PDA

View Full Version : Mystery of William Henry Fox Talbot photogram



cyrus
17-Apr-2008, 13:17
An Image Is a Mystery for Photo Detectives (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/arts/design/17phot.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=talbot&st=nyt&oref=slogin)

By RANDY KENNEDY
NEW YORK TIMES April 17, 2008
The phone call was routine, the kind often made before big auctions. Sotheby’s was preparing to sell a striking rust-brown image of a leaf on paper, long thought to have been made by William Henry Fox Talbot, one of the inventors of photography. So the auction house contacted a Baltimore historian considered to be the world’s leading Talbot expert and asked if he could grace the sale’s catalog with any interesting scholarly details about the print — known as a photogenic drawing, a crude precursor to the photograph.

“I got back to them and said, ‘Well, the first thing I would say is that this was not made by Talbot,’ ” the historian, Larry J. Schaaf, recalled in a recent interview...

Charles Hohenstein
17-Apr-2008, 13:34
Fascinating!

cyrus
17-Apr-2008, 13:39
I admit it.
It was me.

Darryl Baird
18-Apr-2008, 02:10
A lot of this drama played out on the Photo-History list with Shaaf, Michael Gray (former Talbot Museum director), Michael Ware, William Becker, and a host of other heavyweights discussing and debating the likely origins of the leaf image. Tons of interesting stuff about Wedgewood and his (important) circle of friends.

Becker spotted a mark on the lower edge which may indicate a date: http://tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/PhotoHistory/photos/view/49c4?b=1

I hope this turns out to be one of the earliest images, but it ain't for certain yet.

paulr
18-Apr-2008, 06:56
I'll be interested to hear what they learn. I didn't realize anyone figured out a way to fix a photographic image before Niepce in 1826.

Pete Roody
18-Apr-2008, 07:17
I'll be interested to hear what they learn. I didn't realize anyone figured out a way to fix a photographic image before Niepce in 1826.

When I went to Sotheby's for the auction preview, they had a picture of the print hanging with a note saying the image was sensitive to light, so it probably wasn't fixed.