202 C. A. Joy on the Chimenti Pictures. 
is not the remotest approach to stereoscopic effect. There are 
slight differences between the two, but not of the kind which 
a copy (and carelessly done) of the other. The positions of the 
figures differ. In one t 
other. The same figure is ,'; of an inch daller than the other, 
and the bench it sits on stands level, while in the other it 1s 
tipped downward. There are many such differences, which 
prove conclusively that they never were intended for stereoscople 
effect. In the stereoscope it is impossible to make these differ- 
ences coincide.” 
In a paper “On a method of producing stereographs by 
hand,”* Professor Rood has shown that where we “adopt the 
This is illustrated by fig. 1, where A is in the immediate fore 
ground and D in the background, 
D | The bulk of the variations in the 
C Chimenti pictures are not to the right 
B B or left, but up and down. If these 
- : A differences were designed by the artist 
tempt to combine them; so that a majority of persons 
best effect with the Chimenti pictures when two prints from the 
same negative are presented to their observation: while experts 
ue the whole thing as an attempt to practice upon their 
redulity. : 
~ In some of the paintings by Teniers of a chemist in his labo 
ratory, can be seen apparatus highly suggestive of a spectroscope 
We trust that no future Dr. Brown will announce that the spec 
—  * Phis Journal, [2], vol. xxxvi, 71, Jan. 1861. 
