194
help to botanists...especially useful for naturalists since
one can copy the most diffi cult things with a great deal
of ease...I have practiced this art since the year 1834.”
Vegetation made for a perfect subject for typically long
photographic exposures: they were inexpensive and they
did not move. Prior to photography, woodcuts were the
primary method for plant illustrations, yet most were
not drawn from life and thus inaccurate.
At fi rst one would think black and white photography
less than ideal for reproducing such a vibrant entity as
fl owers. Although the autochrome process was not per-
fected until 1907, early experiments often used botanical
specimens for their rich variety of hues. André Louis
Ducos Du Hauron utilized leaves, stems, and fl owers in
an early attempt at a three color carbon assembly print.
Later developments in light sensitivity allowed fi lm,
normally overly sensitive to blue, to more accurately
reproduce more natural tones.
Botanical photographers drew from many sources—
both scientifi c and aesthetic. Dutch painters had long
turned to the exact copying of still-lifes. In French,
still-life was literally “dead nature.” Other prototypes for
the botanical photographer included tromp-l’oeil paint-
ings in the manner of William Michael Harnett and the
Peale family. Meant to be hung in dining rooms, these
pieces, like the Dutch “breakfast piece,” were intended
to speak of the bounty of nature as well as their host.
The Victorians saw in fl owers a symbolic vocabulary.
Dubbed the “language of fl owers,” many ladies used
small bouquets called “tussie mussies” to express their
emotions. Like these varied precedents, 19th century
botanical photograph also had a touch of “vanitas,” or
the brevity of life and, “memento mori,” or a reminder
of death. The photograph preserved forever short-lived
blossoms. For this reason, documenting extravagant
fl oral casket sprays was also common.
Relatively little is known about the small cadre of
botanical photographers even at the height of their
activity (1860–1880s). Pietro Guidi’s stark albumen
prints evoke subsequent examinations in their stark in-
sistence on form. Richard Tepe’s images share affi nities
with shadowy pictorialist studies. Other lesser names
such as Eugène Colliau, Eugène Chauvigné, and Tony
Boussenit, commingle with other anonymous artists
working in the same vein. Some travel photography
outfi ts based in exotic locations, such as Scowen and
Co., specialized in recording rare specimens for muse-
ums. Numerous others, including British was photog-
rapher Roger Fenton, did at one time produce still-lifes
as brief ventures into the realm, but few devoted their
entire careers to the botanical. Four photographers,
however, Anna Atkins (1799–1871), Adolphe Braun
(1812–1877), Charles Aubry (1811–1877), and Karl
Blossfeldt (1865–1932) seem to have come to defi ne
the genre.
Starting in 1843 and for the next ten years, Atkins
collected and documented all the known species of
algae in the British Isles with the help of her father,
John Children, and her friend, Anne Dixon. Using the
camera-less contact printing method of the cyanotype
(also known as the blueprint), she made thousands of
plates that were later bound into albums. The blueprint
process not only recorded an exact replica to scale, but
the intense color suited the subject well. The French
textile designer Braun, also worked on a large project,
yet for different reasons. Intending them as aids for the
decorative arts, Braun completed a six-volume work
of 300 photographic studies of fl owers. His efforts met
BOTANICAL PHOTOGRAPHY
von Gerlach & Schenk. Plum
Blossoms.
The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los
Angeles © The J. Paul Getty Museum.
