Transcriber’s Note: Italics are enclosed in _underscores_. Other notes
will be found near the end of this ebook.




                                _ESSAY_

                                   ON

                         _ART AND PHOTOGRAPHY_.


                                 1866.

[Illustration: PRINTED BY M. J. WHITTY 18 CABLE ST. LIVERPOOL]




                                 ESSAY

                                   ON

                          Art and Photography.


                                   BY
                             A. V. SUTTON.


                               LIVERPOOL:
                         MICHAEL JAMES WHITTY.

                               MDCCCLXVI.

[Illustration]




                               DEDICATED

                                 TO MY

                          Friends and Patrons.

[Illustration]




INTRODUCTION


The idea that occurred to me in drawing in epitome a history of the
amalgamation of _Art_ and _Science_, and ultimately induced me to
attempt so hazardous a task, was to enable the public to learn the true
course to be pursued in order to give fresh vigour and impulse for
the revival of _Fine Arts_, and I have endeavoured to exemplify in a
striking manner, as far as my poor abilities admit, the inestimable
advantage the one confers upon the other, which renders the combination
so essential in advancing and developing a better, truer, and nobler
style of art--a style that I feel assured will distinguish for ever
the present generation. With this view, I have gathered materials
from every common report or otherwise, from personal acquaintance
with some of the most distinguished artists of the day, and it is
with regret that I find how immeasurably incompetent I am to do
justice to a subject so worthy of being treated by greater talents
and accomplishments than are granted to me. In sketching the various
changes Photography has undergone ere it reached the supremacy it now
enjoys, owing--principally to the natural instability of events--and
in the rapid survey to which the limits of the Essay constrain me, I
have been compelled to point out defects “_both in the Art and the
Science_,” without reserve, but with all due respect to the opinion of
others; but while doing so, I trust that I have rendered justice also.

As a professional artist, the reader may be led to suppose I write with
bias--not so. I have most cautiously avoided any sentiment that might
be so construed, and beg that judgment may be suspended until these
pages have been perused, the perusal of which, I sincerely trust, may
have the desired effect--not actually resulting in the revival of Fine
Arts--but as an auxiliary for paving the way for others commanding a
greater range of knowledge, who may thereby be induced to embark in the
cause I am humbly seeking to advocate.

  LIVERPOOL,
      _Jany., 1866_.




ESSAY.

[Illustration]




ESSAY.


When Photography was first introduced, it met with a severe struggle
ere gaining the esteem it now happily enjoys. Artists of all grades
unanimously condemned it, looking upon it only in the light of a
vehicle that would carry destruction to their own especial pursuits,
while on those who attempted to practice and advance it fell anathemas
and ridicule. So great was professional prejudice, and so blind in its
apprehension, that it dexterously and successfully biased and enlisted
the opinion of the Press in its favour, which echoed the assertions
that, under the most favourable circumstances, “Photography could only
be a caricature of the subject it portrayed.” Thus was the combination
of Art and Science for a time checked in its progress, and the artists,
now exulting in having temporarily attained their purpose, watched
jealously the science of chemistry, and depreciated as useless any
further inquiry that seemed to encourage or aid Photography.

The great body of the public, as usual in all such cases, remained
neutral, but fortunately, for the advancement of the new art, there
remained a few who were more sanguine than their cotemporaries, and
generously bestowed their sympathy on the “oppressed.” They saw in
Photography, a great science, then but in its infancy, but which must
ultimately compete with the finer arts; its peculiar adaptation in
copying rendering it still more valuable, not only to artists, in
furthering their own success, by securing truthfulness and accuracy,
but likewise in all the various usages to which it has since been so
successfully applied. Too numerous to attempt to specify here.

At the period we speak of, Photography was entirely confined to that
class of illiterate men who only pursued it to benefit by its novelty,
and like everything new, particularly when added to cheapness, produced
a great amount of bad taste and unpardonable vulgarity. It is, no
doubt, an art which is peculiarly liable to be perverted to base and
immoral uses, but now that better taste prevails, no such fears need be
entertained. All classes of society have been benefited by Photography;
it has been a generous friend to the poor as well as to the rich, and
all must acknowledge its superior advantages and merits. Not only has
it been fostered and liberally supported by the munificence of kings,
but also in the more humble walks of life has it been welcomed as a
benefactor. Its patrons of all grades have not only derived pleasure
from the novelty of its fascinations, but inexpressible consolation
from the _souvenirs_ it affords of cherished places, and the memory of
those loved ones who may be far away, or sleeping the “sleep of death.”

It would indeed be deplorable if an art so consecrated to all that
is noble, pure, generous and holy, were again to be jeopardised by
the association of bad taste and worse usages. In England we are
fortunately protected from such an evil; but in other countries,
particularly in France, it still exists to an alarming extent, and
until the authorities there adopt the same measure of punishment
as with us, no one can walk the streets without being subjected to
some gross outrage against propriety and moral feeling. Photography,
therefore, has a double claim upon our affections--to preserve it
unscathed and unsullied, when we find it diverted into new channels
that may endanger its purity and legitimate usefulness. An art which
assists the memory and educates the taste is entitled to encouragement,
the more particularly, when by its aid we can recall in privacy the
happy hours suggested by the contemplation of the sure-reflected
lineaments of a doating mother, an affectionate sister, a tender loving
wife, or a fond and innocent child.

One great reason why Photography is so frequently applied to unworthy
purposes is, owing to its cheapness, for, where there _is_ a supply
of anything novel, combined with cheapness, patrons will present
themselves. This is a public weakness which is to be regretted, for
although competition may be consistent with the “spirit of the age,”
it is an unpardonable error when cheapness is resorted to as a means
to success, in place of trying to excel by artistic or superior merits
alone.

In no stage of Photography have we been further advanced and initiated
into the grand applications of its science than by the introduction of
the “paper process;” it presented to the mind of the photographer a
channel for experimentalising and uniting art proper with his own, for
previously the word _Art_ was foreign to the ear of the professional
photographer; all that was deemed essential in the pursuit was that
you should acquire a knowledge how to produce a photograph free from
all the optical and chemical defects. Light was only studied to secure
the _image_ with brilliancy on the plate, of the subject or object
about to be copied. If it came out clear, clean, and sharp, the
_operator_ was delighted with his success--its artistic merits were
never consulted; no question asked whether the face came out with the
rich, soft, rotundity of nature; whether the light and shade had given
tone and gradation, to add harmony to the picture; whether the line
of the head had been carried to prevent awkwardness to the figure;
whether the eyes did not look askance to the _pose_ of the head; its
artistic superiorities, in fact, were never looked for, which explains
why, at that period, photographs were taken, as a general rule, simply
head-bust, most commonly called _vignettes_, or as the Americans would
term it, _ambrotype_. Such were the productions of the “Glass Age.”
But from the time the “paper process” established itself, Photography
at once took its place among the finer arts, and having gained the
victory, the artists that had disdainfully resented its popularity,
ventured to advance into the new field of enterprise, and not only
were they delighted in procuring such an auxiliary, but they laboured
in trying to improve the application of its science to _Portraiture_.
Though _painting_ renders the chemical result subordinate, and
likewise subservient to the skill of the artist, when removed from
the _pressure frame_ to the _easel_, yet in no way does it depreciate
Photography as an art which is necessary to assist in securing with
unerring accuracy of outline momentary indications of character,
expression of face, and costume, consisting of numberless and minute
details; all of which are at once portrayed on a tablet of glass
reflected through the Camera; and which, if not satisfactory to the
mind of the _operator_, he may arrange according to his own artistic
taste, judgment and skill, with a view of securing pictorial effect and
individual character.

It would be utterly impossible to estimate the advantages Photography
has conferred upon all mankind, or to anticipate the still greater
wonders it is yet destined to achieve.

Having sketched the early struggles which Photography had to surmount
to claim a high place for its followers, we now proceed to examine its
distinguishing features. In scrutinizing the works of even the greatest
artists of our day, we are sure to find some fault--some error. Why is
it that imperfection should exist even in works of the highest rank,
grand in conception, beautiful in execution, rich in modulation,
truthfulness of outline and form, and harmonious in colouring? For the
simple reason, that true excellence can only be found in composition
pictures where the creative mind of the artist has been free to labour
in accordance with its own poetic fancy, and when such perfection
exists in portraiture without the aid of Photography, it will indeed be
an exception!

When the practical eye of an artist takes up a Work of Art, he at
once recognizes the _forte_ of the genius in some one particularity.
Say for instance one artist may excel in the master-stroke of
execution, and by a few strokes of the brush give much more artistic
and life-like effect than another would by hours of close application
and the minutest finish--the difference between these two artists
being that the one was a true born artist, and the other a lover of
the art--simply one who had acquired its mechanism from untiring
study and practice. We will again find others who excel in the
amalgamation of colours, others for composition, others for costumes
and drapery--others for the delicacy and transparency of the flesh
tones; and we might still further attempt to specify their various
_fortes_ of particular excellence, by dissecting the human forms and
classify them by their technical terms in anatomy. For instance, I
have known artists who have excelled in the execution of a face, and
yet fail in the representation of the hair--all their heads conveying
to the observer an idea that they were wigged! In other productions we
are at once made sensible that the artist has one ideal for a nose, and
if the picture represents innumerable figures, they are all possessed
of the same type of nasal organ! In others again, we find the artist
manifest in some peculiarity in the eye or in the mouth; but it is not
any of these artistic individualities we ask for when we are desirous
of possessing a faithful likeness of some loved one, nor do we care
to find as we scan their well-remembered features, the artist’s ideal
of a nose, an eye, a mouth, a chin, or some other member, in place
of its, perhaps, more homely characteristic. In nature we are daily
witnessing how the various types of features, at once the most classic
and homely--highest and lowest, come to mingle so congruously in one
face, but such as nature has thought fit to endow us, such do we want
to be faithfully and accurately delineated, and if such combination of
distinctive specialities of art are required for portraiture, which is
rarely, if ever, found individually, then how inestimable is the aid of
Photography! Many are under the impression that its process exaggerates
to such an extent that the object or subject reproduced is figuratively
distorted, which constituted the opprobium attached to its productions.
This is a mistake. If the operator uses a first-class instrument, and
sufficiently large to secure the same perfect definition at the extreme
margin of the plates as in the centre, and regulated by the diaphragm
with space sufficient for the required length of focus, no aberation or
distortion will be visible. But if a questionable lens is used, and the
aperture too small for the flatness of “field” required, then the whole
model will be more or less distorted; its receding lines obtruding as
to become perfectly blurred and indistinct; the shadows black, without
detail, and the lights hard and flat. But let it be remembered that
this Essay is entirely confined to the aspirants to Art in its higher
branches. Photography in the hands of a lover of its art, initiated
in the theory and practical knowledge of its science, would not waste
valuable time in the production of such enormities. We have, therefore,
only to deal with its advantages in its higher order of execution;
or if we deviate a while from our theory, it is but to confirm our
arguments, and give the reader an opportunity to discriminate for
himself between the two. But to return to the fallacy of portraiture
being confined to the erroneous pencil of the deceitful imagination of
an artist possessing one or more only of those capabilities essential
to the production of the truthfulness of individuality. How can it
be expected that he can pourtray, from a few short sittings taken
from nature, to be afterwards finely finished from memory with that
unerring accuracy that the Photograph identifies? I have never yet seen
a portrait painted from life that conveyed the idea of life. As the eye
rests upon the canvas, the mind at once feels that artificially life
has been attempted to be represented, even when the likeness has been
so striking as to draw from the observers an exclamation of “how like,”
and in its artistic merits “how beautiful.” But the absence of that
individuality which casts an air of naturalness in the Photographic
production is lost in the creative picture, and the cold statue-like
aspect which is conventual in Art, in no way associates the mind with
a sentiment of familiarity in the past or present, as the case may
be. Then how is it, it may be asked, that an artist who has given to
the world works of surpassing excellence--standard models for future
ages--is yet incapable of adapting himself to pourtray the simplicity
of real life as it is? Why cannot the artist thus enabled to invest
the imaginary characters of his works with all the sparkling vivacity
of life, identify the same in portraiture? To solve this problem
we must glance and circumspectly dwell for a time on the personal
characteristics of artists. Not that we would suppose, or would wish to
suggest that fac-similar _traits_ are hereditary to the born artist;
but as countries are remarkable for their individual nationalities, so
are the peculiarities in the temperament of an artist. We might without
offence notify it by calling it eccentricity, for it has been said
that genius and eccentricity are inseparable. The active and creative
mind of an artist is ever busy arranging subjects for his art. If not
drawn from Scriptural, historical, or poetical sources, it is from some
grand scene of nature memory has conjured up as he treads, the path of
life, ruminating with all the fancy of the imaginative poet buried in
those early dreams yet to be realised in the various phases of life in
some poetic fashion, glowing resplendently, as personified in the mock
_Tableau Vivants_ of his conception, at a future day to be developed
upon a piece of canvas cloth, and embodied in all the beauty and vigour
of life; its characters standing out in bold relief so prominent in
their varied and natural imitation, that you might fancy they were in
reality breathing the very breath of life!

Thus left to conceive and portray by the inspired hand of genius
without the fastidious or exacting interference of his patrons, the
artist will assuredly be successful, perhaps beyond his most sanguine
expectations, but once interfere with him, the spell is broken, and
once compel him to make alterations against his will, not only will you
find his touches niggardly, but they are given without firmness, force,
or effect. The touches might be given at random, for any advancement
of their creative merit; his ideas are, in fact, crippled, and if that
picture is ever completed, the eye and mind will at once intuitively
feel that there is a want, and that want will be inspiration.

The ideas of an artist are irreproachable and impassable. Once
confined, his own conceptions swayed, his capabilities are disabled;
mind and hand must be as free as the wind of heaven, unshackled by
prejudice or importunities.

Having thus solved the problem why artists cannot adapt themselves
to follow nature in its identical peculiarities, the same reasons
likewise explain the necessity why Art and Photography should be
combined, a consumation still more desirable in the art of portraiture,
where the artist, perforce, is made obedient to the truth of reality.

The portrait thus conveyed by Photography, is not only an immense
saving of time, labour and trouble, both to artist and sitter, by being
enabled to secure individuality, but the variety of talent required for
an artist to execute a portrait from life, is thus adequately balanced.

In the “Operating” Department another stamp of artistic merit is
required--“Conception,”--the eye being called upon in every way to
arrange such pictorial effect that its every production may be in
themselves studies. Thus has the felicitious combination of Science
and Art become irrevocably united--each depending upon the other for
success. The latter is, as I have before remarked, distinguished for
its unerring accuracy of drawing in all its individual properties and
shading; the former for imparting all the glowing warmth of nature; and
this inestimable acquisition has likewise invoked a higher, purer, and
simpler standard for the truthful representation of contemporaneous
life, by unavoidably adhering to the reality of nature, surrounding, in
place of being personified, in some fantastic guise or otherwise poetic
myth.

Art, in the present age, stands conspicuous for its great achievements
in _Truthfulness_, which has been guided and assisted by the aid of
the Camera. Perspective, the great key to Art, was fabulous before
Photography was introduced; and by its aid what perfection has it not
obtained, not only is distance mathematically exact, but the round,
soft, accuracy of light and shade in nature, is most beautifully
defined!

Photography not only aids and assists the Fine Arts, but gives
invaluable aid to Architecture, Astronomy, Geology, Mineralogy, Science
of Chemistry, Physiology, Literature, and numberless sciences, and
likewise what the human eye is incapable of discerning, the microscope
reveals and Photography delineates. Thus are we supplied with copies
perfected by its aid, of every work of art, ancient and modern, thus
multiplied and preserved for generations to come. We will now glance,
in conclusion, upon the defects which have tended to constitute that
opprobrium attached to the productions of photographic portraits by the
public in general. The opinion that Photography exaggerates to such
an excess that, the lineaments it has pourtrayed are quite distorted,
or that five or ten years have suddenly been added to a “sitter’s”
age, and their youth apparently eclipsed by the lines being, perhaps,
too harshly defined, and the shadows too strongly marked, adding
innumerable furrows, reverential and admired in old age, but despised
in youth! This defect is most easily obviated, and no one who loves
his profession will consent to such over-printed copies going out into
the world, for it is by the after process that this defect exists, and
not in the actual taking of the photograph, unless the subject is very
badly lighted, which will occur when there is too much or too little
light. It is possible to print a proof until all the details, even in
the high lights, are entirely obliterated, and the likeness scarcely
discernable. But this is entirely the fault of the artist. Care must be
taken that each impression is carefully watched, and printed according
to scale; this undoubtedly requires the most exacting patience and
perseverance; but with untiring care expended upon each impression not
the slightest trace of exaggeration will be visible, every shade and
detail will be rich in the soft rotundity which nature rejoices in.

These few short hints, and brief and explanatory statements of General
Art Principles, may, we trust, be found enlightening and useful to
all supporters of Fine Art, not forgetting that a small grain of seed
often becomes a goodly tree; let us not trample its first tender
shoots beneath our feet, in contempt at its feeble efforts to obtain
expansion, as it breaks from its mother bed of soil to imbibe the
freshness of the dew-drops and the glorious sunbeam of day. No!--let us
by careful training assist its maturity by removing from its path any
noxious weeds that spring up spontaneously, and by the same method of
cultivation eradicate the evils that threaten to sap its tender youth.

If this theory had been in practice some hundred years ago, how much
further advanced might the world have been, had not neglect and cold
indifference thrown its shadow on all scientific pursuits? Then, let
us not fall into the folly of our ancestors by standing aloof, each
waiting for the other to take the first step in advance, so biased by
the prejudice of the times that we unite in the general cry, in place
of going forward and judging discriminately for ourselves.

[Illustration]

[Illustration]




Transcriber’s Notes


This book does not have a Table of Contents.

Hyphenation and spelling were not changed.

Simple typographical errors were corrected.

All illustrations are decorative. Some are shown within decorative
borders. Those borders were used on all pages of the original book,
including the ones with text.