Professional Photographers In Sheffield And Rotherham

[RichardB]

Thomas Newton Langton, 566 Attercliffe Road

Original Cabinet Photograph (approx 6 1/2 x 4 1/4 inches). Circa 1880/90s.

A studio portrait of a woman.

T. N. Langton, 566 Attercliffe Rd, Sheffield.

eBay

[RichardB]

A & G Taylor, Furnival Chambers, 101 Norfolk Street

Photographers to The Queen

eBay

[RichardB]

Rudolph Leonhardt, 117 West Street

Two approx. 6.5 x 10.5 cms photographs on card by: Rudolph Leonhardt

117 West Street

Sheffield

&

A & G Taylor

Photographers to The Queen

Furnival Chambers

101 Norfolk Street

Sheffield

eBay

[There was a Lewis Leonhardt,

photographer, High Street, Eckington

in 1893 as any fool knows ...]

[RichardB]

There is a sneaking suspicion that Nathaniel Holden, son of George Holden, of Gertrude Street was 7 in 1881 and therefore even less likely to be a professional photographer in the 1870's - just a thought !

N. Holden, Willow Cottage, Arthur Street

1870's ?

A studio portrait of a finely dressed young woman.

eBay

If only we had a name of the person, eh ? Could help prove/disprove the 1870's dating.

I'm aware of a George Holden, photographer of 44 Gertrude Street & 129 London Road (1893) - can't place Gertrude Street, unless it was/is near Thirza Street ... ?

[syrup]

J. Caloe, Corporation Street

1870's

A studio portrait of a gentleman holding a bowler hat.

eBay

Caloe ??

The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent (Sheffield, England), Tuesday, June 18, 1872;

Mr J. Caloe.

Not just a Photographer but a Hero as well.

The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent (Sheffield, England), Saturday, August 16, 1873;

[Sheffield History]

More up to date Sheffield photographers - http://www.sheffieldphoto.co.uk

[RichardB]

I've no idea how you do, what you do Syrup, but I'm glad you do. Excellent work.

The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent (Sheffield, England), Tuesday, June 18, 1872;

Mr J. Caloe.

Not just a Photographer but a Hero as well.

The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent (Sheffield, England), Saturday, August 16, 1873;

[vox]

can't place Gertrude Street, unless it was/is near Thirza Street ... ?

It was.

Gertrude Street

[DaveH]

Not exactly Sheffield and Rotherham but fairly close at Chesterfield

Samuel Whiting is a relative of mine, a great, great grandfather.

Originally born in Diss, Norfolk, in the 1840's he worked on the fairgrounds (another of my family "traction engine" connections") and moved to Derbyshire. He became involved in photography in its very early days when it was, I suppose, a "fairground novelty" to have your picture taken and ended up as a professional photographer as a result.

This advert is taken from an 1873 trade directory

[DaveH]

Not exactly Sheffield and Rotherham but fairly close at Chesterfield

Samuel Whiting is a relative of mine, a great, great grandfather.

Originally born in Diss, Norfolk, in the 1840's he worked on the fairgrounds (another of my family "traction engine" connections") and moved to Derbyshire. He became involved in photography in its very early days when it was, I suppose, a "fairground novelty" to have your picture taken and ended up as a professional photographer as a result.

This advert is taken from an 1873 trade directory

Turns out there is even a website all about him, - nice one G.G.Grandad

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~brett/photos/swhiting.html

[syrup]

Not exactly Sheffield and Rotherham but fairly close at Chesterfield Samuel Whiting is a relative of mine, a great, great grandfather. Originally born in Diss, Norfolk, in the 1840's he worked on the fairgrounds (another of my family "traction engine" connections") and moved to Derbyshire. He became involved in photography in its very early days when it was, I suppose, a "fairground novelty" to have your picture taken and ended up as a professional photographer as a result. This advert is taken from an 1873 trade directory

I am not saying this is the same person but i have found two snip-its from 1884 and 1895 Newspapers.

The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent(Sheffield, England), Saturday, May 24, 1884;

The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent (Sheffield, England), Monday, June 17, 1895;

[Guest SheffieldArchives]

A few more references to Victorian photographers in Sheffield: http://www.flickr.com/photos/shefflibraries/sets/72157627206510673/

Cheryl, Sheffield Archives

[DaveH]

I am not saying this is the same person but i have found two snip-its from 1884 and 1895 Newspapers.

The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent(Sheffield, England), Saturday, May 24, 1884;

The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent (Sheffield, England), Monday, June 17, 1895;

Thanks syrup, what a fantastic find, I will add these clips to my family history.

This is undoubtedly my G.G Grandfather due to both the photographic and the fairground connections.

That second violent assault charge looks a bit dubious to me as the 2 men share the same surname (Whiting) even though they come from different villages.

The Whitings were a large family, a suspect they may be related.

Samuels daughter, my great grandmother, Harriet Whiting, famously bought a Fowler traction engine in 1932 called Kitchener but which was used in a 1962 film called "The Iron Maiden" and has carried that name ever since. She lived her entire life in Fairground, dying around 1948. I still meet older people where I work in Derbyshire that can remember her as an old, Victorian dressed lady running a side stall at the Fairground and not taking any nonsense from any of the customers, - just like her dad in this newspaper cutting.

[Guest Martin-Bacon]

J S Tulley, 24-30 Division Street

1870's

A studio portrait of a young gentleman.

eBay

James Syrus Tulley known 1893-1925 at Division Street, 1870's may be optimistic - 1881 census may help

Picture Sheffield have a few photographs by J. S. Tulley & Co., including one of his studio on Division Street. One, image number s06865 is attributed to O. S. Tulley & Co. in error, I think.

http://www.photolond...ls.asp?pid=7852 gives some details of his life, including his use of the stage name Napoleon Syrus. See the http://www.photohist...otographers.htm webpage. He died in Islington on 20 March 1891. His Sheffield business must have carried on after his death. Perhaps the company was sold at some stage, as a going concern?

He gets three mentions on the 'Watch the Birdie Blog' at http://qvictoria.wordpress.com/sa-sy/ ,one under the name 'Syrus, Napoleon' one as Tulley, J S – Sheffield -1860-1902- and again as Tulley’s – Sheffield -1860-1902. The http://www.cartedevi...hotographers-t/ page lists a 'Tulley, James Syrus & Co.'

Picture Sheffield have a photograph (u02028) dated 24 May 1924, which is the most recent one I have found from his studio. Another composite image (u02179) dates from the 1930's, but it is not clear if that is the date of the photograph or the date of the artist's impression overlaying the photo. Most of the images I have seen, attibuted to the man rather than the business are of carte de visites.

A collection of work, by his studio, after his death can be found at the http://www.archive.o...nslim00firtrich webpage. This looks like a promotional book of some sort. It has some nice pictures of the steel industry, and a very nice picture of Iron Wharf, on the canal.

I also found a reference to an entry of his work in a photographic competition in Scotland, possibly in Edinburgh. (I tried to find out about Tulley a couple of years ago). I can't find my notes at the moment and a websearch didn't turn up any fruitfull links.

[Bayleaf]

This article first appeared in the Transactions of the Hynter Archaeological Society and is reproduced by kind permission of the Society.

THE BIRTH OF PHOTOGRAPHY IN SHEFFIELD 1840-1870

By D.J. Smith

Since the invention of Photography some 140 years ago the world has been overwhelmed by its use in a way its inventors could scarcely have foreseen. The use of photographs in books, magazines, and in advertising has widened the horizons of millions previously able to view the world only through the illustrations of artists, some of them unskilled or prejudiced by fashion or taste.

From the l8th century onwards the number of engravings, woodcuts. etc. increased, and the work of naive painters appeared in the homes of yeomen and tradesmen. Comparatively few people however were able to possess a likeness of themselves or their family before the 1860's when the 'Carte de Visite' photograph made such portraits available cheaply to the masses.

One exception was the 'cut-paper' or 'inked-in' silhouette, which was quite quickly produced by unskilled persons. The famous spent many weary hours sitting to painters and sculptors for that portrait to illustrate a volume of their works or to grace the rooms of some learned institution.

In a letter of 1852 the local poet and hymn-writer James Montgomery reveals that he would be sitting for his portrait for the fourth time in three months, 'having sat to Mr. Ellis for a Medallion, to Mr. Milnes of London for a Bust, and to Mr. Paulson for a Crayon-portrait to please a Liverpool publisher who was publishing a series of Lithographs. If faces be worn out with being looked at mine must be too far gone to produce a good impression'. [1]

Means of simplifying portraiture was constantly being sought. In July 1847 a Mr. Carsoe was exhibiting in West Street the 'Carsoetype' portrait made by a device which, it was claimed, took the contours of the face in profile in one minute, the result being rendered in a Marble preparation at a_. cost of 2/6d to 5/- [2]. Portraits in wax were another form available locally as lateas 1849.

The bulk of the artistic work done in 10th century Sheffield involved patterns and designs for local cutlery, silverware, stove-grates and similar products, for local firms. Consequently at the inception of photography and in its expansion during the 1850s very few local artists turned over to the new medium. Photographers in general were a new breed of artists even though they usually utilized established conventions in portraiture.

PHOTOGRAPHY INTRODUCED

Photography was invented by the Frenchman Nicéphore Niépce and developed by his partner and successor Louis Daguerre, the Daguerreotype process becoming known in England, in 1839.In February of the same year the Englishman Fox Talbot announced his independently invented photographic process, which, was to become known as the 'Calotype'.

The report of Fox-Talbot's process in the Sheffield Iris of 5th February 1839 records that the inventor 'did not claim to have perfected an art but to have commenced one'. The differences between the two processes however were considerable. The Calotype could produce numerous prints from a single paper negative, but it was a process which yielded grainy pictures lacking in sharp fine detail. The Daguerreotype process on the other band resulted in a single, plate as detailed as a miniature painting. The complete apparatus required to produce Daguerreotypes was both costly and cumbersome, requiring a studio or laboratory in which to obtain good results.

Photographic cameras became available in London from the year 1839, though no doubt some of the earlier examples were home made ones. The Daguerreotype process was patented in England in 1839. Buying a license greatly increased the, cost of opening a studio. These factors restricted the growth of commercial photography in the provinces for a number of years.

Such was the situation when in 1840 Adfred Chadburn, an optician of Sheffield took a photograph of the Parish Church, possibly the earliest attempt at photography by a local man. [3] Chadburn, a photographic pioneer of no mean skill, had the advantage of belonging to the firm of Chadburn Brothers, opticians with practical experience in the trade going back to 1817 or even earlier.

The year 1841 saw the opening of the first commercial photographic studio in London by Richard Beard, the speculator, who had obtained a monopoly of Daguerre's patents in England which was to last until 1853.

The first event in Sheffield likely to have aroused widespread interest in photography appears to have been the lecture given to the Sheffield Literary and Philosophical Society at the Music Hall on July second, 1841. On this occasion Mr. Edward Smith gave the Society `an interesting account of the state of the Daguerreotyping process of taking portraits' on plates of polished silver.' [4] This was really a copper plate onto which silver salts were deposited.From the local newspaper of 2 August 1842 we learn that Messrs. Chadburn have agreed with Mr. Beard to take out a license for using his patent in Sheffield, [5] and by January of the following year Chadburn Bros. announced that they were ready to take photographic portraits priced 21s., in case; examples were to be seen at their Exhibition Rooms at Nursery Street. [6] By January 1843 they were able to state that they were daily taking portrait photographs `at eligible rooms built expressly for that purpose at Brightside,’ attendances being from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. [7]From the first, the portraits taken by Chadburns were regarded as successful, the rendering of flesh tints being particularly admired. These `splendid reflected miniatures on silver' were available uncased for 12/6d . [8] In 1849 their Daguerreotypes were priced from 12/6 to £1.5.0d., with 50% added where two figures were to appear on the same plate. [9]When coloured they were said to resemble enamel pictures, and it was also noted that pictures could be obtained even in the most cloudy atmosphere. Figure 1 shows their portrait of Robert Leader, the founder of the Sheffield Independent newspaper.In December 1842 Alfred Chadburn joined the Literary and Philosophical Society, and when in August 1843 a Mr. Lucas read a paper on the Daguerreotype process Chadburn exhibited photographic equipment. Chadburn Brothers made mathematical and nautical instruments and many other scientific devices in addition to optical ones. [10]

By 1851 their advertisements were to appear crowned with the Royal Coat of Arms and the legend `Patent Photographic Portrait Gallery to the Prince Albert' while their catalogue, apparently issued for the 1851 exhibition lists Magic Lanterns among their stock, also `Photographic Cameras with ground glass disc for obtaining the focus from 15/6d. Chadburn's Improved Camera with achromatic glasses, focus glass, and three slides, £2.10s. each.'

There was also a camera with rack adjustment, suitable for holding prepared paper or silvered plates for Daguerreotype portraits, priced from £5 to £20 each. A complete outfit containing the improved camera with apparatus for cleaning and preparing the plate, chemicals, and `every requisite to enable the tourist to take portraits or sketches from nature etc.' was available in mahogany case priced from ten to fifty pounds. Thus during the Daguerreotype era, which lasted approximately from 1840 to 1855^­ photography was quite costly, both for a finished picture and for the equipment. It was not yet a hobby for the man in the street.

Itinerant photographers were a feature of the period when the art was new. Their pictures were often cheaper though frequently they faded or were `as wooden as a figurehead.’ [11] For a time during January 1852 a Mr. Warrs from Blackpool was practicising (sic) photography at Wade's cabinetmaker's room at Fargate offering Dagu­erreotypes from 7/6d to 17/6d. and `profiles from a sixpenny bust to highly bronzed whole length figures and family groups.' [12]

The early photographers came from many professions. Some were quite humble, attracted by the new art and the promise of large profits, due in part to the lack of competition. In some towns there was rivalry between established and incoming photographers and many operators remained only briefly in a town before seeking fresh fields.

The end of the Daguerreotype era came in the mid-1850's by which time the last improvements from America came into use. G. Clarke, who was described as `from Fleet Street, London' and `late of Broadway, New York' advertised cased miniatures at the American Daguerreotype Studio, 8, Norfolk Row, Sheffield, in 1854. [13] Daguerreotypes were now priced as low as 3/6d to 4/- each. Clarke also gave instruction in practical photography and produced portraits for brooches and lockets.

PHOTOGRAPHY IN THE 1850'S. THE COLLODION ERA BEGINS

In the year 1851 the new wet Collodion process of photography was introduced and quickly adopted. Carrying no irksome patent restrictions this process led to a great expansion in photography during the 1850's and into the 1860's.

Wet Collodion plates needed to be prepared, exposed and processed on the site, all this involving the manipulation of much cumbersome equipment. The glass plates were fragile and heavy but possessed the advantage of being able to multiply the number of images ,and they were re-usable.

Chadburns of Sheffield were supplying chemicals for the Collodion process in Sheffield [14] while their Liverpool branch offered free instruction in the new process to customers. They built a glasshouse for this purpose in 1856. [15]

At a meeting of the Sheffield Literary Society in June 1856 Alfred Chadburn exhibited photographs `taken in and near Sheffield.' In August of the same year he read a paper on photography, possibly the one in which he predicted the important role it would play in the recording of buildings of all kinds; indeed, one of his hobbies seems to have been the photographing of churches.

From a contemporary- account we learn that the travelling wet Collodian photographer was obliged to carry chemicals and also a species of dark-house, thus encumbered he was `reduced to the state of a snail carrying his home on his back'. Horrific tales appear in contemporary journals of operators poisoned by contact with chemicals so that by the mid-1850s they were publishing tables of antidotes to the photographic poisons then in use.

The art continued to expand during the late 1850s, during which time - to quote John Holland - photography `had created a profession' and `stimulated into activity, in new forms, half-a-dozen elegant handicrafts'. [16]

Interest was shown by the Sheffield Literary and Philosophical Society at whose meetings in 1856 a work entitled A photographic Tour amongst the Abbeys of Yorkshire was shown, other photographic books were shown in 1858 besides a selection of Egyptian photographs, while in 1861 a copy of the Domesday Book reproduced by photozincography was exhibited. [17]

At the Sheffield School of Art reproduction of works by such masters as Holbein and Raphael were available for study by 1859, [18] whilst the Ruskin Museum at Walkley contained photographs of Venice among its exhibits. [19]

From around 1850 onwards photographers were called upon to record the plant and machinery used by local firms such as Firths. Unusually large castings or forgings were proudly photographed in transit, flanked by workers or representatives of the firm concerned, for example, J. S. Tulley's studio did such work for Newton Chambers in the 1860's and for Thomas Firths around 1900. Such photographs must have stimulated orders for local products. The scientist, H_ C. Sorby, conducted research into the micro-structure of steel in 1863, taking microscopical photographs as early as 1864. [20]

An advertisement for Atkinson's Atelier Photographique at 103 Devonshire Street, Sheffield in 1859 reveals just how the camera was taking over from the artist. [21] Besides portraits and ‘views of Gentlemen's residences', works of art and old manuscripts could be copied and enlarged, engineering works, book illustration and manufacturers patterns were produced. This period saw what was perhaps the greatest expansion in the number of photographers in Sheffield, from four in 1854 [22] to the remarkable number of thirthy in 1864. [23] Almost all the commercial studios were situated centrally, with a handful on the northern and north-western sides of the town.

PHOTOGRAPHY IN THE 1860’S AND SOME LOCAL PIONEERS.

The general acceptance of photography can be estimated from the reactions of the Sheffield writer John Holland. In 1855 Holland had his likeness taken with some misgivings, being rather reluctant to send the `image of a dull old fellow' to a lady correspondent, but by 1862 he was converted and was writing an approving three­ part essay on the history and scope of photography in the November issues of the Sheffield Daily Telegraph, having chosen the pen-name `Photophilus'. [24]

Noting the continuing debate to define photography as either Art or Science Holland remarked on the `universal patronage amongst all classes - literally from cottage to palace'. He reflected `But for all its defects I seldom see a damsel, a servant maid maybe, coming out of a certain glass roofed building with something in her hand, without the pleasant thought that there is a lover in the case - and why not?'

The innovation of the late 1850's and craze of the 60's was the stereo viewer, giving a three-dimensional effect; it was the wonder of many a mid-Victorian household and many stereo cards still exist. From about 1860 magazines for photo­ tourists and stereo enthusiasts were being published, and in 1861 a camera weighing 5lbs. and costing £7.5s.0d enabled the amateur to create his own stereo pictures. Favourite local views were Haddon Hall, Peveril Castle and the gardens at Buxton, whilst armchair travellers could possess exotic views of Egypt, the Holy Land or Europe.

Locally, Henry Swan (1825-89) a follower of Ruskin and one-time Curator of the Ruskin Museum at Walkley devised stereo effects in the so-called `casket photograph'. This device enabled `3D' effects to be made by mounting an ordinary photograph in a casket, into which were mounted prisms and lenses of differing magnification, and Swan's patent allowed for the use of magnifying mirrors in place of these. He is credited with the use of this method for such sitters as Louis Napoleon and Lord Broughton. Swan's invention was covered by Patent Number 559, taken out 29th February 1860 `for Stereoscopes, Stereoscopic pictures, and Cameras for taking the same', but it was not used commercially and became lost in the flood of photographic inventions introduced in the 1860s. [25]

Another local pioneer was the woodcarver Arthur Hayball (1822-1887) who adopted photography about 1853 partly as a means of recording the work he did, and partly to simplify the re-assembly of large, elaborately carved furniture. His photographs, wet collodion plates up to 12" x 10", recorded the fireplaces, tables and carved chairs he produced, and possibly aided the work he did at St. Philip's and Ecclesfield Churches. Hayball also worked as a photographer, in a workshop at Hanover Street doing portrait and stereo work to augment his income, (see figure 2) and is credited with preparing some of H. C. Sorby's photomicrographs in 1866. [26]

One of the most interesting personalities in photography in the locality in the 1860's was Theophilus Smith (1838-1886) the son of Edwin Smith, Sculptor, of the Cemetery Road Marble and Stone Works at Little Sheffield. Theophilus was a skilled sculptor and modeller whose work included a bust of J. A. Roebuck M.P., and portrait medallions of such local worthies as Sir William Sterndale Bennett, Clifton Sorby and Francis Chantrey. He practised photography from the early 1860s though how much use he made of it in his portrait sculpture work is unknown.

In a notebook of 1850 the twelve-year old Smith wrote an essay on portrait painting which gave some insight into the attitudes to portraiture which were later, applied to photogra­phy. [27] He emphasises that the artist should be true to nature, even to imitation of defects in a person's features, but wryly observes that `Ladies and gentlemen do not approve of artists who entertain such sentiments. - the artist must adapt!' On the posing of figures he says `the elderly should be grave, women should display a noble simplicity and modest cheerfulness".. (see figure 3).

In 1867, a writer urged photogra­phers in similar sentiments to `let the right man be in the right place' for example, `an old man or a child in a Churchyard, a fisherman on the banks of a stream, a farm labourer amongst his stacks of hay or corn' these are in harmony in such pictures -

‘a lady with a tiny parasol and a mighty circumference of crinoline, or a gentleman in glossy hat and kid gloves looks absurdly out of place'. [28]

In 1863 Theophilus Smith made a series of small photographs of rocks, caverns other picturesque features of the Wortley area, and it was around these that grew idea of John Holland's book Wharnecliffe, Wortley and the Valley of the Don, published in 1864. The problems posed by `the almost ceaseless motion of the trees in situation so elevated' is noted, and this was no doubt very detrimental to photography in the days of long exposures.

Owing to the success of the `Wortley' volume ,Holland wrote Sheffield and its Neighbourhood, published in 1865, and again Theophilus Smith provided local views of subjects referred to.

In 1864 the Sheffield flood inspired photographs which in turn spawned engraving and the scenes which decorated pottery. By the 18th March 1864 ,Theophilus Smith was offering a set of six cabinet sized pictures of the Flood priced 10/6d, four stereographs cost 5/-, whilst album size pictures were 1/- each, the proceeds being given to the Inundation Fund. [29] Smith's view (figure 5) of the devastation at Hillsborough with mudstains halfway up the walls of the whitewashed cottages and ladders propped against a damaged house still, over a century later, conveys more than words.

Photographs of the flood were also taken by such local photographers as L. F. Peacock and John Caloe of Corporation Street and special trains brought sightseers from the neighbouring towns, among whom was probably James Mudd, the noted industrial and architectural photographer, of St. Anne's Square, Manchester. The large dryplates by Mudd were much admired at the time though the slow exposures necessary precluded the inclusion of figures. James Mudd took photographs at Bradfield, Wisewood and Hillsborough, including one of a damaged mill near the Barracks.

The claims for lost property and profits include a handful by photographers whose premises lay in the path of the Flood. [30] Elias Lowe, Photographer of 8 Ct., Marshall Street, Sheffield included amongst his goods a photographic tent, worth £,3.10s a half-plate camera worth £5.5s, and chemicals worth £1.7s. Joseph Cort, Photographer and Carpenter, of 159, Attercliffe Road lost a large canvas tent for taking likenesses, photographic posts etc., washed away, worth £3.5s, photographic fittings worth £1.5s, six printing frames 15/-, about 200, negatives worth £3.lOs plus one box of Sydney Smith's colours for photographers worth 12/-: £5 was claimed for a month's last business: John Pate, Glasscutter and Photographer, of 13, Cotton Mill Row,, Sheffield claimed for repairs to a half-plate camera costing £1, the loss of a 24 half-plate Pospertaux (sic), camera and stand, plus chloride of gold and nitrate of silver together worth £3.6s.1p, and 24 stereoscope pictures worth 4/-. The above examples are interesting, showing that photography was often combined with another trade. Joseph Cort the photographer at Attercliffe is probably the same man who appears in Drake's 1862 directory at Masborough near Rotherham.

Perhaps the saddest result of the flood was the damage done to Chadburn's Optical Works with, no doubt, the destruction of the photographic studio and exhibition gallery. Their damages amounted to over a thousand pounds. [31] The pioneers seem never to have resumed photography as a business; hereafter the firm concentrated on optical work in Sheffield. Photography had by this date become a cut-throat business, but Chadburn's continued to manufacture photographic equip­ment for some time after the flood.

TOURISTS, AMATEURS AND THE EARLY PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.

The advent of railway travel enabled the photographic tourist to journey beyond his own area without recourse to porters, hiring a trap or building an elaborate horsedrawn darkroom to haul his chemicals and equipment. Derbyshire attracted such tourists, as a London photographer D. W. Hill who made the journey by train in 1860 bringing a stereo camera, chemicals for the wet Collodion process, and a darkbox, the latter considered to be an improvement on being suffocated in a tent. Having photographed quarries, the boathouse at Matlock and the Market Cross at Bonsall, Hill travelled by train to Rowsley and Haddon Hall where he took six or seven plates, meeting there a gentleman with a small cistern four feet square mounted on wheels as a darkroom. His rival was also taking stereo photographs.

At Chatsworth he was deterred by fog. At Wingfield Manor in torrential rain he borrowed a tarpaulin from a farmer and made seven negatives with exposure times of between four and six minutes. The equipment taken by Hill was cumbersome, consisting of a 3 oz. bottle of Collodion, 6 oz. of developer, 4 oz. of cyanide solution, a gutta-percha bottle holding a quart of water, a smaller bottle for rinsing the plate before `fixing', two pneumatic holders, a dozen plates in a light box, a gutta-percha bath and a fluted glass dipper.

Details of local amateurs are sparse. For some of these it was a short lived hobby, expensive of time and money. Second-hand equipment could be purchased, and some amateurs constructed their own cameras for a few shillings. Some photographers prepared their own chemicals, even attempting to produce silver nitrate from coins. For a few years during the 1860's the Sheffield Smelting Company produced photographic chemicals, with a national market including Oxford, Nottin­gham, Derby, Leamington Spa, Portsmouth and Southampton.

Collodion chemicals were also obtainable from such chemists as W. Botham of Old Haymarket, Sheffield Some amateurs had darkrooms where they could mix and store their chemicals, bu many had to wait until the family had retired for the night before preparing plates oi chemicals in the kitchen.

Glimpses of local amateurs appear in the exchange columns of the British Journal of Photography. In March 1867, J. Butcher of Lemon Square, Wheeldon Street, Sheffield was attempting to exchange a half-plate portrait lens made by Chadburns and^-costing £3.l0s. plus a suitable camera for a binocular camera of equal Value. [32]

ln May 1867 ‘R. D. F.' of Daisy Bank, Sheffield was requiring the exchange of a whole-plate square walnut camera and lens by Gaudin for a watch or Carte de Visite camera. [33]

For the wealthy amateur, photography was a light hearted hobby involving excursions into the country with friends and a picnic, although the season only lasted from May until September. Equipment was unpacked, the ladies positioned, the `Cyclopian Artists' set up and work was commenced,, usually with minor mishaps such as a collapsing camera stand or someone walking before the lens. The events were generably enjoyable. By the 1860’s there were notable photographic societies in Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds, for the exchange of ideas, lectures, exhibitions and and summer excursions into the country.

The earliest reference the writer can find to a society in Sheffield is in the British Journal of Photography for 13 January 1865. Members present were Tulley, Rawson (the only amateur), Kirby and Theophilus Smith who made enquiries about the washing of plates. In the same month J. S. Tulley read a paper on experiments with the nitrate of silver bath.

On the first of September 1865 the Sheffield Photographic Society concluded the outdoor season by taking a bus load of photographers, friends apparatus on a thirteen mile trip to Roche Abbey. "Conditions were overcast but calm and five cameras were in the field. Mr. Barber bagged ten 8" x 10" yiews, Mr.Thomas and Mr. Rawson eight or ten stereographs and Mr. Peacock some half­-plates.'

The photographers were at work from noon until teatime. Just before adjourning for tea 'Mr. Rawson, an amateur, obtained^, a very successful stereo negative of the whole party seated amongst the ruins. [34] (See Figure 6.) The society was not able to maintain 1oca1 interest and it^-closed in September 1868. In 1879. J.S. Tulley regarded the 'local photographic societies as dull and of limited appeal even to their own members.' They did not, he considered, give value for the subscription oney. [35]

THE COMMERCIALISATION OF PHOTOGRAPHY IN THE LATE 1860'S

By the late 1860's photography was becoming commonplace, in use by estate agents, as an aid to recording criminals, and even in connection with the Temperance movement. A contemporary observer commented `many thousands have come into the field and made it an ordinary business and not the Art that it was before they came.' [36]

The advent of the small cheap Carte de Visite photo in the early 1860's, made possible by means of a camera with four lenses taking eight negatives on a single plate, sparked off a mania for photo albums, and by 1869 sales of Cartes had reached sixteen to eighteen million per annum. In 1870 a Sheffield dealer offered for sale `the Medallion or Postage Stamp Camera’ capable of taking six medallions on 1/3 plate. [37]

Some creative photography was still being undertaken. James Syrus Tulley, who had founded his studio in Sheffield in 1855, attracted interest in 1867 with his studies of Wlilliam Broadhead, the Secretary of the Sheffield Trade Unions, who became involved in `rattening' and other trade outrages. Tulley’s photographs showed the real Broadhead rather than the villain portrayed in the cheap woodcuts. He was also praised for his views of Endcliffe Hall, the residence of John Brown Esq.

Tu11ey was a keen advocate of the wet plate process and sought to get satisfactory results on the site; by 1867 he had built an elaborate travelling darkroom to enable him to `travel out of town to get views not available by rail or coach'. The waggon was divided into three sections - bottles etc. being stored at one end, whilst at the other was a cupboard; sink and developing bath. There were two side windows and a sliding one for ventilation. About twenty gallons of water was carried for processing work and there were also two passenger seats.

The year 1869 saw photographers engaged in landscape work attempting to use Velocepedes or tricycles to carry the fifty pounds or so of equipment needed. They were thus enabled to work `beyond the reach of cabs, porters or, other civilised auxiliaries’. [39]

Photographic companies and elaborate studios now began to appear in the larger towns and in the more fashionable towns such studios had reception rooms, and printing rooms and boasted a number of portrait studios rich in foreign furniture. In such elaborate settings posed gentlemen lacking military bearing dressed in hired or borrowed uniforms, the simpering young ladies toying with baskets of flowers, or the literary lady by a table full of books or pen in hand. Contemplative Victorians leaned against `marble' columns, which in fact were wooden, hollow, and often doubled as storage cupboards.

Furnishing such premises became a business in itself. Advertisements abound for patent posing chairs, tables, curtains and backcloths showing both outdoor and door settings. Rustic subjects were in vogue and photographic journals recommended frames to which branches could be nailed or around which ivy could be trained.

In 1870 Messrs Cubley and Preston of High Street, Sheffield, photographic manufacturers and dealers, advertised `rock cloth' for backgrounds as well as other props including imitation ivy and grapevines. [40] Figure 4 shows a Carte de Visite including many of these props.

At this time, in the face of intense competition and decreasing profits many photographers gave up the business. In 1870 the apparatus belonging to Theophilus Smith was auctioned at The Mart, New Church Street, Sheffield, by Edward Eadon. Described as ‘ the most complete collection of photographic apparatus and appliances in the Provinces' it included apparatus with capabilities ranging from the Carte de Visite up to a 15 inch plate a11 instruments being guaranteed by Mr. Dallymeyer of London. [41]

As the stereo viewer faded in popularity photographers turned to the making of slides used in the magic lantern. Chadburn Brothers, whose Liverpool branch had shown an Episcope projector made by them in I865 were manufacturing lantern condensers by the year 1869. Times had changed, noted an observer in 1868, since the days when only the rich could have momentoes of friends. `The little washed-out watercolour drawings done by itinerant artists, and the blackpaper profiles cut by the dozen and touched up to suit anybody, were looked upon as miracles of Art by many within the memory of the present generation. Now men who formerly went about Fairs with paper and scissors, cutting out the faces of tier Majesty's subjects wholesale boast cameras and chemicals and take their portraits for six pence, frames and glass included.' [42]

With some justification it can be said that the first thirty years were the most distinctive - at this time it was the province of the individual, not until the introduction of improved dry plates in 1880 and Eastman Kodak roll film camera of 1888 did photography become a simplified hobby for the masses.

Two further items worthy of notice though they overstep the writer's dateline by some years. In 1889 E. Howarth, then Curator of Sheffield Museum, proposed to the Sheffield Camera Club that a photographic survey of Sheffield be made similar to the pioneering work done at Birkenhead. [43] This survey apparently never realised, would have recorded antiquarian and topographical features of the town, besides recording monuments, inscriptions and Parish Registers It was proposed at first to work to a radius of 4 miles from Sheffield Parish Church, including Ecclesfield, Stannington and Hand­sworth, then to work outwards to a twenty mile radius. Twenty-four members, working in twelve sections, were to be employed on this ambitious project.

Another revolution in mass photography was created before the First World War by the postcard. Advocated as the 'letter-card' as early as 1866, the format of the postcard was particularly suited to landscape studies. Before 1914 postcards emerged from the studios of such photographers as J. Biltcliffe of Penistone, active in^, taking views of that area, J. M. Bowns of Ecclesall Road photographed Whiteley Woods, and the Furniss family of Langsett Road were amongst the many producing cards of the Rivelin and Ecclesfield districts.

Suggestions mooted as long ago as 1866 for a National Photographic Museum have only recently been realised. It is only just that in this way we should honour the photographic pioneers who attempted to master a new art, and that we should treasure the images of the past world they struggled so hard to record.

My best thanks are due to the Local History and Archives Departments at Sheffield Central Library and to the staff of the Polytechnic Library at Psalter Lane. Reproductions of photographs were made courtesy of the Sheffield City Library and Sheffield City Museum. Mr. C. W. Harding, of the Department of Physics at the Science Museum, London, provided some information regarding Chadburn.Broth­ers, and numerous other people offered advice and information.

REFERENCES

[1] Sheffield Central Library Archives (SCL), Letters of Samuel Roberts of Park Grange, n.146; 24 Feb. 1852.

[2]. Sheffield and Rotherham Independent, 10 July 1847.

[3]. SCL Local History Dept., Newscuttings relating to Sheffield, Vol. 39, p. 37.

[4] SCL, Sheffield Literary and Philosophical Society Colln:, 192.

[5] Sheffield Independent, 2 Aug 1842

[6] Ibid 14 Jan. 1843.

[7] Ibid., 21 Jan. 1843.

[8] Ibid., 1 April 1843.

[9] William White, Sheffield Directory, 1849, advertisement

[10] SCL, Local Hist. Dept., Misc. papers 855L.

[11] British journal of Photography (B.J.P.), 1855.

[12] Independent, 24 Jan. 1852.

[13] Ibid., 29 April 1852.

[14] Ibid., 18 March 1854.

[15]. Liverpool and Manchester Photo Journal, Feb 1856.

[l6] John Holland `Photography' Sheffield Daily Telegraph 18 Nov.1862

[17] SCL, Sheff. Lit. and Phil. Soc. Colln., 192.

[18]. Sheffield School of Art report of Council meeting 7 November 1859. Sheffield Polytechnic Library.

[19]. William White, The Principles of Art as Illustrated by the Ruskin Museum Sheffield, 1895.

[20]. H. C. Sorby, `Microscopical Structure of Iron and Steel,' Journal of the Iron and Steel Institute, 1887.

[21] Melville and Company Sheffield Directory 1859

[ 22] Kelly's Post Office Directory 1854

[ 23]. W. White, Sheffield Directory, 1864.

[24]. `Photophilus' (J. Holland), `Photography', Sheffield Daily Telegraph, 18th, 19th, 20th Nov., 1862.

[25]. J. H. Stainton, The Making of Sheffield, 1924. Also `Abridgements of Patents-Photography 1839-66" National Museum of Photography, Bradford.

[26]. A. E. Beet, `Arthur Hayball. a Dreamer in Wood', T .H.A.S. Vol. 7. p. 252.

[27]. SCL, MD 6903. Also W. Hudson, The Life of John Holland, 1874.

[28]. B.J.P., 8 March 1867.

[29]. Independent, 28 March 1864.

[30]. SCL, Flood Claims, CA 7.

[31]. SCL, Flood Claims, CA 7, No. 3, Claim No. 2750.

[32]. B.J.P., 22 March 1867

[33]. B.J.P., May, 1867.

[34]. Ibid., 1 Sept. 1865.

[35]. Photographic News, 4 July 1879.

[36]. B.J.P., 27 March 1868.

[37]. Ibid., 25 March 1870.

[38]. Ibid., 13 and 17 May 1867.

[39]. Ibid., 4 June 1869.

40]. Ibid., 25 March 1870.

[41]. Ibid., 27 March 1868.

[42]. Ibid.

[43]. SCL, Local Hist. Pam.Vol 141, O 42 S.

[RichardB]

More

[Guest Edelworth]

There is a sneaking suspicion that Nathaniel Holden, son of George Holden, of Gertrude Street was 7 in 1881 and therefore even less likely to be a professional photographer in the 1870's - just a thought !

Nathaniel Holden was my Great great Uncle and he was born in 1844, He was George Holden's brother. The Nathaniel Holden you are writing about was George Holdens son and he was born in 1874. It was George, Nathaniel (senior) and Eliza that were the photographers :-)

[RichardB]

Thank you for the update and Welcome to SheffieldHistory.

Nathaniel Holden was my Great great Uncle and he was born in 1844, He was George Holden's brother. The Nathaniel Holden you are writing about was George Holdens son and he was born in 1874. It was George, Nathaniel (senior) and Eliza that were the photographers :-)

[RichardB]

and again

J S Tulley, 24-30 Division Street

1870's

A studio portrait of a young gentleman.

eBay

James Syrus Tulley known 1893-1925 at Division Street, 1870's may be optimistic - 1881 census may help

[Edmund]

James Syrus Tulley

In 1861 James Tulley was a selling tickets for the Theatre Royal from his premises at 26 Division street

In 1868 Tulley (artist, Division street) was one of several defendants regarding a disputed payment for installation of gas fittings in 1865 at the Volunteer Club House in Market street.

In December 1869 Tulley was in court regarding the disputed quality of a photograph of the interior of Neepsend Church. He had sent one of his assistants to take it and the light was poor for photography.

In 1873 he was in court again charged with a libel on the landlord of the “Q in the Corner”, Edward Wheeldon, relating to artillery uniforms.

In 1876 when the London Tea Company opened their new premises on High street (next to Tinker’s boot shop) one of their promotions was giving away 10,000 “Carte-de-Visites” by Tulley of Division street (see the ebay sale item for an example of one of these). Another promotion was that every purchase of half a pound of tea was given a ticket for a dozen free photographs at Tulleys.

In 1878 J Tulley was commissioned to paint a portrait in oils for a testimonial for a Sunday school teacher at Garden street Congregational church.

By 1901 J.S Tulley were at 24-30 Division street (telephone 219)

and here’s a photo of their premises: Tulleys

[Waterside Echo]

How do the professionals get all this detail in one shot? W/E.

[SteveHB]

How do the professionals get all this detail in one shot? W/E.how 001.JPG

Multiple shots merged into one, or a very expensive wide angle lens.

[SteveHB]

Dickinson George Thomas Youdan, 327 Glossop Road. 1901, 1905 &1911.
F.R.P.S., Fellow of the Royal Photographic Society.

and

George Thomas Youdan Dickinson, Photo artist, 337 Glossop Road (Kelly's 1893)

[tozzin]

Is this Tommy Youdan any relation to the Tommy Youdan who had the old Alexandra theatre on Blonk St?

[Waterside Echo]

Multiple shots merged into one, or a very expensive wide angle lens.

Thanks Steve. What a nice City we had had then. At least we are old enough to remember the full length of The Moor and the Hole in the Road in all their glory. Any one who does not remember how Sheffield used to be just take a look at the video City on the Move. W/E.