Camera Work: A Photographic Quarterly (1903 (Heft 1))

Spitzer’stwo big works — a head and a full-length picture, both made from
the same old pictorial model — are of necessity strong and attractive; but
with his " Studie im Freien” of last year in one’s mind, he hardly
seems to have maintained his own very high level. But a Paradestück
must not be expected of any one every year. Hugo Henneberg’s work,
too, I found a little disappointing, when compared with my recollections
of his breezy, blue landscape of the last Salon. But, carp as I may,
his three exhibits possess much of the brilliance and broad treatment
we are accustomed to look for from Vienna. Heinrich Kühn has a
sepia and two blue landscapes. The latter, though dazzling at first, on
closer acquaintance seemed less convincing. Professor Hans Watzek sends
a landscape and a seascape, both of which are worthy of the good positions
given them.
THE French pictures — at least those sent by M. Demachy and M
Puyo—are of a particularly interesting character. The former has a portrait
of Madame Demachy in profile, which, besides being a very perfect gum-
print, is a splendid likeness. But Demachy is the father of gum-bichromate
and in his hands this bewitching medium of expression in printing is docility
itself. He has been studying the engraving and lithograph exhibitions in
Paris during the winter, and some of these prints are the result of this
study. Not that they are servile copies of engravings, but Demachy has
introduced into photography the extremely simple effects—composed chiefly
of oppositions (which does not mean contrast in English)—that give that
special charm and interest we appreciate so much in engravings. On the walls
here he has eleven prints , one of which is a landscape, the rest being figure-
studies, some delicate and minute, others broad and vigorous, space alone
preventing a detailed description of them. M. Puyo has some quite different
work from that to which he has accustomed us. Idealistic, partially draped
figures have given place to a well-posed nude, which is an admirable flesh-
study. But his Portrait (165)—a most original study in red chalk—was
the cause of quite an altercation amongst a group of painters, in which I,
photographer-like, detected a note of envy in the criticisms made. Grimprel,
Le Bègue, Zollet, Bourgeois, Bucquet, Dubreuil and Bergon all contribute
good work, some of the photographs by the last named being curious and
puzzling in treatment. A sort of electric light seems to have been thrown
upon the principal points of the pictures, which, presumably, has been
accomplished by the use of artificial light in conjunction with diffused
daylight. But the same worker’s " Fille d'Opera” (171), with its
comparatively simple treatment, is much more attractive. Indeed, an
exhibition like this emphasizes and points the lessons of simplicity, or
apparent simplicity, and the fact can not be disguised that impressionism
is steadily gaining ground in photographic work. By this term I
do not mean the careless, slipshod avoidance of the difficulties of
technique, but an impressionism worthy of the old interpretation of the
word, the result of the study of masters such as Rembrandt, Constable, and
Whistler.

23