Evening journal., 1889-07-18
II lsNT YOURSELF.
Bnt Just the Light Failing Upon You That
Is Photographed.

BHt Just the Light Failing Upon You That
Is Photographed.
sIbe actual theory and the first principles
Of photography" said recently one Of the
high Photographic lights Of the town. nare
generally understood; that is, they are not
misunderstood at all. The art of the photog-
rapher, using the word in its true sense, peo-
pie lose sight of. They think Of him simply
as a machine for placing them in a strong
light. telling them look pleasant, please, and
exposing the plates. That, although working
with different materials and in q different
way, be must have the art tendencies and be
the artist as much as the portrait painter is,
is something that never enters their heads
hAnd this is why. IN making an exposure
IL is not the object that is photographed, but
simply the light that falls upon it. This is
the cardinal principle Of photography, strange
as it may appear And, stranger still, hun
dreds Of the professional photographers, as
they wheel the machine abol< to catch a bet
ter light on the object, are ignorant of it.
Not but that one Of these may not at times
hit upon a capital likeness. That often hap
pens But be does not understand the prin-
ciples Of his art.
NOW, to explain. What does the art pho
tographer Il make the distinctionl do the very
first thing when he starts out to take photo
graphl Why, just as the portrait painter
does He makes swift, yet comprehensive
study OF every feature and the face as a whole
He knows that only parts Of the face can be
taken, and all the rest must fal upon the
plate in shadow, and it is his art that leads
him TO determine what those parts shall be,
so to best catch the expression, the person
ality. The portrait painter does 70 more in
this direction The medium is different, and
he has a palette Of colors to depend upon,
while the photographer is reduced to tones
and tints Of black and white alone.
"Will you have proofs of thisl Here arc
two. Have you ever carefully noticed the
fun length photograph Of man in which
the shoes are visiblel What you saw in the
picture was gleam, suggestion, as it were,
the light of the polish. The remainder Of
the shoe was in shadow for it was the light
and not the object that was photographed.
| Again, to furnish a tangible proof of the
correctness Of this theory of photography, ]
made a series Of photographs of a plaster
bust There were a dozen pictures taken
under exactly similar conditions, camera and
| light being unchanged in every particular.
simply moved apparatus and subject about
made my exposures from difereRt points OF
view. At each Of these the light fell differ
emily upon the features Upon the develop
ment of the negatives the pictures were
hardly recognizable as being of the same
object.
THAT explains why It is that some people
never take well, as they call it. 1t is be
cause In the photographers arrangement
those portions Of tho features on which the
light falls are not just what is necessary K
give the expression. And the make up O.
the expression differs In every individual
case. good likeness is possible to every
one, but it might just SO happen that onei
expression viii never be caught The poor
est of the craft may catch it on chance thu
very bestsnay never exactly get it, but thI
odds are decidedly in the favor of him who 1
a student of lights and faces, and who wei
understands the theory Of Photographic art.
New York Mail and Express