The Recent Solar Eclipse.—New Photographic Venture at the Antipodes.—Photography in the Bush.
The most interesting event, in a photographic point of view, which I have to report is the departure of the scientific expedition to observe the total eclipse of the sun on the 12th of this month. The place selected for the observations is Cape Sidmouth, some three hundred miles south of Cape York, in Northern Australia.
The expedition has been organised by the Royal Society of Victoria, and the expense is met by private subscriptions, largely aided by grants from the several Colonial Governments. The Queensland Government steamer was also placed at the disposal of the party free of charge.
The various instruments necessary for the observations were sent from England by the Royal Society; but, owing to my absence from Sydney at the time the expedition sailed, I am unable to give any details of the arrangements for taking photographs of the eclipse. I hope, however, soon to be able to give a full description of the results.
The party consists of more than thirty gentlemen, the different branches of science being well represented; for botanists and geologists are taking advantage of the trip to make investigations in their own departments. For the astronomical observations Victoria sends her Government Astronomer, Mr. Ellery, at the head of a large staff of observers, and a photographer, Mr. Walters; while New South Wales sends Mr. Russell, the present, and the Rev. W. Scott, the late, Government Astronomer, and Mr. Merlin, of the “American and Australasian Photographic Company.” From this double staff we may expect a large number of photographs and other valuable results.
The steamer left Sydney on the 27th of November, and will return by Christmas, before which time no news will reach us of the doings of the party. We shall, therefore, look forward to their return with much interest.
Professional photographers here do not now devote their attention so exclusively to portraiture as formerly. The “American and Australasian Photographic Company” has announced its intention of photographing every house in the Australasian colonies! I suppose it finds it a profitable speculation, as it has already photographed a considerable number of towns, house by house. The day for each place is previously advertised, so that the inhabitants may put themselves and their dwellings in holiday attire. The photographs are to some extent used as advertisements.
I lately came across a photographer in the far interior, some 500 or 600 miles from Sydney. He had already travelled a still greater distance from Adelaide, in South Australia, from whence he had started on his tour. He was plying his vocation at the various sheep and cattle stations, and was apparently well patronised. I saw several of his groups of aboriginals, which were very good. The black fellows were highly delighted with their portraits, and were very anxious that copies should be sent to their friends in other districts.
Sydney, December 1, 1871. E. B. Docker, M.A.
P.S.—The unfortunate wreck of the mail steamer has deprived us of the journals for this month.—E. B. D.
CARBOLIC ACID.
To the Editors.
Gentlemen,—My attention has been called to an article in your issue of the 19th January, under the head “Correspondence,” by Mr. Thomas Sutton, containing several statements with reference to carbolic acid which it would be wrong to allow to remain uncontradicted.
First: he says carbolic acid is by no means a good antiseptic, and is very poisonous, and then refers to persons being lately poisoned by its fumes at Wolverhampton.
As to its poisonous nature: It is, of course, a poison if taken internally in quantity, but is not a virulent one taken in any reasonable or probable quantity. It is, perhaps, not out of place to say that if it should be taken internally in a concentrated form, by misadventure, large doses of castor and sweet oil immediately administered will materially counteract the poisonous effect of the acid. The fumes of the acid are perfectly harmless and may be breathed with impunity.
Mr. Sutton is labouring under a false impression with regard to the case to which he alludes at Wolverhampton, of which the following is the correct account:—Two dogs (not human beings) were supposed to have died from inhaling the fumes of carbolic acid emanating from a disinfecting powder sprinkled over the floor of a workshop in Wolverhampton, and, the following is an extract from the report of the chemist who examined one of the dogs:—“The disinfecting powder was not a carbolic acid powder, but an imitation; for it contained nothing but lime impregnated with tar, and was entirely innocent of any harm to the animals. Strychnine, however, was discovered in considerable quantity in most parts of the viscera and in the blood. I calculated that at least one grain and a-quarter of this poisonous alkaloid had been administered to the animal by some evil-disposed person or persons unknown.” Thus much for the poisoning of human beings lately at Wolverhampton by the fumes of carbolic acid.[[4]]
[4]. The cattle show at the Agricultural Hall, Islington, has for the two last years been successfully disinfected and kept sweet with carbolic acid.
Had Mr. Sutton ever seen carbolic acid fumigation, or read about carbolic acid, he would not have made an assertion so utterly groundless. The writer has himself many times been for two or three days together in a room containing a large excess of carbolic acid fumes without experiencing any injurious effects.
With regard to the action of carbolic acid on the teeth, if Mr. Sutton will refer to an article in the British Journal of Dental Science for March, 1871, he will find “it is a powerful antiseptic, and invaluable for the arrest of any decay or decomposition of the teeth.”
Mr. Sutton has quoted from a long letter of Dr. Dougall’s to the Lancet, and I cannot do better than refer him to Dr. Sansom’s able reply to it in the Lancet of January 13th. Dr. Sansom says that the white-cloud appearance in albuminous solutions to which carbolic acid has been added is often really no albuminous precipitate at all, but is caused by refractile globules of carbolic acid in a fine state of sub-division; also, that it has been shown that albuminous solutions are antisepted when carbolic acid exists in them in too feeble a proportion to cause any precipitate whatever. If carbolic acid acted as an antiseptic by coagulating albumen, agents which had a greater coagulating power would, a fortiori, be more powerful antiseptics, which has abundantly been proved not to be the case, and therefore the antiseptic properties of carbolic acid do not result solely from its power of coagulating albumen.
With respect to the assertion that the amount of carbolic acid vapour which could be tolerated in the air of a hospital ward would be entirely inadequate to act as a disinfectant, Dr. Sansom says his experiments have shown him that carbolised atmospheres are efficient in preventing putrefaction and the growth of mouldiness, and more so than atmospheres impregnated with chloride of lime or sulphurous acid.
Dr. Sansom objects to the experiments recorded by Dr. Dougall, since tar oil (a crude product weak in carbolic acid, and possessing little or no volatile disinfectant constituent), and McDougall’s powder (a mixture of sulphites of lime and magnesia with tar oil) were used.
As to carbolic acid not being a good antiseptic, the following reports, I think, fully prove the contrary:—
The late Dr. W. Allen Miller, F.R.S., preserved urine and fresh blood for three months by the simple addition of five per cent. of Calvert’s carbolic disinfecting powder—a product containing fifteen per cent. of carbolic acid in a free state.
Mr. Wm. Crookes, F.R.S., says that he took some albumen from fresh eggs and mixed it with an equal bulk of water. By itself it became bad after nine days, and at the end of three weeks it smelt very strongly. He added to four bottles of the fluid respectively 1, 2½, 5, and 10 per cent. of carbolic acid powder (equivalent to 3/20, ⅜, ¾, and 1½ per cent. of free carbolic acid). All kept good at ordinary temperatures for forty days. Blood with 1/15 per cent. of carbolic acid remained good for a month. Solutions of size, glue, and gum mixed with 1/15 per cent. of carbolic acid have remained for two months without becoming sour. Fresh yeast was washed with water containing one-tenth per cent. Its power of inducing fermentation was entirely destroyed.
Dr. F. Crace Calvert, F.R.S., in his paper on comparative disinfectants, gives the following results with antiseptics upon solutions of albumen:—
| Antiseptic employed. | Percentage of antiseptic used. | Time in which acquired an offensive odour. Temperature 70° to 80° F. |
| Chloride of lime | 5 | 16 days. |
| Tar oil | 2 | 11 days. |
| Carbolic acid | 2 | remained sound six months |
| None | — | 5 days. |
The writer preserved meat for ninety days, during a hot summer, by placing twelve ounces of fresh meat in a bottle containing one pound of water and five grains of carbolic acid. The mouth of the bottle was left open, and no offensive smell was emitted till the ninety-third day. The meat was, of course, unfit for food, and was merely experimented with to test the antiseptic power of carbolic acid.
The following is an extract from a report in Compte Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences of March 6th, 1871, by Messrs. Nelaton, Langier, and Payen, on experiments made at the Paris Morgue by M. Devergie:—
“During the heat of summer, when putrefying corpses in the Morgue continually emit a quantity of noxious gases that cannot be removed by ventilation or destroyed by chlorine or bleaching powder, we decided to prevent their production by trying to destroy the vitality of the germs of putrefaction, and thus prevent decomposition itself. We effected this by dissolving one litre of carbolic acid in 1,900 litres of water and irrigating the bodies with the solution thus made. Putrefaction was completely stopped, and disinfection was even obtained after reducing the quantity of acid by one-half. M. Devergie points out that water containing one four-thousandth part of carbolic acid proved sufficient during the intense heat of last summer to disinfect the deadhouse, without the aid of any shaft, when six or seven dead bodies were lying there. * * * * * * * * * * * Carbolic acid seems well adapted for the disinfection of rooms which have been occupied by persons suffering from infectious diseases; therefore, we recommend its use, after being dissolved in thirty times its weight of water, by sprinkling it on the floors, pavements, and staircases during the stay of patients in rooms and for a few days after their departure.”
According to Dr. Sansom carbolic acid is readily taken up by air, so that 159.44 cubic inches of air, at 60° Fah., contain one grain of carbolic acid. Air thus carbolised (currents excluded) entirely annuls putrefaction and fungoid manifestation on the surface of putrescible fluids, and such carbolised air is more permanently efficacious than air charged with the fumes of chloride of lime or sulphurous acid, and it may be breathed with impunity by mammifers.
These few observations will, I think, satisfy your readers that Mr. Sutton’s remarks are erroneous and without foundation. I shall be glad to learn that photographers have tried carbolic acid in the preservative solution for dry plates, and would recommend them to make a solution of carbolic acid, one part to one thousand parts of water, and then add their albumen to this solution to the strength they require it. Above all things it is essential that the carbolic acid be of good quality for photographic purposes; and I would recommend them to use an acid such as Calvert’s No. 1 (gilt label) carbolic acid.—I am, yours, &c.,
Reginald Le Neve Foster.
Bradford, near Manchester, January 27, 1872.
THE TEST FOR ALBUMEN.
To the Editors.
Gentlemen,—It is over two years since I devised the carbolic mixture for detecting traces of albumen. At the time I did not think it of sufficient photographic interest to occupy your space in detailing experiments on the subject; but, as you do not remember the author’s name, I beg to remind you that I am the author. It was published, I believe, as a note by a friend of mine—an eminent chemist and toxicologist—in a medical work.
On one occasion we were talking over the means of detecting albumen, and having experimented with phenol or “carbolic acid” for about eight years, many times in connection with albumen, I knew its properties well, and, on my attention being directed to a test for albumen, I commenced experiments with a mixture of phenol and acetic acid, then with the addition of alcohol, and finally with phenol and alcohol, equal parts by weight. My friend and self then went through a comparative set of experiments side by side—my friend taking his old nitric acid test and I my new phenol mixture—the result being that my test indicated albumen both in plain water and urine, diluted one in ten after the nitric acid failed to indicate any further.—I am, yours, &c.,
F. W. Hart.
8, Kingsland Green, January 29, 1872.
SUGGESTION FOR A PHOTOGRAPHIC EXHIBITION.
To the Editors.
Gentlemen,—The continued complaints which one heard from people after the close of our photographic exhibition, that they had not seen it, did not know when it opened or when it had closed, and the strong interest they felt in it, induce me to believe that a comprehensive exhibition of photography in all its shapes—the new processes, the landscape and humanity of different countries, &c., &c.—might be made of very great interest, and to pay its way as well.
In the spring, and even now, London is filled with collections of paintings, which make photographs look tame. In the International Exhibition they are equally put out; and if they are to be seen and judged properly they must be in an exhibition by themselves. No intelligent collector hangs works in colour with photographs or engravings; and exhibition goers, passing from a gallery of pictures, will not stop to look at photographs. If, therefore, we could, under the direction of the photographic societies, make in October a collection of cosmopolitan photography, and connect with it a display and comparison of lenses of all makers, we should enable the art to claim its just consideration.
Colonel Stuart Wortley’s suggestion as to contributions of negatives would give a photographic exhibition, if adopted, a special technical interest; and we might in this include examples of negatives by the dry processes.
The question of retouching might be decided without difference of opinion by having two classes of works—one touched on the negative, and the other in which no touching other than stopping out pinholes should be permitted. If awards are made—and in this I recall Colonel Wortley’s mention of the medal of the Photographic Society—no award should be made for a touched negative unless a print from it before touching should be submitted to the judges at the same time, but not necessarily for exhibition.
It is clear that when we talk of excellence in photography we mean something other than what a draughtsman may do in the way of supplementing photography. Works which do not enter for an award may omit mention of the distinction I have indicated.
I believe that such an exhibition would excite a very general interest, and do more to improve the knowledge of photographers on practical details than years of casual acquaintance of what other men do.
I am, to a certain extent, an outsider, and cannot do more than suggest; but I hope that some of the influential masters of the camera will take up the question.—I am, yours, &c.,
W. J. Stillman.
100, Clarendon-road, Notting-hill, January 29, 1872.
NATURAL COLOURS IN PHOTOGRAPHY.
To the Editors.
Gentlemen,—Last night, as “I lay a-thinking,” the subject of obtaining photographic colour suddenly occurred to me, and the question arose as to whether the differences in the colours of the light reflected from the surfaces of different-coloured flowers (as red, blue, and yellow) was due to differences in the constitution of their juices, or of the solid matter of which they are formed. If on examination it proved to be of the juices, a second question arose as to whether it would not be possible to take advantage of this in the preparation of plates, as suggested by me in an article which you inserted in The British Journal of Photography for October 27, 1865 (No. 286, vol. xii.). Then, supposing that by this or any other means the three monochromic plates were obtainable, would coloured glasses placed in front of the lens help to stop off the colours not to be represented on the plate? Thus, with a plate sensitive to blue only, the interposition of a blue glass would prevent the transmission of the yellow and red rays, a red glass those of the blue and yellow rays, and a yellow glass that of the blue and red rays to the plates sensitive to the blue, red, and yellow rays respectively.
I have evidence that so early as 1842 the late Sir John Herschel obtained variously-coloured photographs on paper, as he gave me several, and I have still one a good blue, one a fair red, and two purple. The letter accompanying them describes the two latter as produced by the use of the juice of the red poppy; but many of them have faded away entirely. My impression is that others of them were from vegetable juices, but I am not sure that this was the case. There can be no doubt, however, that his published papers will give an account of the numerous experiments he made on this subject.
These suggestions may, or may not, be of value in forwarding the realisation of the great desideratum of photographic colour; but I cannot be far wrong in mentioning them as they occur to me, especially as my former communication, in 1865, was thought to be worth consideration by experimentalists.
That the great end will be attained before a very long period has elapsed, and the prediction of M. Niepce be verified, that “one day a photographic picture will be produced such as one sees in a looking-glass,” is the hope and wish of—Yours, &c.,
Henry Collen.
Milford, Godalming, January 29, 1872.
THE PHOTOGRAPHIC DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION.
To the Editors.
Gentlemen,—The notice which the direction of the International Exhibition has sent to your Journal is sufficiently unsatisfactory to be discussed a little before the photographic profession commits itself to the mercies of that institution for another such display as we had last year.
It seems to some of us that the least the management could do, if the leading photographers are expected to contribute, would be to put some one on the photographic committee whom they are accustomed to regard as identified in a high degree with the interests of the art, or whose interest in it they feel assured of. We should have imagined that one of the presidents of the photographic societies, or at least one of those eminent amateurs who have really contributed to the advancement of photographic science, and shown a disinterested devotion to it in its present condition, would have had the selection, or, at least, a voice in the selection, of the pictures to be exhibited.
As it is, we have Dr. Diamond, who was, in years gone by, interested in photography, and who is understood to be in the present combination a passive member; Mr. Thompson, of whom most of us know nothing; and Col. Stuart Wortley, whom some of the profession do not accept as an authority, and in whose position, as having a commercial interest in photography in no way identified with that of the profession at large, they find excellent reasons why he should not be put forward as the judge and spokesman of it. If a professional photographer is to be assigned this position, Col. Wortley’s place is not sufficiently high to justify his selection. If an outsider must be selected, he is disqualified, as being commercially interested on the one hand and a disputed authority on the other, or one at least to whom few good professionals will defer.—I am, yours, &c.,
Hypo.
London, January, 29, 1872.
[Endorsing all that is said about the two jurors first mentioned, we ask our correspondent if he can, after due consideration, indicate any photographer, professional or amateur, in whom a greater degree of confidence would be placed than in Col. Wortley?—Eds.]
COMBLIKE MARKINGS ON THE NEGATIVE.
To the Editors.
Gentlemen,—Perhaps the following may explain the defect “J. H. M.” speaks of:—During the hot weather last summer, while photographing an engine in the open air, every plate showed comblike marks at one side of the plate. After two days’ trial, and filtering the bath, changing the collodion, &c., it struck me that the cause might be the partial drying of the film. A piece of wet blotting-paper at the back of each plate at once remedied the defect, and all came right. I now always place wet paper at the back under similar circumstances.—I am, yours, &c.,
Geo. Spencer.
77, Cannon-street, E.C., January 26, 1872.
AMMONIA FUMING.
To the Editors.
Gentlemen,—In your useful little Almanac for the present year there is an article by Mr. A. L. Henderson, enthusiastically written, in favour of fuming.
Now, in accordance with his recommendation, I have tried the said fuming; but my first essay has certainly not impressed me very strongly as regards its favourable results—whether from my own defective manipulation or not I cannot say.
I found that the paper—especially some of Marion’s thick Saxe—assumed a most disagreeable yellow colour after fuming, and it maintained that colour through all subsequent operations—as a matter of course, spoiling the prints. Another sample of (Rive) paper procured from another dealer was not quite so faulty in this respect; still, in neither case was the brilliancy of the prints enhanced—rather deteriorated, I thought—although Mr. Henderson maintains so stoutly the advantages of fuming in this respect. Again: instead of the toning being quicker and more regular in action, as Mr. Henderson states, I found it much the reverse.
I think that I must be wrong somewhere in my working, and I wish to ask your opinion or Mr. Henderson’s on the best mode of proceeding—assuming it to be really worth while to adopt fuming. I used an oblong box about two feet in length by one foot in breadth, placing at the bottom a narrow-necked bottle containing about two ounces of liquor ammonia, fuming two quarter-sheets of paper for about ten minutes, with the result above stated.
Have I omitted any necessary addition? or have I proceeded wrongly?—I am, yours, &c.,
Ammonia Fuming.
Leeds, January 29, 1872.
A CORRECTION.
To the Editors.
Gentlemen,—In my communication to the Journal last week, at page 37, under heading Using the Substratum, there is an omission which would prevent the successful coating of the plates.
The strength of the albumen there given is that of the stock solution, to use which add two ounces of distilled water to every half-drachm required, half-a-drachm thus diluted being amply sufficient to coat fifty plates.—I am, yours, &c.,
Aleck. A. Inglis.
Edinburgh, January 30, 1872.