1256
for demonstration to the Academy of Sciences in 1840.
His philosophy was summarised: “... we shall let Nature
reproduce herself ... with all her details and infi nite
nuances.” The poor response of his plate to daylight,
however, prompted him to develop alternative lighting
forms, and he successfully adapted the oxy-hydrogen
torch as a light source for his microscope. By 1845,
Donné and Léon Foucault had published an illustrated
atlas of histological photomicrographs intended for
teaching—“it is so to speak the object itself which
will be placed before the eyes and in the hands of the
audience.”
There was no formalised programme for developing
photography as a tool of the sciences. Whilst others
accepted photography as an art form, the scientifi c
practitioners welcomed photography as an aid to their
work, and used it in different ways. Some realised that
emulsion sensitivity extended beyond the boundaries
of human vision and that it was possible, for example,
to probe the night sky and secure ocular proof of their
observations. At times, it was possible to dispense with
lenses and optics, but instead, to build equipment de-
signed to “write” direct to sensitive plates. At an early
stage, analyses of solar and other spectra benefi ted by
having images for comparison with other versions.
Practitioners in medicine, natural history and crime
recognised the potential for creating standardised records,
records that provided an image, which was adequate to
serve as the original. Botanists were prompt to recognise
the advantages over drawing, and when Anna Atkins
made cyanotypes in 1843, she overcame diffi culties “in
the interest of the botanical value.” Robert Hunt declared,
“Specimens may be copied with a fi delity which cannot
by any other means be obtained.” At Surrey County Asy-
lum Hugh W Diamond believed photographic evidence of
his suffering patients would contribute to improvements
in treatment. Staff at London Zoological Gardens under-
took to compile a catalogue of “type specimens” from
the animals in their collection and in 1871, unwittingly
created a photograph of the last surviving quagga. Police
services recognised the merits of “the rogues gallery”
when a police sergeant from Bristol was able to identify
“a hardened offender” in Birmingham.
Other disciplines of a scientifi c nature also annexed
photographic techniques for recording aspects of their
pioneering work. Liberated from free-hand drawing,
archaeologists utilised photographic prints in lectures,
in exhibitions and in publications. Space saving was
welcomed by travellers. Prior to the use of photography,
expeditions had relied on casting plaster images of the
faces of native tribes. Photographic prints would serve
ethnology just as well, stated The Photographic News.
On any Arctic voyage, space was at a premium, but the
merits of securing permanent records of the explorations
were seldom overlooked, in spite of the hardships to be
endured by the photographic offi cer, who was obligated
to work in diffi cult conditions.
In astronomy, photographic recording became such
an asset, that many of the astronomers made important
contributions to photographic science. Janssen advised
on good laboratory practice for photographing with the
telescope, and valued photography—“[it] gives us today
images of the sun in such perfection that they permit us
to employ them in work of the greatest precision.” For
twenty years, he had cherished a belief that “a photo-
graph ... offers for purposes of measurement and exami-
nation such previous details that they surpass in value
the observations of the most skilful astronomer.”
At the observatory in Bonn in 1894, the fi rst as-
sistant, Dr. Julius Scheiner, devised a sensitometer for
establishing reliable plate speeds for his photographic
exposures, which subsequently evolved as the Scheiner
speed system. Regular adjustments to equipment and
techniques sometimes revealed the need for improve-
ments to sensitised materials. For example, in 1884,
Josef Marie Eder proposed a formula for orthochromatic
plates, colour-corrected to improve rendition of yellow-
greens. Early in the twentieth century, further improve-
ments delivered the panchromatic emulsion.
The single astronomical record was valuable, but
photography was a tool that could be applied to a
constructive purpose. In 1882, some observers agreed
to document stellar positions, but by 1891, eighteen
worldwide observatories were working in co-opera-
tion to assemble a comprehensive dossier of the night
sky. Such was the authority of the assemblage that the
undertaking was not repeated until 1949. Similarly, in
medicine, the compilation of an “atlas” of conditions
often provided confi dence to diagnostic procedures.
The applications of photography multiplied for two
reasons. It provided results in a permanent form, and
some techniques could be adapted to reveal data that
were otherwise undetectable. Talbot’s use of the solar
microscope in 1839 had been successful, but within
three years, he was demonstrating polarising microsco-
py, and showing its potential for crystallographic studies.
In combining his enthusiasm for pictorial photography
with his studies in crystallography (1853), Sir William
Crookes admitted his motive had been to “retain in a
more tangible form the well-known beautiful fi gures
observed...” (That is, the distinctive ring structures that
permitted identifi cation of crystals.) However, Crookes’
results provided a welcome surprise; his photographic
plate revealed more than four times what he had expect-
ed from his visual observations, which, in turn, initiated
further enquiries within the scientifi c community, and
the evolution of standardised techniques.
The possibility of recording beyond the limits of
the human eye was considered possible. Sir John Her-
schel had succeeded in identifying infrared radiation