In the summer of 1868, Edward Wilson, editor of The Philadelphia Photographer, was busy organizing opposition to the extension of the Bromide Patent. The application for this extension had already been made by Asa Oliver Butman, administrator of the estate of James A. Cutting, and would have passed had the National Photographic Convention, led by Wilson, not resolved to fight it.

In the meantime, Wilson failed to edition a photographic print for the July issue of his magazine. With no time to lose, Wilson contacted several friends and came up with a group of negatives, which were all printed and bound into various copies as available.

So far, we have found three different photographs in July 1868 issues but undoubtedly there were many more.

In his description of “Our Picture,” that July, Wilson confesses, “We have endeavored to secure, to each of our subscribers this month, a pleasing picture of some pretty little Missie or other, and as we shall, doubtless, be found out, we had better confess that they are not all of the same subject.

We have had so large a portion of our time occupied, since the convention, by correspondence, and business attendant upon the opposition to the bromide extension, that, among other things neglected, we failed to make our usual provision for our picture.

Several of our friends have come to our aid, and kindly loaned us negatives, from which we have printed our large edition in less than a month, and much of the time rainy. For this reason, we can say but little about them.

We hope all will be pleased with what they get, overlook our shortcomings this time, and charge them to bromide.”

–The Philadelphia Photographer July 1868, Issue 55.

 

Please let us know if you find other examples.

  

The Graphic Arts Collection holds one of 100 privately printed volumes offering an arboricultural study of Scotland. “The following pages are the result of numerous wanderings through the counties of Fife and Kinross during the summers of 1875-6-7-8. The localities visited, and the many fine specimens of Trees and Shrubs which came under our notice, afforded us both pleasure and instruction, and in submitting our observations for perusal, our chief object will be fulfilled if we can interest the Reader in the subject of Arboriculture, or contribute a little to the information and enjoyment of any lover of nature.”-from the Preface.

The following is a selection from the “Obituary Notice of John Jeffrey, Balsusney,” by C. Howie, St Andrews.

John Jeffrey, Balsusney, Kirkcaldy, along with his brothers, succeeded to an extensive linen manufacturing business, carried on by their father in Kirkcaldy and the west of Scotland. . . . As a relief from the constant routine of an industrious life, he betook himself to the culture of trees and shrubs, planting his park by the side of his works with choice specimens. . . . the recreative study of plant life in the field was his delight, nothing being more pleasing to him than the sight of some majestic tree that stood forth among its contemporaries. He resolved, in conjunction with the writer, to register the dimensions of trees in the Fife district, a dendrometer being obtained from Mr Sang of Kirkcaldy for ascertaining the height.

When Mr Jeffrey resolved to publish, we restricted our pursuits only to taking note of the largest trees, and those of more recent introduction . . . no expense was spared in photographing specimens, the plates being forwarded to London to undergo the Woodbury process. There were only 100 copies printed of this labour of love, many were given away to friends, and the rest were readily disposed of. A copy was presented to the then prime minister, with the authors’ compliments. —Transactions and Proceedings, vol. 17-18 (Botanical Society of Edinburgh, 1889).

H. R. 5893

To restore the First Amendment Rights of Photographers.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 2, 2015

Mr. Stockman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the
Committees on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and the Judiciary, for a
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned

A BILL

To restore the First Amendment Rights of Photographers.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds as follows:
(1) In recent years, the Federal Government has enacted
regulations to prohibit or restrict photography in National
Parks, public spaces, and of government buildings, law
enforcement officers, and other government personnel carrying
out their duties.
(2) In recent years, photographers on Federal lands and
spaces have been threatened with seizure and forfeiture of
photographic equipment and memory cards, and have been arrested
or threatened with arrest for merely recording what the eye can
see from public spaces.
(3) Even in the absence of laws or regulations, Federal law
enforcement officers, other government personnel, and private
contractors have been instructed to prohibit photography from
public spaces, and threatened photographers with arrest or
seizure of photographic equipment.
(4) Arresting photographers, seizing photographic
equipment, and requirements to obtain permits, pay fees, or buy
insurance policies are abridgments of freedom of speech and of
the press.
(5) The First Amendment of the United States Constitution
states, “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press.”.
(6) Still and motion photographs are speech.
(7) The photography by Ansel Adams and other famous
photographers helped bring home to Americans the beauty and
fragility of our natural resources.
(8) Ansel Adams’ photographs helped build public support to
make Yosemite into a National Park.
(9) Future “Ansel Adams” must not have their paths
blocked, regulated and made more expensive with fees and fines,
or be threatened with arrest and seizure of their equipment.

To continue reading, see: https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5893/text

Silhouettes, pantographs, and physiognotraces are just a few of the pre-photographic topics covered by the George Eastman House in their new series of videos. This is the first of 12, each lasting about 6 minutes, beautifully illustrating the various photographic processes from the renaissance to the present. These videos make it much easier to understand and appreciate many objects in Princeton’s collection, such as:

Charles Balthazar Julien Févret de Saint-Mémin (1770-1852), Physiognotrace portrait of Thomas Jefferson, n.d. [1804]. Engraving and copperplate. 7.1 x 6.6 cm. Graphic Arts French prints. Gift of Charles Scribner Jr., Class of 1943.

Brass pantograph, in a tapered, hinged mahogany case, 27.5″ (long) x 4″ (high) x 5.75″ / 2.75″ (wide), signed “W & S Jones Holborn, London.”

Here is the link to the whole series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me5ke7agyOw&list=PL4F918844C147182A

New Hampshire photographer Henry Moore traveled to South Caroline in 1862 to photograph the Civil War victories of the 3rd New Hampshire Regiment. Among other campaigns, they had been part of the November 7, 1861 takeover of the sea islands. Moore spent much of his time photographing the newly freed men and women who had subsequently taken over the plantations where they once worked as slaves.

Edward Wilson (1838-1903) was also photographing the Civil War in 1862 and may have come in contact with Moore. When Wilson began publishing the Philadelphia Photographer in 1864, he looked for images he could include as original prints in each issue. Wilson purchased one of Moore’s glass plate negatives and had John Slaney edition enough prints to paste one into each copy of his September 1865 issue.

“Now our dreadful civil war is ended,” wrote Wilson, “every one is anxious to possess some relic or remembrance of it. Photography has done much to cater to these desires in the way of views of ransacked, burned and deserted cities, fields of battle, and of the dead martyrs, and portraits of the various officers of rank and merit on both sides.”

“Views may yet be taken, such as we have described, but such a one as we present in this issue can never more be taken . . . The jaded donkey and the sable field-hands with their implements, all explain themselves. When they were taken, they were slaves; now they are free men and women. The view was made (in 1862) with a single Jamin View lens, by Henry P. Moore, of Concord, N. H., on Edisto Island, S.C., at the plantation of James Hopkinson. The planters on this island left their homes at the time Port Royal was taken. About fifty slaves were found on this plantation at the time our view was made, living in the parlors of the mansion, and some of them sleeping on the piano . . . .”

Wilson continued, “As there will doubtless be a demand over and above our issue for this picture, we can only supply them to our subscribers.” The prints are made from Moore’s negative by John M. Slaney of Camden, and additional copies were sold at Wilson & Hood’s shop on Arch Street. Wilson was right about the popularity of the image. Most of the copies of this magazine have had the photograph removed, including the digital copies available from online sources.

 

In October 1885, a brief notice in The Princetonian mentioned that the Harvard Crimson was promoting “the advisability of securing a composite photograph of the Senior Class.” The technique of superimposing multiple photographic portraits of one entire class was being attempted at Smith College and the students from other universities were encouraged to undertake similar studies.

By June 1887, it was noted that Harvard seniors were preparing the photography for such a project, as were the students at Wellesley College.

http://smitharchives.wordpress.com/tag/john-tappan-stoddard

The March and November 1887 issues of The Century Magazine contained a two-part article entitled, “College Composites,” with illustrations of portrait photographs created from the classes of students at Harvard, Amherst, Bowdoin, Cornell, Smith, Williams, and Wells.

By late fall 1887, Princeton had still declined to join this endeavor. One last attempt was made to convince their fellow students when the May 1889 Princetonian pointed out that Cornell Juniors were also having a composite photograph taken. Princeton opted out.

It is not known why Princeton decided not to undertake composite photographs, which were extremely popular at the time. Above are a few from the other institutions.

We are all interested in typical representations. The novelist or poet holds and gratifies us as we feel that the character which is portrayed with skillful words is the type of a class. The artist draws an ideal head, his expression of a type for which no single model will serve, and we look with satisfaction and pleasure at the product of his fancy. Both artist and author seek to sketch a face or character that has grown in their minds by the blending of impressions gained from the observation of many individuals. The result at which they aim is a generic portrait which shall retain the typical characteristics of the class for which it stands, while the peculiarities and idiosyncrasies of the individuals are left out.

The generalized image, which the creative mind is able to seize upon and express, rises with more or less vividness in the mind of every one as the representative of the class or group of objects which is present in his thought. This image is often a vague and unsatisfactory one, and the mind, in its efforts to gain clearness, runs rapidly over the more distinct images of members of the class, and not infrequently ends in selecting some one of these to stand as the type of all. . . — John T. Stoddard, College Composites, Century Magazine 1887.

The Century illustrated monthly magazine (New York : The Century Co., 1882-1913). http://digital.library.cornell.edu/c/cent/index.html

When Edward Livingston Wilson (1838-1903) began his journal, The Philadelphia Photographer in 1864, he embellished the articles (his word) with an original albumen silver print as a frontispiece for each issue. In 1866, the photographers he published included William Notman (1826–1891); John Coates Browne (1838–1918); Max Petsch (active 1860s); Henszey; S.G. Rogers; Walter C. North (1831–1891); James Inglis (1835–1904); and Frederick August Wenderoth (1819–1884).

The photograph posted above is a view of James Inglis’s Montreal studio on St. James Street, with a very young operator at the daguerreotype camera. Inglis eventually moved to Rochester and then Chicago, where he died in 1904 following an explosion while experimenting on a new form of magnesium lighting. Over at The Photo-Beacon, F. Dundas Todd wrote a remembrance of the photographer,

“Getting interested in dry plates in the early eighties, [Inglis] entered upon the experimental stage with his usual whole-souled energy, and, like many more of that time, with disastrous financial results. He gravitated to Rochester, where he founded the Inglis Dry Plate Company, and entered with enthusiasm into their manufacture.

Those were troublous times in the photographic world, where a cool head was essential to financial success. Gelatin is a very uncertain substance even in the present day, as plate and paper manufacturers well know, and in those days it was more so, and many a promising business was ruined by an unsuitable brand of gelatin, and, unfortunately, the cause was rarely suspected. Then the wet plate was emphatically slow, while it was so easy to make dry plates that were decidedly faster.

Photographers would persist in overexposing, and many a good emulsion was wasted because photographers could not get out of their old ways. With his usual habit of going to the limit, James Inglis twenty years ago made dry plates as fast as are on the market to-day, but they proved his financial ruin.”

Here are a few of the other photographs published by Wilson in 1866.
S.G. Rogers, “Oil Well, Carmichael’s, Pa.,” The Philadelphia Photographer, v. III. No. 35 (April 1866).
John Coates Browne (1838–1918), “Portraits by Magnesium Light,” The Philadelphia Photographer, v. III. No. 35 (January 1866).