CONCLUSION. 129 



If the reader will study the photographs of 

 moving animals in the advertisements which display 

 the excellences of various shutters on the market, 

 he will realise the difficulty of securing, even with 

 the perfection of apparatus and technical skill, a 

 result which shall be in any degree convincing. 

 As far as the writer's experience goes, the idea of 

 motion is better conveyed by the picture of an animal 

 in a stationary but suggestive position than by any 

 possible photograph of it in actual movement. If we 

 propose to analyse animal movement, to study, for 

 instance, the various positions of the quill feathers in 

 the flight of a bird, instantaneous exposures are 

 essential, but the resulting pictures will not represent 

 what we see with our eyes. The picture of a 

 " hovering " bird would, if photographically obtainable, 

 convey the notion of flight much better than one of a 

 flying bird. The case of four-legged creatures is on a 

 similar footing. If we examine a kinematograph record 

 of a moving animal we shall find that very few pictures, 

 when isolated from those which immediately precede 

 and follow, suggest at all adequately the idea of move- 

 n\ent. If this be the case with a number of pictures 

 which, in point of time, follow hard upon each other, it 

 is obvious that the chance of doing better by a single 

 snapshot is a very remote one. The quicker the 

 exposure the more remote the chance, for, when there is 

 a deliberate attempt to suggest movement, a slightly 

 blurred outline is not to be despised. The " distinct " 

 rendering of some quick moving objects the wings of a 



