Chapter IV: Part 4

Remembering now that, as set forth in the earlier part of this article, a picture should appeal to our feelings and stir our emotions, it may be pointed out that in most ordinary things, and certainly in the arts, the most powerful things are those which possess _one_ dominant idea or feature, as in a piece of music the refrain keeps recurring, a preacher takes a text, in a story there is _one_ hero, and so forth, and in point of composition fig. 7 is better than fig. 8, although the view is less comprehensive.

It may not, however, always be easy for the beginner to determine what is the chief object which should occupy the central position, or which object or group to choose in a landscape.

This brings us to speak of another important matter, and that is the right disposition of lines which form the view or the selection of view so that the lines formed by the component parts shall fall in a desirable manner. The various objects in any view tend to form or suggest lines, thus in fig. 9 the outline of the trees, the bank along the shore, the clouds, and the boats suggest the lines shown in the diagram, fig. 10, which lines all run the same way, but in fig. 11 we have a similar view in which the lines suggested counterbalance each other, and not only so, but by their convergence they carry the eye to a spot near the centre, and so make the boat, although not very large nor conspicuous, the one and principal object (see diagram fig. 12).

For the sake of training one's perceptions look at any good pictures, and in your mind resolve them into line diagrams and see how these lines fall, and in considering any landscape or other subject to be photographed make up your mind as to what lines are suggested, and then select your point of view so that these lines balance or are symmetrical in arrangement, and also that they converge towards some point well within the picture, and near the centre of it.

But in fig. 13 we have a subject in part well composed, but the composition is spoilt because of the line formed by the road and fence, which seem to cut the picture in two, whereas could we have chosen the same subject from a point of view giving such an arrangement as fig. 14, a difference is at once felt and a more pleasing effect gained.

Lines which seem to separate us from the picture and cut off one part from another must be carefully avoided, and an endeavour to find something which will, as it were, lead the eye into the picture, should be diligently sought for, and indeed a subject, however it may interest us, must often be abandoned if it lacks those things which go to make pleasing composition, remembering as we should always do that in pictorial work the fact that objects are curious, or interesting, or pretty, has nothing to do with the case, but that they are only to be valued according as they act as media for expressing pleasing ideas, beautiful thoughts and sentiments, which they will not do if some part creates a feeling of unpleasing arrangement or design. If a scene does not compose well, we should as pictorial workers feel no desire to reproduce it. But you may say "Cannot we often by changing our point of view get an otherwise ill-composed subject to compose well?" Most decidedly, that is precisely what we should do, but it is no longer the same subject or view.

And now let me say that it is often surprising how much alteration may be made by changing our position. Figs. 15 and 16 are together an instance of this, the outline here given being made from a pencil sketch made on the spot, whilst figs. 17 and 18 are examples of the desirable change brought about by watching and waiting for a change in the position of light and the condition of the river's tide.

Where the beginner most often fails is in taking things as they are without pausing to consider whether they might not be improved, and if so in what way, and then patiently searching to see if such better way can be found.

Pictorial success will as often as not depend on the exercise of fastidious taste, which is satisfied with nothing but the very best, and not quite content even then.

A great deal more might usefully be said with reference to the composition of lines if space would permit, but this general reference may be given as a sort of summing up.

If the disposition of the lines constitutes such a perfectly symmetrical design that it is at once recognised as symmetrical, then it is wrong, because the artifice by which pleasing composition is attained is betrayed, and we feel the thing to be artificial. If, on the other hand, the lines fall so as to make the beholder conscious of their presence, as, for instance, cutting off a portion of the subject or presenting a one-sided appearance, again it is wrong. _In neither case should the lines or the objects suggesting them be felt at all until sought for, neither as being very right or very wrong._

In art it is a maxim that the means by which the thing is done should not proclaim itself, and hence it must apply to pictorial photography, which is an effort after the artistic. A composition should please without our quite knowing why, and without our being able to see the machinery, as it were, by which our pleasurable sensations are set in motion.

But whilst it is convenient to speak of _lines_ in the landscape, it is only a manner of speaking, for, as we know very well, photography, unlike pen drawing, has to do with "tones," that is, _masses_ of light and shade. Now the general rules suggested as regards the arrangement of lines, apply in much the same way if we regard a picture (as we should do) as consisting of masses of light and shade.

If when standing before a picture we close the eyes and then suddenly open them, our attention is certain to be drawn to the highest light or the deepest shadow, and hence, as a general rule, whichever of these is the strongest to attract attention, that should be in or near the principal object (indeed it will make of itself the principal object), and should therefore be well removed from the margins of the picture.

Refer back to fig. 8, in which the light patch of sky, the light in the water and the two clusters of light rushes, all form competing points of attraction, and if these are too near the margins, they remind us of those margins, hence the improvement in effect when these are cut away or left out.

But disposing of the highest light and deepest dark does not finish the matter. There is a certain relative degree of lightness and darkness between everything in nature. Moreover, colours have to be interpreted by certain degrees of light and shade according to the distance objects are away from us, and according to the amount of light falling on them.

Such relative lightness and darkness is called "_tone_." The word used in this sense has nothing to do with "tone" as applied to the colour of a print, which colour we change by a process we call "toning," and upon the correct rendering of relative tones so much of the effect of a picture depends, and so much of its emotional qualities.

Generally speaking, although there are often exceptions, the further an object is from us the grayer it seems. White becomes less white, and dark objects grow less dark, until in the distance both, under ordinary circumstances, come almost to the same "tone," and we see the distance only as a gray hazy mass.

If for a subject we have a figure of a woman by a stream of water and we make an under-exposed negative of it, or develop the negative to too great a density, we shall very likely have a print in which the water and the woman's apron and cap come very much whiter with regard to the rest of the subject than ever they appear in nature, whilst the distance will very likely come too dark. Here we show a disregard for the correct rendering of relative tones and the effect is hard and harsh, unlike nature. We must therefore endeavour, both in exposure and development and printing, to preserve relative tones exactly as they are in nature, and constant study and observation of nature should be carried on in order that the eye may be trained to know how things come relatively in nature, and so be able to decide at a glance if the photograph is good.

Ultimate success, by the way, often depends less on knowing what to take and how to take it than on a well-trained judgment which knows what is good or bad when we have taken it.

Whilst the mere lines or forms of objects may impart some amount of feeling and sentiment to a scene, inasmuch as there is restfulness and repose in the long horizontal lines of the river-side pastures, something rhythmical in the sinuous curves of the winding stream, or vigour and variety in the irregular forms of the rugged cliffs and so on, yet the ideas and feelings which the picture will promote depend more on the lights and shades, and the masses contrasting or merging each with each.

But Nature does not always present herself in pleasingly arranged masses, and is consequently at such times commonplace and unpicturesque in the literal sense of the word. At such times she will not attract the pictorial worker any more than she will when perchance the lines and groupings are unsuitable.

The landscape which basks under the full blaze of sun, glittering throughout every inch with a myriad twinkling lights and sharp details, awakens no feeling akin to those which probably everyone feels when in the twilight of evening plane after plane recedes as one broad flat tint behind the other. Under the bright light of day we may wonder at the richness and plenty upon the earth, we may rejoice in that there are so many curious and pretty things to look at, but these are like the feelings inspired by reading a book on natural history, rather than the emotions created by the perusal of a poem, or listening to sweet music.

Compare for a moment the two photographs, fig. 19 and fig. 20.

The first is by no means an extreme case of the ordinary photograph, and notice that although the composition is fairly good as far as grouping goes, there is an absence of any quality which might make one feel anything outside the bare recognition of the facts depicted, but the second, if it be good at all, must depend for admiration on a certain amount of sentiment which it suggests or creates. You will notice that in the first there is no sense of distance, and although a church tower, behind the masts of the boats, is half a mile or so away it does not possess the "tone" and veiling of atmosphere which would make it appear distant. Every part of the view seems equally near, or nearly so; the eye wanders over the whole, alighting on details here and there which interest and amuse, yet there is an absence of just that breadth which is noticeably present in the second example.

Now let it be distinctly understood that detail, its omission or suppression, and its introduction or sharp delineation, is not a question of lens focus only, or even chiefly, but it is largely a question of light. Imagine the photograph, fig. 19, with the greater part of the detail taken out so that the quay, the houses, the shore, etc. were just broad masses of lighter or darker tone, should we not then get a composition which would be less disturbing, more compact, more concentrated in interest? Is not this the case in fig. 20, in which detail is almost entirely absent? And yet detail could not have been truthfully introduced in this photograph, because with the light in the position it is, and in the misty evening air, _no detail was there to reproduce_; it was the fact that objects ranged themselves in masses one against the other, leaving room for imagination and creating ideas that determined its selection and its consequent portrayal.

In many cases a clear and sharp delineation of details will perhaps be desirable, not, however, for the sake of showing detail, but just so far as the production of the effect may require; on the other hand, just the full amount of detail that a lens will give is by no means always wanted.

_Lenses were not invented for pictorial purposes_, and therefore there is no reason for concluding that what the lens gives is necessarily right, for remember that we started with the distinct understanding that we were merely _applying_ to a certain purpose just so much of the photographic process as we considered we needed; because I have the means of travelling at sixty miles an hour there is no reason why I should not apply the same means of locomotion to coaching a pedestrian at a tenth of that speed if I choose. It may be said that in the two photographs referred to the comparison is not a fair one, because so much depends on the sky. Granted that much in the second example does depend on the sky, which is an essential part of the picture, and indeed one cause of its very existence, but in the other (fig. 19) the presence of clouds would not improve the pictorial faults to which reference has been made. As a mere record or portrayal of Old Woodbridge Quay, the absence of clouds is as much a characteristic of its particular species, as the clouds in the second one are inseparable from its existence.

So, but little more than half hinting at the principles involved in the due suppression of unnecessary details, and the elimination of undesirable objects in order to obtain breadth, and having said but little as to the preservation of correct relative values or tones, I must pass on.

Every corner of nature's broad expanse is, as it were, enveloped in atmosphere, and invisible as we are commonly in the habit of considering it to be, it affects to a greater or less degree everything we see, and the visible atmosphere is often responsible for some of nature's most beautiful and most appealing aspects. Obviously then we cannot afford to leave out so important a contributory to picturesque effect, and it is on this account rather than on account of sharp or un-sharp detail that the question of stops and lens apertures comes in.

Look at the image of a landscape on a moderately hazy day, as it appears on the ground-glass focussing screen of your camera, using the lens at full aperture--then quickly insert _f_/32, and notice the difference. Not alone have objects near at hand and more remote become more sharply or more equally defined, but you may also notice that objects are _more brilliant_, and that a sense of atmosphere has been cut out.

Compare if you will two photographs, the one made respectively with full aperture of _f_/6 or _f_/8 and the other made with _f_/32 or _f_/45, and provided that in the first case we have not actual blurring to the extent of destroying form and structure, does not the first remind you more of nature? I do not say it is so instructive, so surprising, so dainty, or of such exquisite finish, but is it not more reminiscent of the _effects_ we remember to have seen and _felt_ in nature. It is not the function of this article to say to what optical laws this difference is due, and yet the student may expect to receive something by way of practical working instructions.

My recommendation is then to use a single landscape lens or the single combination of a doublet, and in starting to use the full aperture.

With this it may be that when the foreground is moderately sharp, trees more remote are so ill defined as to appear as a collection of little blots and irregular patches. Whilst sharp detail in all places may not be productive of pictorial effect, yet the extreme opposite will be displeasing in another way, and it will be best to secure just _so much definition and no more_ as shall save the representation from appearing to have been wilfully put out of focus--once let the destruction of detail be obvious and we betray the artifice by which we are working, which is just what we should avoid.

In the case just supposed then, we may now introduce the first stop, simultaneously racking the lens in a little until we get middle distance without unpleasantly obvious blurring. The foreground may be a little out of focus, and in practice I find it is rather helpful to general effect if detail is sacrificed more in the foreground than in the middle distance.

This I believe is contrary to the teaching of many, but my feeling is that with a sharply defined foreground the eye is attracted and the interest so far arrested, that it is difficult to travel further and enter into the poetry and sentiment of the scene beyond.

Wide-angle lenses have a double disadvantage, shared in part by so-called rapid rectilinear doublet lenses. In the first place they flatten the view, bringing distant planes to appear as near as the nearer ones, and by including a comparatively wide angle they bring into the plane of the foreground, objects so near that they appear out of proportion, and hence proportions are false when judged as the observer must judge by the standard of visual perspective.

A long-focus, narrow-angle lens necessitates a camera which racks out to a considerable length, and probably a greater extension than any camera in the ordinary way can give, would be an advantage on some occasions.

Passing reference has been made to the interpretation of colours in nature in their true relative value of black and white.

If we have a subject in which brilliant orange-coloured rushes in autumn are seen as glowing bright against a background of dark blue water, and the rushes made still more golden of hue by the ruddy rays of a sinking sun, a difficult case is before us.

Such a case I remember very well in the south of Devonshire, close to what is known as Slapton Ley. It was late afternoon in November, and from over the rounded hills behind me to the westward, the declining sun sent warm red rays on to the belt of faded reeds which stretched out into the expanse of the still land-locked water of the Ley--a great sheet of fresh water which placidly lay under the shelter of the bank of shingle which alone separated it from the ever-restless sea--placidly listening to the ceaseless voices of sea music, and at this particular hour reflecting the sky deep blue and of almost leaden hue--just above the bank rose the full moon, orange in tint, on a background of blue-green sky--the yellow reeds, kindled into glowing amber tints by the sun's rays, flamed out from the deep blue water--yellow the shingle bank against the blue water and green-blue sky, deeper yellow the moon as it rose from out the sea. So grand a scheme of colour that by its side the essays of the most daring painter might well seem feeble, so exquisite a poem that the intrusion of the photographer, analysing the values and tones and calculating his powers of reproduction seemed like sacrilege. In the main it was yellow, orange-yellow, and red standing out as luminous against the deep blue of water and only a little less blue sky. It was gorgeous non-actinic colour appearing as _light_ against a highly actinic but _darker_ colour. The consequence of an indiscreet exposure with an ordinary plate might be anticipated to produce _dark_ rushes against a _pale grey_ background of water, and so probably the very effect we were minded to secure, reversed and dissipated.

This is an extreme case, perhaps, but throughout the whole range of nature the contrasting and blending of adjacent colours is so subtle a thing that I should feel one were throwing away at least a possible advantage by not using colour-corrected or isochromatic plates on nearly every occasion, and in order to get the full advantage of isochromatic plates, I should consider the addition of a yellow screen an essential.

The rapidity of one's plates, isochromatic or otherwise, must be governed entirely by the nature of the subject, as also to some degree must be development and subsequent printing.

In every case I would endeavour to get a comparatively thin negative, with even the portions representing deepest shadows slightly veiled. "Clear glass shadows" is an enormity and an outrage both of science and art; equally are solid high-lights to be shunned. With modern printing methods it needs much less than actual opacity in the negative to produce white paper, and if the picture requires any part of it at all to appear as quite white, no subject will need more than the very smallest region to be so. A general softness and very subtle gradation, with a total absence of "sparkle" and brilliancy in the negative, will yield by at least most processes the most suggestive print, bearing in mind that delicate gradations suggest atmosphere, and atmosphere is one of nature's most precious qualities.

Whilst plain salted papers sensitized with silver present possibilities not yet sufficiently exploited, yet until such time that something more entirely satisfactory in all respects is given us in silver papers, platinotype and carbon, and perhaps also gum bichromate will be the processes most suitable for our purpose. Personally, platinotype has been the favoured medium, being, as I believe, more ductile and more amenable to various methods of control than is generally recognised.

And leaving much more of importance unsaid than space limits admit of my saying, I must leave it.

_A. Horsley Hinton._

_Architectural Photography._

To the majority amateurs, the photographing of architectural subjects presents considerable, and in many cases apparently insurmountable difficulties. Undoubtedly there are difficulties to be grappled with, but they are neither so formidable nor so numerous, but that any ordinary photographer with the average amount of common sense can master them be he so minded.

Unfortunately there are a great many who take up photography as an amusement to whom the slightest departure from the ordinary routine presents a difficulty. It is however to the amateur photographer who desires to be able to portray architecture, be it either of our cathedrals, churches, historic mansions, or places of personal interest, and at the same time wishes to be able to do the subjects fair justice, that it is hoped the following particulars may be of some service.

To the beginner taking up this or indeed any branch of photography, size is of course a great consideration either from the weight carrying or pecuniary point of view. Another reason is the fact that young photographic workers have an idea that the smaller the plate, the easier the working. Sound though this reasoning may appear, nevertheless it is not entirely correct.

As a matter of fact all things being taken into consideration the larger the plate up to 12 × 10 or 15 × 12 employed the more rapidly will the worker progress.

Large plates, especially in architectural work, tend to make the operator more careful and conscientious when out with the camera; and even more so when in the developing room. So much more can be done with a large plate than with a small one; the use of a large plate moreover checks the common failing so prevalent among amateurs of rushing work and recklessly using plates.

Taking all things into consideration, I would strongly recommend the whole plate or 10 × 8 camera to the student taking up this branch of our art.

In selecting a camera purchase a front extending one with bellows only slightly tapering. See that it has both rising and cross movement to the front, and also that the amount of movement in each case is a not too restricted one. Makers, unfortunately, do not give sufficient attention to this matter, the usual rise allowed being very slight whereas it should be at least equal to one-third of the longest way of the plate; even more than this is advantageous if it can be obtained. By the rise I mean the amount of upward movement that can be obtained, the lens being in the centre before starting.

The cross-front should have a movement of about one-quarter of the length of the plate each way.

It may be useful to know that a little more rise can be obtained by the placing of the lens above the centre of the cross-front; reference to the photograph of camera will explain this matter more fully.

The swing-back should be a practical one, working from the centre, and capable of being swung either to or from the lens.

In many of the cheaper front extension cameras it is not possible to use the swing-back when tilting the camera down, only when tilting upwards. The swing-front, although not an absolute necessity, is undoubtedly a movement possessing great advantages, especially when the front is raised rather high, and one is using a lens of limited covering power. This movement should be acquired if possible.

The camera should possess double extension, focussing by rackwork, and having a reversing back so made that it will fit on all ways; it is then possible to draw the slide shutter out in any position.

In selecting a tripod stand purchase one of the kind known as the sliding leg variety, two-fold is better than three, giving greater sliding power. The top of stand should be as large as possible; this is preferable to a turntable, as this piece of workmanship is seldom rigid after a little use, and some difficulty is experienced when trying to spread the legs out rather wide. A two-fold Ashford stand is as good as any on the market.

The blocks herewith illustrate the kind of camera used by myself, and with the exception of the turntable, which is not a great success, it answers all requirements.

In the selecting of suitable lenses a great deal will depend upon the inclination of the purchaser and the depth of his pocket.

There is such a great variety upon the market at the present time, that to the young photographer the buying of the right lenses is somewhat a difficult problem.

The Zeiss series are undoubtedly the finest obtainable and for architectural work are unrivalled, possessing great covering power, good marginal definition, and in fact very fine definition all over the plate. The lenses of this series, although quite new, have met with great favour amongst architectural workers.

They work at an aperture of _f_/18, but I understand that they can be opened to _f_/16 and numbered on the _f_ system. As regards their relative working capabilities they give about the same picture at _f_/32 that the majority of wide-angle lenses give at _f_/64.

The Goerz anastigmats are also another very fine series but do not give anything like the covering power of the last mentioned, and moreover are nearly double the price. Their special merit is that one can work at _f_/8 or _f_/11, and get a picture sharp up to the edges. Taylor, Taylor & Hobson also make a good wide-angle lens, possessing great covering power and at a moderately low price. With one of their nine inch lenses I have covered a plate 12 × 10 inches.

For a whole-plate camera, a useful battery would be a 5 inches, 7-1/2 inches, 9 inches and 12 inches; for 10 × 8, 7 inches, 9 inches, 10-1/2 inches and 14 inches. The three last in each case are the most useful.

Having selected the lenses, another very important point and one not to be decided hastily is the question of levels. Four are required, two circular and two ordinary. They are placed as follows: Fix the circular levels, one on the baseboard near the front of the camera, the other on the top of the back part of camera. The other two should be placed one on the side of the back part and the other on the back of camera just under the reversing back. Care must be taken to purchase slow moving levels as some work so quickly that it is next to impossible to level the camera with them, and as this is one of the most important points in the whole business, too much care cannot be taken in selecting and fixing the right kind of level.

The focussing screen should be ruled as accompanying diagram. This will divide the screen into inch squares, working from the centre, and will considerably assist the photographer in "sizing his subject up."

One other thing required is a set of clamps for binding the tripod legs together. These are, I believe, made by George Mason, of Glasgow, but any dealer will procure them for you.

The use of the right kind of plate constitutes a very important factor in the production of a satisfactory negative, particularly in this branch.

Owing to the greater difficulty experienced in developing extra rapid plates, one generally sees the slower variety recommended. No hard and fast rule can however be laid down. To gain the best result, the plate must be suited to the subject.

For instance, in a very dark interior in which heavy black shadows predominate, many of them appearing much darker than they really are owing to their close proximity to a strong light, the quicker the plate used the better. This tends to break down the harsh contrasts, and at the same time the shadow detail is considerably better rendered.

On the other hand, working in a light interior or one which is flat owing possibly to the large amount of light present, a slower plate can be used with advantage, and, providing the exposure is sufficient the result will be all that is wished for.

Exteriors, particularly those in sunshine, should be photographed on a fairly quick plate. Slow plates, although good, do not yield nearly such good negatives, and unless very fully exposed give excessive hardness.

Taking this class of work all round, the quick plate is the more useful of the two and is undoubtedly the best for interior work, particularly such interiors as one meets in our English cathedrals.

For all subjects possessing strong high-lights, such as windows, stained or otherwise, rapid plates combined with a suitable backing composition yield the best results, and I would impress upon the reader the fact that no plate should ever be placed in a dark slide without being covered at the back with a suitable composition for the prevention of halation.

The value of this agent is distinctly demonstrated by the accompanying illustrations, and I would point out the fact that the negatives were both developed with the utmost care. The unbacked plate was so developed as to prevent the appearance of halation as much as possible, and it will be noticed that all portions of the photograph, other than that where halation has occurred, are nearly as good in the unbacked as in the backed one.

Having obtained all the apparatus and materials, a very good subject to begin on and one giving good opportunities for the exercise of the various movements connected with the camera, etc., is a general view of the choir in some cathedral or church near at hand.

Having erected the camera, the next thing is to decide upon the most pleasing point of view.

Speaking from my own experience I would advise the shifting of the camera either to the right or left, so that the centre aisle is thrown slightly in perspective. This tends to give a much better and decidedly more pleasing effect to the resulting photograph. Of the two sides, moving to the right seems to be the best. The next item is the fixing of your ground line, this must be so arranged that it is quite clear, not obstructed by the backs of chairs, etc., which look very badly if left standing. Personally, I have generally found it necessary to move one or two rows of chairs so as to make the ground line myself.

In adjusting the height of the camera from the ground it is well never to exceed six feet. Five feet to five feet six inches is the most useful height. This will give a photograph in which the point of sight is the same as that of the person actually viewing the subject.

The placing of the camera on step ladders, chairs, or other supports, so as to overlook objects in the immediate foreground is a practice to be condemned, giving results very rarely pleasing and always bad from the sightseer's point of view.

Having settled upon the point of view and the lens to be used, the student should then roughly focus the image. Notice the amount of subject on the plate and how much rise is required.

If having a camera such as described, the rise is easily accomplished and the camera can then be truly levelled up. Care should be taken over this as unless you have the camera exactly level you cannot expect a true picture. The bubbles of the levels should be _exactly_ in the centre, _a little bit out will not do_.

If it is found that the rising front fails to give the amount of subject required, recourse must be made to the swings, and it is here that the swing front triumphs over the swing back.

To swing the back necessitates the shifting of the camera and tripod stand, and at once throws all the levels out of gear. Then comes re-focussing, etc. Sometimes this will have to be gone through five or six times before the desired amount of swing has been achieved. Owing to the re-focussing required every time the camera is moved it is very difficult, especially for the beginner, to rightly estimate the amount of rise required.

With the swing front the desired amount of rise is attained easily and quickly, and it can be worked with the head still under the focussing cloth, which is a great convenience. At the same time the baseboard and back of camera always remain level.

After gaining the correct amount of rise the sides of the subject should be considered. A golden rule to remember in this class of work is when you show a column, show the base of it, and always start the sides of plate with either half or three-quarters of a column. It looks very queer to see the bend of an arch wandering away out of the side of the picture without any apparent support. In arranging the sides it is usual to have a preponderance of subject on the opposite side to which the camera is, and to start that side with a column. Sometimes the subject fails to fit the plate nicely, in that case it is better to trim the print than to have uninteresting features present.

Of course a great deal depends upon the personal taste of the worker, what one man considers right another will rebel against; so although I advocate the use of columns to fill the sides of the plate it does not follow that that is the one and only method of photographing these subjects.

The student having carefully gone into these matters and arranged the subjects to suit his own satisfaction the question of what point to focus for arises, and indeed in very dark interiors the question of focussing anything at all comes in. A method I use myself is to roughly divide the distance from the camera to the farthest object in half, and then to focus midway between the camera and the middle of the subject. Then stop down the lens until the most distant object is sharp. In practice I have found this rule so good that I can recommend its adoption for all subjects, and if carried out correctly will always result in the production of crisp negatives.

Exposure is not a very difficult thing to overcome. Arrange the focussing cloth well over the head, open the lens out to its largest aperture and remain under the cloth until you can see the image distinctly all over the plate. Then without uncovering the head proceed to slowly stop down until you can only just see the image all over the plate. Now using a plate of the rapidity of Barnet extra rapid, an exposure of ten minutes will yield a satisfactory fully exposed negative.

The varying exposures for other plates and stops are easily obtained. For instance you find the image can just be seen all over at _f_/32 and you wish to use _f_/64 The exposure will be forty minutes.

After having used this method for over seven years, and having invariably found it correct, I can unhesitatingly recommend its adoption, and if used with a little common sense the worker will seldom suffer from his plates being either badly under or over-exposed.

In photographing side aisles, transepts, or long rows of pillars, the worker is often troubled by the unnatural way in which the floor runs up. This is more especially noticeable when there are no prominent objects in the immediate foreground. A considerable amount of this can however be overcome by the lowering of the camera to about three feet from the ground. It is here where the sliding legs of the tripod stand become of service.

I would ask the student always to use the longest focus lens possible, consistent with the effect desired.

The use of extreme wide-angle lenses has had a disastrous effect upon the public taste in respect to architectural photography due principally to the abortions one sees exposed for sale in the shop windows of our cathedral cities.

It should be seldom necessary for the amateur to use very wide-angle lenses. Of course, when it is a question of getting a detailed photograph in a confined situation a wide-angle lens is of great service. But it is when you see the whole length of a cathedral photographed on a whole plate with a five inch lens that the fault is so noticeable.

In photographing exteriors great care should be taken in the placing of the camera in a suitable spot. Try and so arrange it that the short side of the building does not run off too violently, indeed, it is often much better to leave out a portion of the subject rather than to cram the whole subject upon the plate.

General views are much better if photographed when there is a little sunlight. This gives to the subject a sharp, clean-cut appearance.

Details on the other hand are better if photographed in a subdued light and slightly over-exposed.

In focussing very high subjects some difficulty will be found in getting bottom and top in focus at the same time, especially if the lens be strained by either altering the back or front of the camera.

The best place to focus is a little way above the centre of the screen, so that when stopped down the bottom of the building is quite sharp. A slight softness towards the top of the subject is scarcely noticeable in the final print.

The exposure of exteriors varies between three seconds at _f_/64 to ten minutes, and no correct guide can possibly be given. To the beginner a Watkins' exposure meter will here be of some service.

If people are continually passing and repassing stop the lens down to _f_/64 and give as long an exposure as is possible; this will as a rule completely obliterate them. I have found that an exposure of from ten to twenty seconds entirely destroys all trace of moving objects.

Another method of making an exposure where there is much traffic past the building, and perhaps people standing about whom you cannot very well ask to move, is, to break the exposure as many times as possible. Expose for two seconds, then wait until the traffic has somewhat altered; then give another two seconds and so on until finished. By this means I have been able to photograph buildings in the centre of a crowded street or thoroughfare without a trace of anybody showing.

It is often interesting for the student to be able to successfully tackle the photographing of drawing-room, ball-room, or other apartments either of his own or friends' houses.

This work is considerably more difficult than it seems; and it is in such subjects that the taste of the operator becomes manifest. A great deal depends upon the point of view chosen and also upon the arrangement of the furniture.

If a long room, the camera should be placed at one end at about a quarter of the width of room away from one side and from the end wall. Keep the camera parallel with the sides of the room and use the sliding front so as to obtain more of the opposite side of the room. This will give the ceiling a true square appearance and the side of the ceiling will not run off with an unpleasing effect.

In some subjects it is perhaps necessary to include one or more windows. This can of course be accomplished by the aid of backed plates, but it is always better to block those particular windows out. This is usually done by covering the outside with black cloth or brown paper or pulling the sun blinds down. To get the effect of the windows you must remove the paper or cloth at the end of the exposure for a few minutes, three minutes being generally sufficient. By this means it is possible to show the landscape as seen from the window. Do not place your camera too high. Four feet to four feet six inches is quite sufficient. If the camera is higher you look over the immediate foreground objects, touching the ground past them, which is undesirable.

In arranging the furniture be careful that round or oval objects are not placed so that they appear on the edges of the plate which gives them an exaggerated appearance.

In exposing on all such interiors I would strongly recommend a very full exposure, the object being to flatten the subject. A great thing to study in this branch of work is the careful lighting of your subject. This can be largely varied by the use of the inside blinds, also by the sun blinds found outside many windows. It is _not_ advisable to draw the blinds up to their fullest extent. By so doing you accentuate your cast shadows thrown by tables, chairs, etc. In fact, the softer the light in the room coupled with a corresponding exposure, the better the result. Another point to notice is that a comparatively dull day is often the best for interior work, the light being much softer and subdued. As a slight guide to exposure I would suggest that an additional twenty-five per cent. be added to that recommended for church work.

_John H. Avery._

_The Hand Camera and its use._

What is the best form of hand camera? How often this question is asked, and yet how impossible to give any definite reply, the conditions of use, and requirements of each worker being so widely different. One, desires a form of apparatus, capable of being closed up into the smallest space, weighing but the least possible number of ounces, the necessary movements, confined to touching a spring, or pressing a button, and the total cost not to exceed two or three pounds, while others do not care so much as to its possessing these qualities, if by a little increase in bulk, weight, and cost, it is capable of use in a less restricted manner, on subjects of wide variety, and under such conditions of light, and atmospheric effects, as, when shutter exposures are being given, call for the _maximum light passage_ to the plate.

Assuming the camera to be intended exclusively for use without a tripod, then it becomes not a difficult matter to point out its essential features. First and foremost, it should be characterized by simplicity in construction, and every part be easily accessible, complicated movements being rarely found necessary, except perhaps, to raise the price of the instrument. When being employed in the field, the camera and its working parts ought not to need the slightest consideration, each movement, whether they be few, or many, being made, without requiring troublesome attention at the moment when every thought should be devoted to the subject.

The component parts of an instrument, complete and effective for this class of work, may be taken to be a good lens capable of covering at _f_/8, a shutter, some simple means of focussing, adequate finders, and the means of carrying plates either in some form of magazine, or ordinary dark slides.

Each system of holder for plates possesses its own distinctive advantages, which are preferable, depending entirely on individual needs, or tastes. Some admire one method, and some the other.

When plates are carried in one of the many forms of magazine which cameras are nowadays fitted with, it is _important when re-charging it_, that care be taken to see _each sheath and plate is laid true_ in its place, as the slightest irregularity at this point, means certain trouble when changing a plate after exposure, indeed, perhaps fifty per cent. of the misfortunes which occur when out at work, from failure to act of the changing arrangements, _are directly caused by carelessness when laying the plates in the magazine_. Given reasonable care in this matter, almost any of the modern automatic changing methods, may be relied on to answer satisfactorily. When however the slight additional bulk, weight, and it may be increase of cost is not objected to, then there can be no denying separate dark slides possess many and important advantages.

No need to fear a wasted day, caused by some plate sticking, and rendering further work impossible, without having recourse to a dark-room, which probably is miles away; and again, one must not overlook the opportunity they give of carrying plates of different degrees of sensitiveness, a matter of service, when subjects to be dealt with are varied, such as, say, clouds and water, landscapes and figures. In the first case, when light is fairly good, the ordinary speed plate will be found amply quick enough during the daytime, and fifty per cent cheaper in price. When open landscapes are being taken, during summer time, medium rapid plates generally will be quick enough, but many opportunities, for pictorial work, arise under conditions of atmosphere and light, in which to obtain fully exposed negatives with a shutter, demands a plate of extreme sensitiveness, and if for no other reason than that they offer this opportunity of carrying a varied assortment of plates, many workers prefer dark slides, to any form of magazine.

There are advantages, and disadvantages, with both systems, and it becomes simply a question for each worker to consider which fulfills his requirements best.

_The Lens._--Good work can be, and is done, with cheap single lenses, but the opportunities offered are considerably restricted, what is needed, being such a lens as may be used at full aperture of _f_/8 or _f_/6, and will then cover the plate from corner to corner, sharply. This is necessary not only because the actinic quality of light is not always over good, but that moving subjects demand the shutter should be working with rapidity, sometimes indeed with considerable speed: under which conditions two factors are absolutely essential, a large working lens aperture, and a rapid plate. It is well, therefore, to _buy the best lens you can afford_, it more than pays in every way. For 1/4-plate work, a _rectilinear_ of 5, or 5-1/2 in. focus, working say at _f_/5.6, and with iris diaphragm, by one of the best makers, will allow work being done under any condition of weather, or other circumstances, when shutter work is possible.

_Finders._--Years ago, the question of whether finders were necessary, or not, in a camera of this kind, was a matter on which some at least expressed very different opinions, from those now held by most workers. Further experience has shown that when certainty in working is desired, some kind of finder is an absolute necessity as part of the working mechanism. It usually takes the form of a small camera obscura, what is required being, that it should not be too small, should give a perfectly discernible image, and be so adjusted, that only so much of it is shown, as will be projected on to the sensitive plate, when the exposure is made. The reason of its importance is that it _enables the subject being arranged_ tastefully, as well as ensuring that the whole of it is on the plate.

Where no attempt at pictorial work is intended, and the important matter is simply that the object being photographed should be in the _centre of the plate_, then it is only necessary that the finder should show as wide an angle of vision, or a little wider than the lens being employed inside the camera. But when something more is aimed at, _viz._: _Tasteful composition over the whole plate_, then it is necessary to block out on the finder all excess of view, beyond what will be received on the sensitive plate.

_The Shutter._--What particular form may be best is a matter of doubt, but whatever it be, exposure must be possible without vibration, it should give greater exposure to the foreground than the sky, and ought to allow of being regulated for exposures ranging from 1/4th of a second up to perhaps 1/100th for ordinary work.

Where shutter work has to be done, which demands anything less than 1/100th of a second, then special shutters for the purpose are needed, but after having used hand cameras of one form or another for the last nine or ten years on such classes of subjects as are ordinarily dealt with, the occasions on which any greater speed than 1/30th of a second has been called for have been extremely rare. It may be said this would not allow of taking subjects such as a close finish of a cycle race and such like, which is quite true; did occasion arise for so doing, then a shutter such as the focal plane would be employed as a matter of course. But by far the greater amount of work done with hand cameras would be the better for receiving a longer exposure, better because light action on the sensitive plate would be more thorough, and far better because when slowly moving objects, such as waves rolling shoreward, are given 1/10th instead of 1/100th of a second, we get less of "_petrified naturo_," and a more natural appearance in the resulting photographs. As a general rule it is well to give the _slowest exposure possible_.

_The Focussing Arrangements._--These need be only very simple, and generally are done by scale to distances. As a rule with the lens working at _f_/11, and the scale set at 15 feet, it will be found that the depth of focus is sufficient for most ordinary work, and any alteration in the focussing seldom necessary, when dealing with subjects where figures are included, that are not required to be approached much closer than the distance mentioned.

So far as may be necessary for _hand-camera work_ simply, the instrument should be without complications, is better for having a _good rectilinear lens_, needs a shutter easily adjusted for exposures ranging if possible, from a 1/4th of a second, up to say 1/100th, properly adjusted finders, some means of quickly altering the focus of lens, one or other method of carrying the plates or films, and for _purely hand-camera_ work, there is _no need_ for any other addition to it.

Passing away from the camera to its use, one is faced immediately with the fact, that in spite of the multitude of such instruments now in use, the _general average of results_ produced by its means are, in quality, unmistakably below those done with a camera and tripod, nor is the reason for this far to seek. In the latter case, a plate of medium rapidity is generally employed, such an exposure given, as makes no serious _strain_ on the developer used to bring the latent image fully out; the action of light having been ample, and the plate not so easily spoiled, as one of higher sensitiveness, there is not that call for such skilful treatment, as where light action on a highly delicate emulsion, has been but brief, and needs to receive careful handling, before good, well-graded negatives may be produced.