New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-06-06

noticeable for clevcrly vivid accentuations.
strong contrasts between light and dark But
our author justly reserves higher praise for Bon
ington and Caame. Harding and Isabey. Rafret
and Gavarni who were all disposed to make
their work subtle in tone and therefore
richer and more varied. Bennington and Harding
did some noble work in their prints for Baron
Taylors famous Voyages pittoresques ct roman
tiques dams rancienne France" In the archi-
tectural studies of Bennington and in Harding's
landscapes you find the same depth and rich
ness. the same tonal variety and force. The Gem
evese Calame is hardly the landscape master
that Mr. Curtis would have us believe him to
be, but certainly he produced some beautiful
prints The "Cours de IAar la Handeck,"
which is reproduced in this book has range Of
atmospheric effect and decacy Of graduation in
the tone which would have seemed scarcely &C
cessble to the photographer. We are glad to see
that Mr.. Curtis is not afraid to utter the truth
about Daumier. That celebrated carcaturist has
oeeh ior many years one of the superStitiens OF
amateurs He has humor it is true and alon;
with his mental penetration he had a tremen-
dous gift of expression. But he had no concep-
ton OF what the sensuOus side of traught sman-
ship means. he never had glimpse of beauty
in his life if his Autographs are to be taken as
criterion, and there is appositeness in Mr.. Cur
us remark that after looking lot Of
Daufniers caricatures at one time they become
"unbearably tresome." Daumier was ;ndubi-
style. and his sense of the ridiculous was unri-
vailed He was a consummate draughtsman also.
in his way. and when he chose to be- But how he
paieS beside. say. a man like Gavarnii Upon
the latter Mr.. Curtis wreaks himself with
good many superlatves. but it is hard to blame
him. Gavarni had wit. delightful wit. and if his
drawing was less vigorous than Daumier's it
was. on the other hand more supple and more
imbued with artistic feeling. Though Gavarni
drew with extraordinary ease and rapdty," says
Mr. Curtis. he never lost sight of the artistic
side OF his work. Everything is properly subor-
dinate to the main idea the centre of interest
being always in the principal figures. So thor
oughy are the minor details kept in place that
we do not at first notice them and yet when we
do turn our attention away from the leading fig
ures we find the same knowledge the same
power in carrying it out" Hence Gavarni is one
OF the photographic masters whose drawings
practically always designs. He projected n picto-
rial motive into everything he drew. and the
dexterity of his hand kept pace with the fecund-
ity of his satiricai genius He is always firm al
ways true and effective. Anatomy seems to have
presented no difficulties to him. and he carried
his treatment of it tar beyond accuracy.
making his studies vital with character. Alto
gether he is the hero OF this book Yet there is
4 singular uniformity in the selection Mr. Cur
tbs has made. His delight may find unduly warm
expression. but his taste has not wavered The
sentative. and what is more. they are repre-
sentative of what is sanest and most edifying in
the art. Mr.. Curtis might have written a his
tory" of photography and left his readers con-
fused as 10 the best ideals pursued by its vari-
Gus masters. In concentrating himself upon this
little group he has gone the best way to work in
order to show the art at its best. His book has
been finely made. and the photogravure repro
auctions especially really artistic and useful
additions
1t is a pity that while Mr.. Curtis was about II
he did not do something to clear up the tech
meal question which has recently been raised
even causing one now notorious lawsuit in Eng
land. We refer to the question OF what const-
tutes a Autograph. MIR. Walter Sickert, in The
Review maintained that a lithograph
was necessarily drawing made on a ltho-
graphic stone direct. Mr. Joseph Pencil carried
the argument into court and got British Jury
to agree with him in the contention that a draw
ing made on prepared paper and then trans
ferred to a photographic stone is, equally with
the other drawing to which have referred
entitled TO be called Autograph. This how
ever proved nothing save the incompetence of
the jury and II is regrettable to see that Mr.
Curtis fails TO seize his opportunity and settle
the question once for all. He begins In his an
pendix by stating that "a Autograph, in its
lt.,..