Chapter 2

        Photogravure is not just photography, it is an art. The best way to describe it is a rich and sophisticated form of photo processing. The way these images are produced is not in a darkroom like other photographs. Photogravures have a somewhat velvety quality to them and at one point in history, was the superior way to produce images in comparison to other photomechanical processes. It is one of the nineteenth century processes still in use by artists today because without a doubt, they produce some of the most exquisite images.

Photo by Fritz Liedtke 

Image Source: http://www.nationalgeographic.it/wallpaper/2015/07/06/foto/sul_viso_un_velo_di_stelle-2680925/5/?refresh_ce  

        According to Professor Nordell, "People before photography had no idea how the body looked like frozen in the air". Photogravure began in 1814, when Joseph Nicephore Niepce was experimenting with light sensitivities. After that, many started actively trying to improve their methods of reproduction. According to the Art of Photogravure, “Niepce was able to print a portrait on a lithographic platewhich was then coated in light sensitive gelatin to expose positive film. Then,William Henry Fox Talbot, used a resin powder which gave the plate an even tint to prevent fading over time”. By the late 1800’s, photogravure was often used to show images in high quality books, a process that was technically and artistically more superior than other methods. Yet, by the end of World War II, photogravure was a thing of the past and made way to less expensive methods, like rotogravure.

        It is hard to make a connection between photogravure and photojournalism, because photogravure is considered a method that is mostly used in fine art, and fine art and photojournalism is very different. Yet, without any advances in photography, photojournalism may have not ever been possible. Photogravure made photography recognized as art, and being able to capture a moment the way photojournalists do, makes them artists too. As involved as the process of photogravure is, it opened the door to many possibilities. It motivated photographers to continue to look for different ways to create images that are less labor intensive and more cost effective.

        The difference between photogravure and capturing an image on a smartphone now is the length of time it takes to create one image. We now have the luxury of taking a picture and instantly seeing it right away, and if you don’t like the way it looks, you can just delete it and take another one. I will say one thing, the quality of professionally made pictures is 100 times better than a simple camera phone picture. I guess that is the price we have to pay for convenience. Camera phones also have the ability to auto-focus in which you couldn’t do back then without going through a whole process. Like Professor Nordell mentioned, “it adjusts naturally, unlike the single lens reflex cameras”. I was born in the very early 80’s and I remember how inconvenient photography was back then in comparison to today. I remember using the 35 mm film, where you had to feed the film through the mechanism in the camera. I also remember having a couple of those cameras that used the 110 film. This technology was advanced compared to its origins, but it is clearly ancient technology just 35 years later.

        I can’t imagine having to deal with the inconvenience of having to lug a camera and all the film and equipment you need everywhere you go, like I remember having to do, but to have to do all that and carry aroundyour mobile caravan filled with your equipment like Quinn Jacobson does now for enjoyment,is crazy. But that was their reality. The art of photography has been around for many years, but Matthew Brady’s pictures of the realities of the Civil War, introduced the world to depicting everyday life through photography. This documenting every aspect of your life is clearly seen now and easily done through the convenience of our smart phones. 

Photo by Judith Soto