AMATEUR' PHOTOGRAPHY. 



159 



but will not answer all requirements, and 

 besides, have to be adjusted for each sepa- 

 rate view. Instantaneous views will, when 

 the clouds are pronounced and the land- 

 scape well lighted, develop simultaneously 

 to something like the true value ; but in- 

 stances like these are rare except in sea- 

 scapes. 



Orthochromatic plates and a color screen 

 will do wonders in rendering sky and land- 

 scape in true color value, especially on a 

 day when the sun is setting in a red and 

 purple Turneresque sky, or when there is a 

 soft haze over all. But on a bright sum- 

 mer day, when the atmosphere is clear and 

 beautiful rolling white clouds chase each 

 other over a deep blue sky, the orthochro- 

 matic plate and the color screen, together 

 or separately, ignominiously fail to render 

 anything like the effect we have tried to 

 reproduce in our print. 



After trying all schemes to catch the 

 fleeting cloud and the landscape together on 

 the same plate, I find the only sure way 

 to combine the 2, with any degree of satis- 

 faction, is by the old process of double 

 printing. Of course this means extra 

 work in printing and the use of 2 nega- 

 tives, but we have the satisfaction of being 

 able to produce a picture perfectly balanced 

 and complete in all its details. For ex- 

 ample, take a picture showing a long stretch 

 of landscape. If a suitable sky be printed 

 in, shading it so as to produce the brightest 

 light at the horizon and gradually darken- 

 ing toward the zenith, it heightens the at- 

 mospheric affect and helps the perspective 

 in the picture. 



It is advisable to have a variety of cloud 

 negatives on hand to avoid monotony, and 

 they should also be lighted from the right 

 and from the left to suit various views. 

 It is not necessary to have orthochromatic 

 plates on which to make the cloud nega- 

 tives. In the sky there is no trace of 

 color save the azure blue and the white 

 of the clouds. By the use of a simple ray 

 filter, dark or yellow, according to the con- 

 trasts desired in the effect, the most beau- 

 tiful cloud negatives can be produced on 

 any make of plate or film. The yellow 

 of the screen changes the blue of tne sky 

 into a green, which photographs in its true 

 color value and the white clouds stand out 

 clearly. It is not a bad idea to have a set 

 of negatives of clouds on film, as they can 

 be printed from either side to suit right or 

 left pictures, and if printed through the 

 celluloid the softness given would be an 

 improvement rather than a detriment. 



Looking at a sunlit landscape the eye 

 does not first take cognizance of the clouds, 

 but of the landscape, therefore the clouds 

 should be printed to hi. e the same effect 

 in the picture. The best effect is when the 

 cloud negative is printed until the deep- 



est shadows of the clouds are just distinct- 

 ly visible. Were the clouds printed in too 

 strongly it would enthrall the gaze of the 

 beholder to the detriment of the picture. 

 Of course this is different when it is de- 

 sired to render a pure cloud effect. Then 

 the clouds may be printed in to the full 

 strength of the rest of the view, but in this 

 case it is a rule never to have the horizon 

 line above one-third of the picture, the 

 sky and clouds occupying the remaining 

 two-thirds. — W. J. Howell, in the Camera 

 and Dark Room. 



NOT SATISFIED WITH AWARDS. 



Worcester, Mass. 

 Editor Recreation : 



I have read your answer to H. G. Gos- 

 ney, in May Recreation. I had no inten- 

 tion of making any remarks about the re- 

 cent photo competition, but since seeing 

 your letter I have decided to express my- 

 self freely in the hope that a future contest 

 may be decided with some consideration 

 as to the merits of the photographs. Take 

 the fishing scene that was awarded first 

 prize. That is a good photograph, but I 

 should like to know what the" fact that it 

 was taken with an expensive lens has to 

 do with the awarding of a prize. That 

 same picture can be duplicated by anyone 

 who has a view camera and an achromatic 

 lens costing perhaps $3. An expensive lens 

 is not one of the requirements of photog- 

 raphy, especially on photos of that nature 

 where the subjects are posed. 



Regarding the photo of the 3 deer that 

 was awarded a special prize : You said in 

 your answer to Mr. Gosney, "There 

 are other elements that must be taken into 

 account in awarding a prize to a picture 

 than the difficulty of getting it." The 

 other elements evidently were not taken 

 into account with this photo, as its only 

 redeeming feature is that it is a somewhat 

 rare subject to get. I will admit that it 

 was taken under unfavorable conditions, 

 but in a photographic contest photographs 

 are to be considered and not conditions. 

 Detail is entirely lacking. The water, 

 shrubbery, rocks, and practically every tree 

 have been carefully engraved in by hand. 

 That is not a photograph. It is an engrav- 

 ing. 



The nth winner was a tame goose on 

 nest. That is certainly a wonder for a 

 prize winner ! The nest is made of sticks 

 and the bird has a head, but both are so 

 much out of focus that they are hardly 

 recognizable. 



The most interesting awards of all are 

 shown together on page 105 in February 

 issue. "Howling Coyote" gets prize 4, 

 while "Resting" gets 8. You have said that 

 an expensive lens counts for a good deal 

 in the awarding of a premium, yet 8th prizp 



