On the twelfth of August, in front of the Smithsonian Institute, in
Washington, dedicated to manifold arts and sciences, will be erected a
lasting memorial to Daguerre, the author that we all know fixed the
visible image on a given surface, which is photography, with all its
varieties and names, and they are numerous.
Why should we Americans put up such a memorial? The inscription on the
granite below the bronze portrait tells the story:
[Illustration]
“To commemorate the first half century in photography, 1839–1889.
Photography, the electric telegraph, and the steam engine are the three
great discoveries of the age. No five centuries in human progress can
show such strides as these. Erected by THE PHOTOGRAPHERS’ ASSOCIATION OF
AMERICA, August, 1890.”
The monument, now almost complete, its bronze features being of a high
order of art, will stand sixteen feet high, and will be the only
international monument in the city of Washington, where Smithson himself
dedicated his fortune for the advancement of science in the western
world.
In connection with this celebration we present to our readers a portrait
of Daguerre. Strange to say, there are but few authentic portraits of
Daguerre in existence. In our search for such a portrait we discovered
the one here reproduced; it was engraved by Orr from a photograph by Dr.
Meade, of New York, for the International Magazine, of that city, and
used to illustrate the obituary of the eminent Frenchman, September 1,
1851. As everything relating to Daguerre cannot but prove of interest at
the present time, we republish the interesting article in full as it
appeared at the time:
Lewis Jacques Mande Daguerre, whose name is forever associated with the
photographic process, of which he was the discoverer, died on the tenth
of July, in Paris, in the sixty-second year of his age. He was a man of
extreme modesty and great personal worth, and was devoted to art.
He was favorably known to the world before the announcement of his
discovery of the Daguerreotype. His attempts to improve panoramic
painting, and the production of dioramic effects, were crowned with the
most eminent success. Among his pictures, which attracted much attention
at the time of their exhibition, were, “The Midnight Mass,” “Land-slip
in the Valley of Goldan,” “The Temple of Solomon,” and “The Cathedral of
Sainte Marie de Montreal.”
In these the alternate effects of night and day, and storm and sunshine,
were beautifully produced. To these effects of light were added others,
from the decomposition of form, by means of which, for example in “The
Midnight Mass,” figures appeared where the spectators had just beheld
seats, altars, etc.; and again, as in “The Valley of Goldan,” in which
rocks tumbling from the mountains replaced the prospect of a smiling
valley.
The methods adopted in these pictures were published at the same time
with the process of Daguerreotype, by order of the French Government,
who awarded an annual pension of ten thousand francs to Daguerre and M.
Niepce, Jr., whose father had contributed towards the discovery of the
Daguerreotype. Daguerre was led to experiments on chemical changes by
solar radiations, with the hope of being able to apply the phenomena to
the production of effects in his dioramic paintings. As the question of
the part taken by him in the process to which he has given his name has
been discussed sometimes to his advantage, it appears important that his
position should be correctly determined. In 1802, Wedgwood, of Eturia,
the celebrated potter, made the first recorded experiments in
photography; and these, with some additional ones by Sir Humphrey Davy,
were published in the journals of the royal institution. In 1814, Mr.
Joseph Nicephore Niepce was engaged in experiments to determine the
possibility of fixing the images obtained in the camera obscura; but
there does not appear any evidence of publication of any kind previously
in 1827, when Niepce was in England. He there wrote several letters to
Mr. Bauer, the microscopic observer, which are preserved and printed in
Hunt’s “Researches on Light.”
He also sent specimens of results obtained to the Royal Society, and
furnished some to the cabinets of the curious, a few of which are yet in
existence. These were pictures on metallic plates covered with film of
resin.
In 1824 Daguerre commenced his researches, starting at that point at
which Wedgwood left the process. He soon abandoned the employment of the
nitrate and chloride of silver, and proceeded with his inquiry, using
plates of metal and glass to receive his sensitive coating. In 1829 Mr.
Vincent Chevalier brought Niepce and Daguerre together, when they
entered into partnership to prosecute the subject in common. For a long
time they appear to have used the resinous surface only, when the
contrast between the resin and the metal plates not being sufficiently
great to give a good picture, endeavors were made to blacken that part
of the plate from which the resin was removed in the process of
heliography (sun drawing), as it was most happily called. Amongst other
materials, iodine was employed; and Daguerre certainly was the first to
notice the property possessed by the iodine coating of changing under
the influence of the sun’s rays. The following letter from Niepce to
Daguerre is on this subject:
“81, LOUP DE VARVENNES, June 23, 1831.
“Sir and Dear Partner:--I had long expected to hear from you with
too much impatience not to receive and read with the greatest
pleasure your letters of the tenth and twenty-first of last May.
“I shall confine myself in this reply to yours of the twenty-first,
because, having been engaged ever since it reached me in your
experiments on iodine, I hasten to communicate to you the results
which I have obtained. I had given my attention to similar
researches previous to our connection, but without hope of success,
from the impossibility, or nearly so, in my opinion, of fixing in
any durable manner the image received on iodine, even supposing the
difficulty surmounted of replacing the lights and shadows in their
natural order. My results in this respect have been entirely similar
to those which the oxide of silver gave me; and promptitude of
operation was the sole advantage which these substances appeared to
offer. Nevertheless, last year, after you left this, I subjected
iodine to new trials, but by a different mode of application. I
informed you of the results, and your answer, not at all
encouraging, decided me to carry these experiments no farther. It
appears that you have since viewed the question under a less
desperate aspect, and I do not hesitate to reply to the appeal which
you have made.
“J. N. NIEPCE.”
From this and other letters it is evident that Niepce had used iodine,
and abandoned it on account of the difficulty of reversing the lights
and shadows. Daguerre employed it also, as it appears, with far more
promise of success than any obtained by M. Niepce. On the fifth of July,
1833, Niepce died; in 1837 Daguerre and Isodore Niepce, the son and heir
of Nicephore Neipce, entered into a definite agreement, and in a letter
written on the first of November, 1837, to Daguerre, Isodore Niepce
says, “What a difference, also, between the method which you employ and
the one by which I toil on! While I require almost a whole day to make
one design, you ask only four minutes! What an enormous advantage! It is
so great, indeed, that no person knowing both methods would employ the
old one.” From this time it is established that although both Niepce and
Daguerre used iodine, the latter alone employed it with any degree of
success, and the discovery of the use of mercurial vapor to produce the
positive image clearly belongs to Daguerre. In January, 1839,
Daguerreotype pictures were first shown to the scientific and artistic
public of Paris.
The sensation they created was great, and the highest hopes of its
utility were entertained. On the 15th of June M. Duchatel, Minister of
the Interior, presented a bill to the Chamber of Deputies relative to
the purchase of the process of M. Daguerre for fixing the images of the
camera. A commission appointed by the Chamber, consisting of Arago,
Etienne, Carl, Vatout, de Beaumont, Toursover, Delessert (Francois),
Combarel de Leyral, and Vitet, made their report in July, and a special
commission was appointed by the Chamber of Peers, composed of the
following peers: Barons Athalin Besson, Gay Lussac, the Marquis de
Laplace, Vicomte Simeon, Baron Thenard, and the Comte de Noe, who
reported favorably on the 30th of July, 1839, and recommended
unanimously that the “bill be adopted simply, and without alteration.”
On the 19th of August the secret was for the first time publicly
announced in the institution by M. Arago, the English patent having been
completed a few days before, in open defiance and contradiction of the
statement of M. Duchatel to the Chamber of Deputies, who used these
words:
“Unfortunately for the authors of this beautiful discovery, it is
impossible for them to bring their labor into the market, and thus
indemnify themselves for the sacrifices incurred by so many attempts so
long fruitless. This invention does not admit of being secured by
patent.”
In conclusion, the Minister of the Interior said: “You will concur in a
sentiment which has already awakened universal sympathy. You will never
suffer us to leave to foreign nations the glory of endowing the world of
science and of art with one of the most wonderful discoveries that honor
our native land.” Daguerre never did much towards the improvement of his
process. The high degree of sensibility which has been attained has been
due to the experiments of others.
Daguerre is said to have been always averse to sitting for his own
picture, and there are but few photographs of him in existence. The one
from which our engraving is copied was taken by Mr. Meade of this city,
and first appeared in the _Daguerrean Journal_, a monthly periodical
conducted by S. D. Humphrey and L. L. Hill, who were distinguished for
their improvements upon Daguerre’s process.