988
travelling around. This must be due to a growing num-
ber of clients, especially after the introduction of the
carte-de-visite around 1860. One of the very fi rst to
realise the commercial viability of the carte-de-visite
was Maurits Verveer (1817–1903), who established
himself in The Hague in 1857. From 1861 he launched
a rather large series of portraits of “Tijdgenooten in
Kunsten en Wetenschappen” (contemporaries in the arts
and sciences). Amongst them were writers, painters,
university professors, and clergymen. A contempo-
rary comment on Verveer’s portraits suggests that—in
general—clergymen and low-necked danseuses sold
best. The habit and fashion to exchange carte-de-visite
portraits is demonstrated by the diary of the Danish
writer Hans Christian Andersen, who, during a stay in
The Netherlands in 1866, gave away many copies of his
portrait and received a similar number in return from
people he met. As in other countries, it was a hobby
to collect such portraits and to put them in an album
specially designed for that purpose. Very often, such an
album would begin with royal persons, followed fi rst by
other famous people and then by acquaintances of the
one who compiled the album.
Professional photographers depended almost com-
pletely on the making and selling of portraits, both of
well-known persons and of individuals who wanted a
(half) dozen of their portraits to circulate among their
friends and relatives. All other subjects—topographical
views, art reproductions, the construction or demolition
of buildings—were comparatively marginal. Pieter
Oosterhuis (1816–1885) was one of the very few who
closed down his portrait studio—he did so in 1869—to
concentrate upon photographing the construction of
railways, canals, breakwaters, bridges, sluices and
other public works. In the second half of the 1850s he
had already started making a great many stereoscopic
views in Amsterdam and other towns. The latter survive
in rather large quantities, so they must have sold well.
Commissions for photographs of public works probably
paid handsomely, otherwise Oosterhuis would probably
not have taken the decision to close down his studio.
He seems to have been the only photographer whose
commissions were located throughout the country,
whereas in most cases a commission was awarded to a
local photographer.
Most of his colleagues, however, stuck to portrai-
ture. In Amsterdam their number rose from six in 1851
to about sixty by 1899. The Hague and Rotterdam
followed: in these cities about fi fty and about fourty
photographers respectively were active in 1899. Judg-
ing by the occupational censuses that were held three
times in the 19th century, most studios, especially in
the smaller towns, were rather small: in 1889 and 1899
the average photographer had only one assistant. The
actual number of people working in a photographic
studio may have been a little higher, as it is likely that
in many cases the photographer’s wife and/or children
worked there, too, without being counted in the census.
Contrary to what is regularly asserted in the literature of
Dutch photography, the carte-de-visite was not within
everyone’s reach: many people did not earn enough to
be able to afford the relative luxury of having them-
selves photographed or collecting pictures of famous
people. A set of twelve cartes-de-visite usually cost
about four or fi ve Dutch guilders in 1865—c. 30 to 35
Euro in today’s money. That was simply too much for
the lower classes.
In the fi rst two decades, photographers often took
on other jobs, in order to earn a living. Like in any pro-
fession, some became quite prosperous, while others
never escaped poverty. Research into assessment-lists
that have survived suggests that since the 1860s most
photographers managed to be independant from other
jobs and earned a decent living. A popular assumption
is that many photographers originally were second-rate
painters who changed their profession to earn more
money. In fact, only approximately one-third of the
professional photographers had a background in the
arts (painting and engraving, especially), while a similar
number came from commerce and handicraft. Those
who had started as artists did not always completely give
up their original profession, but sometimes practised the
two at the same time. (It is the same with printing fi rms,
which continued to produce engraving or lithography,
but took up photographic printing as an extension of
their activities.) Although some photographers reached
prosperity, only some of them formed part of the cultural
or social elite. Societies or clubs counted few photog-
raphers among their members, with the exception of
artists’ societies, of which many photographers were still
members even if they did give up their former artistic
occupation. Photographers are seldom mentioned in
letters, autobiographies and other material that might
otherwise have given some information on what kind
of people they were and how they were looked upon.
The social standing of photography was not very high,
and, assuming that in the 19th century most people still
married within their own class, the professions of their
fathers-in-law may serve as an indication as to which
kind of occupations photography was mostly associated
with. Most brides were the daughters of working men,
craftsmen, and tradesmen; they nearly all had a lower
or middle class background. Apparently these were the
classes in which photographers belonged.
Throughout the 19th century there was no other way
to learn photography than to be trained by an accom-
plished photographer. Until 1942 photography was a
profession that could be practised without a license, i.e.
the obligation of having fi nished some offi cial educa-
tion. Although there were occupations easier to enter