Adelaide Gallery <1>
23. août 1844
Monsieur
J’ai eu l’honneur de vous écrire il y a deux jours. Depuis j’ai fait avec Murray <2> de nouvelles experiences sur votre nouveau procédé. <3> Nous avons coupé un morceau de papier iodé en deux. L’un a été préparé avec la solution de fer & l’autre avec l’ancienne solution. Nous avons placé ces deux morceaux l’un à côté de l’autre pour prendre simultanément l’impression d’une gravure. L’exposition dans la chambre obscure, l’intensité de lumière, toutes ces conditions étaient les mêmes pour les deux papiers. Nous avons laissé opérer la lumière pendant 20 secondes. Le nouveau procédé n’a rien donné & vous verrez par les deux négatifs ci inclus les resultats de deux operations differentes, que chaque fois l’image a été produite par l’ancien procédé, tandisque que le nouveau n’a pas produit le moindre effet. Le temps était couvert pendant ces deux experiences. Nous essayerons de nouveau le premier moment que nous aurons du Soleil.
L’honble Stephen Spring Rice <4> est venu faire faire son portrait au Talbotype. Nous l’avons essayé trois fois. La première fois la lumière était belle & comme il ne pouvait pas supporter le Soleil, nous avons attendu un nuage, pendant ce temps nous avons operé & la pose a duré 25. secondes. Comme il y avait quelques tâches dans le négatif j’ai invité Mr Spring Rice a revenir. Vous verrez les deux négatifs des deux opérations suivantes. Il faisait un temps sombre.
Pendant les trois visites de ce monsieur je l’ai traité avec les plus grands égards & lui ai expliqué les difficultés des procédés Photographiques, aujourdhui à mon grand étonnement je reçois une lettre for peu polie dans laquelle il dit: “Mr Spring Rice having received a letter from Mr Fox Talbot stating that nothing is easier than to obtain a good portrait by his process in 5. or 6. seconds, Mr Spring Rice thinks that the most favorable interpretation of the repeated failures at the Adelaide Gallery is that the operator does not understand the process. He will not therefore trouble that person to make another attempt.” Je vous fais juge de nos failures. J’ai peut être eu tort d’être trop poli et de proposer un nouvel essai après le premier qui me semble assez satisfaisant.
Nous avons encore fait hier un tres beau grand portrait & je ne crainds [sic] pas d’avancer que ces specimens sont les plus beaux en fait de portraits que j’aie encore vus. Il est heureux pour moi de rencontrer en général des personnes plus justes & plus indulgentes que Mr Spring Rice & nous avons contenté plusieurs personnes en faisant leurs portraits au Talbotype. Il faut que Mr Spring Rice est [sic] fort peu de connaissances scientifiques, autrement il aurait été moins prompt à porter un jugement entre vos 5. ou 6. secondes & mes 25 secondes. Il aurait pu s’imaginer qu’il fallait considérer l’intensité de la lumière & la longueur focale des instruments.
Agréez, Monsieur, l’assurance de ma consideration très distinguée.
A Claudet
Translation:
Adelaide Gallery
23 August 1844
Sir,
I had the honour of writing to you two days ago. Since then Murray and I have conducted new experiments on your new process. We cut a sheet of iodized paper in half. One half was prepared with the iron solution & the other with the old solution. We placed the two pieces side by side in order to make a simultaneous impression of an engraving. The conditions were identical for the two pieces of paper, including the exposure in the camera obscura and the intensity of the light. We exposed them to light for 20 seconds. The new process did not produce anything & you will be able to see the results of the two different operations from the two negatives which I have enclosed. Each time, the image was produced by the old process, whereas the new one did not have the slightest effect. The sky was overcast during these two experiments. We will try again the moment we have some Sun.
The Hon. Stephen Spring Rice came to have his portrait taken with the Talbotype. We made three attempts. The first time, the light was good & since he could not abide the Sun, we waited for a cloud. Meanwhile, we took the picture and the exposure lasted for 25 seconds. As there were some marks on the negative, I invited Mr Spring Rice to come back. You shall see the two negatives of the following two attempts. The weather was gloomy.
During this gentleman’s three visits, I treated him with great consideration and explained the difficulties of Photographic processes to him. Today, to my great surprise, I have received a very impolite letter in which he writes: “Mr Spring Rice having received a letter from Mr Fox Talbot stating that nothing is easier than to obtain a good portrait by his process in 5. or 6. Seconds, Mr Spring Rice thinks that the most favourable interpretation of the repeated failures at the Adelaide Gallery is that the operator does not understand the process. He will not therefore trouble that person to make another attempt.” I make you the judge of our failures. Perhaps it was a mistake to be too polite and to suggest another attempt after the first one which seems quite satisfactory to me.
Yesterday, we took another very good portrait & I am not afraid to suggest that these specimens are the most beautiful portraits which I have yet seen. It is fortunate for me that I have generally met people who are fairer and more indulgent than Mr Spring Rice & and we have satisfied several people by taking their portraits with the Talbotype. Mr Spring Rice must have little scientific knowledge, otherwise he would not have been so quick to judge between your 5. or 6. seconds & my 25 seconds. He could have imagined that it was necessary to consider the intensity of the light and the focal length of the instrument.
Please accept, sir, my kindest regards.
A Claudet
Notes:
1. Adelaide Gallery, Lowther Arcade, Strand, London: Gallery of Practical Science; site of Antoine Claudet’s photographic studio.
2. Unidentified, but just possibly Robert Murray (1798–1857), Irish instrument maker, based in London at John Newman; from 1855 partner in Murray & Heath (Robert Murray & Vernon Heath), instrument makers & photographers, London.
3. WHFT had published and patented some improvements of his photographic processes in the winter and spring of 1844. See ‘Patent Granted for Improvements in Photography’, Chemical Gazette, v.2 n.30, 15 January 1844, pp. 55–56; see also ‘Improvements in Photography’, Chemist, v. 2 no. 15, March 1844, pp. 115–117. However, it is also possible that the process referred to is the calotype process.
4. Stephen Edmund Spring Rice (1814–1865), deputy chairman of the Board of Customs, and eldest son of Thomas Spring-Rice, 1st Baron Monteagle (1790–1866), statesman. This letter has not been located; however, there are several letters between WHFT and the father, a fellow graduate of Trinity College, Cambridge.