with two very large photographs showing the arrangements. The hanging appears to be admirably done, and we can readily trace many of the English contributions which grace the walls. We should have been glad to have engraved the photographs, to give additional interest to this report, but for the unsuitableness of our columns for the very large scale which would be necessary to preserve anything like useful detail in the engraving. We had the opportunity, however, of showing the prints at the only remaining photographic meeting of the session on Tuesday night week, where they were examined with interest. “Dear Sir. — I have long been indebted to you for a special report of our Exhibition. The multiplicity of duties however, …” “…Mr. Robinson’s pictures are artistically, the most important of any here. After Robinson’s the Studies of Life by Rejlander begin, and those from Miss Cameron, Isle of Wight. Rejlander is already so well-known in England that I do not need to say anything in his praise. His contributions are to be ranked among some of the finest in the Exhibition, I envy him his beautiful model and his fine group of children. Of Miss Cameron I have never heard or read anything, but I must grant to her pictures, in some respects, my great approbation. They are, it is true, technically imperfect, but a very fine taste and feeling is manifest. Piofessor Richter, one of our best artists, has found much pleasure in them. They are a series of Madonnas from life, similar to Rejlander’s, and several very expensive portraits of Tennyson, Taylor, &c., &c. You see that in figures also your Fatherland obtains great honour, and I admire — and I remark it here — the wonderful landscapes of Bedford and Vernon Heath. The latter has presented our society with a series of thirty landscapes, and we rejoice that we are able to adorn our society booth with them; it is a precious present….”]

“The London Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:356 (June 30, 1865): 309-310. [“From the Illustrated London News. This is the only extended notice of the Exhibition which we have seen in either the daily or weekly press. — Ed.” “It may well appear not a little surprising that, after struggling on for ten years, the annual Photographic Exhibition can no longer maintain an independent existence; and that, after removing from place to place almost every year seeking a new home, it now appears as a modest adjunct to the Architectural Exhibition in Conduit Street. When we think of the enormous extension, both of the practice of, and demand for, photography; when we recollect the varied applications of the art, and that it is now cultivated by high and low, at home and abroad; by an army of amateurs, as well as by professionals; by ladies and men of rank, as well as by the intelligent mechanics who contribute to industrial exhibitions; that it has a literature of its own and supports several journals; and that there is hardly a home in the three kingdoms without a sun-picture of some sort; it does, we say, appear remarkable that a self-supporting exhibition cannot be established. Yet for some years, we believe, the receipts from the exhibition have not equaled the expenses; and the last and present exhibitions especially have been very inadequately representative of the progress of the art in various directions….” “…The nearest approach to art, or rather the most bold and successful application of the principles of fine-art to photography, will be found in several portraits of literary men and painters, and studies from women and children, intended as illustrations of “Faith,” “Hope,” “Charity,” &c., by Miss Julia Cameron. These photographs are “out of focus;” but, for the most part, not extravagantly so, like some former works by this lady. We are disposed to think that some of their softness of outline, breadth, and (as we might almost say) their apparent lifelike capability of movement is obtained — so general and equalized are these qualities — by some mechanical contrivance other than by simple manipulation with the lenses. At all events, these attempts by scientific means to imitate nature not only as she is, but as we see her, afford rare pleasure to artists, and irrefragably establish any leading principles of art which have been ignored even by a certain class of painters themselves. How it is that these principles have not been more generally adopted by portrait photographers we are at a loss to understand. How it is, above all, that greater attention is not paid to lighting, we cannot conceive. Light, instead of being the greatest friend, is, we verily believe, the greatest enemy to the mass of photographers; and until we see three-fourths of their glass houses bricked up they will never be able to secure the one great charm of art within their reach, the broad, simple, and regulated chiaroscuro of Rembrandt, Correggio, and Velasquez. These productions by Miss Cameron, a portrait composition by Mr. Twyman, with two or three portraits by Mr. H. P. Robinson, one or two by Claudet, a few vignettes, and a solar camera enlargement of the head of Tennyson by Mr. Mayall, are among the few figure-subjects here which have any very decided art value in their lighting; and the remark can apply in very limited degree to vignettes….” “…The photographs also by Mr. Bedford of buildings, sites, and scenes in the East are unsurpassed for delicacy and multiplicity of details, and have therefore the quality which, in photographic representations of such subjects, is of primary importance. On the other hand, Mr. Walker’s photographs of more familiar scenes are also to be highly esteemed, because, while they have less detail where detail is of less interest, they are equally records of natural effect, although they render paramount those broad gradations which it is the aim of the artist to secure. The contributions of the two last-named exhibitors are instructively placed side by side, and evince how entirely distinct may be the works of two photographers — distinct, almost, as their several handwritings, or as the styles of different artists. Mr. Mudd, the results of whose manipulations lie, for the most part, between these two last, is represented in several admirable examples….”]

“Photography.” POPULAR SCIENCE REVIEW 4:16 (July 1865): 530-534. 1 illus. [“The Photographic Exhibition. — The annual exhibitions of the London or King’s College Photographic Society and that of the Architectural Union, have, for some years since, been pecuniary failures; this year they combine their attractions, and we hope the result will be more satisfactory….” “…The exhibition also contains some admirable landscapes by Bedford, Mudd, Thompson, England, Blanchard, Annan, Gordon, Macfarlane, and others of our best landscapists, and several specimens of new printing processes in carbon, printer’s ink, &c., on various surfaces. The specimens of apparatus shown are some stereoscopes by Murray and Heath, a graphoscope, and a very tastefully and highly finished piece of cabinet work, in the shape of a handsome cabinet stereoscope, in polished walnut-wood, by Mr. Meagher….”]

Hughes, Jabez. “About Light, and about Lighting the Sitter; with some Reflections about the Room in which he is Lighted.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:159 (July 15, 1865): 103-110. [“Read April 13th, at the South Loudon Photographic Society.” “Light is verily the Alpha and the Omega of the photographer, yet it has received less special study than any of the agencies he employs. Hitherto our energies have been directed to the understanding and perfecting our processes — in securing good tools and proper materials; but having attained considerable success in these directions, it should now be our purpose to study how best to use the power we have obtained. We have conquered mechanics, controlled chemistry, subsidized optics, and now we should attack Old Sol himself, and seize him by the beams, as a lion by his beard, and so assume the mastery, light is very much as the proverb says of Fire — a good servant, but a bad master. One must not let it have its own way; it must be governed, ruled, controlled, held in check. The Sun is far too liberal with his power; he darts his rays just as freely in the wrong as in the right direction, and is as ready to spoil as to make a picture. It is for the photographer to use and not abuse this prodigality. And I this leads to the question of questions, how to use the light….” “…I think the true test of good lighting is the preservation of delicacy of half-tone. Ruskin says that he can only find one thing common to all great artists — delicacy. May we not say the same of our clever photographers? Consider the works of Bedford, Robinson, Williams, England, Wilson, Blanchard, Mudd, Heath, Thurston Thompson, and the many others equally skilful; and in what do they excel so much as in their wondrous delicacy? And what is delicacy but another name for soft and tender half-tone? Remember, there is quite as much beautiful and delicate half-tone in the deepest shades as in the highest lights, and all is produced by a harmony of opposing lights. The first condition, however, is for a person to feel and love these delicate gradations, to be happy when they are present, and miserable when they are absent. When this condition of mind is produced, the quick hand and sensitive eye will find means to register them on the plate. The grand claim of photography is, that it is true. Deprive it of this virtue, and all its other merits are valueless. But the presence or absence of half-tone is the principal element of photographic truth. It is not usually thought so, but it’s a fact….” p. 106.]

“The Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:159 (July 15, 1865): 115-118. [“The following review of the Exhibition, from the Illustrated London News, appearing to be an independent criticism from a non-photographic writer, we have transferred it to our columns as a record of public opinion: — It may well appear not a little surprising that, after struggling on for ten years, the Annual Photographic Exhibition can no longer maintain an independent existence; and that, after removing from place to place, almost every year seeking a new home, it now appears as a modest adjunct to the Architectural Exhibition in Conduit Street. When we think of the enormous extension, both of the practice of, and demand for, photography, — when we recollect the varied applications of the art, and that it is now cultivated by high and low, at home and abroad by an army of amateurs as well as by professionals, by ladies and men of rank as well as by the intelligent mechanics who contribute to industrial exhibitions, — that it has a literature of its own, and supports several journals, — and that there is hardly a home in the three kingdoms without a sun-picture of some sort, — it does, we say, appear remarkable that a self-supporting exhibition cannot be established. Yet for some years, we believe, the receipts from the Exhibition have not equalled the expenses; and the last and present exhibitions especially have been very inadequately representative of the progress of the art in various directions. Doubtless some blame must be attached to the management for these untoward results. The repeated alterations of the place and season of exhibition have alone been sufficient cause for numbers of the general public overlooking the show altogether. But the body of photographers must also be charged with unaccountable and, we suspect, illiberal neglect of a great means of advancing their art, and securing it a definite and respectable status. A new complaint to be made this year is the absence of a catalogue. It is true that the title, method, and name of executant are affixed to each contribution. But, though this innovation is so far entirely commendable, it does not supersede the uses of a catalogue to those who wish to make comparisons and preserve a record. A more serious deficiency, however, is, as we have already intimated, the absence of examples of some new processes, of several valuable applications of the art, and of some of its most skilful practitioners. The only specimen of the too much vaunted Wothlytype is completely, and we need not add tastelessly, obscured by colour. There are no specimens of the photozincography and photolithography employed by Colonel Sir Henry James, in conjunction with the methods of chromo-carbon printing developed by Captain Scott for the multiplication of copies of the “Ordnance Survey,” ” Domesday Book,” &c. Some other processes of heliography, affording means for using printers’ ink, and carbon printing, are likewise not represented. In this Exhibition surely there should also be specimens of the admirable photography from the Farnley Hall Turners, by Messrs. Caldesi, and other recent photographs after the same master; together with sheets of the photographic fac-similes of Shakspeare’s first folios. Photosculpture, “crystal cubes,” and other useful and ornamental applications of photography would also contribute to give the display a more popular character. As regards photosculpture, however, we may repeat what we said on its first appearance — namely, that it is not likely to win any but most qualified admiration from persons with a just conception of the nature of sculpture as a fine art. Moreover, until photosculptures are produced in London, as at Paris, by the aid of a large number of simultaneous photographs from different points of view, and not merely from a half-dozen of such photographs, we shall not be disposed to accord to the invention even the moderate amount of credit it may fairly claim when properly carried out. It is utterly impossible for a photosculpture from a small number of views of a figure or object to have the actual or closely-approximate photographic accuracy claimed for the invention, whatever the degree of resemblance it may (but is not likely to) derive from the generally inferior sculptors employed to round off the ridges left after using the pantograph. The peculiar value of photography in copying architecture and sculpture should be more fully illustrated in such fine studies as those of the Architectural Photographic Society (though even these are surpassed by the French), and in such examples as have been on former occasions contributed by the Stereoscopic Company and by Messrs. Thurston Thompson, Lake Price, Dixon Piper, and others. We miss, too, from this Exhibition the exquisite “studies” of the Viscountess Hawarden, the artistic “out-of-focus” portraits of painters by Mr. Winfield, the beautiful vignettes of Mr. T. R. Williams, and the productions of some proficients in the management of figure-subjects. However, notwithstanding these drawbacks — notwithstanding that the Exhibition is far from being so comprehensive as we think the Society ought to strive to make it, yet it is very interesting and in many ways instructive. The great discovery of the year is Mr. Wharton Simpson’s new method of printing with the collodio-chloride of silver, and it is here exemplified (we wish it had been more fully) in three or four diverse tones of colour, one lane-scene in a bistre tone being marvellously delicate and aerial. The process is as simple as it is beautiful; and, to Mr. Simpson’s great honour, it is presented to photographers at large as common property unfettered by restrictions of any kind. The principle of the process is founded on the possibility of suspending chloride of silver in collodion in such a fine state of subdivision as to constitute something very nearly resembling a solution — a chemical fact so unexpected as to excite the surprise of every member of the Photographic Society present on its announcement. The nearest approach to art, or rather the most bold and successful application of the principles of fine-art to photography, will be found in several portraits of literary men and painters, and studies from women and children, intended as illustrations of “Faith,” “Hope,” “Charity,” &c., by Miss Julia Cameron. These photographs are “out of focus,” but, for the most part, not extravagantly so, like some former works by this lady. We are disposed to think that some of their softness of outline, breadth, and (as we might almost say) their apparent lifelike capability of movement is obtained — so general and equalized are these qualities — by some mechanical contrivance other than by simple manipulation with the lenses. At all events, these attempts by scientific means to imitate nature not only as she is, but as we see her, afford rare pleasure to artists, and irrefragably establish many leading principles of art which have been ignored even by a certain class of painters themselves. How it is that these principles have not been more generally adopted by portrait-photographers we are at a loss to understand. How it is, above all, that greater attention is not paid to lighting we cannot conceive. Light, instead of being the greatest friend, is, we verily believe, the greatest enemy to the mass of photographers; and until we see three-fourths of their glass houses bricked up they will never be able to secure the one great charm of art within their reach, the broad, simple, and regulated chiaroscuro of Rembrandt, Correggio, and Velasquez. These productions by Miss Cameron, a portrait composition by Mr. Twyman, with two or three portraits by Mr. H. P. Robinson, one or two by Claudet, a few vignettes, and a solar-camera enlargement of the head of Tennyson by Mr. Mayall, are among the few figure-subjects here which have any very decided art-value in their lighting; and the remark can apply in very limited degree to vignettes. The portrait composition by Mr. Twyman, just mentioned, represents a musical club, “Our Society,” as it is called. The various members are well arranged; but what is more remarkable is the very diverse gradations of tone and degrees of definiteness with which they appear, according to their relative position — variations that are excellent in intention, though carried somewhat too far. But this, like all photographs produced from “positives ” joined together from several “negatives,” is open to the charge of violating our faith in the understood, or what should be the understood, of photographic representation. The same objection applies in a more limited degree to Mr. Robinson’s “picture compositions,” of which the most noteworthy is “The Lady of Shalott.” After making this deduction we must, however, admit that Mr. Robinson’s contributions are, as usual, preeminent for artistic feeling in idea, arrangement, breadth, selection of models, and accessories, combined with manipulative skill. But the most curious examples from more than one negative, and the most successful in their concealment of all traces of joining, are the “doubles” or ” Siamese ” photographs of Mr. Gill, in which we see a man shaking hands with himself, or drinking to himself, or squaring up to himself, a little girl wheeling herself along in a perambulator, and such like supernatural phenomena. The more ordinary “ghost trick” in photography, of which there are examples here, was noticed on a former occasion. Several beautiful subjects have been obtained by Mr. Rouch from the statuary and flowers in a handsome conservatory. Much taste is displayed by Mr. S. Thompson in his vignette “book illustrations.” We have given warm commendation to some photographs of the face and figure that appear to us to indicate artistic knowledge or feeling, because, without a certain amount of artistic treatment, photographs, more especially of the face, are, from various imperfections of the process, false to our impressions and destructive of the beauty of nature. But it is not to be concealed that there are many classes of subject in which any such treatment, or anything short of the utmost sharpness and accuracy of which photography is susceptible, would be wholly out of place. It must also be admitted that photography is never more legitimately employed than as a scientific record, wholly independent of art. Its value when so employed is indicated, for instance, in the photographs, by Mr. How, of numerous microscopic organisms and structures. It will be readily understood that applications of photography such as this must be an immense assistance to chemistry, medicine, geology, and many branches of scientific inquiry. The photographs also by Mr. Bedford of buildings, sites, and scenes in the East are unsurpassed for delicacy and multiplicity of details, and have therefore the quality which, in photographic representations of such subjects, is of primary importance. On the other hand, Mr. Walker’s photographs of more familiar scenes are also to be highly esteemed, because, while they have less detail where detail is of less interest, they are equally records of natural effect, although they render paramount those broad gradations which it is the aim of the artist to secure. The contributions of the two last-named exhibitors are instructively placed side by side, and evince how entirely distinct may be the works of the photographers — distinct, almost, as their several handwritings, or as the styles of different artists. Mr. Mudd, the results of whose manipulations lie, for the most part, between these two last, is represented in several admirable examples. The highest praise is also due to the Indian photographs of Messrs. Macfarlane and Buxton, their purity and beauty being the more remarkable on account of the greater difficulties imposed on the photographer by the climate. Some instantaneous stereographs, by Mr. Blanchard, of seaside views, with clouds and breaking waves, and a series of photographs of the animals in the Zoological Society’s Gardens, by Messrs. Melhuish and Hayes, exemplify two of the many useful applications of the more rapid processes. The carbon process of Mr. Swan we should have mentioned before as a novelty promising most valuable results. It may be remembered that we last year spoke in high terms of this process of printing (in which indestructible carbon takes the place of always more or less fugitive silver); but we spoke with some reservation, because the process was only illustrated in landscapes, not in portraiture. This year, however, there is a portrait, and we must say that it is the best example of the employment of carbon we have seen. Though unnecessarily black, and still lacking the extreme delicacy of a silver print, we have never yet seen the gradations and modelling of flesh so tenderly rendered by the material. Mr. Pouncy, who claims to be the originator of carbon printing, exhibits some examples; but, as these are prepared for enamelling, they are not fair specimens of his method. By-the-way, there are some beautiful monochrome and also several coloured photographic enamels. Lastly, Mr. Burgess exhibits specimens of ordinary printing on a material he calls “eburneum,” resembling in its soft tone and semi-transparent texture the finest ivory. The material is, we believe, gelatine, opalized, in a state of fusion, with white lead.”]

“Berlin International Photographic Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:359 (July 21, 1865): 339-340. [“The award of the jurors at this Exhibition has been made, and we have just received from Dr. Vogel a list of the English contributor who have received medals, from which it will be gleaned that not only have the commissioners been extremely liberal in the number of medals distributed, but that English photographers have received signal honour. Most of the gentlemen concerned have doubtless received by this time information of the honour awarded to them, or will do so very shortly. In regard to the medal awarded to ourselves for the invention of the collodio-chloride process of printing, we feel the honour the greater inasmuch as we did not send any contributions to the Exhibition, and the award is made to the inventor on the strength of illustrations of the process contributed by resident photographers. The list of English medallists is as follows; — H. P. Robinson (late of) Leamington — for compositions, portraits, and genre pictures. G. Wharton Simpson — for his collodio-chloride silver process. F. Bedford, London — for landscapes. Vernon Heath — ditto. Fox Talbot, Lacock Abbey — for photographic engravings. Warren De la Rue — for astronomical photographs. J. W. Osborne, Boston — for photo-lithographs. Photographic and Stereoscopic Company — for photographs of statues. John Eastman, Manchester — for beautiful dry plates. J. W. Swan, Newcastle — for one carbon print. J. Pouncy, Dorchester — for carbon prints. Willis, Birmingham — for fine aniline printing process. O. G. Rejlander, London — for studies. Miss Cameron, Isle of Wight — ditto. J. H. Dallmeyer, London — for portrait and triplet lenses and cameras. P. Meagher, London — for cameras. Ottewill, Collis and Co. — ditto. Schade and Kistenman London — for vessels in porcelain.
Dr. Vogel resumes his report in the Exhibition as follows; — …” “…The landscape department is extraordinarily richly represented, and I only need to mention Bedford, Vernon Heath, Davanne, Bisson, Braun, to show you that the most illustrious names are here to be found. Bedford’s landscapes have been made known to Germany for the first time through this Exhibition, and the public and the critics have declared their most earnest approbation for that which has been so excellently done in this department of art. A peculiar charm and enchantment rests in these pictures, which continually enrapture the beholder. Vernon Heath’s pictures are also excellent, but I think that the atmosphere and sky in them are not so fine as in Bedford’s….”]

“Echoes of the Month. By an Old Photographer.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:361 (Aug. 4, 1865): 363-364. [“A Letter from Ireland — The Magnesium Light and the Atlantic Cable — The Berlin Medals — The Pantascopic Camera — Photo-Binographs — Dr. Pritchard — The Simpsontype — Backgrounds. “A friend who has gone over to Dublin to see the Exhibition writes as follows, and is very anxious that I should do him the honour of inserting his letter in this column. It is not quite so complete a record of the Photographic Department of the Exhibition as he promised to send me before he started, but is interesting from a meteorological and psychological point of view, the prevalence of “Bulls” showing how soon the climate of Ireland takes characteristic effect upon strangers. Here is the letter: — “ Dear old Photo, — I have now been in these foreign parts of the United Kingdom more than a fortnight, and have discovered that it is, strictly speaking, not “justice to Oirland” to say that it always rains in the sister kingdom; there have been at least two days since my arrival on which I found it quite unnecessary to clothe myself in umbrellas. I need not send you any account of the Exhibition, although that is the object of my letter….” “…If I have not told you what has been photographed, I will tell you what ought to be. I can’t say fairer than that. Purely for the sake of finding “fresh fields and pastures new” for our English photographers, who have worn out the home pasture, I have taken excursions into the wilds. My exertions for the sake of others were well repaid with great enjoyment to myself; it is very well known that ‘A thing of beauty is a joy forever.’ as long as it lasts, and I was sorry to leave so many things of beauty without being able to obtain any good reminders of them in the shape of photographs. It is true that some of the principal places have been ‘done,’ but I should like to see them done by Bedford, or Blanchard, or England. ‘Not a smaller soul, Not Launcelot nor another.’ The most beautiful scenery near Dublin is the Glen of the Dargle, and Powerscourt Waterfall….”]

“North-Eastern London Exhibition.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:160 (Aug. 15, 1865): 121. [“The Exhibition of Arts and Manufactures for North-eastern London will be opened on the 16th, with a grand ceremony, in which the National Choral Society, of one thousand voices, under the direction of Mr. G. W. Martin, will take part. Through the energy of the indefatigable chairman, Mr. W. Hislop, and the Committee of the North London Photographic Association, the photographic section of this exhibition will be one of the largest and best that have been held in London. All the most eminent names connected with the art will be represented. Bedford, England, Robinson, Mudd, and a host of others, with whose works our readers are familiar, have sent selections from their finest works; and there is every reason to hope that this will be one of the most complete displays of photography that has yet been brought before the public.

“The Dublin Exhibition — Photographic Department. (Second Notice.)” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:160 (Aug. 15, 1865): 123-127. [“In our June Number we gave a general glance at this Exhibition; we now propose to enter into a more detailed account of the specimens exhibited. As in all exhibitions of English photographs landscapes are preeminent, so also is Mr. Bedford preeminent in landscape-photography. It is true, he has nothing in the present Exhibition but what we are perfectly familiar with, and it is a test of merit that a picture once seen cannot be forgotten; yet we always feel satisfaction in looking upon his beautiful works, so perfect in manipulation and so artistic in selection and treatment. The sadly deficient catalogue informs us that Mr. Bedford exhibits “Portraits and Studies,” the compiler having evidently mistaken a frame of Mr. Dallas’s photo-engravings, which contain some copies from Mr. Bedford’s negatives as specimens of his process, for this gentleman’s contribution. One of the most beautiful of Mr. Bedford’s pictures is “Glen Lledr.” He exhibits twenty subjects, amongst which are “Warwick Castle,” “The Castle Grove, Kenilworth,” “The Rood Screen, Hereford Cathedral,” “Interior of Beauchamp Chapel,” “Coast View, Ilfracombe,” and “The Temple of Philae.” There are also some of his cabinet views exhibited in Mr. Frith’s frames; why, is not explained. Closely following Mr. Bedford’s pictures in merit, though widely different in subject, Mr. England’s Alpine views claim admiring attention. He exhibits several frames of 9 x 7 views, and a large collection of stereoscopic pictures of Swiss scenery, all exhibiting the well-known perfection for which this artist’s works are famous….” p. 123. “…Col. Stuart Wortley and the United Association of Photography both exhibit specimens of printing by the Wothlytype process, which are nearly as good in tone as prints on albumenized paper. Mr. Swan sends some fine specimens of his process for printing in carbon. Mr. Dallas’s specimens of landscapes, reproductions, and portraits by his photo-engraving process, and which are named in the blundering catalogue “Bedford, F., London — Portraits and Studies,” are exceedingly interesting, and make us anxious to see his invention worked out commercially; nothing could be better for a book-illustration than the “View of Kenilworth,” done by this method….” p. 126.]

“North-Eastern London Exhibition. Report of the Jurors of the Photographic Department.” PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNAL 10:160 (Aug. 15, 1865): 148-150. [“In presenting a Report of their labours in the Photographic Department of this Exhibition, the Jurors have much pleasure in noting the great excellence of the majority of the contributions. In some departments the uniformity of this excellence rendered the task of deciding upon the highest merit one ‘which required much deliberation, and the Jurors will feel it necessary, in stating their reasons for their awards, to qualify in some instances the degree of merit which they represent. The following Medals have been awarded: — For the best Portraits, Mr. E. W. Foxlee. For the best Landscapes, Mr. F. Bedford. For the best Pictures from Dry-plate negatives, Mr. J. Mudd. For the best Enlargements, no award. For the most Artistic Pictures, no award. For the best Instantaneous Pictures, Mr. V. Blanchard. For the most important Invention, Mr. W. B. Woodbury. For the best Camera, Mr. Meagher. For great excellence in lenses. Mr. Dallmeyer\ Mr. Ross. In deciding upon the award for the best portraits, the Jurors had to distinguish between various degrees of excellence possessed by many highly meritorious contributions. The portraits by Mr. Foxlee, by Mr. Jeffreys, by Mr. Rejlander, by Mr. Whaite, by Messrs. Maull and Co., by Mr. Downer, and some others, all presented distinct points of merit, and were worthy of very high commendation. Some of the contributions just named possess qualities of a higher artistic order than the pictures to which the Medal was finally awarded; but, in estimating the degree of merit in portraiture, the Jurors felt that the size of the pictures and the degree of technical photographic excellence attained were considerations which, in an Exhibition of this kind, demanded attention; and, in estimating the aggregate of good photographic qualities, it was decided by a majority of the Jurors that this Medal should be given to Mr. Foxlee. In determining upon the best landscapes the Jurors had not much hesitation. With the exception of those of Mr. England and those of Mr. Mudd, which claimed consideration on other grounds, there were no other landscapes, notwithstanding a goodly number of fine pictures contributed, which could compare with those of Mr. Bedford in all the qualities which constitute good landscape-photography….” “…Hugh W. Diamond, M.D., Chairman. G. Shadbolt. W. Hislop. G. Wharton Simpson. H. P. Robinson, Reporter.”]

“The North-Eastern London Exhibition of Arts and Manufactures.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:363 (Aug. 18, 1865): 386-387. [“On Wednesday last the Exhibition of Arts and Manufactures in connection with the north-eastern district of London, was formally opened at the Agricultural Hall, Islington, by the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Mayor of London, the ceremony being accompanied by choral and instrumental music. This is the first experiment in holding local exhibitions of arts and manufactures, and, if successful, it is not improbable that it will be followed by similar displays in other districts of London. It is not to be confounded with the Industrial Exhibitions which have during the last year or two been held in different localities of the metropolis, its aim and purpose being essentially different. The final object of the present Exhibition is the establishment in the district of a permanent museum, in character, if not in extent, resembling that at South Kensington….” “…The photographic department, which is classed amongst the fine arts, occupies the central portion of one gallery, paintings occupying a similar position in the opposite gallery. As our readers know, this department was placed by the general committee under the entire management of the North London Photographic Association, who will have little reason to be ashamed of the result they have secured. It is, we say it without qualification or hesitation, notwithstanding some prognostications to the contrary, in which perhaps the wish was father to the thought, one of the very best, if not the best, display of photography which has ever been held in this metropolis, and, for this reason, we presume we may say in the world. As the catalogue is not yet complete, we cannot state the exact number of contributions, but they cover, we believe, a space of nearly two thousand square feet, and include contributions from almost every photographer of reputation. Here are, perhaps, few very great novelties, the strength of the Exhibition consisting in the great average excellence of the mass of the contributions. Something of the general good effect is doubtless due to the suitability of the gallery for displaying photographs, its great length permitting the arrangement on the line of all really deserving works, and its capital light doing full justice to the good qualities of the pictures. The hanging committee appear to have done their work with great care and judgment, massing the pictures in several bays, divided by pilasters in front of which sculptured busts are placed, so as to form a pleasing general effect to the eye, whilst they have also scrupulously given, so far as hanging exigencies would permit, the best place to the best pictures. Thus, in the centre of the central bay, the place of honour, hang the now world-famous “Bringing Home the May,” “Autumn,” and “Lady of Shalott,” of Mr. Robinson. Near to these are the clever compositions and studies of Mr. Twyman. In the centre of another bay we have the works of Bedford and Mudd; in the centre of another the fine compositions and instantaneous pictures of Mr. Blanchard, and the charming studies of Mr. Cooper; in another the Swiss views of Mr. England, surrounded by a number of capital studies by Rejlander. On a screen in the centre some exceedingly good examples of portraiture by Mr. Foxlee, and on a table a number of specimens on opal glass by the collodio-chloride process, a couple of beautiful transparencies on opal glass by Mr. W. Woodbury, by his process of relievo-printing described on another page, and some clever carbon prints and transparencies on paper, by Mr. Stone, by the gelatine and bichromate process he described some time ago in our pages. There are some very good coloured pictures, amongst which some contributed by Mr. Ernest Edwards and by Maull and Co. There is a large number of amplified pictures, some good, and others of which it may probably be more true to say that they would have been better if the artists had better understood the work than if they had taken more pains. Of all these, however, which merit any detailed notice, we shall have occasion to speak on some future occasion. There is also, adjoining the philosophical department, on the basement, a capital display of apparatus, &c….”]

“Photography at the Dublin International Exhibition. Fourth Notice.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:364 (Aug. 25, 1865): 399-400. [“The display of landscape photography in the Dublin Exhibition is very good, and our interest in examining it was not lessened by the fact that many of the contributions were very old friends, although this cause renders it the less necessary that we should notice many of them in extended detail. Amongst the old friends to which we have referred, are the contributions of Mr. Bedford, of which we scarcely know which most to admire, his charming English landscapes, or grand eastern views, both kinds of pictures so perfect in photography, so good in art, so brilliant, so soft and full of tone, with such admirably managed skies, so well printed, mounted and framed with such neatness and good taste. The admirable Swiss views of England, so full of quiet harmony, so free from the hardness which many photographers of similar scenery mistake for brilliancy. The wonderfully brilliant and exquisitely delicate landscapes of Heath, including the finest photograph of Windsor Castle we have ever seen. The prints of Mudd, from dry plates, some of immense size, and at once brilliant without hardness, and soft without tameness, and his cabinet prints which have probably never been surpassed in either artistic or photographic qualities by photographs produced by any process whatever. The poetic landscapes of Dixon Piper, of which we have not seen any exhibited for some years. The bold and picturesque Pyrannean views of Gillis. The charming landscapes of Annan, alike excellent for their perfect manipulation, and the fine feeling which pervades all his work. The unsurpassed reproductions of Thurston Thompson, and the grand landscapes of Maxwell Lyte, which we have so often admired are amongst the pictures which we are glad to see here again. The bright delicate and picturesque cabinet pictures of Rouch, which we noticed at Conduit-street; and the very admirable Irish landscapes of Brownrigg, some of which have never been surpassed, which we noticed at the same exhibition. These and some others challenge us with the familiarity of old friends, or, in some instances, as friends we had already, even if recently, greeted in Conduit-street. Amongst the pictures with which we were not so familiar, we may mention as claiming a prominent position the very admirable landscapes of Sir Joscelyn Coghill, to whoso indefatigable energy and patient courtesy much of the success of the photographic department was due. These are amongst the few Irish landscapes to which photography, as represented by this Exhibition, seems to have done justice; bright, delicate, and picturesque, they are altogether excellent….”]

“The North London Photographic Exhibition. The Medals.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:365 (Sept. 1, 1865): 411-412. [“We have not hitherto, for obvious reasons, as occupying a position among the jurors, made any critical observation on the pictures at this exhibition. The awards having now been made, the motive for reticence is removed; and we shall in one or two articles briefly review such of the contributions as appear to demand especial notice. We may, at the outset, indicate the exhibitors to whom awards have been made, observing, however, that as the jurors will publish a detailed report of their views in making the awards, it may be found that the explanations accompanying the decisions may, in some degree, qualify the awards….” “…Dealing with the subject in the spirit we have described, and construing best, in some instances, as indicating a possession of the most general photographic excellence, the jury have made the following awards: — For the best portraits: Mr. E. W. Foxlee. For the best landscapes: Mr. F. Bedford. For the best pictures from dry plates: Mr. Mudd. For the best enlargment: no award. For the most artistic pictures: no award. For the best instantaneous pictures: Mr. V. Blanchard. For the most meritorious invention: Mr. Walter Woodbury. For the best cameras: Mr. Meagher. For high general excellence in lenses: medals both to Mr. Ross and Mr. Dallmeyer….”]

King, W. Warwick. “Photography and Archaeology.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:366 (Sept. 8, 1865): 426-427. [“Your facetious correspondent who accused me of “airing” my “hobby” will doubtless, when he sees the present number of the News, say “be is at it again;” but though I am partial to the study of archaeology and photography in connexion therewith, having experienced great pleasure therefrom, and desiring that others should do the same, yet do not wish to take the same line as the irate gentleman did with regard to the stranger at table who did not take mustard with his beef; and knowing that Englishmen are, above all other nations, more easily led than driven, with that object in view I put on record a few notes of the late meeting of the Archaeological Institute at Dorchester….” “…The next excursion was to Wareham, Corfe Castle, and Wimborne Minster. An amusing incident occurred here. I noticed among the vehicles which were to convey the party to Corfe one of a black colour but its nature was to a certain extent hidden by some bright-coloured cushions on the knife board. The driver of the one on which I was seated informed me that the suspicious-looking vehicle was one of Shillibeer’s funeral carriages, which had been brought into requisition by the large number of visitors to Corfe. Corfe and its castle (which, in its ruined state, is very noble) have been photographed from nearly every point by Mr. Good, who seems, like Mr. F. Bedford, to be what every landscape photographer should be, an archaeologist as well as a photographer. Returning to Wareham, I saw little work for the camera, but plenty for the sketcher in the curious leaden font in the church, with its figures of the twelve apostles, and a chapel on the south side of the chancel containing a cross-legged effigy in mail armour, and some curious stone coffins, in shape somewhat like a boat, as if the Norman wished to retain something of the Northmen in their love for the sea….”]

“North-Eastern London Exhibition. Report of the Jurors of the Photographic Department.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:367 (Sept. 15, 1865): 438-439. [“In presenting a report of their labours in the Photographic Department of this Exhibition, the jurors have much pleasure in noting the great excellence of the majority of the contributions. In some departments the uniformity of this excellence rendered the task of deciding upon the highest merit one which required much deliberation, and the jurors will feel it necessary, in stating their reasons for their awards, to qualify in some instances the degree of merit which they represent. The following medals have been awarded: — For the best Portraits, Mr. E. W. Foxlee. For the best Landscapes, Mr. F. Bedford. For the best Pictures from dry-plate negatives, Mr. J. Mudd. For the best enlargements, no award. For the most Artistic Pictures, no award. For the best Instantaneous Pictures, Mr. V. Blanchard. For the most important Invention, Mr. W. B. Woodbury. For the best Camera, Mr. Meagher. For great excellence in Lenses, Mr. Dallmeyer. Ditto, Mr. T. Ross….” “…In determining the best landscapes, the jurors had not much hesitation. With the exception of those of Mr. England, and those of Mr. Mudd, which claimed consideration on other grounds, there were no other landscapes, notwithstanding a goodly number of the pictures contributed, which could compare with those of Mr. Bedford in all the qualities which constitute good landscape-photography….”]

“The North -London Medals.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:368 (Sept. 22, 1865): 454. [“Sir, — I am one of those whom you designate, with more point than courtesy, “disappointed exhibitors,” but I have awaited the publication of the Report of the Jurors before I gave expression to any feeling on the subject. I am not going to imitate the spirit of indecent self-laudation which has characterized the protests of some of the workmen who have contributed specimens of their cabinet-work; and for this reason, and because I do not care to parade myself amongst those who know me, as a disappointed man, I send my name in confidence and not for publication. But I should like to know why, since a medal was offered for the most artistic pictures, one was not given to the best of those which did compete? Since a medal was offered for the best enlargement, why, I should like to know, was not one given to the best exhibited, since it is admitted that some were good? And I further think that, for the satisfaction of exhibitors generally, some answer should be given to the charges made in the protests published, as the fact that the protests are egotistical and in bad taste does not lessen the weight of the facts alleged, namely, that one exhibitor was favoured with a private interview with the jurors, and that the cameras of others were condemned for some of the same features of construction which were rewarded with a medal in the camera of the favoured exhibitor, and, further, that the said camera was simply a copy of those of some of the other makers. I think some satisfaction on these points is due to us, although I am bound at the same time to say that I had every confidence in the ability and character of the jurors, or I should not have competed for medals which I knew that they had to award. — Yours. An Unsuccessful Competitor.
[We should have thought that the Report of the Jurors was tolerably explanatory on almost all the points on which our correspondent desires information. In regard to the first question, we may state that, even if Mr. Robinson had not exhibited, it is most probable that the jurors would have declined awarding the medal for the most artistic pictures, inasmuch as, we believe, the majority of the jurors felt that none of the other contributions, except the landscapes of Mudd and Bedford, possessed sufficient artistic merit to be distinguished with a medal for that equality. Of course such a decision is open to competent criticism. It may be that the jurors set up too high a standard of artistic excellence. The same form of argument applies to the enlargements, on which our correspondent is, perhaps, naturally sore. The jurors, however, had a higher standard of excellence than the contributions reached. As for the foolish statements, in regard to which our correspondent thinks he ought to receive some information, we certainly should have scarcely considered them worthy of notice. We may say for his satisfaction, however, that there is not a word of truth in any of them. No exhibitor had any private interview, nor any privileges not possessed by all. The jurors examined the contributions of all the camera-makers carefully and impartially, and at such time as was convenient. They expressed no condemnation, such as one of the protesters describes, of any camera of any exhibitor. The medal was given for the greatest combination of good qualities in design, as expressed in the Report, and curiously enough, as we have been reminded since, the jurors of the Scottish Society gave a medal for the same camera some time ago, thus corroborating the judgment of the North London jury. Putting ourselves out of the question, we should feel it an insult to the gentlemen who were our colleagues in the jury to defend either their capacity or their honesty. — Ed.].”]

“North London Photographic Exhibition. Landscapes.” PHOTOGRAPHIC NEWS 9:369 (Sept. 29, 1865): 459. [“The display of landscapes at this exhibition includes some of the finest examples of this branch of the art we have seen. When we mention the names of Mudd, Bedford, and England, it will be readily understood that the pictures are good, and we may add that the contributions are amongst the finest we have ever seen them exhibit. The fine Alpine scenery of Mr. England, which struck us in a more dimly-lighted room as rather heavy from deep printing, appear in this well-lighted gallery to perfect advantage, and leave nothing to be desired. The admirable landscapes of Mr. Bedford, so delicate and full of atmosphere, possess more of the prevailing character of brightness and perfect lighting than almost any photographs we see. Mr. Mudd’s pictures arc perhaps the most poetical of all the landscapes exhibited. There is that indescribable presence of feeling in them that enchains the beholder’s attention with a loving regard, and makes him long to visit the lovely and peaceful scenes of nature portrayed. The transparent shadows in the placid lake, the stirless repose of the distant foliage, the calm, peaceful effect of many of the landscapes, seem to woo the pent-up city worker to the glad rest they afford. And in all the pictures he exhibits, both in the bold grandeur of the larger photographs and the more delicate beauty of the cabinet pictures, there is manifest such a careful study of composition and mastery of the subject, that we feel very little doubt that had the medal been awarded for the most artistic picture, and Mr. Mudd had not received one for the best dry plate pictures, the artistic medal would have been his. In alluding to the highest art excellence we are naturally reminded of the instantaneous stereographs of Mr. V. Blanchard. In referring to this subject the award of the jurors of a medal for instantaneous pictures has been the subject of some singular criticisms by persons who ought to have known better. The award has been regarded as a tribute to dexterity, sleight-of-hand, quick working — anything, in short, except that which it really is, namely the exercise in the highest degree of almost all the qualities which go to make a good photographer. The criticisms to which we refer strikingly illustrate the tendency in some minds to underrate that which they cannot achieve or which they have never attempted, and the difficulties of which they hence do not appreciate. Of course there are grades of excellence in instantaneous pictures, But to attain the highest success in securing them requires, in the first place, a cultivated taste and knowledge of what is good, and a rapid power of perceiving and appreciating natural beauties; it requires a perfect command over all the technicalities of the art, so as to be able to secure at all times the best chemical conditions, the most exalted sensitiveness, and the most perfect cleanliness. Rapid, skilful, and certain manipulation constitute the lowest qualification for success, although to some minds it appears to be the only ground of superiority. Fine instantaneous pictures can only take second rank on artistic grounds simply because they afford less scope for deliberative art contrivance, arrangement, or composition than some other classes of pictures; but they require not the less a thorough knowledge of these things, and a perception of the existence of good composition in natural objects, and a power of selection, and, at times, of arrangement. The stereographs exhibited by Mr. Blanchard admirably illustrate all this. They include some of the most exquisite effects of cloud scenery we have ever witnessed, and the arrangement of sea, foreground, and marine objects, with which they are found in combination, illustrate Mr. Blanchard’s fine eye for good composition in nature when it is to be found. They are pictures of which we never tire, always affording fresh pleasure in the contemplation; and we rarely examine them without longing to see some of them enlarged. Mr. Nelson K. Cherrill exhibits a frame containing landscapes, interiors with machinery, and some magnificent examples of the large, massive waggon-horse. These horses, taken in direct sunlight, apparently instantaneously, are exceedingly fine and perfect. The interiors are amongst the finest examples of this kind of work we have seen; delicate, well-defined in all parts of the complex machinery, free from curved lines or distortion, they are altogether excellent. The landscapes are also fine, especially considered as studies of foliage, for which purpose they are exhibited. Mr. J. C. Leake has some fine vignetted landscapes taken in Epping Forest; these are very delicate, but wanting a little in contrast, the monotony being due apparently to the absence of sunlight. Mr. Morley has some very good landscapes from dry plates. Some views in the English lakes are exceedingly good; some of the prints exhibited here, however (a common fault of dry plates), being a little hard. Mr. Ernest Edwards exhibits a series of views about Cambridge, having great delicacy. Mr. Goslett has a series of good landscapes by the milk process, which illustrate the fact that a very simple and excellent preservative is to be found in milk. Mr. Frank Good exhibits a series of landscapes, many of which are of well-known scenes in the Isle of Wight. Mr. Good is rapidly progressing into the position of one of our very best landscape photographers: he has a fine appreciation of artistic effect, and works with great delic