Desirability of Color in Photography
*Chapter 16 of Pictorial Photography by Paul L. Anderson, 1917 (251-255). I feel that the entire chapter is worth reading for any photographer, because it presents an interesting case for photography as an intellectual activity, rather than an exercise in embodiment.
Almost since the first discovery of photography scientists have been working to develop some method which would permit reproducing not only the gradations of natural objects but also the colors, and within the past ten years considerable success has crowned their efforts, in that methods of color photography have become commercially practical. Before that time there had been discovered several methods which permit the accurate reproduction of colors, but color photography remained a laboratory experiment, or at least required laboratory apparatus and very careful work, until the introduction of the autochrome plate by Messrs. Lumiére. Since that time several plates more or less resembling the autochrome in general character have been placed on the market, and Fredrick Ives has standardized an older process in such a manner that any photographer who will follow instructions carefully can at the present time make satisfactory photographs in full color of practically any natural object.
There can be no question as to the scientific value of these processes, since they render possible a perfect record of many objects of the highest interest, scientists hitherto having been obliged to rely on the comparatively laborious and inaccurate method of hand coloring, so that to the botanist, the zoologist, the pathologist, and to many other workers in scientific fields color photography renders inestimable assistance. So far as the artist is concerned, however, the value of color photography is more or less doubtful, and many arguments are advanced against its use in this field. The writer has at various times made a great many color photographs and, like nearly every photographer, was very enthusiastic over the process on his first introduction to it, but after making perhaps two or three hundred color photographs he found that, the novelty wearing off, the results failed to interest him. In a search for the reason for this condition the writer has come to a very definite conclusion, that in the present state of the art the use of color is not desirable.
Some time ago, in conversation with two well-known painters, the writer said: “How much do you feel that photography loses by being unable to reproduce colors?” One of my painters answered, “I do not feel that it loses anything. If you examine the black-and-white reproductions of the works of great masters, you will find that in many cases the black-and-white version is more interesting than the original, and this is true of even the works of the Venetians, such as Titian,” and turning to the other painter, he asked: “Isn’t that so?” The other replied: “Absolutely; and if Titian’s color couldn’t make a thing interesting, nobody’s could.” Here, then, were two painters, both of them able men, both of them familiar with the best works in their medium, and both of them accustomed to work in color, who felt that a black-and-white art could, other things being equal, be quite as interesting as a color art. The average layman is actually thrilled by the sight of a photograph in color, as witness the immense sale in the country of hand-colored prints, so it must be apparent that the layman and the artist are pleased by entirely different aspects of art.
To determine the cause of the different feeling which exists between layman and artists, it may be well to consider first the appeal made by different forms of art, and it will be found that every art possesses in varying proportions an admixture of both sensuous and intellectual appeal. Thus, the appeal of music is almost entirely to the senses, the intellectual part being so slight as to be not worth considering; that of poetry may be composed of intellectual and sensuous constituents in almost any proportion; that of architecture is almost exclusively intellectual, and so on. It is of course apparent that, whereas an intellectual appeal is to the logical faculties, a sensuous one is to the physical portion of the individual; that is, certain nerves respond to certain stimuli, thus affecting in greater or lesser degree the entire nervous system. It is well known that certain classes of music may stimulate the hearers to almost entire self-forgetfulness, inducing either tears or great exaltation, but is not so well known that color possesses in lesser degree the same power. It has been found that the warmer colors, such as red, orange and yellow, stimulate the nervous system very markedly through the action on the optic nerve, so that no neurologist would permit a patient to remain in a room finished in red, whereas the cooler colors are distinctly quieting to the nervous system. Hence it follows that the combination of different colors in their suitable proportion may produce a sensuous excitement or sensuous calm resembling that aroused by music. It seems clear, then, that the function of color in art is to heighten the effect by producing in the spectator a nervous condition, which renders him receptive to the idea which the artist wishes to convey, and that when the artist wishes to appeal solely or principally to the intellectual faculties, he will refrain in great measure from the use of color, and will certainly only employ subdued colors. Examination of the works of those artists who are noted for their psychic insight, such as Rembrandt or Velasquez, shows that these men employed color to a very limited extent, their work being conspicuous for the use of secondary and tertiary colors, almost to the exclusion of primaries.
Since photography is capable of reproducing more perfectly than any other art the outlines and gradations of natural objects, and since it reproduces colors with comparative difficulty, it would seem that the worker with the camera is particularly favored if he desires to produce a result which shall appeal to the logical faculties rather than to the senses, and this serves to indicate the difference of opinion existing between artists and laymen as to the value of color in photography, for the artist is necessarily trained to observe and to think, whereas the average individual does neither. Many persons will be inclined to question this statement as to the failure of the average person to observe his surroundings and to employ his logical faculties, but investigation shows that it is quite justified.
The photographer who wishes to work in color is, generally speaking, limited as to the ability to produce various effects, since he cannot modify the internal relationships of his colors with the same ease that the painter can and it therefore seems a mistake for a worker whose desire it is effect a sensuous stimulus to employ the camera, but the possibilities of appealing to the logical faculties by means of photography seem almost unlimited and the writer, therefore, feels that color photography does not merit serious consideration by the pictorial worker.
