408 



RECREATION. 



hair in heavy, rough pompadour roll, 

 decollete frock, and the light thrown 

 strongly on the back of the head. That 

 threw the face in the shadow, but it was 

 the face of a Gibson girl. The features 

 were strong and the exposure was long 

 enough to bring them out; while the 

 light encircled the hair like a halo. 

 It was a striking and pleasing effect; but 

 if you try it be sure of your subject's 

 strength of feature, and the rough roll of 

 hair; and don't, as was the case in this 

 instance, use the decollete frock. The light 

 comes over the hair in a pleasing manner, 

 but falls at each side of the neck and over 

 the bare shoulders in white lines, while 

 the throat and hollow of the neck are the 

 darkest parts of the picture. That makes 

 a bad effect. If you try it, by all means 

 drape the throat and shoulders in fleecy 

 white. That will catch and diffuse the 

 light, and will prevent the strong lines 

 down the neck. 



H. R. Paff, of Jennings, Ala., sends me 

 2 prints on which he wishes my advice as 

 to the work of the lens. I give my reply 

 to Mr. Paff, for the benefit of other ama- 

 teurs that may contemplate doing the same 

 thing. To make a fair test of the 2 lenses, 

 you should have sent me prints from ex- 

 posures made on the same subject, at the 

 same time and place, with the same light- 

 ing, developed and printed by identical 

 methods. The 4x5 is a snapshot, taken 

 with a fixed focus, or an extension front 

 set at fixed focus; and snapshots are so 

 universally under timed as to be an un- 

 fair test of any lens. The 5x7 is taken 

 with an extension front, set so nearly at 

 fixed focus that the extreme distance is al- 

 most as sharp as the foreground, and the 

 well defined shadows under the bridge and 

 to the left indicate time. No fair compar- 

 ison of the work of the lenses can be made 

 from these prints, but judging as best I 

 can I should prefer the work of the one 

 used on the 5x7. The best method of 

 testing a lens, and the one expert opticians 

 use, I gave in the December, '99, issue of 

 Recreation. 



Factories should back their plates. It 

 seems they need more urging. We must 

 have backed plates. If the manufacturers 

 will not prepare them we must do it our- 

 selves. It would certainly be easier for 

 them to put backed plates on the market 

 than for the users to prepare their own. 

 It is a nuisance to back plates. It is almost 

 impossible in traveling, yet that is the time 

 when one most wants to be sure of his 

 material; for in traveling every care must 

 be used to get a good picture, as one may 

 not go that way again. Manufacturers are 

 constantly feeling the pulse of trade. If 



we call for backed plates until they hear 

 us, we will get them; but unless plate users 

 arise and ask in concert, we will go on 

 backing our own plates or else making 

 weak, thin negatives, with traces of hala- 

 tion, because we failed to do so. 



I gave the best formula I know for in- 

 tensification months ago. Use gelatine 

 paper, print and tone carefully. If your 

 result shows a possibility of your being 

 able to do better, try again until you reacfi 

 your limit and the work you send in is 

 your best. Then when you see yourself in 

 Recreation you will have cause for pride 

 in your work, and you will have earned the 

 gratitude of a man who is daily doing much 

 for all of us. 



There seems to be a new idea abroad 

 in the land, a poseur. One artist to pose 

 a subject and a second to expose the 

 plate. I notice many of the latest mag- 

 azines contain pictures posed by Susy 

 Smith, photographed by John Jones. I 

 prefer to struggle on alone. 



Almost every magazine one picks ' up 

 nowadays contains articles illustrated by 

 photos taken by the amateur. One won- 

 ders whether the pictures sell the article 

 or the reverse. 



RANDOM NOTES. 



F. R. WOODWARD. 



This photographic department is rap- 

 idly assuming the proportions it should as 

 one of the most important and valuable 

 furnished by our worthy editor in his in- 

 imitable magazine. I modestly contribute 

 my mite to assist him, and perchance give 

 fellow enthusiasts a helpful suggestion or 

 two. 



Are you systematically keeping a note 

 or scrap book? I have one labeled, "Pho- 

 tographic Notes and Suggestions," and it 

 is fast becoming a mine of information, 

 formulas, etc. Whenever I run across and 

 test a good thing of the kind in any of the 

 periodicals, into the book it goes. The 

 woods, magazines, and annuals are full of 

 formulas for everything. I have one well 

 tested formula for each essential process, 

 and stick to it. I advise every amateur to 

 do likewise. True, there may be a better 

 formula somewhere than the one you use. 

 But if yours works successfully, you will 

 waste more time, money, and patience 

 seeking the better than you can gain. 



Don't fail to write the Wager Exposure 

 Scale people for their little book. You 

 will get more for 2 cents and a drop of 

 ink than you ever got before. 



That brings me to the subject of ex- 

 posure. I met a young lady amateur not 

 long ago who was in trouble. She had 

 used grosses of plates, had hardly a good 

 negative to show for all her pains, and 



