link to Talbot Project home page link to De Montfort University home page link to Glasgow University home page
Project Director: Professor Larry J Schaaf
 

Back to the letter search >

Document number: 06512
Date: 09 Nov 1851
Recipient: GREAT EXHIBITION OF 1851 Exhibition Committee
Author: TALBOT William Henry Fox
Collection: British Library, London, Manuscripts - Fox Talbot Collection
Collection number historic: LA51-81
Last updated: 25th April 2012

[This letter is also summarised, in context, in WHFT's manuscript notes on his continuing correspondence with the Executive Committee - see Doc. No: 15000]

[draft:]

Exve Commee

8 9 Nov / 51

Gentn – I am favord with yr lr of yest’s date ye 8th inst signed by Mr C. T. Thomson & am glad that y have mentd ye reasns wch hve weighed wh y. in considg ye questn of wh respect to ye price wch ought to be [illegible deletion] paid for ye posve copies.

In order to see whether Mr Hennemn has put proposed an exaggerated price upon for ym let us considr some similr or analgs [illegible deletion] instces

The price of a guinea & more is not unusual for a fine posve copy – I myself gave 20 shgs 25 fr the other day for one by Martens of Paris, nor do I thk it was too much, altho’ if the argts made use of in reasoning your letter of ye 8th were admitted Mr Martens ought not to have charged more that 6d for ye same. –

The principal Daguerreotypists in London charge 2 and or 3 gs for a portrait if not more, altho’ it only takes ym 10″ to make it, as they not only acknowledge, but make it a subject of boast

Where th is no patt but unlimtd competn Mr Hill of Edinburgh sells albums of Talbotypes photographic views and sketches, very fi portraits and at what price? Forty gs for the volume. And that this such a price is not unreasonable is shown by the fact of several of our most eminent artists in London having purchased ye volume. collection it.

If I go into a printshop and ask the price of a fine engraving, I am told perhaps 4 or 5 guineas – what wd be thought if I only tendered the price of the paper, together with the [illegible deletion] cost of the workman’s printing off that impression from the copperplate?

In these instances, what is the reason wch justifies the high price demanded? Evidently this, that the price represents not only ye prime cost of the materials employed, but also ye remuneratn due to ye skill of ye artist wr he call hself be he draughtsman engraver or photographer together with interest on ye capital sunk in the business, wch in ye case of a photoger may be many thousd pds – Y will please

I can state that it is ye intentn of my licensees Messrs Hennn (nor do I think that Messrs Knight & Co wd do less) (and I believe I may add of Messrs Knight also) in the event of their being directed by the Exve Comtee to furnish ye posves to expend at once several hundred pounds in building the proper wkshps in ye outskirts of London to execute so large a contract properly and in order to do it within the time named, to adopt the principle of multiplying ye copying frames beyond anythg that has yet been done, so as to have 100 to 200 working at once & following the Sun by being mounted upon revolving stages or platforms

Exve Comtee 8 9 Nov / 51

2

Your outlay on ye work may appear large is doubtless large, but what wd it hve been if you had the work had been executed as such were formerly if ye work hd bn execd on ye old system of engravg or lithography? What wd have been ye cost of 100 drawings by first rate artists and as many finished engravings therefrom? made from the drawings? Surely much more it wd hve cost several times as much I do not think th If this questn is fairly exnd I do not thk that any 1 can doubt of the superr cheapness of the photc methd of illustn

P.S.

upon revolving stages or platforms’:

P.S.
Would ye Comtee like to see specimens of posves printed off by Mr Henneman from 7 6 to 10 years ago, wch have remained unaltered?
I shd suppose tha In that case I wd forward a parcel containing perhaps 100 of that age them for [illegible deletion] their inspection.
?where to be put?Y ought also Y will please to recollect moreover that I have waived any all claim to royalty or patt dues either from yrsves or fm my licensees, on ye ground of this being a natl work, and (so to say) part & parcel of the Gt Exhtn wch was an honour to the [illegible deletion] age and countryHad it been Were it a mercantile speculatn the royalty wd proby amount to £500 to or £1000 supposing the work to consist of 100 plates, and 150 to 200 copies of it to be printed

Your outlay

[expanded version:]

Executive Committee

8 9 November 1851

Gentlemen,

I am favored with your letter of yesterday’s date the eighth inst., signed by Mr Charles Thurston Thomson <1> and am glad that you have mentioned the reasons which have weighed which you in consideration of the question of which respect to the price which ought to be [illegible deletion] paid for the positive copies.

In order to see whether Mr Henneman <2> has put proposed an exaggerated price upon for them let us consider some similar or analogous [illegible deletion] instances.

The price of a guinea and more is not unusual for a fine positive copy – I myself gave twenty shillings (twenty-five francs) the other day for one by Martens <3> of Paris, nor do I think it was too much, although if the arguments made use of in reasoning your letter of the eighth were admitted Mr Martens ought not to have charged more that six pence for the same. –

The principal Daguerreotypists in London charge two and or three guineas for a portrait if not more, although it only takes them ten seconds to make it, as they not only acknowledge, but make it a subject of boast.

Where there is no patent but unlimited competition Mr Hill <4> of Edinburgh sells albums of Talbotypes photographic views and sketches, very fine portraits and at what price? Forty guineas for the volume. And that this such a price is not unreasonable is shown by the fact of several of our most eminent artists in London having purchased the volume. collection it.

If I go into a printshop and ask the price of a fine engraving, I am told perhaps four or five guineas – what would be thought if I only tendered the price of the paper, together with the [illegible deletion] cost of the workman’s printing off that impression from the copperplate?

In these instances, what is the reason which justifies the high price demanded? Evidently this, that the price represents not only the prime cost of the materials employed, but also the remuneration due to the skill of the artist whether he call himself be he draughtsman engraver or photographer together with interest on the capital sunk in the business, which in the case of a photographer may be many thousand pounds – You will please

I can state that it is the intention of my licensees Messrs Henneman (nor do I think that Messrs Knight & Co would do less) (and I believe I may add of Messrs Knight also) in the event of their being directed by the Executive Committee to furnish the positives to expend at once several hundred pounds in building the proper workshops in the outskirts of London to execute so large a contract properly and in order to do it within the time named, to adopt the principle of multiplying the copying frames beyond anything that has yet been done, so as to have one hundred or two hundred working at once and following the Sun by being mounted upon revolving stages or platforms

Your outlay on the work may appear large is doubtless large, but what would it have been if you had the work had been executed as such were formerly if the work had been executed on the old system of engraving or lithography? What would have been the cost of one-hundred drawings by first rate artists and as many finished engravings therefrom? made from the drawings? Surely much more it would have cost several times as much I do not think that If this question is fairly extended I do not think that anyone can doubt of the superior cheapness of the photographic method of illustration –

P.S. Would the Committee like to see specimens of positives printed off by Mr Henneman from seven six to ten years ago, which have remained unaltered? I should suppose that In that case I would forward a parcel containing perhaps one-hundred of that age them for [illegible deletion] their inspection. ?where to be put?You ought also You will please to recollect moreover that I have waived any all claim to royalty or patent dues either from yourselves or from my licensees, on the ground of this being a national work, and (so to say) part and parcel of the Great Exhibition which was an honour to the [illegible deletion] age and countryHad it been Were it a mercantile speculation the royalty would probably amount to five-hundred pounds to or one-thousand pounds supposing the work to consist of one-hundred plates, and one-hundred fifty to two-hundred copies of it to be printed.

Notes:

1. For the letter from Charles Thurston Thompson (1816–1868), engraver & photographer, see Doc. No: 06510. It concerned the eventual publication of Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All Nations, 1851: Reports by the Juries. Four volumes, illustrated by original photographic prints from negatives by Hugh Owen and Claude Marie Ferrier. In the copies given to WHFT, a dedicatory sheet was inserted (most likely printed up by him): 'This Work, on the Results of the Great Exhibition of 1851, Illustrated with Photographic Plates, being One of Fifteen Copies Given by the Royal Commissioners to H.F. Talbot, Esq. of Lacock Abbey, as The Inventor of this Branch of the Photographic Art, was by him presented to _____'. This publication caused WHFT considerable consternation at the time, for he felt that the Commissioners had stealthily and unfairly taken the job of printing the plates away from Nicolaas Henneman. For a summary of this complex situation, see Nancy B Keeler, 'Illustrating the "Reports by the Juries" of the Great Exhibition of 1851; Talbot, Henneman, and Their Failed Commission,' History of Photography, v. 6 no. 3, July 1982, pp. 257-272.

2. Nicolaas Henneman (1813–1898), Dutch, active in England; WHFT’s valet, then assistant; photographer.

3. Friedrich von Martens (1809–1875), German inventor & photographer, active in Paris.

4. David Octavius Hill (1802–1870), Scottish painter & photographer.