Page 27 - Studio International - July August 1975

White noted the change in photographic particularly of breadth and luminousness'
aesthetics in the nineties. Writing in 1895 (sic). He noted that: 'Some
he commented on the attitude of 'the new extraordinary objections have been taken
school of photographers' whose aim he to the results on these papers as not being
saw being 'to infuse the sentiment and photography because they bear
poetry of nature as seen with the resemblance to wash drawings; and one
imperfection of human vision, in place gentleman finds in this, and in the
of the relentless and prosaic methodism character of diffraction photographs, an
of nature as imaged by various opening of the door to any and every
mechanical and chemical appliances — the kind of brush work upon the print. But
results of which may be more perfect the answer is, first, that there is no aim
than human eyesight, but all the same do to get wash-drawing appearance; and,
not satisfy the aesthetic vision nearly as secondly, all the process is pure
fully." 3 photography.'" These denials began to
In order to reach this point the look a little shaky when photographic
front-runners in the chase to establish prints produced by what was called
photography's position as an art form `photo aqua-tinting' — the gum
cleared a hurdle which had earlier caused bichromate process — began to appear in
the leader of the field — P. H. Emerson — the mid-nineties. In these prints
to pull up. In 1891 Emerson had manipulation and brushwork came to
produced what Davison called a 'mad play a large part and Emerson, rightly
pamphlet' in which he renounced his suspecting that a fundamental change
claims for photography as a medium for was occurring in attitudes towards
Robert Demachy
artistic expression. In the course of his photographic print-making, referred to Jeune Fille
bewildering back-tracking, Emerson `gum printing' as 'one of the greatest Gum print
stated: 'The limitations of photography bubbles floated on the limpid stream of Royal Photographic Society
are so great that, though the results may pure photography'. The cry went up
and sometimes do give a certain once again that a bastard had been
aesthetic pleasure, the medium must brought forth, and articles with such
always rank the lowest of all arts, lower titles as 'The Legitimacy of Brush
than any graphic art, for the individuality Development in Gum Bichromate Work'
of the artist is cramped; in short, it can soon appeared. The new process split
scarcely show itself, Control of the picture photographers once again and Emerson
is possible to a slight degree, by varied thundered out a warning against 'those
focussing, by varying the exposure . . . who would have us sell our birthright for
and, lastly, by a certain choice in a mess of gum.""
printing methods. But the all-vital The coming of the gum bichromate
powers of selection and rejection are process enabled the 'artist photographers',
fatally limited, bound in by fixed and as some called them, to realize the worst
narrow barriers.'14 But Davison would fears of those who believed that
have none of this. The year before photography's role was that of translating
Emerson had decided that photography selected portions of the real world into
was 'a very limited art', Davison had scientifically accurate, two-dimensional
taken a provocative stance, challenging images. The gum process, which allowed Robert Demachy
those who saw photography restricted to the photographer to produce Head of a Girl
a narrow, functional role: 'What is this manipulated prints from negatives Gum print
selection and discrimination which is produced in the usual manner, brought Royal Photographic Society
impossible to camera craft ? What is it the nightmares of the old guard in
which is possible to the painter in photography into the daylight of the Ladêveze in 1894. As critics opposed to
monochrome which is really an essential photographic exhibitions. The its use pointed out with glee, there
of good art that is cut out of the power of photographer could now begin to alter the was nothing new about the process — it
the photographer ? . . . I see no reason . . . tones and 'values' of a print to a much had been around for 4o years or so. The
why photography should not be used to greater extent than was possible, or at fact that what was seen as its 'artistic'
express our impressions of natural scenes least usual, before, and provided him potential had not been developed
as well as any other black and white with such freedom in the use of 'brush before 1894 points to the switch in the
method.' Photography, he said, had development' and other techniques that concerns of photographers during these
supplanted line engraving, and rivalled he could make his presence and his years, away from photographic definition
all monochrome processes in the control felt in the form of hand-work and towards artistic effect.
reproduction of tones, surpassing etching signifying 'artistic expression.' The hand Robert Demachy first exhibited gum
and matching mezzotint 'to which, of the 'artist' (some called him prints at an exhibition organized by the
indeed, it is often superior in respect of `craftsman') embellished or defaced — Photo-Club de Paris in 1895, and within a
delicacy of gradation'." Emerson and depending on your point of view — the few years had been recognized
Davison, once colleagues in pure photographic record which many in internationally as the most outstanding
photography's struggle for recognition, both the nineteenth and the twentieth of the photographers who had taken up
moved farther and farther apart during centuries have held to be the natural the new manipulative printing processes.
the nineties. In 1900, when it might have product of the camera. Most He wrote that the beauty of the gum
been expected that passions had cooled off photographers working today would bichromate process is that, without
a little, Emerson found venom enough to agree with H. P. Robinson's century-old painting in, stippling, and exhaustive
describe Pond at Weston Green, which had protest 'that it is not the mission of retouching, we can get . . . a certain
appeared in Photograms of 1899, as 'the photography to produce smudges.' But number of effects that other processes
very worst in the book — to which we the gum bichromate process, which came cannot give photographically.'20 The
adjudged, too, the wooden spoon', and into use in 1894-5, was only the first of photographer had so much control in
sneeringly remarked that this the new printing processes which obtaining these effects — which were to be
`abominable daub' possessed 'every ill provided photographers interested in obtained, Demachy emphasized, not by
that photography is heir to'." `pictorial effect' with new fields in which painting in or deliberately altering lines,
Davison had, early in the nineties, to develop their creative vision, and it was but by repeated washing out or by
defended the newly introduced rough- welcomed by them with open arms." repeated friction with a wide, flat brush
surfaced papers for printing which he Indeed, it cannot have been chance alone during development — that prints taken
described as having 'very excellent and which led to the re-introduction of the from the same negative could be given
distinctive qualities, in respect gum bichromate process by Rouillé- quite differing points of emphasis. The

7