Camera Work: A Photographic Quarterly (1906 (Heft 16))

the issue. “That the huge plate”—he is speaking, of course, of etchings-
“therefore, is an offense; its undertaking an unbecoming display of de-
termination and ignorance; its accomplishment a triumph of unthinking
earnestness and uncontrollable energy, endowments of the ' duffer'."
Yet, without subscribing to these conclusions of contempt, one may be
very conscious of their general applicability to photographs. Personally —
and I have been asked for my impressions—I doubt if any large print can
be satisfactory, unless it is a reproduction of a painting. In these the
representation of the actual brushwork draws the large surface, as it were,
into a net of interest. But your honest photograph — the straight kind —
does not permit of this analyzed individuality; it requires, on the contrary,
a more generalized and uniform treatment, in which the individuality
is synthetized; broadly, and at times a little brutally, under Steichen's
handling; subtly under that of White, and in an example like The Model,
by Puyo. As between White and Steichen, who, as far as I know, are the
best exponents, respectively, of subtlety and breadth, there need be no
invidious comparison. Each is sincerely following his temperament, and is
able in expressing it. Yet, in studying these conflicting qualities as they
diversely appear and reappear in photography, I find myself compelled to
the conclusion that subtlety is the intrinsic domain of the photographer.
For he is primarily occupied with that manifestation of nature which is at
once the most subtle and vital—light. It is with this also that the most ad-
vanced of modern painters are concerned; but while they, with the old-
fashioned, comparatively clumsy implements of brushes and pigments, are
endeavoring to represent this volatile, evanescent thing, the photographer
has actually entered into copartnership with it, and is assisted by the latest dis-
coveries of modern chemistry. Spread before him is a field of experiment and
adventure, of which, as yet, it is probable that he has cultivated but the fringe.
If one accepts this view of subtlety being the photographer’s pre-
eminent domain, we shall be disposed to a preference for the smaller print,
from the four corners of which, as it were, may be spun a gossamer web of
light and shade. We can not imagine ourselves desiring a Brobdingnagian
gossamer, and are pretty sure that if it were attempted something would
impair its delicate completeness.
Again, the purpose of the artist, apart from satisfying his own desire of
expression, is to convey an impression to the imagination of others, and it is
jejune to try and stir the imagination deliberately by bigness. An imagina-
tion so stirred is likely to be one that an artist, at any rate of pictures, should
be prouder to leave unmoved. There is no doubt that a tactful judgment
discovers an absolute relation between subject and size — that there is a
point in the progression of inches when the requirements of the composition
are exactly fitted — less would be inadequate, more, an impertinence. So,
if alone on this score, I should think a photographer who works thinkingly,
mentally conceiving his composition before he exposes the plate, must from
the start take this question of size into consideration, and be chary of en-
largements and reductions. Meanwhile, to record my own impression, I

35