Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB
[graphic][merged small]

Delaware & Chesapeake Canal. Photograph by Prof. Lewis M. Haupt, University of Pennsylvania. fect fine grained emulsion on their film, because in the finished bromide the pupil of the man's eye is clearly discernible. The writer was so surprised and delighted with this little detail that he carefully avoided touching it up in any way, while finishing the print with air brush and stump.

The development of a print of this size is extremely interesting, particularly if the operator is too anxious to get to work to wait for the carpenter to make a tray large enough to accommodate the entire print. The largest tray on hand proved to be one measuring 25 x 40 inches and having a glass bottom. It was made of a frame of 7-inch stuff, 4 inches deep, the glass fitting into a groove 3/8 inches deep and half an inch from the bottom of the frame. Two 1⁄2-inch strips of wood across the bottom, under the glass, give ample support. The print, handled of course by two men, is drawn back and forth through the eighteen quarts of developer which are necessary to give sufficient depth of solution. The roll of paper is 27 inches wide and cut 4 inches longer than the print is to be when finished. This will be found necessary to provide finger hold and obviate tearing into the picture. Developing, rinsing, and fixing are all carried out in the same manner. The final washing is given

in a deep porcelain sink, where the print is occasionally turned over. writer has made more than a dozen of these large prints under these conditions with but one failure, and that was due to the fact that the negative was too contrasty.

[graphic][merged small]

At first, considerable trouble was experienced in finding typical pictures which could be squeezed into this narrow panel.

One picture which appeared to be very desirable was found to be entirely too wide for the panel. (Illustration No. 7, Fig. 1.) The difficulty was solved by placing the picture before the camera at an angle of 45° and making a copy with the lens stopped down to the smallest diaphragm with the result shown in Fig. 2. It will be seen that although the picture is decidedly foreshortened there is no real distortion apparent. The lens used for this purpose was a Goerz Dagor of 84 inch focus, stopped down to U. S. 128. No particular detail was selected for focusing, the ground glass being racked until there seemed to be equal diffusion and it was found that at this point the foreshortening was least apparent. The print was copied under glass and placed so that no direct light fell on it, thus avoiding all reflections. This procedure necessarily prolonged the exposure very much, the Standard Orthonon plate used requiring an exposure of half an hour. On account of the great enlargement, for which it was intended, the plate was fully timed and rapidly developed (70 seconds actual count) with a developer of only half strength, the result being a thin negative teeming with detail.

The finished print, illustration No. 8, is perhaps better pictorially, than the

[graphic][graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small]

original, and on account of the height of eye of the observer loses almost all evidence of foreshortening.

The same principle is sometimes used in architectural work. Almost all workers have, at some time or other, found the most extreme use of the swingback insufficient to "square the lines." In such cases a print is made and placed at an angle before the camera, the narrower part of course nearest the camera. The print can be adjusted so that the lines on the ground glass will be absolutely square and parallel. The same result will be obtained by placing the print squarely before the camera and inclining the swing-back until the lines appear corrected.

The results thus far described have been reached by purely photographic methods. But when the worker has once started to force facts to assume a different shape than the "Camera-don't-lie" principle would permit, he stands a good chance of losing at least one of his reputations. The camera don't lie, but heaven help the operator, because his next step is "faking" and he finds it just as easy and comfortable as initiation in the far-famed Ananias Club. The following illustrations show to what depths the writer has descended on this easy road to success.

The 4 x 5 photograph (illustration No. 9), was loaned the writer by Prof.

[graphic][merged small]

L. M. Haupt, of the University of Pennsylvania. This was patched up with clippings from three other photographs of the same quality. A tuft of cotton stuck on the film extends the smoke across the margin of the original print. The result as seen in illustration No. 10, is an upright effect. After touching up this conglomerate print with a spotting brush, it was copied at an angle as described above with the result shown in illustration No. II.

The bromide enlargement which also measures 2 feet by 6 feet (Illustration No. 12), of course required a more liberal use of the air brush. The engineer in charge of digging the canal would hardly recognize the locality, but the finished print is an almost ideal picture of canal transportation.

The writer has forty of these panels to make, and it is the intention to include only the most typical methods of transportation, beginning with the most primitive, the human burdens for personal needs, and ending with the limited express and ocean greyhound.

WHAT PHOTOGRAPHERS MAY LEARN FROM THE OLD AND NEW MASTERS.

BY SIDNEY ALLAN.

PAPER II.

On Interiors.

T

[graphic]

HE ordinary "interior," taken for commercial purposes, has no artistic pretensions. It is nothing but a statement of facts, and of interest merely to the builder, furnisher or owner.

A scene like Fig. 1 is a pictorial impossibility. An interior that is uninteresting in itself is a hopeless case from the start. A rearrangement of the furniture would scarcely improve the total effect. The room would look dismal under atmospheric conditions. Only a peculiar and happy light effect might save it from its utilitarian ugliness.

The "artistic" interior is of Dutch origin and de Hooch, Terburg, van der Meer, Metzu, Jan Steen, and Teniers were its masters. It was ignored by the Italian painters. They hardly ever depicted home-life. They

did not feel the pleasure which the Dutch genre painters took in each little incident of their environment. An intimate study like the "Woman Writing a Letter," Fig. 8, was never attempted by a cinque-cento master. They strove for the larger aspects of life, the idealization of the human form, the depiction of elemental passions and the dramatic expression of religious sentiment.

The Dutch painter was primarily a worshipper of surface beauty. Artists like van der Meer and Metzu took a special pleasure in furs and satins, in rugs and precious stuffs, in sunny spaces on wall and floor, and all bright things like the curious gleams of silverware or porcelain shining from the shadows. Van der Meer was the painter of bright flaring sunlight. He depicted only a part of the room, and placed the figures half-size near the window. The sunlight centers upon the figure and objects of interest, illumines the background (generally a gray wall with a map in a black beveled frame) with a soft

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »