CHAPTER VII.

DEVELOPMENT.

[Sidenote: Study of chemistry.]

Before entering on the subject of development, it is necessary to tell

the student that if he does not already understand the principles of

chemistry, he should lose no time in doing so, and as aids to such

understanding he cannot do better than get Roscoe’s “Lessons in

Elementary Chemistry,”[12] and Abney’s “Photography with Emulsions,” and

master the chapters mentioned in the footnote, ignoring the rest for the

time. Also let him buy Bloxham’s “Laboratory Teaching.” For a few

shillings he can purchase apparatus enough to do qualitative analysis.

This he will be able to do by following Mr. Bloxham’s directions,

omitting, perhaps, testing with the blow-pipe. If he has the time and

means, he will do well to do some quantitative analysis, working, say

with water, since it is of such immense importance to the photographer.

He will find a knowledge of chemistry as interesting as useful, and the

power of observation and accuracy acquired by the study will be

invaluable in subsequent stages of his work. We refer the student to

works on chemistry by specialists, because we think it is a mistake to

swell the bulk of our book by an exposition of chemical principles. We

caution the student, however, who intends to take up photography as an

art, to have nothing to do with plate-making. [Sidenote: Plate-making.]

That manufacture can only be done satisfactorily by experts constantly

employed at it, and it is as reasonable to expect a painter to prepare

his own colours, and make his own canvas, as to insist upon a

photographer making his own plates. Some people have tried to propagate

the false idea that a picture taken on a plate of the exhibitor’s own

making has a special kind of merit, but obviously this is only true when

the object is an “Emulsion process competition.” In judging of the

merits of a picture, no facts should be taken into consideration, save

the art expressed by the picture. [Sidenote: Plates.] Still the student

should know the methods by which his plates are prepared, and that his

chemistry will teach him, and when he has found plates which suit him,

let him keep to them. We have worked with fourteen different kinds of

plates, and have found most of them good, though each requires different

treatment. One piece of advice is, however, necessary, always buy your

plates direct from the makers, unless you can rely upon your dealer.

Some plates are, of course, much quicker than others, and this point the

beginner must carefully bear in mind, making his exposures accordingly.

[Sidenote: Vigilance committees.] He must not forget, however, that

there are brands of plates which are “starved” of silver; these he

should avoid, and it would be well if a vigilance committee were

appointed in every society to test batches of plates occasionally, and

report on them in the photographic journals, thus showing up the

fraudulent manufacturers. Assuming, then, that the student has carefully

studied the chemistry of development and has fixed on a satisfactory

brand of plates, we will proceed to give him a few practical hints, but

before we do so we must get rid of an obstacle in his path, and that is

the wet-plate process.

-----

Footnote 12:

Roscoe’s Chemistry:—

Lessons 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, and potassium, sodium, and ammonium in lessons 19, 22, 23;

chromium and uranium in lesson 25; mercury, silver, and platinum

in lessons 26, 27, and 28.

“Photography with Emulsions:”— Caps. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 22,

24, and 31.

-----

[Sidenote: Wet-plate process.]

If the student were to ask ten middle-aged photographers whether they

prefer a wet plate or a dry plate negative, nine out of ten would, without

doubt answer, “Oh, a wet-plate negative.” If the student is curious and

asks, why? he will get a vague answer, in which the words “bloom” and

“beauty” play conspicuous parts, the adjectives reminding him of an

advertisement for patent balms for the skin. The fact is, not knowing the

first principles of art, photographers have raised for themselves false

gods, and they are still worshipping them. Let us at once and most

emphatically state that wet plate negatives do not give so true an

impression of nature as a gelatino-bromide plate, nor are the results so

artistic. We have seen much of the best of Mrs. Cameron’s work, and she

obtained from collodion and silver some of the best results ever obtained

from wet plates, for she had artistic insight, yet even in her work the

tonality is not so true, and the “quality” and freshness is not so fine as

can be obtained from gelatino-bromide negatives. The work by this process

is hard, and incapable of expressing texture correctly, while the general

impression is more or less artificial. This is fortunate for us, for the

slowness of the wet-plate process would seriously handicap it, even if the

artistic result were better than that of dry plates. The inadequacy of

collodion plates is emphasized when we look at the work of the craftsmen

who used them, and whose ideal was sharpness and “bloom.” Such work will

be found most unnatural and inartistic. Surely many of the false ideas

current amongst photographers arose from the evolution of the art.

Daguerreotypes, the first photographs, were shiny, and most of the

subsequent processes followed in their wake, until one clear-sighted

photographer, Blanquart-Evrard, tried to combat the evil tendencies.

Considering, then, the poor artistic quality of collodion plates and their

slowness in exposure, there is absolutely nothing to be said in their

favour for art work. It is decided, then, that our student will work with

gelatino-bromide plates.

[Sidenote: Hints to be remembered in developing.]

We venture to state briefly certain hints founded on the chemistry and

practice of development, which the student must have at his fingers' ends,

for let him remember that _the vital question of tone depends on

development_. That exceedingly nice question of getting the tones in

approximately true relation, which gives all artists so much work, gives

him who uses photography as his medium no less thought, and it is on

account of the _plasticity of the process of development_ that we can at

once take our stand and repudiate the ignorant assertion that photography

is a mechanical process. Of course there are fifty other reasons why it is

not merely a mechanical process, to mention one more of which will be

enough, i.e. the variety of exposures ranging between the 1/2000 of a

second (as with Muybridge’s work), and a couple of hours as in taking an

interior. Developing is really what modelling is to the sculptor, and as

art guides the modeller’s hand, so it must the photographer’s who wishes

to obtain _pictures_, and the art value of the work of both men will be

proportionate to the art knowledge and insight of the workers. Now you can

understand how absolutely necessary to pictorial photography is a

knowledge of art. Where photographers are devoid of all art knowledge,

their aim is to get “pluck,” “nice gradation,” “vim,” “snap,” “sparkle,”

“brilliancy,” to use only a few of their strange and cheap terms, and,

according to them all these loosely named qualities must be present

equally in a sunny picture and in a grey day picture, if ever they dare to

expose a plate on a grey day. It is all such talk that has brought

photography down to be called a merely mechanical process, which of course

it becomes in the hands of those who can and do give “pluck” and “sparkle”

to every negative, regardless of effect. It never occurs to these that

each picture is a problem in itself, and needs different management from

beginning to end. They aim for their “sparkle” from the moment of exposure

to the end of development, and obtain all the other qualities described so

eloquently by their cheap adjectives, by their _unvarying_ development.

Now let the student, keeping all this in mind, carefully commit to memory

these hints, for they are of vital importance.

[Sidenote: Hints.]

Placing the plate in water before using the developer is equivalent to

weakening the developer.

By first immersing the plate in the pyrogallic acid solution with no

restrainer or alkali, the subsequent development is slowed, and greater

contrast obtained. When pyrogallic acid is added in excess, too great

density and fog result. By adding pyrogallic acid, greater density and

contrast are obtained.

If the high lights are getting too dense, before the detail in the shadows

is well out, take the plate out of the developer and let the details

develop up with the amount of solution contained in the film, and then

replace it in the developer for density, if necessary.

Develop plates coated with quick emulsions to a greater density than

others.

Where there is much black and white in the picture, as in photographing

sculpture against black velvet, weaken the pyrogallic acid. The alkali

brings up the detail, and in properly exposed pictures increases density.

In excess it causes fog. The rate at which the picture is to be developed

can be governed by the restrainer, which also checks detail and increases

density. For long exposures the restrainer should be freely used, whilst

for quick-exposure work its use should be very limited.

Too much hyposulphite in the developer tends to solarization. Although its

value in the alkaline developer has been denied, we are of opinion that in

certain cases it is invaluable; it accelerates development in dark

shadows, rendering the reflected light in the shadows as nothing else can.

Captain Abney recommends its use in the ferrous oxalate developer only,

but we are well assured of its value in conjunction with the alkaline

developer in all cases of very rapid exposure.

The action of the developer is of course increased by the alkali, and

slowed by the oxidizing agent, but the tonality is affected unless it be

well governed by the restrainer.

If a picture flashes out quickly, add the restrainer and plenty of water.

If it comes up very slowly, mix a new developer containing half as much

restrainer as the normal and twice as much alkali.

The quicker the action of the developer the less marked the relative

tones; this is most important to remember; the pyrogallic acid should

never be extremely strong, never perhaps so strong as recommended in the

standard formulæ. [Sidenote: Method.] We must remember, then, that we have

our three necessary factors for development, the oxidizer, the alkali, and

the restrainer, all of which we can modify at will. On our minds, too, we

have, or should have, a vivid impression of the picture translated into

black and white; we remember what we wish to emphasize, and what to

subdue, so that the resulting picture shall be true in tone and

impression. We proceed then to mix our developer accordingly, remembering

first that the temperature of the developing-room makes a difference, and

remembering that the photographic image exists on the film to a degree

proportionate to the actinic value of the light which fell upon it.

Therefore, if it is a brightly-lighted landscape in sunshine, taken with a

full exposure, we must get a picture in a high key, but be it remembered

in such a picture the light greys will be lost in the whites, as has been

already shown; on the other hand, if it is a very low-toned effect, the

dull greys will be lost in the blacks. [Sidenote: Slow development.] We

must never forget to develop _all plates slowly_, let this be our

ever-present rule, for by developing slowly, the student has far more

command over his work, and that is what every artist seeks. No haphazard

work, but complete control, so that we can mould the picture according to

our will. And here we must again remind the student that he can never get

scientifically correct gradations from high light to deep shadow,

therefore he must be prepared to get only the true impression, and as a

fundamental law, let him remember to _watch over the truth of the lowest

tones_.

[Sidenote: Meteorological conditions to be adhered to in developing.]

It must not be forgotten that Nature is ever varying, and that the

chemicals will act differently under different conditions of temperature,

mixture, electrical conditions, &c., &c., and the worker must learn to

modify them accordingly; thus weaker solutions should be used in summer

and on mist effects. In fact, the more one sees into photography, the more

difficult does the matter become, for every picture is, from start to

finish, a new problem. Artistic work is not nearly so amenable to rules as

is laboratory work, where the conditions are generally more constant and

better determined. Even the state of the weather at the time of exposure

has great influence. The careful observer will soon see, in going over a

collection of first-rate negatives, developed by the same hand and

developer, that they all differ in quality, each one has physical

characteristics of its own, which are the combined resultant of these

protean conditions of Nature, and that such is the case is yet another

proof of the individuality of a photograph _per se_, apart from any other

reasons.

[Sidenote: Plates to be developed on day of exposure.]

Another very important point is the fact that the light does not act on

the film proportionately to the length of exposure; the greatest action

occurs at the earliest part of the exposure, as can be proved, in a rough

way, by exposing a plate on different subjects for the same length of

time. This fact alone at once and obviously creates a fatal objection to

composite photography. It is a fact which must be constantly remembered in

relation to tonality. It has been stated that an under-exposed plate can

be improved by being kept (undeveloped) for several months, the idea being

that the action having once begun will continue, but this is not our

experience with gelatine plates, though we have observed something of the

kind in working with carbon tissues. Instead of keeping his exposed

plates, our advice to the student is _develop your negatives as soon as

possible after exposure, never later than the day on which they are

taken_, and for these reasons. First, and chiefly, because you should

develop your negative whilst yet the mental impression of what you are

trying for is fresh. You have, we will hope, analyzed your subject and

thought it all out in black and white masses, and by developing while that

analysis is still vivid to you, you stand a very much greater chance of

getting a true thing. Secondly, of course, you are on the spot to take

another negative if the first prove a failure. For complete success, this

is the only way, and even if it entail carrying about a cumbersome dark

tent, the practice will in the end bring its own reward, and it must be

insisted upon as the best method of working. The astounding habit which

some industrial photographers indulge in, of sending their operators all

over the country, while they themselves stay at home to develop the work

of those and other operators, accounts in a great measure for the numerous

parodies of Nature which deck the shop-windows. This is truly mechanical

work, and we are prepared to say that no one, save by mere chance, can

produce perfect artistic work, _who does not develop his own plates on the

spot_. [Sidenote: On over-production.] Then, again, the student of

photography who wishes to produce artistic work must not hurry or

over-produce. One _picture_ produced in a month would be well worth the

time and trouble spent on it. We once asked an eminent landscape painter

how many plates he would be content to produce in a year if he were a

photographer. His answer was, “Twenty first-rate things would be good,”

and _that meant working all the year round_. We recommend that saying as

one worthy to be remembered. The poet Gray purchased immortality by one

short poem; many historians and novelists, now forgotten, have written as

many volumes as there were verses in that one poem of Gray’s, yet few

would prefer the oblivion of the prolific ones to the name that Gray has

won.

[Sidenote: Ferrous oxalate developer.]

But we must go back to developing, and we come now to the question of,

“What developer to use?” In our opinion the ferrous oxalate developer is

unsuited to artistic work. At one time we used it for negatives and

positives. For negatives we do not think it gives the quality which can be

obtained with the alkaline developer nor does it allow of the same

control, which is, of course, a very grave fault. For positives, on the

other hand, where the conditions are better known, and where absolute

purity of film is required, it is very useful, but as we are not concerned

with positives here, we will not go further into the matter.

[Sidenote: Chemicals.]

We must impress upon the student the necessity of always using fresh and

pure chemicals, and to secure such, it is wise to procure them from a good

chemist.

Re-sublimated pyrogallic acid should always be used, and re-crystallized

_sulphite_ of soda, and, above all, be sure the water is pure. For all

operations where chemical action results, none but pure non-aerated water

should be used, preferably, boiled, distilled water, for the air and other

impurities in ordinary water may be most harmful, as any one who has

studied the analysis of water and air knows well.

Let the developers (the stock solutions) be mixed with boiling or

distilled water, for this will aid in preserving them. The alum and

hyposulphite solutions should be mixed with cold boiled distilled water,

the alum bath being a saturated solution.

[Sidenote: Standard developer.]

Perhaps the simplest advice we can give as to the particular developer to

be used is to take as the normal developer one mixed according to the

formula sent out with the plates which the student has chosen to work

with, but the student must not use it in the exact proportions given by

the maker. Let the student mix up the stock solutions as told, varying the

constituents as the case in hand demands. If he has carefully and

thoroughly read his chemistry, and if he remembers the hints we have given

him, he will have no difficulty in following out the directions.

He should, as a rule, never use more than two-thirds of the amount of

pyrogallic acid recommended; let him be very careful how he uses the

restrainer, and let him add the ammonia _only in small quantities_, unless

the exposure has been very rapid. As a rule let him work with _weak

developers_. We could easily give a dozen or even fifty formulæ for

developers, but the student would be no wiser if we did, only more

confused. Every photographer fancies his own particular formula, but we

have no belief in any special favourites; we have worked with many, and

find the results depend altogether on the quantities used and the manner

of developing rather than on the constituents. Take, then, the formula

recommended by your plate-maker, but use it, as we have said, with

judgment. Begin with a sufficiency of pyrogallic acid (according to the

subject), use little restrainer, except in over-exposure, and add the

ammonia slowly, adding a few drops from time to time as required. In

short, make it your rule to _use weak developers, and develop slowly_. If

you think you are likely to have under-exposed, add ten to twenty drops of

a one per cent. solution of hyposulphite of soda, using no restrainer.

Some unscientific persons imagine that development can be reduced to a

science, and that absolute quantities of each solution must be used. One

might as well expect a physician always to prescribe the same doses. Each

picture requires a developer of its own; that should never be forgotten.

We have tried hydrokinone instead of pyrogallic acid; a given quantity of

hydrokinone does the work of double that quantity of pyrogallic acid, but

it has no advantages, so far as we can see, except for the development of

under-exposed plates. For very rapid work we recommend the

carbonate-of-potash developer, as green fog does not result. [Sidenote:

Eder’s potash developer.]The formula we use is Dr. Eder’s:—

A. ℞ Pure dry mono-carbonate of potash 90 parts

Water 200 ”

B. Pyrogallic acid 12 ”

Sulphite of soda 25 ”

Citric acid 1½ ”

Water 100 ”

Before using, mix forty to sixty drops of A with three ounces of water,

and the same quantity of B. We generally use more water than that

recommended in the formula.

Now it will be remembered that in bright sunny effects brilliancy, and

therefore density, is needed; the gamut of light and shade is not so

extended as in some subjects, for the shadows are bright with reflected

light, but the whole must be brilliant and in a high key. In our opinion

Dr. Eder’s potash developer gives this better than any other. For snow

scenes, on the other hand, where there are often very black heavy shadows,

we recommend, as we have done before, the developer given by the maker of

the plates, used in a weak solution.

[Sidenote: Local development.]

No photographer need hope to obtain perfect results and exactly what he

wishes, without resorting to local treatment; and here once more the

knowledge of the artist steps in and places him at an advantage over the

craftsman, but no one without sound art-knowledge should attempt this

local development. On the other hand, with a thorough knowledge of the

tonality of his subject, the artist can, by local development, so modify

his work that he will be able to obtain wonderfully true results. Let us

imagine such a subject as a dark tree in the foreground of a landscape

with a bright delicate distance. No manner of development will bring these

into true relation unless local treatment is resorted to. Unfortunately,

directions cannot be given for this work, for each subject will of course

require special treatment; the rationale of the practice, however, is

founded on the general chemical principles of photography. For use in

local development, then, it is always wise to keep a series of small

paint-brushes at hand. All three developers may thus be used locally with

great effect. During local development, the plate should constantly be

re-plunged into the developer, so that the local development may not show.

We strongly recommend the student _always to develop by artificial light_,

for by this method he will have a more regular standard to judge of the

quality of his negative than if he trusts to the varying strength of

daylight.

The best way of judging of the tonality of a negative is to hold it up

from time to time before the light of the developing-room; correct

judgment on this matter can, however, only be obtained by long experience.

The student will be told in the printed directions—supplied with many

plates—that if the image does not come up in 10 or 15 seconds, the plate

has been under-exposed. This is not our experience, and, as a rule, the

image takes longer to show than the time named. We prefer to judge by the

way the image comes up. If the highest lights come up very sharply defined

and turgid, then the plate is under-exposed, but if they come up

delicately, and detail begins to appear gradually over the various parts

of the plate, all is well. But all this will only become familiar by

experience. By constant habit the student will mentally run over the facts

of the problem before him, as does a physician, and proportionately to his

skill will he apply the right remedy at the right time.

[Sidenote: After treatment of plate.]

After development the plate should be well washed, and then placed in an

alum bath. Alum acts as a scavenger, and clears up all the remains of the

developer. Next the plate should again _be well washed_, and put in the

hyposulphite bath. This bath should be constantly renewed, for as soon as

it becomes well discoloured it is inadvisable to continue its use. It

should not be made stronger than 1 to 5, 1 to 10 being the best

proportion. Taking the plate from the fixing bath, you should wash it very

thoroughly, and re-plunge it into a fresh alum bath, leaving it for a few

minutes, then again wash it, and put it into a plate-washer, the water of

which should be frequently changed. It can then be placed in a drying

rack, and left to dry gradually in a dry room, where no dust is raised.

[Sidenote: Duplicate plates.]

It is, in our opinion, always well to expose two plates on each subject,

for the operator can thus, in a second plate, correct any error he may

detect in the first. This is our own invariable rule, and the practice,

apart from the better results obtained, has taught us better than any

other method could have done, how wonderfully the plate can be brought

under the operator’s will. It is hardly necessary to say the first plate

should be examined after development, by daylight, before proceeding to

develop the second. Once having seen a beautiful thing in nature, the

enthusiastic student will determine to get it _perfectly_, if it takes

fifty plates and as many days to do it in.

[Sidenote: Study of tone.]

We strongly advise those desirous of doing artistic work to begin by

studying tone, expose (always giving two exposures to each subject) on

selected subjects, especially fit for the study of tone; for example, a

figure in a white dress against a white background, another in a black

dress against a black background, and then a white dress against a black

background, and a black dress against a white background; some white

flowers against a sheet of white paper; yacht-sails against the sky; faces

against the sky; black velvet in bright sunshine, and on a grey day;

yellow flowers (with orthochromatic plates) on a white background. In

short, the student should think of all the possible harmonies and discords

that can be found indoors and out of doors, and he should, before taking a

plate, make a mental translation of the subject into black and white, and

put on paper roughly, with a piece of charcoal, what he expects to get, by

drawing rough masses in tone of the subject. He should at first think

nothing whatever of composition, or the more poetical qualities of a

picture; but simply study tone, and by this he will learn thoroughly

exposures and development. Let him eschew all requests to take portraits,

dogs, horses, parks, and what-nots; but let him always study tone. When he

has mastered tone, and with it exposure and development, he knows the most

difficult part of his technique and practice, let him then proceed to

picture-making. In this early stage let him take anything and everything

that is a study of tone, and let him take it anyhow, no posing, no

arrangement, and when he knows his _métier_ thoroughly let him destroy all

these early plates ruthlessly. We strongly advise him to give away no

prints of early work, or he will most surely rue the day when he did so.

In our opinion a year is not too much in which to work in this way, both

in doors and out of doors, in studios and out, with shutter and without,

before there is any attempt to take a portrait or picture of any kind.

[Sidenote: Accidents and faults.]

In working with gelatine plates various unavoidable accidents and faults

will crop up, some of which can, however, be remedied. Such cases we will

now go into.

[Sidenote: Under-exposure.]

Gives chalky whites and sooty blacks, _ergo_ no tonality, _ergo_

worthless. No remedy, destroy at once.

[Sidenote: Over-exposure.]

Gives thin negatives. What a thin negative is, is a matter of opinion, and

must be settled by a comparison of the print with the impression of nature

which it is wished to obtain. For many effects thin negatives are

invaluable, and the student must not take the ordinary photographer’s

opinion as to his negatives; but only that of an artist, for, as has been

shown, low-toned prints are unrecognized by the ordinary craftsman, his

aim and object is never to produce such things, these he designates by all

sorts of names, whereas they may be, by their tonality, infinitely truer

than his “sparkling” falsehoods. In short, it all depends on what the

student wishes to express. Some of the best work done has been produced

from negatives made purposely thin, which have at the same time been true

in tone, and full of breadth. [Sidenote: Intensification.] The density of

a negative can be increased by intensifying the negative; but it must not

be forgotten that intensification does not, in our opinion, correct the

_tonality_, this is a matter of great importance which has been

overlooked. From this it will be seen that a negative that requires

intensification is worthless for artistic purposes, and had better be

destroyed at once. But as intensification may be required for some

particular object, we must caution the student against the ordinary

perchloride of mercury and ammonia intensifier. In many cases it acts well

enough, in many others it acts unevenly and in patches, and in all cases

it is not permanent. The best intensifier we know of is Dr. Eder’s, whose

formula we give—

[Sidenote: Dr. Eder’s intensifier.]

℞ Uranium nitrate 15 grs.

Potassium ferricyanide 15 grs.

Water 4 ℥

Wash the plate thoroughly after fixing, so that no hyposulphite remains,

and immerse in the intensifier. It works up the scale from the lower

tones, which is an advantage over any other. To remove all the

hyposulphite of soda it is well to treat the plate before using the

intensifier, as Captain Abney directs. A drachm of a 20-vol. solution of

peroxide of hydrogen should be mixed with 5 oz. of water, and the plate

soaked in it for half an hour, and then washed.

[Sidenote: Fog.]

The student will find that for certain effects he may intentionally

produce a slight fog over his plate, as has often been done with very good

results; but if his plates are unintentionally fogged, they are ruined.

Fog is due to light having had access to the plate, either during

manufacture, during exposure, or during development. By developing an

unexposed plate it can be proved whether it was fogged during the

manufacture, as in that case the plate turns black. If the fog is caused

by a leaky camera the edges of the plate, which are generally clear glass,

are not fogged, for they have been hidden behind the rebate of the dark

slide. Light coming through the dark slide shows itself in lines or

patches, and is not general. If all these sources have been eliminated,

the dark room must be suspected. This is tested by putting a plate in the

slide, drawing the shutter out half way, and exposing the plate for a few

minutes to the developing light. If the exposed half fogs, then the dark

room is to blame.

[Sidenote: Red fog.]

We have only met with this phenomenon once, and that was in developing a

uranium plate. [Sidenote: Green fog.] This is green by reflected light,

and red by transmitted light. It is generally deposited at the corners of

the plate and round the edge.

[Sidenote: Yellow and brown fogs.]

Are rarely met with, and are yellow and brown by _reflected_ light,

whereas stains are coloured only by transmitted light. The student can

easily distinguish between fogs and stains in this way. We have been very

successful experimentally with Captain Abney’s method of clearing off

green fog. He recommends the following solution to be used after fixing:—

℞ Ferric chloride 50 grs.

Potassium bromide 30 grs.

Water iv ℥

The plate should be well washed after this treatment, and developed up

with the ferrous oxalate developer.

But such plates are not always saved artistically by the method, for the

tonality may be thrown out, and the texture of substances is nearly always

damaged.

[Sidenote: Frilling.]

Is due to the expansion of the gelatine, and will rarely occur if the

plate be put in the alum bath before fixing. The gelatine can be made to

contract by soaking in methylated spirits of wine.

[Sidenote: Blisters.]

Are of rare occurrence, and will dry out if the plate be carefully handled

and washed in alum, as directed. They may be treated locally with

methylated spirit, which causes the gelatine to contract.

[Sidenote: Dense negatives.]

The best reducer we know of is Dr. Eder’s. He recommends the use of—A.,

one part chloride of iron to eight parts of water. B., two parts neutral

oxalate of potash to eight parts of water. A well-known authority on

photographic matters, Dr. H. W. Vogel, says, “Both solutions keep a long

time without deteriorating. Immediately before using, equal parts of A.

and B. are mixed, forming a bright green solution, which keeps well for

several days in the dark, but decomposes in the light. Of this mixture a

little is added to a fresh and strong solution of ‘hypo.’ In difficult

cases 1 part ‘hypo’ and 1/4 to 1/2 of iron solution are employed. The

plate to be reduced is placed in this solution. The image weakens quickly

and uniformly. The plate is taken out and washed just before the desired

reduction is reached, because the action continues during the washing,

gradually diminishing under the stream from the tap. This reducer acts on

plates developed either with ‘pyro’ or ‘oxalate,’ and does not destroy the

details in the shadows like cyanide. There is also less tendency to frill

than with the cyanide bath.”

Reducers, like intensifiers, should not be resorted to, unless in case of

a very valuable negative, for it must never be forgotten that, though the

printing density is reduced, the tonality is not corrected.

[Sidenote: Yellow stains.]

Due to the developer, are easily removed by Edwards' clearing solution,

which we have found most effectual—

℞ Sulphate of iron ℥ iii.

Alum ℥ i.

Citric acid ℥ i.

Water O i.

[Sidenote: Transparent spots.]

Are due to dust in camera or slide, or to using the “hypo” bath too long.

If the spots have sharply defined edges, they are due to air bubbles

forming at the beginning of development.

[Sidenote: Halation.]

This is a bug-bear we have had little experience of, though we have taken

many interiors. The only occasion on which we met with it was once when

the plate was overexposed on a stained glass window, containing much blue

in it. If a large stop be used, and the exposure kept as short as

possible, our experience is that no halation need occur. If, however, the

student fears it, and there is always a danger of it where any bright

lights act on the film, he should, with a squegee and some glycerine,

apply a piece of some dark tissue to the back of the plate; this is easily

stripped off before development.

[Sidenote: Defects due to damp.]

All plates should be kept in a dry place, and whilst travelling it is as

well to keep them in tinfoil. The effect of damp is to produce patches,

which either do not develop at all or develop unequally.

[Sidenote: Removal of varnish.]

This is easily done by putting the plate into hot methylated spirit, and

rubbing the varnish off with cotton wool.

[Sidenote: Sea air.]

It has been said that sea air affects gelatine plates, this has not been

our experience.

[Sidenote: Dirty backs.]

The backs of the negatives which are generally dirty, should be cleaned by

scraping, and then rubbing up with a rag moistened in hot water, or

preferably, methylated spirit. The negatives should be kept in a dry

place, in grooved cardboard boxes. Wooden boxes should not be used for

storing either plates or negatives.

[Sidenote: Marblings.]

Are due to a dirty fixing bath; or to an uneven action of the developer

arising from not rocking the plate, or to adding the alkali to the

developer in the dish and not thoroughly mixing them before putting in the

plate. The clearing solution removes some of these.

[Sidenote: Prolonged and patchy fixing.]

Due to the alum bath being used before “fixing” in plates from which the

developer has not been thoroughly washed. It can be remedied by washing

and swilling the plate in water just rendered alkaline by ammonia, and

then fixing as before. We once had a plate which took several hours to fix

even after this treatment.

[Sidenote: Limpet-shell markings.]

We have had these appear in a few negatives some months after development.

We know of no remedy for the defect; nor do we know the cause, but believe

it to be due to hyposulphite of soda left in the film.

[Sidenote: Deposit on film.]

This is sometimes met with after the imperfect washing out of hyposulphite

of soda; or sometimes whilst the negative is in the fixing bath, if it has

been in the alum bath previously, and not thoroughly washed. Sulphur is

deposited. The remedy is obvious.

[Sidenote: Metallic patches.]

Coloured metallic-looking patches appear at times near the edges of the

plate, which may, or may not, be accompanied with fog. We have often

observed these patches in plates which have been kept a long time. There

is no remedy if they are unaccompanied by fog, but if fog is present, the

ferric-chloride solution will generally remove them.

[Sidenote: Scratches.]

On the back of the negative show as dark lines in the film.

[Sidenote: Undeveloped islands.]

Rarely, we have met with small patches which seem to have refused to

develop; they are generally circular. Captain Abney says they are due to

the use of chrome alum in the emulsion. There does not appear to be any

remedy for this accident.

[Sidenote: Dull spots and pits.]

In one batch of plates we were greatly troubled by these faults, one of

the plates being covered with pits as thickly as if it had been peppered

with a pepper-box. Captain Abney says they are due to the use of gelatine

which contains grease. They ruined a whole series of fine negatives for us

once. These complete the enumeration of the accidents likely to occur

during development.

[Sidenote: Varnishing.]

We shall now presume that the student has thoroughly dried his negatives,

after having developed them. Before storing them, however, he must varnish

them, to protect them from scratches, and especially from damp, for

gelatine, being very hygroscopic, easily absorbs moisture. At times, when

warming an apparently perfectly dry negative over a flame, preparatory to

varnishing it, a slight steam can be seen to arise, due to the evaporation

of the moisture in the film. This moisture in the gelatine would of course

in time lead to decomposition, and ruin the image; for these reasons,

then, all negatives should be varnished. Before “varnishing” each negative

should be carefully brushed over with a camel’s-hair brush. [Sidenote: Dr.

Carey Lea’s Varnish.] Now it is obvious that many of the varnishes used

are more or less non-actinic, as Dr. Carey Lea has proved; he, therefore,

recommends the following:—

℞ Bleached lac ʒ x.

Picked sandarac ʒ v.

Alcohol ℥ xii.

Let the lac dissolve in the alcohol, then filter, first soaking the filter

paper with alcohol. Pour slowly, and if necessary at the end add 1 ℥ more

of alcohol to enable the rest to pass. Next add the sandarac to the

filtrate and refilter, using of course a fresh filter.

Warm the plate gently, and, holding it in the left-hand bottom corner

between the thumb and finger, pour a pool of varnish on to the plate that

will cover about one-third the area of the plate, then let it run to the

right-hand top corner, then to the left-hand top corner, then to the

thumb, and finally drain off at the right-hand bottom corner into a

filter. Then place it on a drainage rack, till just set, when rewarm by

the fire, otherwise it does not set hard and smooth.

[Sidenote: Roller slide.]

Since paper negatives and a roller slide were suggested by Fox Talbot, and

made fit for use by Blanquart-Evrard, several ingenious persons have been

trying to improve upon these early attempts. From time to time, during the

last fifty years, various workers have announced old ideas as new

discoveries, nor have these been confined to roller slides and paper

negatives, but extended to many other photographic processes. That no one

can claim any originality of discovery on this head since Talbot and

Evrard is obvious; only perfected methods can be claimed. There have been

many of these introduced, but none worth discussing until that offered by

the Messrs. Walker and Eastman. They have perfected Talbot’s and Evrard’s

work, and though they have numerous imitators, their work is _facile

princeps_.

[Sidenote: Paper negatives.]

Now the student will naturally expect us to give an opinion on these paper

negatives. For many photographic processes they are of course invaluable,

but for artistic work our opinion is that they are not equal to the

ordinary method. These remarks apply equally to the various flexible films

which have lately been introduced.

For hand cameras, we should think, film negatives would be very useful,

and for small studies such as they produce, would do well; but then such

are not pictures. A picture must be perfect in all points, and for this

reason the films will not as yet answer. They do show grain, say what

people will; we have examined dozens of the very best, and that is our

opinion. Besides this, they are liable to the defects common to paper,

such as transparent spots, and the defects common to films, such as

markings and stains, and in addition to all this there is the liability to

injury of the negative after development, in the subsequent processes of

oiling and stripping, if stripping films be used. The quality, too, of the

picture is not equal to that of an ordinary negative. Why it is so we

cannot explain. What the future of these processes may be we do not

pretend to say, but for the present we feel assured that the finest

quality of work is to be obtained on a glass support. For ordinary touring

purposes no doubt the roller-slide and flexible films have every

advantage, but with any but the art side of the question we have nothing

to do. In artistic work, all hap-hazard results or accidental effects must

be carefully eliminated. Lightness, printing from either side, and a good

retouching basis are no considerations for the artist, he wants none of

these things.

[Sidenote: Ortho-chromatic photography.]

There still remains, however, a very important point from the art point of

view, as regards tonality, for as the student who has read his chemistry

knows, the different parts of the spectrum act differently on the

different haloids. The effect of this has been to destroy true tonality,

thus a yellow flower comes out black if taken on ordinary plates. To

remedy this dyes have been used which absorb the weakly acting rays, and

thus has been made one of the greatest advances in photography, both

scientifically and artistically. This ortho-chromatic photography has

engaged the attention of experts, and Abney, Vogel, Eder, Ives, Bothamley,

and Edwards are hard at work upon it now, besides many amateur scientists.

We have been for some time experimenting in this direction for artistic

purposes, having begun with Tailfer’s plates before any others were

introduced into the English market. For the photographing of pictures

Messrs. Dixon and Grey conclusively proved the superiority of the process

by their exhibits at the Exhibition of the Photographic Society of Great

Britain, in 1886. But the matter is different when landscapes and

portraits from life have to be considered. It is with the wonderful

protean aspects of nature that we have to deal when working from nature,

and we feel the question is not one to be entirely settled in the

laboratory. Our method is always to work out of doors, noting, as far as

possible, the conditions and judging the results by the prints, and though

such experiments are far from conclusive, we can at present say that the

ortho-chromatic plates are nearly correct in the rendering of tonality,

but not perfect, the reds overrun the other colours, and are too strongly

rendered. In fact, the reds and greens are not perfectly rendered, and

even if the correct values of the spectrum are rendered in a laboratory,

this will not and does not give the relative tones of nature. This is the

point which must be remedied. Undoubtedly ortho-chromatic photography

alone will be used in the near future, but just at present it is not

cut-and-dried enough for all practical purposes. The student, however,

must use these plates. They are supplied by B. J. Edwards; and Dr. Vogel’s

eoside of silver plates can be bought of Gotz, 19, Buckingham Street,

Strand. So far the truest tonality that we have seen has been obtained on

Dr. Vogel’s plates, and in addition his landscape plates require no yellow

screen to be used with them, which is a tremendous advantage.

[Sidenote: Final.]

Thus it will be seen that in every operation the art-knowledge of the

operator will tell. For example, let us suppose a camera set up with the

lens fixed, before a beautiful landscape composed on the ground-glass

screen by an artist, then let us imagine that two photographers proceed to

take plates of the picture. After the very first operation of focussing,

stopping and adjusting the swing-backs; a mighty gulf will separate the

two pictures; the gulf widens as the exposure is made, and finally in the

developed plates they are no longer the same thing. One may be a sharp,

common-place fact, false in many parts, the other may be full of truth and

poetry. Let a print be taken from each plate and presented to an

artistically uneducated craftsman and to an artist, the craftsman will go

into raptures over the sharp craftsman picture, the artist will do the

same over the artistic picture, but the artist will not look for a moment

at the craftsman’s ideal, and this little matter any one can prove for

himself. Let the student, then, strive to earn the artist’s praise, and

let him ignore the craftsman’s, and value his opinion on these matters at

the same price he would value his opinions upon any other subject where

taste and refinement are called into question.

Naturalistic Photography for Students of the Art. · 第 7 / 17 章