Paper and Light r-.~heCalotype in Franceand GreatBritain, 183 9-18 7 0 The Museum of FineArts, Houston September24-November 21, 1982 Organized by the Museum of fine Arts , Houston, and the Art Institute of Chicago in cooperation with the Univer­ sity of Texas at Austin. The exhibition and its catalogue were made possible in part through a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts, Washington, D .C., a federal agency . The exhibition will be shown at the Art Institute of Chicago from December 15, 1982, to February 13, 1983. Designed by Michael Glass Design, Inc ., Chicago, Illinois The information in this brochure was drawn from Paper and Light: The Calotype in France and Great Britain , 18 39-1870 (at press). All rights reserved . No portion of this brochure may be used without permission of the Pub­ lications Department , the Art Institute of Chicago. A 1'6'~ [982- '1 I L-. 7- A Symposium on 17thCentury FrenchPainting Nicolas Poussin, Landscape with Saint John on Patmos, c . 1640, oil on canvas,T he Art Institute of The Art Institute of Chicago Chicago, A. A. Munger. H :E ;>;"' :E ::r P> !:!..::ro Friday, October 29, 1982 Friday, October 29 <n O Pl S 0 "' ~ .... ' < Pl and Saturday, October 30, 1982 (JQ. s ;ii :::, 6:00 Inspiration of the Poet: Reflections on Two Paintings by Nicolas 5· fE S ~ Poussin, Marc Fumaroli, Professor, The Sorbonne, Pari s. Pl :::, (1) Pl s· p.:, ~ - -<= OQ :::i < A symposium of American and European scholars to be held n ,O"'~ Saturday, October 30 8. r::r''-< ::;' in conjunction with the exhibition France in the Golden Age: 10:00 Opening Remarks (t):::, (1)p.:, I") ~ (J'J-· 17th Century French Painting in Ameri can Collections at the Art 0-::rp_. i= . 5"3Pl -· Institute of Chicago September 18 through November 28. 10: 15 Reflection on Fran ce in the Golden Age, Richard Spear, Director, '-< """"'"',...,. 1-rj Allen Memorial Art Museum, Oberlin College . >-l F-:a 0 p.:, :::::rt) :::.. Columbus Drive Auditorium (Please use East Entrance) 10:55 The Medici Cycle, Diploma cy, and the French Court, Simone c? p.:, • ::::: Q.l o :::s The public is invited, free of charge Zurawsky, Assistant Professor, DePaul University. ~ p_. a Pla ...,.. ....,. (t) ...,.. 0 ~ ::!. ,...,. 11 :35 New Thoughts on the Brothers Le Nain , Konrad Oberhuber , .... ""CS < ::r Curator of Drawings , Fogg Museum. ~V)='t.nro o -· -· ~-OQ'O The symposium is organized by the Art lnstitute 's Departments of 12: 15 Lunch :::: ""'1""'l0 Museum Education and European Painting and Sculpture, and is 0:::, <ni= O.... :::,-· 1:45 Philippe de Champaign: Truth in Painting Olan Rand, Assistant ~ ~ s :: supported by generous financial assistance from the Old Masters ,..,. ~ ...,.. 0 Professor, Northwestern University. 0 ~ ::r p_. Society of the Art In stitute , Un iversit y of Chicago , De Paul U niver­ ,...,. :::::ro ro sity, U niversit y of Illinois, Chicago Circle , Loyol a U niversit y and 2:25 Claude and Light, Michael Kitson, Lecturer , The Courtauld In­ i; ;. ()::r, Northwestern University. sititute of Art, University of London. :::, (1) nl ~ (1) :E (1) 3:05 Panel discussion by respondents from the Art Institute staff and (lQ O )';"' Pl .... I p_. area university faculties. 4:00 Adjourn The Department of Museum Education The Art Institute of Chicago Michigan Avenue at Adams Street Chicago, Illinois 60603 A Symposium on 17th Century French Painting Introduction The calotype was one of three photographic processes in­ vented almost simultaneously in the mid-183os by men working independently of one another-Louis Jacque s Mande Daguerre and Hippolyte Bayard in France, and William Henry Fox Talbot in England. Each process em­ ployed essentially the same techniques: A support (Da­ guerre's was a metal plate, Bayard 's and Talbot's a sheet of paper) was coated with light-sensitive chemicals and exposed until an image appeared, which image was made permanent by additional chemical compounds . Photographic imagery, whether by daguerreotype or calotype, confounded contemporary observers and critics who attempted to understand it in terms of aesthetic standards that had been established for the pictorial arts. The fact that a photograph was made by machine seemed to rule out the possibilities of artistic selectivity, inter ­ pretation, or imaginative synthesis . Photographs were thought to be bound directly to reality, reporting every­ thing before the lens-even the most complex forms-with total objectivity and an exactitude far beyond the ability of the human hand. However, while they do indeed share this quality of impartiality, the daguerreotype and the calotype differ in significant respects. The daguerreotype is distinguished by a sharpness of delineation, whereby infinitely small detail is accurately recorded, and a tonal scale in gray that is so broad as to include the most subtle half-tones. Its silvery, mirror-like surface requires that it be held at a certain angle to the light for the image to be seen; for this reason, it is com­ monly presented in a small , dark case, against which the reflection is muted. The daguerreotype is a unique image and therefore can be reproduced only by photographfr1g the original. The calotype is characterized by a general softness of effect owing to the fibers of the paper negative, which break up line and obscure detail. Consequently, the calo­ type print possesses a much narrower tonal range than that of the daguerreotype , with far less representation of half-tones. Mas s, rather than line, and contrasts between light and shade are the essential features of the calotype. It generally has a matte surface, the image lying within the fibers of the paper, and comes in a variety of hues. The calotype's great advantage over the daguerreotype is that it is a print medium-any number of positives can be made from a negative. It is important at this point to define what we mean by "calotype." Deriving from th e Greek kalos, meaning "beautiful," and typos, "useful," the word was originally coined by Talbot to refer only to the nega- 1 tive print; however, by the late 1840s it was used to de­ less quality. Talbot's Haystack looks as though it might scribe all phases of his process. We have broadened the have stood forever under the bright light of an endless term somewhat to encompass any photographic process day. employing a paper negative . In the 1840s calotypes were made by a small group of At photography's inception, the art world was experi­ English and Scottish photographers, most of whom knew encing a period of unprecedented change and experimen­ Talbot personally . By the early 1850s, as a consequence of tation. While such institutions as the Royal Academy in French improvements to Talbot's original process, the England and the Academie des Beaux-Arts in France medium enjoyed a florescence in both France and Great strove to define certain immutable aesthetic standards Britain. Although it would be eclipsed in the mid-185os based on past art, many painters and sculptors sought to by the glass -negative process, made public in 1851, calo­ place their work at the service of society. Such artists as type photography continued to be practiced in to the 1860s. Jacques Louis David and Eugene Delacroix painted large­ Interestingly, the medium played no significant role in scale public-exhibition pictures representing current early American photog,raphy, remaining litt le known in events, and temporary exhibitions increased in both num­ this country until Alfred Stieglitz and other art photogra­ ber and significance throughout the century. As a result, phers at the turn of the 20th century rediscovered, exhib­ the audience for works of art expanded considerably be­ ited, and published the work of several pioneer calotypists . yond the upper classes. Concurrent with this sense of Because it was a print medium, the calotype was, more accountability to the public was a new emphasis, by art­ than any other early photographic process, the fountain­ ists and critics alike, on exact representation. To de ter­ head of modern photography. Yet, owing both to its pre­ mine the "correct" poses, costumes, and settings for their mature entrance into the mass market for images and to paintings, artists began not only to travel widely in the comparatively high cost of production of a calotype search of materials but also to consult graphic and photo­ book or album, the medium failed to take hold. The two graphic images. most important calotype printing establishments (see Tal­ The movement to make art both accurate and accessible bot and Marville / Blanquart-Evrard, below) closed, bank ­ to a mass audience had its logical counterpart in print­ rupt, after short but brilliant periods of production; and making, which advanced rapidly with the rise of commer­ few photographers continued to work with paper nega­ cial lithography . Lithography was invented at the end of tives in the 1860s. It must be remembered, however, that the 18th century, just on the heels of the revolutions in calotype photography was as much a medium as any of America and°France. The first graphic art capable of rapid the other graphic arts. The early photographic processes and infinite duplication, it was, by the 1820s, the medium with which it shared the limelight were, of course, subject most used to relay visual information. Within a few years, to modifications and improvements, but at a much slower as a result of its enormous success, promoters of mezzo­ rate and to a far lesser degree . For instance, a daguerreo­ tints and wood engravings began to vie for the lucrative type produced in France in the early 1840s looks very little market in the mass production of prints. By 1844, when different from one made in America more than 30 years Talbot's Pencil of Nature (the world's first major photo ­ later, whereas calotypes exhibit an astonishing diversity ·.