DOI article:
Caffin, Charles Henry: The Development of Photography in the United States
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.27086#0073
UNITED STATES
but in rendering the subtleties of light, there is a fair chance that
the superiority, as a medium, will be discovered in the camera. It
is on this account that the aims and accomplishments of the
best American photographers are entitled to the highest con-
sideration.
On this occasion space will not permit a critical analysis of their
individual contributions. Nor if it were possible would it be, in
a general comparison of modern manifestations of photography,
so interesting as a summary of the principles upon which this
particular body of workers is proceeding. I may add a word about
their methods.
These are, for the most part, based upon the recognition of the
virtue of the “straight” negative ; one, that is to say, which has been
subjected to no subsequent alterations, unless it be the local reducing
or strengthening of certain parts by chemical applications. It
remains, as it was at first, a direct result of the logic of chemical
cause and effect, obtained by regulating the degree of intensity
to which it is developed. This is not generally believed ; yet it
is a fact, so far as concerns the present work of all the leading
photographers. And it is a very important fact, since it shows
a reliance primarily upon the scientific qualities of the medium.
To play all kinds of tricks with the plate, as used to be a not
unusual habit over here, proved nothing but the ingenuity, often
times perverse, of the craftsman. It was at best an extraneous
ingenuity, not based upon the chemical conditions or tending
intrinsically to advance a knowledge and control of them. The
need for it was frequently the result of the operator’s lack of
scientific knowledge in the handling of an instrument founded
upon scientific principles.
For the majority of the men and women now regarded as our best
picture-makers began with no previous artistic training, but with
a zeal to make their prints express some sentiment of their own.
Hence it is easy to see what a poverty of sound results might have
ensued. This danger, largely through the consistent advocacy of
the “straight” negative by Mr. Stieglitz, has been avoided. The
tyro in the use of his camera has been encouraged to become an
expert, searching its possibilities as a musician those of his particular
instrument; and, moreover, the stress which has been laid upon
getting the artistic quality first and foremost into the plate, has
compelled him who was ignorant of the artistic principles of
picture-making to study and master them.
With similarly excellent results the value of “ straight ” printing has
u s 6
but in rendering the subtleties of light, there is a fair chance that
the superiority, as a medium, will be discovered in the camera. It
is on this account that the aims and accomplishments of the
best American photographers are entitled to the highest con-
sideration.
On this occasion space will not permit a critical analysis of their
individual contributions. Nor if it were possible would it be, in
a general comparison of modern manifestations of photography,
so interesting as a summary of the principles upon which this
particular body of workers is proceeding. I may add a word about
their methods.
These are, for the most part, based upon the recognition of the
virtue of the “straight” negative ; one, that is to say, which has been
subjected to no subsequent alterations, unless it be the local reducing
or strengthening of certain parts by chemical applications. It
remains, as it was at first, a direct result of the logic of chemical
cause and effect, obtained by regulating the degree of intensity
to which it is developed. This is not generally believed ; yet it
is a fact, so far as concerns the present work of all the leading
photographers. And it is a very important fact, since it shows
a reliance primarily upon the scientific qualities of the medium.
To play all kinds of tricks with the plate, as used to be a not
unusual habit over here, proved nothing but the ingenuity, often
times perverse, of the craftsman. It was at best an extraneous
ingenuity, not based upon the chemical conditions or tending
intrinsically to advance a knowledge and control of them. The
need for it was frequently the result of the operator’s lack of
scientific knowledge in the handling of an instrument founded
upon scientific principles.
For the majority of the men and women now regarded as our best
picture-makers began with no previous artistic training, but with
a zeal to make their prints express some sentiment of their own.
Hence it is easy to see what a poverty of sound results might have
ensued. This danger, largely through the consistent advocacy of
the “straight” negative by Mr. Stieglitz, has been avoided. The
tyro in the use of his camera has been encouraged to become an
expert, searching its possibilities as a musician those of his particular
instrument; and, moreover, the stress which has been laid upon
getting the artistic quality first and foremost into the plate, has
compelled him who was ignorant of the artistic principles of
picture-making to study and master them.
With similarly excellent results the value of “ straight ” printing has
u s 6