LEONARDO the Camera Man

{same subject, I wrote this 25 years ago}

Leonardo da Vinci 1452-1519 ”described the Pinhole Camera in the pages of his private notebooks, written in secret code.” {B. Newhall, 1943, The Complete Photographer} “In this Codex Atlanticus, Leonardo da Vinci sketched a Camera Obscura and wrote that the images created by the device “will actually seem painted on paper”. {Van Deren Coke, 1964, THE PAINTER AND THE PHOTOGRAPH} Leonardo da Vinci, being thoroughly knowledgeable in the use and construction of the Camera Obscura while writing images projected appear “painted” and being an artist/painter of experimentation/invention himself, would suggest to myself his practical usage of such a device in the creation of art, rather than an avoidance and omission of usage. Also we read “Leonardo’s belief in exact imitation of nature is even greater than Alberti’s. He constantly sets up this as the final test of painting, as, for instance, when he {Leonardo} says, “that painting is the most to be praised which exactly agrees with the thing imitated”. And though in other passages his opinion of this seems to differ, he certainly considers it of great importance, since he recommends the painter always carry with him a mirror to see whether the reflection in it agrees exactly with his painting and elsewhere he refers to the reflection in a mirror as “the true painting”.  Blunt, 1940, ARTISTIC THEORY IN ITALY 1450-1600, pg. 33 Also of relative interest in the formation-execution of art, “Leonardo’s whole-hearted faith in nature makes him disapprove of those who devote themselves to imitating the style of other masters, “never imitate the manner of another painter, or you will be called a grandson and not a son of nature in your art”. The danger of copying the style of another painter is that it leads to mannerism, and that, in Leonardo eyes, is one of the worst sins, since mannerism excludes naturalism. Mannerism generally springs from constantly repeating a trick of any kind without referring back to nature. The same sort of fate is likely to befall an artist who relies on his memory instead of studying nature directly”. Blunt, 1940, {Ditto} Also one might like to note Leonardo wrote “in fact, whatever exists in essence, in material form or in imagination, all this the artist has first in his mind and then in the work of his hand.” Blunt, 1940, {Ditto}

{And here are a couple more quotes related to the time when the transitional use of the camera went from the Camera Obscura to the camera image which was preserved in the form of the Daguerreotype or Ambrotype or Tintype etc., rather than just being a projected image which the artist formerly traced}

“Today, open air photography imbues the artist’s work with fresh pulsating life, offering him a thousand valuable hints….the Camera now forms an essential part of…. studio equipment; out-of-doors it stands next to the painters easel. If formerly the painter was only active under his sunshade, now he puts his head just as often under the black focusing cloth. In a hundred cases, if you go into a modern painters studio you will find the owner is busy in the darkroom. Artists who do not use the camera are in the minority…”

Karl Raupp, “DIE PHOTOGRAPHIE IN DER MODERN KUNST”, DIE PHOTOGRAPHIE FUR ALLE, 1889, pg.325

Referring to the work of Jean A.D. Ingres, “he does seem to have used photographs as an aid when painting some of his pictures. Certainly his later nudes clearly resemble Daguerreotypes in their hard outline, smooth finish, and lack of color. The photography historian H. Gernsheim has expressed the opinion that one of Ingres late works, “la Source”, is directly related to Nadars 1856 photograph of Christine Roux. It is known that Ingres admired photographs, for he said of them, “this is the exactitude that I would like to achieve”. At another time he was more cautious and expressed reservations, “it {a photograph} is admirable but one must not admit it”. To this his pupils Hippolyte Flandrin and E. Pineux Amaury-Duval he said, referring to a photograph, “look at this, Gentlemen!, which of you would be capable of such fidelity, such firmness of line, such delicacy of modeling?”.

Van Deren Coke, “THE PAINTER AND THE PHOTOGRAPH”, 1964, pg. 12.

To you, the fearers of life inspired creations, or to you, those acceptors, believers, and prefers of anti-photo hand-created suggestions of form….why is it I who needs to familiarize art instructors of today’s young as to what is and what isn’t of historical common knowledge? Why current art people, teachers, instructors, writers, historians, curators, judges, etc., fear the photo in the transformation of a once seen variance of reflected light {reality} itself dependent upon an infinite accumulation of innate factors, the wind, the moon, stars and all, into art, is a Mighty Mystery to Me. Or to suggest the credit of a reflected realities inherent proportional attributes, infinite variance of light reflection & absorption, and projected emotional intensities, based upon a universal continuance,…..too a photographer’s passing affinity to subject as exhibited by a movement of thumb or finger, is needless to say, rather intellectually mummifying. If either the human {sitter/model for artist} {or other realities in continual observable change} had the physical stabilities of a rock {or any object of non-observable change} or I had a hand of light speed {really fast}, I would dump the camera image {reflected reality impression}, and pursue capturing all observable realities perceived or worlds then imagined, but alas, for now, no time to blink an eyelash for reality and this thought is now as it never was. When Leonardo da Vinci says let the mirror be the final judge whether the work of art reflects reality or not “to see whether the reflection in it agrees exactly with his painting”, when

CEZANNE, COROT, DALI, DEGAS, DE KOONING, DELACROIX,

EAKINS, GAUGIN, MANET, MATISSE, PICASSO, ROCKWELL,

PARRISH, RODIN, ROUSSEU, SARGENT, SHAHN, TISSOT,

TOULOUSE-LAUTREC, VAN GOGH, VERMEER, & WARHOL

all worked directly from the camera image to find inspiration in the creation of art,….what then my dear sir, my dear lady instructor, writer, teacher, curator, historian,

do you feel is your reasoning/justification/purpose in your participation in the education of the young in denunciation of the camera in cooperation/conjunction to the creation and formation of art?

Being neither history,

intellectual commonsense,

or emotional desires of the young seem to be in your favor,

what Earthly good would come from such a continuance?