The decadence of the daguerreotype is to be regretted for at least one reason,--the man who elected to work in that medium was necessarily at least a craftsman, whereas at the present time many photographers are neither artists nor craftsmen, but merely mechanics of only fair skill. Photography has been brought to such a state of perfection that good technical results may be obtained by persons that work by rote and know absolutely nothing of the principles underlying the craft. This lack of training and enthusiasm for the work must evidently be reflected in the results obtained.
There are few forms of portraiture art that equal in beauty choice early examples of daguerreotype photography. They have the exquisite delicacy, softness and individual charm of the best miniature portraits. Good old daguerreotypes are treasured possessions in the homes of many families--and rightly so, for they combine a fine quality of art with a gentle personal appeal.
WRITTEN FOR THE MENTOR BY PAUL L. ANDERSON ILLUSTRATION FOR THE MENTOR. VOL. 6, No. 12, SERIAL No. 160 COPYRIGHT, 1918, BY THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC.
[Illustration: FROM A PRINT BY ALVIN LANGDON COBURN
David Octavius Hill (born 1802, died 1870), was a Scotch painter who conceived the idea of producing a great historical picture representing the Disruption of the Church of Scotland. This work involved painting some four or five hundred portraits, and Hill, despairing of obtaining satisfactory sittings from so many persons, turned to the newly discovered art of photography to furnish the portraits he needed, with the idea of using the photographs as a guide in painting. Hill used the calotype process, invented by Fox Talbot, which rendered a piece of paper sensitive to light by coating it with iodide of silver. When it was exposed in the camera and developed, a negative resulted, and positive prints were made from this negative in the same medium.
Hill became so much interested in photography that he worked with it for several years, to the neglect of his painting. During those years he produced photographic portraits which have certainly never been surpassed, and which some people think have never been equalled. The exposures necessary were very long--four or five minutes in bright sunlight. This fact lends a great deal of beauty to the results, for there is no doubt that full sunlight gives effects that cannot be obtained in any other way, and these may be of surpassing beauty, provided the photographer is skilful enough to manage his apparatus and pose the sitter properly. It is regrettable that so many photographers of the present day shun out-door portraiture, for there is unquestionably a great opportunity in that class of work. The claim of some photographers that out-door light is not satisfactory for portraiture is refuted by Hill’s results.