THE CAMERA 



269 



FIG. 2 A BLOTCHED ICING SNAKE. 



Designed to show the difference in the scales of the 



upper and under parts. 



tnent ; but it conveys to tbe mind the 

 probable size of the creature, for I was 

 -careful to include in the picture, by way 

 of comparison, common plants and 

 toadstools with which everyone is fam- 

 iliar. 



By the aid of an ordinary lens, wt 

 can easily study the peculiar carinated 

 scales, as well as count the scales upon 

 the upper and lower jaws, which are a- 

 mong the characters employed in class- 

 ifying" this species. We can see 

 there is no "pit" a short distance in 

 front of the eye ; therefore it is not a 

 "pit viper," and consequently, being a 

 North Temperate American snake, we 

 know it is an innocuous one and per- 

 fectly harmless. Of course, it is un- 

 fortunate that we can tell nothing 

 about the color of this reptile from the 

 reproduction of its photograph ; but this 

 is something that we have so often de- 

 plored that it would be idle to touch 

 again upon it here. 



Sometimes it is advantageous to so 

 pose a snake that, in the resulting pho- 

 tograph, the student may get a view of 

 the pattern of the scales on the under- 

 pays. This I have accomplished in the 

 •case of the blotched king snake (Lam- 



pro'peltis rhomb omaculatus,) here repro- 

 duced in Fig. 2. This picture I took 

 in my study at home, where I used a 

 clean, white sheet for a background, 

 and I encouraged the reptile to slide 

 very gradually down on a limb, which 

 I had firmly screwed into a little hand- 

 vise, fastened to the top of an extra 

 tripod. It was a short exposure, as one 

 will appreciate by regarding the fore- 

 part of the animal, which is poised in 

 the air and shows no movement what- 

 ever. 



The difference in the character of 

 the scales in the upper and lower part 

 of this king snake are here well exhibit- 

 ed, as well as the nature of the smooth, 

 unkeeled scutes of the dorsal surface. 

 However, this picture has no special 

 scientific value, whatever its worth may 

 be from an educational point of view. 

 Personally, I have never particularly 

 cared for it. for the reason that it savors 

 too much of the unnatural. Still, it 

 does exhibit the character and arrange- 

 ment of some of the scales on the under 

 side of the body, and that is something; 

 for we cannot very well get those in the 

 case of a snake, unless we make a hand- 

 drawing of them. This is strictly the 

 case with respect to the terrestrial 

 snakes, which, when photographed in 

 their native haunts, rarely show any 

 of their under-parts. 



An example of this is seen in Fig.3 

 illustrating this article. It is the re- 

 production of a photograph of a pretty 

 little Garter Snake, which I obtained 

 in Northern Virginia several years ago 

 It is really a good zoological cut, cap- 

 able of being used in any scientific 

 work on the subject, and that to de- 

 cided advantage. It shows the species 

 — Thamnophis sirtalis — in a place when, 

 one would be very likely to meet with 

 it in nature. It is also about life-size, 

 and has assumed a perfectly natural 

 pose — in fact, one in which it is just 

 about to make off for a place of greater 

 safety. 



By the use of an ordinary hand-lens, 

 one can discern the complete arrange- 

 ment of the scales on the top and sides 

 of the head, as well as the distribution 

 of those on the body. Further, one can 

 plainly see the round pupil of the eye, 

 and the absence of the "pit" between 

 the latter and the nostril of the same 

 side. The entire form of the reptile is 



