Latent Developments from Gallic Acid, 1839

References

• Wood, R. D., Ann. Sci, 27, 47–83 (1971).
   Google Scholar
• Wood, R. D., “The involvement of Sir John Herschel in the photographic patent case, Talbot v. Henderson, 1854”, Ann. Sci, 27, 239–264 (1971).
   Google Scholar
• For unhappiness at the Royal Society over Talbot’s papers see footnote 62 on p.33 of Wood, R. D., Ann. Sci., 27, (1971).
   Google Scholar
• Herschel’s letter to Talbot dated 28 February 1839; MS. in Photographic Collection, Science Museum, London, reproduced in Photogr. J., 77, 528–531 (1937).
   Google Scholar
• John Herschel’s important Photographic Memoranda book is at the Humanities Research Center of the University of Texas at Austin. Dr. R. S. Schultze was greatly hindered in his valiant and close study of Herschel’s experimental materials now at the Museum of the History of Science at Oxford because batch numbers only had been written by Herschel on the test papers without information on the chemical treatment given (R. S. Schultze, J. photogr. Sci., 13, 57–68 (1965). The importance of Herschel’s Photographic Memoranda book is that it provides the key to Herschel’s experimental batch numbers, but unfortunately was not known to Dr. Schultze.
   Google Scholar
• Lubbock Correspondence, Royal Society, London: Letter T20. The particular “Thursday Evg” on which it was written can be dated with certainty as 28 March 1839 because it was written in reply to a letter of 27 March from Lubbock regarding hypo, and elicited another letter on 30 March in the Talbot Collection, Lacock.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, R. D., Brit. J. Photogr., 21 July 1972, p.611.
   Google Scholar
• Smee A., “Photogenic drawing”, Literary Gazette, 18 May 1839, pp.314–316.
   Google Scholar
• The summary in this paper of Reade’s experiments in photography and his life in the first months of 1839 is integrated from the author’s previous studies: (a) “J. B. Reade, F. R. S., and the early history of photography”, Ann. Sci, 27, 13–83 (March 1971); (b) “J. B. Reade’s early photographic experiments-recent further evidence”, Brit. J. Photogr., 28 July 1972, 119, 644–647,643. Full documentation is therefore not repeated here.
   Google Scholar
• Charles Wheatstone and J. F. Royle when refereeing papers submitted by Reade in December 1836 and March 1838 both also noted that his writing was imprecise and “wants definiteness” (Royal Society: “Referees Reports”, Vol. 1, Reports 193 and 194). Indeed a slackness is characteristic of Reade’s letters and communications to journals throughout his life which, misleading unwary readers, certainly has contributed to the continuance of a legend that he was a pre-1839 inventor of photography.
   Google Scholar
• Letter from J. B. Reade dated 28 February 1839: Royal Society, London, Misc. orre pondence, MC3. 15. Published in full in R. D. Wood, op. cit. ref.(9a), pp.32–33.
   Google Scholar
• Herschel, J. F. W., “Note on the art of photography”, The Athenaeum, 23 March 1839, p.223, Phil. Mag: 14, 365–367 (May 1839);Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., 4, 131–133 (1839); Froriep’s Neue Notizen aus dem Gebiete der Natur- und Hei/kunde, 2nd series, 10 (No 17), cols. 260–261 (June 1839).
   Google Scholar
• Manu cript of J. W. F. Herschel’s paper read to the Royal Society on 14 March 1839, in St. John’ College Collection (Jame 510), cambridge, transcribed by L. chaaf in History a/Photography, Vol. 3, pp. 57–60 (1979).
   Google Scholar
• Letter from J. B. Reade to his brother George, 1 April 1839, in Royal Photographic Society ollection, published by A. T. Gill, Photogr. J., 10l, 10–13 (1961).
   Google Scholar
• Autograph letter, in Royal Photographic Society Collection, written on the morning of Easter Monday, 1 April 1839, from T. S. B. Reade (J. B. Reade’ father) at Leeds to a younger son George at Guisborough in the North Riding of Yorkshire, where George purchased Hutton Lowcross farm. J. B. Reade’s letter to his brother (sec ref. 14) was written on the back of this letter.
   Google Scholar
• Andrew Ross & Co., 33 Regent Street, Statement of Account for W. H. F. Talbot for 1839:Talbot Museum, Lacock, MS. LA39.J3.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander Garden, operative chemist, 372 Oxford Street, London, Statement of Account for W. H. F. Talbot for the period 20 March to 6 December 1839: Talbot Museum, Lacock, MS. LA39.25.
   Google Scholar
• W. H. F. Talbot’s Notebook (6 February 1839–25 June 1840), Photographic Collection, Science Museum, London.
   Google Scholar
• “Copy Memorandum by Mr. Edward Wm. Brayley Junr of the London Institution handed to Messrs Fry and Loxley [Solicitors to Laroche] 14 June 1854, and al 0 sent by him to Mr. W. H. F. Talbot 19 June 1854” (Edward Wm. Brayley, London Institution, 17 June 1854): Talbot ollection, Lacock, MS. LA54.34.
   Google Scholar
• For The relationship of Brewster and Reade ee R. D. Wood (1971), op. cit. (ref. 9a), pp.18, 77–79. It is conceivable that if in late March 1839 Reade had ent a communication to Brew ter, rather than directly to Brayley, for publication in the London de Edinburgh Philosoplrical Magazine even Brewster could have mentioned Reade’s experiments to Talbot.
   Google Scholar
• The long extract from Reade’s letter to Brayley, misdated 9 March 1839, appeared on pp.470–471 of article on “Photography” by Brewster in North British Review, 7, 465–504 (1847). A manu cript copy made in 1854 of the complete original letter dated 9 April 1839 has survived in the Talbot ollection, Lacock, MS. LA54.34, and is published in full in R. D. Wood (1972), op. cit. (ref. 9b).
   Google Scholar
• J. C. Poggendorf’s Biographisch-Iiterarisches Handwortenbuch zur gesclrichte der exacten Wissenscha/ten (Leipzig), Vol. 2, pp.420–421 (1863) and Vol. 3 (ii) p. t031 (1898).
   Google Scholar
• Petzhold, A., "Ueber Daguerrotypie", Journal für praktische Chemie, 18, 111-114 (1839).
   Google Scholar
• A brief news item on Petzholdt’s photography in Dresden appeared in mid-March in Froriep’s Neue Notizen aus dem Gebiete der Natur- und Heilkunde 2nd series, 9, col. 298, (March 1839). This journal, (issued twice weekly) reprinted articles in medical and scientific studies indispensible to Dr. Petzholdl.
   Google Scholar
• Boyle, R., Experiments and Considerations Touchillg Colours. ... The Beginning 0f a Experimental History 0f Colours, London (1664). In the section on “Whiteness and blackness” Boyle also refers to infusion of nut galls added to iron sulphate (green vitriol) which was a well-known mixture for gall inks and even used as an invisible ink by writing with only one component and revealing the invisible image by washing with the tannic/gallic infusion and is a reagent with a long and influential history going back to the ancient World (Nierenstein, M. “The early history of the first chemical reagent”, Isis, 16, 439–446 (1931). Old links between FeSoc/nutgall and uSoe/Urine (ammonia) mixtures are relevant to Herschel’s work.
   Google Scholar
• Herschel, J. W. F. ,“On the chemical action of the rays of the solar spectrum on preparations of silver and other substances. .. and on some photographic processes”, Phi/.Trans., 130, 1–59 (1840).
   Google Scholar
• Wood, R. D., The Calotype Patent Lawsuit 0f Talbot v. Laroche 1854, published by the author, Bromley (1975).
   Google Scholar
• Chancery affidavit sworn by Sir John F. W. Herschel on 25 May 1854 in the case Talbot v. Henderson. The original affidavit exists at the Public Record Office, London (document No. C31/1048/733), but was published (probably at Talbot’s instigation) along with an affidavit sworn by Brewster (but possibly drafted by Talbot) in Notes and Queries, 8 July 1854, pp. 35–6. See also Wood, R. D., op. cit. (ref. 2). Robert Hunt’s important affidavit survived only in the manuscript records of the Court of Chancery.
   Google Scholar
• Talbot, W. H. F., Chemical Notebook (26 June 1840 to 23 April 1843), Photographic Collection, Science Museum, London.
   Google Scholar
• Reproduced in Plate XIII opposite p.81 of Wood, R. D. op. cit. (ref.1).
   Google Scholar
• Talbot’s remarks at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science at York in J844 are of particular interest. He was reacting to papers read by Robert Hunt (who was sugge ting the use of iron sulphate as a developer of plain silver salt negatives) and Dr. Thomas Woods of Parsonstown, Ireland (who used paper negatives sensitized with ioduret of iron and silver nitrate, without separate postexposure development, but who thought the iron salt continued to act after exposure). Adv. Sci. Brit. Assoc. Report for 1844, Part 2, pp.36–37 and 105. See also Wood, R. D., op. cit. (ref. 2), .p 255.
   Google Scholar
• Gernsheim, H. and A., The History of Photography, Thames and Hudson, London, 2nd cd. (1969), Ch. 14; Thomas, D. B., The First Negatives, Science Museum Monograph, London (1964); Ostroff, E., “The calotype and the photographer”, J. photogr. Sci. 26, 83–88 (1978).
   Google Scholar