676 
POPULAR SCIENCE REVIEW. 
upon by light, producing degrees of relief which will enable casts to be taken, 
as in Mr. Woodbury’s process. A very rapidly stopped action of the solvent 
again applied produces a stickiness, so that when a black pigment in powder 
is brushed over the surface, it adheres, removing the relievo effect and com- 
pleting the picture. It seems to us that this process has little to recommend 
it beyond its novelty. 
Photogra'phic Exhibitions . — The display of photographs at the Dublin 
International Exhibition was a very admirable and interesting one, compre- 
hensive in its scope and of a very high class. Most of our best photographers 
and artists were represented. The sunny atmospherical effects wliich are 
almost peculiar to Mr. Bedford’s productions ; the humour, pathos, and 
beauty of Mr. Reglander’s pictures, abounding with evidence of artistic 
feeling, taste, and conception ; the clean, sharp, delicate, yet forcible effects 
of Mr. Kobinson’s productions ; the pictorial merit of Mr. Mudd’s, the 
charming transcripts of Scottish scenery by Mr. Annan, together with the 
fine works of Mr. V. Blanchard, Mr. Dixon Piper, Thurston Thompson, 
Vernon Heath, Kouch, Breese, Sir Josceljm Coghill, M. Eoussett, Johnson 
& Co., and many others, have won palms from new circles of admirers. 
The Exhibition of the North London Photographic Association at the 
Agricultural Hall, Islington, is also a very admirable one. Strikingly pro- 
minent by their originality and artistic character are the rare and beautiful 
works of Mr. 0. G. Reglander, every one of which tells its story with a force 
and naturalness which has puzzled those who are ignorant of the power of 
the art-science, in the hands of a true artist. Worthy to rank with these 
productions is “ The Zealot,” a picture by Mr. V. Blanchard, the sentiment 
and feeling of which are admirably expressed "with a breadth and picturesque- 
ness of effect seldom equalled. Aiming in the same direction, but with much 
less power and ability, are the conspicuously hung photographs by Mr. 
H. P. Eobinson, which, although well deserving the high praise we have 
awarded them in the above paragraph, yet regarded in connection with this 
clever manipulator’s imperfect art-knowledge, and their extravagantly am- 
bitious character, must, we fear, be characterized as very presumptuous efforts. 
Some life-size photographs by Mr. Aldis are excellent ; specimens of Mr. G. 
W. Simpson’s printing process — described in our last — and of Mr. Wood- 
bury’s, are eloquent in their advocacy. Mr. Breese’s stereographic transpa- 
rencies are wonderfully beautiful ; the portraits by Mr. Leake and those by 
Mr. Foxlee also deserve warm praise. In connection with this exhibition, 
complaints have been made public against the way in which the jurors 
have awarded the medals. Mr. Thomas Eoss, the eminent optician, has 
very properly declined the questionable honour conferred upon him, and 
sent back his medal, stating that “ the only terms on which he could accej)t 
a medal ” would be that his productions should be subjected to the test of 
“ a careful and scientific examination whereas although he was present 
during the so-called examination of the jurors, he was not asked for the key 
of his case, and that his lenses were not previously inspected by these 
gentlemen. Other exhibitors point out that the jurors were not competent 
to decide upon the relative merits of their productions, being ignorant of the 
principles of their manufacture ; others complain that their goods were 
refused the medal upon the ground of defects existing which their produc- 
