From: Peter Marshall (petermarshall@cix.co.uk)
Date: 02/23/02-01:37:21 PM Z
>
> Now, rereading the book by Roland Barth "La chambre claire", "Camera
> Lucida"
> in English, he mentions that the first photograph was by Niépce, and
> that it
> was a "dinner table". So the claim that the photograph, "Le point de
> vue de
> la fenêtre" was the first photograph ever, which is in Harry Ramson
> Center
> in Austin, seems in doubt. It seems then, that what is presume to be the
> first photograph, is in reality "the first preserved photograph from
> nature*" (*According to Helmut Gernsheim-photo-historian) , not the
> first
> photograph.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alejandro López de Haro
I think you have to ask what the evidence was for the "dinner table" - I
think it is possibly a mistaken recollection on the part of the author,
who perhaps had a later picture by Talbot in mind.
You would need to go back to the primary sources to investigate the claims
properly. What you find on the Internet in particular - whether at the
address you give or in my feature on Niepce - is almost entirely based on
secondary sources.
Peter Marshall
Photography Guide at About http://photography.about.com/
email: photography.guide@about.com
_________________________________________________________________
My London Diary http://mylondondiary.co.uk/
London's Industrial Heritage: http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/
The Buildings of London etc: http://londonphotographs.co.uk/
and elsewhere......
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:22 AM Z CST