My Talbot essay for Histories and Theories of photography. Final draft.
History and Theories of Photography, essay draft for question one; what do you think William Fox Henry Talbot meant by the phrase ‘evidence of a novel kind’? In your discussion make use of writings from the reading list as well as further research.
William Henry Fox Talbot’s phrase ‘evidence of a novel kind’ comes from his book ‘The Pencil of Nature’ which was published in 1844. The phrase is taken from plate 3 ‘Articles of China’ and is used to describe Talbot’s theories about the future uses of photography. He predicted that photographic documentation would serve many purposes within society. Born on the 11th February 1800 in Dorset, Talbot was the inventor of the negative to positive printing process, allowing multiple copies of photographs to be created. The details of the process used are in the 1969 reissue of ‘The Pencil of Nature’ in the introduction, written by Beaumont Newhall. He discusses in detail how Talbot began his creation. In short Talbot couldn’t draw, which caused him to wonder if there was a way of capturing the image projected by a camera obscura. Calling his camera the pencil of nature, he invented an internal combustion machine which captured images onto light sensitive paper. Fondly referred to, by him, as ‘Sun Pictures’ (Talbot, 1844) he published them as a book, which was unlike anything ever seen before. Talbot’s work was the first of its kind, a book of photographs had never been available to the public before and some of the readers found it hard to believe that they weren’t looking at drawings. He was a ‘pioneer of photography’ (BBC history, no date). Within his book are photographs of architecture, art, fruit, people, documents and objects - all of these things produced in a way that could not be replicated perfectly without the photographic method.
Talbot realised that taking a photograph of a cabinet full of china items would be a more efficient way of documenting them than providing a written description of each object. Talbot’s photographs were described by Vered Maimon as ‘an undecided and reserved view with regard to the future.’ (2008: 314) which I think means that, he didn’t believe that Talbot realised the full extent of his discovery. While others had been preserving moments of time themselves, no one had been able to create a process that allowed multiple copies. For instance Joseph Nicéphore Niépce invented heliography, the first photographic technique that captured an image onto a metal plate. Niepce created the ‘earliest known surviving photograph made in a camera.’ (Harry Ransom centre, no date) in 1826 - 1827. With Niepce’s help, this led to Daguerre creating the daguerreotype using a similar technique. None of these photographic processes used Talbot’s develop, stop and fix technique which he had been experimenting with since 1833, as these photographs were exposed only onto one metal plate not a reusable paper sheet. Declaring his work in 1839 as the 'art of photographic drawing' (BBC history, no date) Talbot released ‘Pencil of Nature’ in 6 fascicles, with a total of 24 photographs. Each of his prints stood as different ‘proofs’ that his work wasn’t crafted by hand, but by light chemically reacting with surfaces. Capturing an object in this way gave an access to detail that was incredible for the time, resulting in many mixed views and opinions from its viewers. Not everyone believed the invention could exist. Talbot’s ‘black magic’ (Schaaf, 1992, p47) took some persuasion to be believed, and by using selected photographic examples to ‘demonstrate wide range of its applicability’ (Schaaf, 1992, p47) Talbot showed the photographer’s new found advantage was remarkable over an artists, as different skills and techniques could obtain so much more detail. Unlike now where computer software can imitate every detail, within Talbot’s time photographs were compared to paintings and drawings. Talbot suggests that evidence is a powerful thing, as ‘the more advantage in having their pictures given instead of their descriptions’ (Talbot, 1844) there is further evidence for the police to identify a stolen belonging or for a crime scene to be analysed. The truth wouldn’t be denied as easily. Once this information was revealed the concept of capturing detail would change forever. For example photographs could be compared against one another, as many thought at the time a photograph couldn’t lie. ‘Photography is about the frame you put around an image’ (Fixing the shadows, 2007) and without context and cropping, a single image could tell many different things. Not only as evidence for crimes or legal purposes, photography could be used for black mail and to reveal discreet information to the public. Journalists and newspapers would thrive from this invention, revealing events in the world never before imagined.
It worried Talbot when Daguerre revealed his new image process, as Talbot wanted to be the first photographic inventor. By comparing himself to Daguerre, Talbot disputed whether his work would be ‘evidence of a novel kind’ as the quest to be the inventor of photography seemed to be a very competitive one. Talbot knew of Daguerre’s work and the public were already accustomed to viewing Daguerreotypes, yet Talbot’s was re-printable and more accessible. Talbot wrote in a letter to the editor of the Literary Gazette in 1849 admitting he had been ‘Placed in an unusual dilemma’ (Schaaf, 1992, p45) between the releases of his work and Daguerre’s. Luckily for him no one in Britain knew of the French invention and he managed to establish an ‘independent priority of his photographic drawing’ (Schaaf, 1992, p47). His views of the possibilities created because of his invention were novel, and possibly he thought if others knew of Daguerre’s work first he wouldn’t have become as well known. Talbot ‘scrambled to stake a claim to priority’ (Malcom, 2004) and was successful at capturing the attention of many people. With new methods and ideas changing the techniques, his novel creation would be inspirational for decades to come. As a result of his work many other photographic processes were invented.
Talbot established his priority as the inventor of photography by taking photographs of different things, such as art, architecture, fruit, and glass. For example the 3rd image within his book titled ‘Articles of China’ has the text ‘it would certainly be evidence of a novel kind’ (Talbot, 1844). Talbot is referring to the fact if the objects were to be stolen the photograph would be solid proof of their ownership, and it would be far less time consuming to study the photograph than ‘it would take him to make a written inventory’ (Talbot, 1844). I find it interesting that he has already began thinking about the multiple processes and uses his invention would have, and little did he know how correct he would be. Larry J.Schaff, a photo-historian, described Talbot’s ideas in a film as ‘reproducing images for the masses’ (Fixing the shadows, 2007) which in my opinion ideally describes Talbot’s way of thinking. Talbot admits that in criminal cases there would still be ‘speculation of those who poses legal acumen’ (Talbot, 1844) but at this current point in time photographs couldn’t lie, they could not be manipulated like they are today.
Regarding Talbot’s theory towards manipulation, he believed the camera makes ‘a picture of whatever it sees’ (Pencil of nature, 1844). Talbot believed that using a camera was the same as seeing. The paper as the retina, and the glass as the eye. His argument would seem agreeable to some degree, as the camera would photograph exactly what was in front of it. Yet a photograph could never capture the personal view someone has, or how different elements stand out more to individual people. Photography was seen ‘as the mechanical perfection of a representational and aesthetic task’ (Good, J. No date) and photography was unable to capture that individuality. A good example from Talbot’s work would be photograph 10; the haystack. To everyone else this was a simple photograph of an everyday scene, yet the haystack had never been shown like this before. There was now access to real detail. Many trained painters could never obtain every part perfectly even with hours of work, yet now within moments a photographer could capture everything. On one hand this photograph gives more to the viewer than you can predict, things a person wouldn’t notice instantly, yet a personal view of this haystack may differ to the way it is taken. Talbot’s text with the photograph is straight to the point discussing how ‘no artist would take the trouble to copy faithfully’ (Talbot 1844) indicating his thoughts towards time consumption between artists and photographers are true. He has predicted many difficulties photographers would have in the future. This haystack was now seen in a different way, capturing every detail a person probably wouldn’t want to spend the time doing so. Yet it still doesn’t capture any individuality of the persons view when taking the photograph. What Talbot is forgetting is that a haystack is used in context in a painting, for example, to show its harvest time and not as a single image. Can a photograph reveal too much? We discover things we shouldn’t as the ‘Photographic medium doesn’t care what’s important and what’s not’ (Fixing the Shadows, 2007). A photograph has the capability of revealing so much without any context, and once an image is captured it is there forever. Talbot clearly believes that painting a detailed image is now a waste of time.
One of Talbot’s photographs which interests me the most is plate 14; The Ladder. It is a photograph of a ladder being held up against a barn by three boys. Photographs of people were hard to obtain because of the length of the camera exposure, and this photograph would have had to have been staged. The ‘patience of the sitter’ (Talbot, 1844) was vital when creating these photographs, and depending on the weather conditions they could be standing a very long time. He chose an everyday object, such as a ladder, as Talbot had an ambition to show everyday life within his photographs. This average scene of three boys with a ladder up against a barn, was something the public could relate to when seeing these photographs for the first time. His ‘Evidence of a Novel kind’ (Talbot, 1844) was showing the extra ordinary within the ordinary, everyone has seen something similar to this before, yet never in such a way. Photography experienced a ‘massive boom’ (Hacking, 2013, p10) in the 1850’s and this was probably due to the publication of these photographs. Many people wanted to try photography themselves, as Talbot’s photographs were so inspirational. This caused people to document their belongings and lives for themselves. Talbots way of thinking had inspired many generations to come. There was such interest in the restaging of the original photographs from his book ‘Pencil of Nature’, that to mark its 150th anniversary, in the 1950’s, a film was made to document it, which can be found in the Huntley films archive. The black and white silent movie was humorous to watch, as so many people gathered around Lacock Abbey. They were taking photographs of their own of the recreation of the photograph. Including the chairman of Kodak! Comparing Talbot’s photographs with some of the best photographers in the world, I’m of the opinion they aren’t the best. Yet their importance means so much more as the context is incomparable.
While Talbot was inspirational, not everyone agreed with his views. Vered Maimon suggests that the ‘Pencil of Nature’ isn’t ‘embedded in the idea of authentic copy or index, as it has been suggested in recent theories’ (Maimon, 2008). He felt that Talbot’s work can’t be authentic because of the staged reality in order to capture some of the photographs. Talbot ‘has a desire for truth’ (Maimon, 2008) which is only related to a specific style. His opinions are correct yet he is thinking in a ‘specific form of romantic historicism’ (Maimon, 2008). In other words his ideas only relate to specific functions. He hasn’t thought of commercial uses, advertising or art, he has mainly thought of law, possession, and reality. These concepts of his are novel for the time, but are they relevant now? His work is documenting parts of his life as a middle class white man living in England, which aren’t relatable to everyone else in the world. For example, one still life contained a pineapple, which only the privileged could afford. Was Talbot showing off his social status? I disagree, as Talbot’s work was about showing the world what he could do. His ideas and methods were novel, yet the photographs themselves aren’t so much. The ‘popularization of photography…led to a shift in attitudes towards the medium’ (Hacking, 2013) in the late 1850’s photography slowly began to recognize itself as an art form. People were taking photography down different paths and styles, leading towards pictorialism, which after Talbot was a huge change, as he also hadn’t predicted any of this.
In our society some photographs and pieces of artwork have become great and interesting because of their context, others simply because of what they are in the world and nothing else. For instance Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa is seen by thousands every day; is each of those people seeing it to appreciate the beautiful art work, or simply because of what it is and its fame? To some, Talbot’s work would be nothing more than, for example, a photograph of an old abbey, yet to others it represented so much more than that. Plate one; Part of Queen’s college Oxford shows the ‘most evident marks of the injuries of time and weather’ (Talbot, 1844), this expresses the cameras ability being so much greater than any quality of drawing or painting seen before. The warn marks of the stone are capable of being photographed to that exact extent of what they are, thus Talbot proving the ‘novel’ evidence that the camera is a remarkable invention. These small markings and details we are used to seeing every day would have been incredible to see replicated at the time, making it novel and good proof for Talbot to use. Seen by everyone they are recognisable yet instantly making the audience aware they are more than just a painting or a drawing.
‘Evidence of a novel kind’ (Talbot, 1844) could represent thoughts and ideas, as well as so many possibilities for the future. Talbot’s use of multiple examples seen in every day Victorian life justifies his argument that they could have so many uses in the future. Documentation is now easier, legal issues now have physical proof, family life can be captured, and the development of cultures and communication can be shared. Talbot’s invention is novel, more than novel, by changing the way the world worked. In my opinion his photographs now aren’t what’s important, it was his futuristic views that changed everything within society. The end of the introduction of ‘The Pencil of Nature’ states that the book is left to the ‘indulgence of the Gentle Reader’ (Talbot, 1844). My indulgence is to imagine what effect these photographs would have had on the public. To imagine a place where this was unknown, and every photograph was real and believable. No editing or manipulation, this world would be alien to imagine. It is novel to think of the changes made within our world, and it is novel to imagine the thoughts, reactions and feelings towards these photographs. The photographs will never loose meaning, as long as they never lose their context. (2546 words)
Bibliography
BBC - History - William Henry Fox Talbot. 2015. BBC - History - William Henry Fox Talbot. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/fox_talbot_william_henry.shtml. [Accessed 07 November 2015].
Batchen, Geoffrey, ‘William Henry Fox Talbot. ‘Latticed Window (With the Camera Obscura, August 1835’ in Sophie Howarth ed., Singular Images. Essays on Remarkable Photographs, Tate, 2005.
Booth, A. (1965). William Henry Fox Talbot; Father of modern photography. London: Cox and Wayman LTD. 53-64.
Fixing the Shadows (2007) The Genius of Photography, (Television programme). BBC 4, October 25th.
Good, Justin.. (no date). Why photographs are not more realistic than paintings.Available: https://blackboard.lincoln.ac.uk/bbcswebdav/users/dmeyerdinkgrafe/archive/good.html. Last accessed 20th Dec 2015.
Hacking, Juliet, ed, Photography: the Whole Story, Thames & Hudson, 2013.
H.J.P, Arnold. (1977). William Henry Fox Talbot; Pioneer of photography and a man of science. Essex: Anchor Press LTD. 175-216.
Joseph Nicéphore Niépce: The First Photograph. 2015. Joseph Nicéphore Niépce: The First Photograph. Harry Ransom centre, University of Texas in Austin. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/permanent/firstphotograph/niepce/. [Accessed 07 November 2015].
Malcom, D. (2004) William Henry Fox Talbot (1800–1877) and the Invention of Photography. The metropolitan museum of art. Available from http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/tlbt/hd_tlbt.htm (accessed 29th October 2015).
Nelson, K.E. (1996) A Thumbnail History of the Daguerreotype. The Daguerreian society. Available from http://daguerre.org/resource/history/history.html (Accessed on 4th of November 2015).
Shaaf, L.J. (1992) Out of the shadows; Herschel, Talbot and the invention of photography. London. Yale University press. The dawn of photography; Herschel and Talbot in the spring of 1839. 45-73.
Talbot, W.H.F. (1844) The Pencil of Nature. Project Gutenburg. Available from http://www.gutenberg.org/files/33447/33447-h/33447-h.html (Accessed on 19th October 2015).
Vered Maimon (2008) Displaced ‘Origins’: William Fox Henry Talbot’s The Pencil of Nature, History of Photography, 32:4, 314-325, DOI: 10.1080/03087290802315793
William Henry Fox Talbot (1800–1877) and the Invention of Photography | Thematic Essay | Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History | The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 2015. William Henry Fox Talbot (1800–1877) and the Invention of Photography | Thematic Essay | Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History | The Metropolitan Museum of Art. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/tlbt/hd_tlbt.htm. [Accessed 08 November 2015].
Wolf, H.. (2013). Innovation and discovery; Nature as drawing's mistress. In: Brusius, M. William Henry Fox Talbot; Beyond photography. New Haven: Yale centre for British art. 119-142.
YouTube, (2015). William Henry Fox Talbot, 1950's - Film 16492. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOb--pgnlfY [Accessed 24 Oct. 2015].
