This section is from the "Naturalistic Photography For Students Of The Art" book, by P. H. Emerson. Also see Amazon: Naturalistic Photography For Students Of The Art.
Next I shall discuss briefly the ill-effects of a too sedulous study of Science upon an Art student.
The first and, perhaps, the greatest of these ill-effects is the 'positive mental attitude that Science fosters. A scientist is only concerned with stating a fact clearly and simply; he must tell the truth, and the whole truth. Now, a scientific study of photography, if pushed too far, leads, as a rule, to that state of mind which delights in a wealth of clearly-cut detail. The scientific photographer wishes to see the veins in a lily-leaf and the scales on a butterfly's wing. He looks, in fact, so closely, so microscopically, at the butterfly's wing, that he never sees the poetry of the life of the butterfly itself, as with buoyant wheelings it disappears in marriage flight over the lush grass and pink cuckoo-flowers of May.
I feel sure that this general delight in detail, brilliant sunshiny effect, glossy prints, etc, is chiefly due to the evolution of photography: these tastes have been developed with the art, from the silver plate of Daguerre to the double-albumenized paper of to-day. But, as the art develops, we find the love for gloss and detail giving way before platinotype prints and photo-etchings.
The second great artistic evil engendered by Science, is the careless manner in which things are expressed. The scientist seeks for truth, and is often indifferent to its method of expression. To him, "Can you not wait upon the lunatic?" is as the late Matthew Arnold said, as good as, "Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased?" To the literary artist, on the other hand, these sentences are as the poles asunder, - the one in bald truth, the other literature. They both mean the same thing; yet what aesthetic pleasure we get from the one, and what a dull fact is, "Can you not wait upon the lunatic?" There are photographs and photographs; the one giving as much pleasure as the literary sentence, the other being as dull as the matter-of-fact question. The student with understanding will see the fundamental and vital distinction between Science and Art as shown even in these two short sentences.
And now, ladies and gentlemen, I do not think I can do better than finish this section by quoting another passage from the writings of the late Matthew Arnold.
"Deficit una mihi symmetria prisca. - ' The antique symmetry was the one thing wanting to me,' said Leonardo da Vinci, and he was an Italian. I will not presume to speak for the American, but I am sure that, in the Englishman, the want of this admirable symmetry of the Greeks is a thousand times more great and crying than n any Italian. The results of the want show themselves most glaringly, perhaps, in our architecture, but they show themselves also in our art. Fit details strictly combined, in view of a large general result nobly conceived: that is just the beautiful symmetria prisca of the Greeks, and it is just where we English fail, where all our art fails. Striking ideas we have, and well-executed details we have; but that high symmetry which, with satisfying delightful effect, contains them, we seldom or never have. The glorious beauty of the Acropolis at Athens did not arise from single fine things stuck about on that hill, a statue here, a gateway there. No, it arose from all things being perfectly combined for a supreme total effect."
And now I must finish my remarks. I have not perhaps told you very much, but if I have succeeded in impressing upon beginners and some others the vital and fundamental distinction between Science and Art, something will have been achieved. And if those students who find anything suggestive in my paper are by it led to look upon photography in future from a new mental attitude, something more important still will have been attained. For, in my humble opinion, though it is apparently but a little thing I have to tell, still its effect may be vital and far-reaching for many an honest worker, and if I have helped a few such, my labour will have been richly rewarded indeed.
LONDON: printed by gilbert and rivington, limited, st. john's house, clerkenwell road.
"If any one wants to convert an artist to photography, he should present him with some of Emerson's picturex; but, whether with this object or otherwise, we earnestly recommend every photographer to obtain, and to study, Emerson's books." - Mr. W. J. Harrison in "The International Annual of Anthony's Photographic Bulletin" for 1888.
Life and Landscape Series.
Collectors and Librarians should take notice that all Dr. Emerson's previously published Works are strictly limited to the numbers herein advertised. After the completion of the advertised editions all plates and blocks will be at once destroyed. Intending purchasers should therefore complete their sets as soon as possible, before the works become scarce and advance in price. These works can be obtained through any bookseller or from the publishers direct.
"GATHERING WATER-LILIES."
(Copyright.)
AUTOGRAVURE.
Size of Plate, 14 1/4 x 11 inches. India Proofs, mounted on plate paper, size 23 1/2 x 17, limited to 150 copies. Price 10s. 6d. each.
Prints on plate paper, size 23 1/2 x 17 inches, 7s. 6d. each. Limited to 1000 copies.
To be obtained of the Autotype Company, 74, New Oxford Street, London.
 
Continue to: