1 00:00:03,540 --> 00:00:05,730 Thank you, Philip. Good morning, everyone. 2 00:00:06,150 --> 00:00:12,450 I join the brilliant speakers that preceded me in thanking the organisers of this symposium and Geoff for inviting me. 3 00:00:12,840 --> 00:00:16,230 I am truly delighted to be here and to take part in this event. 4 00:00:16,950 --> 00:00:21,569 In closing this panel today, I have the pleasure of introducing you to William Henry Fox Talbot's 5 00:00:21,570 --> 00:00:24,300 experiments in photomechanical printing. 6 00:00:24,930 --> 00:00:34,680 This is the object of my PhD research, developed at the De Montfort University under the supervision of Professor Kelley Wilder, Dr Geoffey Belknap, and Dr Beatriz Pichel. 7 00:00:35,880 --> 00:00:45,060 As we are going to see, Talbot's photomechanical experiments are a rich and complex aspect of his work, which occupied roughly 30 years of his life. 8 00:00:45,720 --> 00:00:50,940 In this talk, I want to specifically address the materiality of his experimental practice, 9 00:00:51,270 --> 00:00:56,490 focusing on how certain materials moulded and developed his view of photography. 10 00:00:58,350 --> 00:01:06,540 If you're here in this lecture theatre today with great probability, you're already rather familiar with Talbot and his work on photography. 11 00:01:07,260 --> 00:01:16,890 However, in spite of the impressive volume of research on Talbot, we still know very little about his photomechanical work from the late 1840s onwards. 12 00:01:18,660 --> 00:01:26,280 During this time, Talbot produced two patented processes the photographic engraving in 1852 and the 13 00:01:26,280 --> 00:01:32,100 photoglyphic engraving in 1858. From period accounts and the few studies available 14 00:01:32,250 --> 00:01:36,270 We know that he was not the definition of success within this field of research, 15 00:01:36,630 --> 00:01:42,420 as none of his patents was ever commercially profitable or applied within the printmaking industries. 16 00:01:44,050 --> 00:01:51,040 For instance, in the appendix of the English edition of Gaston Tissandier's A History and Handbook of Photography, 17 00:01:51,400 --> 00:01:59,049 published just one year after Talbot's death, his son Charles expresses the hope for Talbot's photomechanical processes to be 18 00:01:59,050 --> 00:02:05,340 turned into and I quote a general utility instead of a mere scientific curiosity, 19 00:02:05,350 --> 00:02:09,580 and of quote, stressing the little fortune and application of the invention. 20 00:02:10,590 --> 00:02:19,830 However, the great amount of photomechanical material that we can find today spread across several archives and collections, reveals a more nuanced story. 21 00:02:20,580 --> 00:02:29,580 All this material provides, in fact, a vivid trace of the intensity and extension of Talbot's experimental practice, as well as his creative approach to it. 22 00:02:31,850 --> 00:02:38,960 For instance, if we look at some of the prints and proofs on display in the exhibition Bright Sparks curated by Professor Batchen 23 00:02:39,320 --> 00:02:42,800 We see how many of these openly show their experimental nature. 24 00:02:43,460 --> 00:02:51,950 This is expressed by the size and the irregular asymmetric cut of the paper, or in the multiple subjects erratically engraved on the same plate 25 00:02:52,190 --> 00:02:56,570 Which printingmark is well visible due to a sloppy cleaning of the ink. 26 00:02:58,220 --> 00:03:06,440 This other proof instead bears on the verso the handwritten date of the experiment, which give us a precious hint to match these with Talbot's notes. 27 00:03:07,250 --> 00:03:13,850 What these prints show and have in common is that none of them is an end product for sale. 28 00:03:14,480 --> 00:03:21,500 They are all in-between stages of an experiment, much different than a finished print that looked more like this one. 29 00:03:22,580 --> 00:03:27,020 Not only the size of the paper is different, but the photoengraving is here, 30 00:03:27,020 --> 00:03:36,380 presented together with a caption addressing the subject and right underneath the image indication on the author, technique, and the date of the print. 31 00:03:37,250 --> 00:03:47,330 This, however, is not the most common typology of material, as the large majority belongs to the first group I showed you proofs and working material. 32 00:03:48,350 --> 00:03:56,780 These are notoriously more challenging for the objects to research as they are small traces of the in-between phases of practising, 33 00:03:56,840 --> 00:04:04,730 designing, and experimenting a new process. Needless to say, it is a path disseminated with more failures than successes. 34 00:04:05,480 --> 00:04:13,219 However, I believe that their experimental value is much more interesting than these labels and image content on the proof, 35 00:04:13,220 --> 00:04:18,950 which was, as we are going to see, subordinated to precise criteria that Talbot put in place. 36 00:04:21,100 --> 00:04:27,070 Prints and proofs are not the only photographic objects available to unpack these experiments. 37 00:04:27,640 --> 00:04:34,930 Photomechanical processes encompass multiple stages of image manipulation, and prints are only at the end of this chain. 38 00:04:35,530 --> 00:04:40,120 On the other hand, printing plates were at the very heart of Talbot's experiments. 39 00:04:40,750 --> 00:04:45,550 He used a variety of different materials, mostly steel, especially in the first years, 40 00:04:45,820 --> 00:04:50,410 but also copper, steel-faced copper plates and occasionally zinc ones. 41 00:04:51,490 --> 00:04:57,400 Each one add a different set of properties and technological implications which impacted Talbot's decision. 42 00:04:58,210 --> 00:05:02,650 For instance, copper was easier to engrave, but right because of its ductility, 43 00:05:02,860 --> 00:05:13,989 It would bear less impressions than a steel plate. It is also interesting to note that in the large majority of the cases it was not Talbot who printed 44 00:05:13,990 --> 00:05:20,350 from the metrixes he made. During 30 years of experimentation, he entrusted several practical men, 45 00:05:20,440 --> 00:05:27,200 printers and engravers, whose hands on knowledges on printmaking complemented Talbot's photographic expertise. 46 00:05:27,760 --> 00:05:36,520 Therefore, we could safely say that Talbot spent most of his time working on ways of marking the metal plates instead of printing from them, 47 00:05:36,910 --> 00:05:40,030 developing and designing different ways of doing so. 48 00:05:42,460 --> 00:05:48,280 As for the metals of the plates, the selection of subjects was closely linked with performance. 49 00:05:49,090 --> 00:05:57,160 Most of the processes encompassed the step of impressing a subject onto the plate, and he did so by contact printing. 50 00:05:57,880 --> 00:06:02,800 For this reason, most of the first experiments reproduced natural the objects and textiles. 51 00:06:03,460 --> 00:06:13,450 What made these suitable subjects was a series of material qualities which were crucial: flatness, smallness, texture, and a clear outline. 52 00:06:15,100 --> 00:06:21,130 For instance, a glass like this one, which was used as a subject in this famous photograph, 53 00:06:21,460 --> 00:06:26,020 would have not been a good subject for the photographic or the photoglyphic engraving process. 54 00:06:26,530 --> 00:06:32,830 It is completely transparent, which compromises the outline and most importantly is not flat. 55 00:06:33,490 --> 00:06:41,890 Flatness was particularly crucial as the surface of the entire subject had to be in close contact with the photosensitive gelatine spread on the plate, 56 00:06:42,430 --> 00:06:45,250 Preferably blocked under a photographic coping frame. 57 00:06:47,200 --> 00:06:55,240 Another aspect that made the botanicals specimens and textiles great subjects was their texture. Unlike paper photographs, 58 00:06:55,390 --> 00:07:02,290 They were not a uniform, continuous opaque surface, and their outline successfully translated into detail detailed ink work. 59 00:07:03,700 --> 00:07:10,060 In this phase of Talbot's experiments, it is not uncommon to come across several proofs of the same subjects, 60 00:07:10,240 --> 00:07:16,360 which give us a fair idea of Talbot's modes of consistently experimenting with the same subjects. 61 00:07:17,900 --> 00:07:24,410 And here instead is an enlargement to show you the impressive degree of detail he could achieve with lace. 62 00:07:27,000 --> 00:07:34,510 In order to enhance performance, in 1853 Talbot developed a new technique called the photographic veil, a gauze 63 00:07:34,530 --> 00:07:39,210 which grid provided a screen to split up large areas into smaller sections 64 00:07:39,330 --> 00:07:48,840 easier to ink. This element would provide texture to those subjects which are not changing the overall character of an etching. 65 00:07:49,350 --> 00:07:56,370 Nevertheless, as this image shows, this would not provide a nuanced halftone, but only a flat texturised tone. 66 00:07:58,200 --> 00:08:00,029 Talbot's aim was, however, 67 00:08:00,030 --> 00:08:08,040 to use the photographic and photoglyphic engraving processes to reproduce information carried by paper objects such as engravings, 68 00:08:08,040 --> 00:08:11,080 handwritten or printed documents and photographs. 69 00:08:11,100 --> 00:08:20,340 Of course, photographs and in particular photographic halftones were in fact the real testing ground of his process, especially in the late 1850s. 70 00:08:20,880 --> 00:08:30,240 In order to overcome their uniformity and opacity, Talbot made large use of wax paper positives, such as the ones you can see here in the slide, 71 00:08:30,930 --> 00:08:37,710 this would make the photographs more transparent and therefore enhance the transferring of detail onto the bichromated gelatine. 72 00:08:38,190 --> 00:08:44,850 Here you can see, for instance, a few examples of how these albumen prints actually translated into ink work. 73 00:08:45,780 --> 00:08:50,640 And here again, we have an enlargement to show you the halftone quality he could achieve. 74 00:08:51,720 --> 00:09:00,750 In these experiments, Talbot moved from the photographic veil to another technique, a variant of the aquatint ground where he used asphalt or resin powder. 75 00:09:01,410 --> 00:09:10,650 However, if waxed paper positives produced a fine results, Talbot also used glass positives, mostly commercial ones made by French photographers, 76 00:09:10,920 --> 00:09:17,340 which, thanks to the high quality of detail and transparency, proved to be one of the most performative objects. 77 00:09:19,550 --> 00:09:25,280 To conclude, what we have seen today is how materials critically informed Talbot's photomechanical practice. 78 00:09:26,330 --> 00:09:35,690 Their use was closely linked with performance, which pushed Talbot to experiment with unusual solutions and objects such as a gauze, used for the 79 00:09:35,690 --> 00:09:41,270 first time as a photomechanical screen to overcome some of the technical limits of the process. 80 00:09:41,990 --> 00:09:49,460 I hope this overview triggered your curiosity as there is still so much to learn. In spite of its little fortune, 81 00:09:49,700 --> 00:09:56,590 photomechanical printing was without a doubt one of the fields of research to which Talbot dedicated more time and money, 82 00:09:56,600 --> 00:10:02,780 as he often recalled. By unpacking his engagement with these experiments and the materials involved, 83 00:10:03,020 --> 00:10:11,060 We can begin to see our scientific curiosity actually informed Talbot's view of photography and how it could be reproduced in printers ink. 84 00:10:11,240 --> 00:10:11,720 Thank you.