Running Book Review: D’Agostini/Rose - 19th Century Great Britain & Ireland Lenses.

[Steven Tribe]

This is the 3rd book which Corrado D’Agostini has been associated with. The first two covered France and Germany, respectively.

The book can be obtained from Corrado. There may be alternative solutions for those outside of the EU to escape import VAT.

There is a new publisher/printer, but the general appearance/size is the same as the previous books.

Following the trend in the second book - German lenses - there is a further reduction in the companies given Chapter status.

There is a major editing issue as the listing of contents Corresponds to pages, but the chapter numbering is either absent or incorrect. The text Line editing programme has produced some ugly spaces in an otherwise attractive layout.

Only Ross, Dallmeyer, Grubb (Ireland), T,T &H and Horne, Thornthwaite & Wood are given this chapter status.

A quick perusal of the more than 350 pages confirm that the information/illustrations of the Ross and Dallmeyer “stories” are the most wide ranging and complete available. There is much information here, along with illustrative material that I have not seen before. Grubb is interesting too, but the temptation to include a lot of Grubbs’ work with major telescopes should have been resisted.

As in previous books, the scientific contributions to early photographic experiments and invention make up the first four sections. Herschel, Fox Talbot and many others are included, along with practitioners like Henry Colleen and Claudet. At last, someone has researched and included the glass available for these early lens makers. Are these sections the work of Mr. Rose?

I think this volume is best described as an excellent account of the contributions made by Ross, Dallmeyer and TTH towards photographic lenses - along with the work of real practitioners in the 19th century. This appears extremely well done - also as regards author’s ability to communicate in an engaging manner.

I am less impressed by the inclusion of Grubb and Horne, Thornthwaite and (Wood). This later firm was one of many UK/London photographic outlets either using other people’s designs or even other firm’s production. I personally find it very useful as I have (had) quite a few of their lenses. To be be honest, Grubb’s contribution to Photography was finished with his early Aplanatic/Double Aplanatic - and other lenses mirrored what other manufacturers were selling.

Enough for now!
I’ll add comments as I work through the detailed sections - and I hope others will join in a running review,

There is a rapid “thumb through” here!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q2QoSL-92E

[Steven Tribe]

After further Reading…..!

The first section covers both pre- 1839 approaches and the explosive developments after that time. Both the UK and France are included in spite of the title. It is really a much more detailed account than the one which starts of the original “French Lenses” book. Very engaging, with lots of -new to me - facts. Uses Fox Talbot/Calotype/Scott Archer/Collodion to cover the early history of Photography.
The result is a very convincing, entertaining and original account.

The Ross and Dallmeyer sections are wonderful chronologically based accounts including:-

- Personal histories.
- Advertising and Catalogues.
- Cross sections of lens designs.
- All lens series.
- Serial numbers and Chronologies.

The Rofs/Ross sections stops at the turn of the Century, whilst Dallmeyer has a few pages on the 20th Century in order to include the super fast Cinematograph lenses. Both accounts have included many non-photographic sections (telescope, microscopes etc) which although completely uninteresting to me, personally, probably helped the finances of these two companies during a very tough time economic environment.


The number of photographs of lens is quite unique and very clean examples have been discovered. These are far nicer than the more soiled lens we own!
As far as I can see, there is no section on Patent protection which must have been very important for Dallmeyer. - especially as regards RR and the revised Petzval design. It would have been interesting to know when the numerous French copies became legal! Unfortunately, there is no index to check. The only page I take issue with is page 264, which gives a very incomplete snapshot of Dallmeyer’s relation with other makers.

Next time, Grubb and Horne & Thornthwaite sections.

[Willeica]

I agree generally with Steven's review, apart from his dismissal of Grubb's contribution, of course. I may see everything through 'Irish eyes', but I would not have bought the book without Grubb's output being in it. One of my lenses, Grubb No 3631, is in the book, but this photo must have come from an auction catalogue as I did not supply it. Likewise, I did not supply, nor was I asked for permission to use, a photograph in the book which I took of the Great Telescope at Birr which was built by the Earl of Rosse, with the assistance of Thomas Grubb. My name appears several times in the Grubb section of the book, mainly in the context of my article on Grubb and Parsons on Macfilos and my article on the British Photographic History site on the practice of 'signing' lenses which Thomas Grubb carried out to authenticate his products.

If I had been consulted about this I could have provided more up to date information based on my research and my collecting. While some entries on this forum have been mentioned, if the authors had kept their perusal of the forum up to date they might have noticed the following which I have posted here:

Statement about no lenses between 3631 (which I own) and 5406. I have posted a picture of 5405 (which I own) on this forum

Statement about no lenses in the 4,000 group. I have posted a picture of 4039 (which I own) on this forum. The lens is genuine and has the usual 'signature'

I would not really have expected the authors to have know about 5350 (the highest Grubb serial number seen and which I own) as I only posted the details around the time that the book was published. This is the lens which has an aluminium barrel, a diaphragm and an orange coated optic.

My research into Grubb continues. I have seen a series of 80 waxed calotypes taken by Mr Grubb in the early 1850s and their quality is superb. I have seen an exhibition print made by Mr Grubb in or just before 1857 which has his handwriting on the back making reference to the curvature of railings, presumably in the context of his lens design reducing distortions and aberrations. This was around the time that he submitted his patent application. I have also held Mr Grubb's geometry set in my hands and I have photographed it. I have a lot more besides which is not in the book.

We can argue about Kingslakes's comparison between Grubb's Aplanat and Dallmeyer's Rapid Rectilinear some other day. I believe it was right to include the other optical achievements of the Grubbs, father and son, as they put a context on the photographic lenses. The achievements of the optical work of the Grubb family were immense and had impact all around the world. The Carte Du Ciel project to photograph the skies at night all around the world is certainly worthy of some decent write ups in layman's terms. Howard must have been proud in 1919 when Eddington and others used a coelostat machine which he had made to prove Einstein's Theory of Relativity.

I am fine with the astronomical stuff and I would not have objected even if the authors had shown Mr Grubb's machine for printing bank notes and/or his iron billiard table!

I agree about the bad spacing in the book and this appears to be particularly bad in the Grubb section.

I think that the book overall is good. The Grubb section could have been much better, but I do welcome the translated von Rohr material which I had not seen before.

I do intend to contact the authors/publishers about the above points.

William

[pgk]

I am less impressed by the inclusion of Grubb

Really? As the originator of the Rapid Rectilinear (I have an 1864 Doublet and the concept to twp Aplanatics used in this way is at least reffered to in Grubb's 1857 Patent) surely this (then 'British') developer and maker of photographic lenses deserves a place in any book about early photographic lenses, especially those made in what was then part of the UK? We tend to forget the realities of the time. Grubb was an outlier with (supposedly) lower costs than his London based adversaries. The London firms undoubtedly tried to obtain 'superiority' in various, sometimes less than palatable ways, and not including Grubb in such a book would be to accept the situation as 'fabricated' or 'advertised' rather than in reality.

And the development of photographic lenses is intertwined with telescope development too. We tend to try to isolate facets of history which, IMO, makes them far less interesting. As an example, one problem, referred to in a book on Grubb telescopes, for early lens makers was getting good, bubble free glass, which made it difficult to make larger lenses. Whilst of great importance when making large teescope objectives it also would have impacted large (and expensive) photographic lenses too. There is much crossover of problem solving to be gained from associating the two and since many of the manufacturing probles were similar, telescope makers were ideally situated to make photographic lenses.

Having discussed the Grubb content with William, I can say that a more complete history is needed. Something which William and myself are considering.

[Steven Tribe]

Yes I fully expected two gentlemen to jump into the “Grubb” discussion - which is why I said very little! And they contribute more than I could about the validity of the section and how comprehensive it is.

Both Grubb and Horne & Thornthwaite’s activities are, at present, best covered by researchers in their “other” mainstream activity, telescopes and microscopes, respectively. So, a historical overview and an account of their activities slanted towards photographic lenses is a great advance,

I have had time to look through the Horne & Thornthwaite chapter. It just so happens that I have been the owner of 5 of these lenses. All of which have been in the 1/4 plate size for sliding box cameras. Mostly Petzvals, but also a double achromat (pre- Dallmeyer/Steinheil/Ross) which I can identify due to one period catalogue included in the section! To my surprise, I discovered that H &T admit to selling lenses that “others” have made because they identify certain lenses ( at a premium price!) that they point out are made by them.

[pgk]

Both Grubb and Horne & Thornthwaite’s activities are, at present, best covered by researchers in their “other” mainstream activity, telescopes and microscopes, respectively. So, a historical overview and an account of their activities slanted towards photographic lenses is a great advance.

In the case of Grubb, Ian Glass's excellent book on the Grubbs devote only one page to their photographic lenses! There is a lot of information on their telescopes but both had extensive involvement in photography. I suspect that the 'problem' was that telescopes were far more profitable which is why these were therir mainstay and what both are best known for. Howard also built most of the periscopes used by the British Navy in WW1 and originated the concept of what is now known as the 'red dot rifle sight' . I have also read that it was Howard who asked Dennis Taylor to look at the Telescope Doublet with a view to improving it (they were trying to minimise glass/air surfaces) which indirectly led to Taylor designing the Cooke Triplet - another telescope/photogrpahy lens connection if so.

[Willeica]

I suppose we should stay quiet on the British/Irish thing as things are boiling up again in Northern Ireland, post Brexit. Thomas and Howard Grubb were both Irish and both were born and died in Ireland and I have brought some of my brass lenses to both of their graves here in Dublin. The Patent issued to Thomas was, however, British and a strange thing which I have noted is that Thomas dropped the use of Dublin after he got his patent, which may have been related to some of the resistance he had received from Thomas Sutton and others in Britain around the time his patent was issued. The one exception I have is his Aplanat No 482 (approximately C size) which was engraved or stamped (not in the usual elaborate style) No 482 Grubb Dublin, but then the word Patent was added in a different style, which may have happened after the patent was granted. I also have No 582 which has a similar style of stamping or engraving, but that reads 'Grubb Patent No 582' with no mention of Dublin. Anyone who has read the exchanges between Grubb and Sutton and others in the Photographic Journal will know that Grubb Sr was not a shrinking violet when it came to 'discussions' about lens design. His son Howard brought Dublin back into the picture on the lenses which he made under his own name. He had been knighted by then and on the census returns for 1901 and 1911 he described his occupations as 'Knight' followed by 'Astronomical Instrument Maker'. This takes us back to the old British/Irish thing, of course.

All good clean fun looking back after 160+ years, but some of these issues may have been serious back then. I'm delighted that the Grubbs are covered in detail in the book and that 'Ireland' is on the cover, but the detail and material could have been much better if someone had dropped me an email. Did I mention that I have seen photos taken by Thomas Grubb out of one of the back windows of his home in Leinster Square Rathmines, Dublin in the early 1850s about 5 years before he got his patent?

Grubb's use of helicoid focus in the 1850s is mentioned in the book. My first Grubb lens was No 509 which has a helicoid, a feature not generally seen in camera lenses until much later.

William

[Ivan Rose]

Right to reply, as it were. Ivan Rose (Britain) co-author with Corrado D'Agostini (Italy).
I have a 40 year interest in photographic lenses. My grandfather bought a new Dallmeyer lensed camera in the 1950s, which I still have, so this company has always intrigued me.

For a short period while collecting lenses I was very lucky in finding several examples from the first years of Dallmeyer, pre-archive. So continuing the work of the late Sean MacKenna (Dallmeyer on-line archive) was s logical project. This led to some intriguing revelations as to how J. H. Dallmeyer started his company, but also how well respected he became within his life, despite some turbulent periods within that life. Finding evidence of the mansion Dallmeyer had built for his second wife and children, plus servants, a lodge for the coachman and his family the same for the gardener and his family, was a very pleasant find and gave an idea as to his lifestyle at the end of his life. The Dallmeyer household takes a complete page of the 1881 census. His address was ''Sunny Field House'', Childs' Hill, Hendon. Dallmeyer was a ''Naturalised British Subject'' by this date.

After hearing of Corrado's project for a Great Britain lens book, I offered him my information on early Dallmeyer, plus the Aldis designs for Dallmeyer, along with many examples of Ross and Ross/Zeiss production. The TT&H research took place while writing the book, again revealing an interesting story regarding the introduction of the 'Cooke' range of lenses.

Yes there are problems with the setting of the text, the spacing is not ideal and not as the original 'word' documents. We had to much text for the space.

The choice of makers would always be difficult. It came down to who made, or was interested in making a contribution to the advance of photography in the period 1840 - 1865.
Ross and Dallmeyer were the biggest British companies during the 19th century, both having strong world wide export connections. Horne and Thornthwaite were one of the earliest companies to supply complete outfits during the 1840s, during the 1850s they produced an excellent range of wet-plate camera. Grubb saw photographic lens making as a good addition to his telescope business and had a genuine interest in improving the design of the landscape lens. TT&H made the first steps in Britain to a much higher degree of precision in lens manufacture. Along with their work with H. Dennis Taylor of the Thomas Cooke telescope company of York, pulled British optics into the new 20th century.

The smaller makers, again there was a problem with space. Many of the small makers, and some were very small, imported the glass elements from France, just the barrel was made by them. There were two companies who started in a small way during the 1880s but became more important in the 20th century, Beck and Wray, Aldis started after 1900.

During the 19th century professional photographers, 'Art' photographers and lens makers would attend meetings at places like the Photographic Society of London (later the RPS) to exchange ideas. Studio photographers did not necessarily want a 'perfect' lens, the initial introduction of 'soft focus' into the design of a lens was one example of this exchange of ideas between the lens user and the lens maker, the request came from working photographers. Andrew Ross, Sutton, Grubb, Dallmeyer and later Thomas Ross and Thomas Dallmeyer would all debate lens design at great length (specific details of any new design would not be revealed for obvious reasons).

There has to be a strong tie between telescope and lens making especially in the 19th century, Andrew Ross was a microscope and telescope maker, he wanted Dallmeyer to become the premier British telescope maker after his death (Dallmeyer had other aims). Each discipline learns from the other, the degree of colour correction improved during this period, this increased the definition considerably within each type of lens. There is another factor, photographic lens making was only seen as a 'second string' or subsidiary line for the companies until the early 1860s, production of lenses by modern standards was incredibly small.

[Willeica]

Right to reply, as it were. Ivan Rose (Britain) co-author with Corrado D'Agostini (Italy).
I have a 40 year interest in photographic lenses. My grandfather bought a new Dallmeyer lensed camera in the 1950s, which I still have, so this company has always intrigued me.

For a short period while collecting lenses I was very lucky in finding several examples from the first years of Dallmeyer, pre-archive. So continuing the work of the late Sean MacKenna (Dallmeyer on-line archive) was s logical project. This led to some intriguing revelations as to how J. H. Dallmeyer started his company, but also how well respected he became within his life, despite some turbulent periods within that life. Finding evidence of the mansion Dallmeyer had built for his second wife and children, plus servants, a lodge for the coachman and his family the same for the gardener and his family, was a very pleasant find and gave an idea as to his lifestyle at the end of his life. The Dallmeyer household takes a complete page of the 1881 census. His address was ''Sunny Field House'', Childs' Hill, Hendon. Dallmeyer was a ''Naturalised British Subject'' by this date.

After hearing of Corrado's project for a Great Britain lens book, I offered him my information on early Dallmeyer, plus the Aldis designs for Dallmeyer, along with many examples of Ross and Ross/Zeiss production. The TT&H research took place while writing the book, again revealing an interesting story regarding the introduction of the 'Cooke' range of lenses.

Yes there are problems with the setting of the text, the spacing is not ideal and not as the original 'word' documents. We had to much text for the space.

The choice of makers would always be difficult. It came down to who made, or was interested in making a contribution to the advance of photography in the period 1840 - 1865.
Ross and Dallmeyer were the biggest British companies during the 19th century, both having strong world wide export connections. Horne and Thornthwaite were one of the earliest companies to supply complete outfits during the 1840s, during the 1850s they produced an excellent range of wet-plate camera. Grubb saw photographic lens making as a good addition to his telescope business and had a genuine interest in improving the design of the landscape lens. TT&H made the first steps in Britain to a much higher degree of precision in lens manufacture. Along with their work with H. Dennis Taylor of the Thomas Cooke telescope company of York, pulled British optics into the new 20th century.

The smaller makers, again there was a problem with space. Many of the small makers, and some were very small, imported the glass elements from France, just the barrel was made by them. There were two companies who started in a small way during the 1880s but became more important in the 20th century, Beck and Wray, Aldis started after 1900.

During the 19th century professional photographers, 'Art' photographers and lens makers would attend meetings at places like the Photographic Society of London (later the RPS) to exchange ideas. Studio photographers did not necessarily want a 'perfect' lens, the initial introduction of 'soft focus' into the design of a lens was one example of this exchange of ideas between the lens user and the lens maker, the request came from working photographers. Andrew Ross, Sutton, Grubb, Dallmeyer and later Thomas Ross and Thomas Dallmeyer would all debate lens design at great length (specific details of any new design would not be revealed for obvious reasons).

There has to be a strong tie between telescope and lens making especially in the 19th century, Andrew Ross was a microscope and telescope maker, he wanted Dallmeyer to become the premier British telescope maker after his death (Dallmeyer had other aims). Each discipline learns from the other, the degree of colour correction improved during this period, this increased the definition considerably within each type of lens. There is another factor, photographic lens making was only seen as a 'second string' or subsidiary line for the companies until the early 1860s, production of lenses by modern standards was incredibly small.

Thanks Ivan

I wont say anything more about the unauthorised use of one of my photos in the book, as, despite its imperfections, I actually find the book quite useful and I consult it a lot. If I had been consulted you might have got a lot more information about the Grubbs and their lenses. Not only have 'pgk' and I discovered further Grubb lens variations, but I have come across about 80 waxed calotype negatives which Thomas Grubb took with his lenses in the early 1850s and I have also examined Thomas Grubb's own geometry set from around that time. While he was also making some telescopes at that time, his 'day job' was as Chief Engineer of the Bank of Ireland where he created a method of preventing the forging of banknotes. He was also running an observatory where he personally hand signed the entrance tickets. I have a photo which he took in the early 1850s of security staff in uniforms sitting outside the Bank of Ireland HQ. I also have a copy of a photo of Trinity College Dublin where he wrote a few lines on the bank making an obvious allusion to the distortion free nature of his lens. This was done around the time (1857) that he had applied for a patent for his Aplanatic design.

I had to consult the book today in respect of a talk which I am giving next Tuesday https://strokestownpark.ie/event/wil...talk-and-tour/ . The darkroom contains a camera with a small Dallmeyer Rapid Rectilinear lens which could be used for creating small square positive plates for use in a 'Magic Lantern' type projector. The photographer had scratched the then 'new' UK/US aperture scale next to the Dallmeyer scale which is on the lens. He seems to have got the position of f16 just right, which is just as well as, according to his notebook, which I have, he seems to have used f16 for everything. Hope this is visible on the image below.

William

[Ivan Rose]

William,
re Grubb section, basically I did a proof reading with a clean-up on small sections.
It sounds like you have enough for a very interesting book on Grubb. The waxed calotype negatives sound very interesting, if they were taken early in the 1850s they must have been done with a prototype of his Aplanatic View lens, or a test lens as the patent is for 1857.

The Dallmeyer RR, in that size it was intended for making magic lantern slides. That is the old Dallmeyer iris scale which can be confusing. Dallmeyer scale 25 is very close to f/16 (not to be confused with the US 'f' scale which is different again). This size is not listed in the catalogue for 1881 or 1896, the records have batches for 1883 starting No. 31733, 1884 starting No. 33840 and 1885 no. 35888, then in 1886 it seems to become the 4.25x3.25 inch size. So with that engraving it must have been a short lived size.
Ivan