Hercule Florence, the “Isolated Inventor of Photography” in Context
Grant Romer, a world authority on early photography, discusses the pursuits and discoveries of Hercule Florence in his experiments with the photographic process.
If told that a young man, without high education, living in a small rural settlement in Brazil, devoid of resources, independently invented photography, in 1833, would you believe it? Hercule Florence made that claim in 1839, and a Brazilian historian made it again in the 1970’s. The claim has since been thought dubious by historians of technology since nothing survived that looked like photographs, as commonly understood. Recently, a group of scholars, scientists, conservators, and descendants of that young man, Hercule Florence, gathered at the Hercules Laboratory in Evora, Portugal, to examine and analyze the surviving evidence of what was thought to be examples of photographic work. The conclusion... Yes, he did indeed invent Photography.
There is no need to entirely rewrite the history of the invention of photography, since a number of othersalso claimed to have “invented” it, more or less at the same time as Florence. All of them hadsignificant advantages compared with Florence, and none but two had progressed further than he did in1833. When Florence learned in 1839 that a means of fixing the image of the Camera Obscura had beenfound by a French artist, Louis Mandé Daguerre, he was stunned. Without further knowledge ofDaguerre’s process, Florence rapidly moved to publish in a Brazilian newspaper a claim to priority ofinvention. He described how he began on the path to inventing Photography:
“Having had the desire in 1830 to publish a memory with the intention of making the voices of animals a new subject of Studies of Nature and finding myself in a country where there was no printing workshop, I understood how useful it would be if this art [printing] were simplified both in terms of device and process so that everyone could print whatever was necessary. I have, therefore, devoted myself to the study of the printing arts, and with the few books I had [...] it occurred to me that perhaps it would be possible to images from the dark chamber by means of a body that could change its color by the action of light.”
Thus, beginning in 1832, while working on a simple means of printing, Florence began photographicexperimentation with silver nitrate, which he learned of from a pharmacist. He later claimed to havemade significant achievements over the next five years. After ultimately learning the details of Daguerre’sinvention, he wrote:
“It is true that, for some years, I have used photography to draw, and that in 1834, I did that in the presence of Sirs Riedel and Lund [sic], who took with them some of my photographic drawings [...] perhaps it would not be hasty to say that I have also invented photography [...] but the truth is that I did not pursue my experiments, and, for that reason, I do not want to attribute to myself a discovery upon which others might have more rights.”
Florence acknowledged that an idea could occur to multiple individuals at the same time. Indeed, it had.At least fifteen individuals formally claimed, in 1839, to have invented systems of Photography. Allhad kept their conceptions and experiments secret, fearing that the idea would be stolen before they hadresolved certain issues, most notably making the image permanent.
Like Florence, they worked with silver salts, which spread in solution on paper, rapidly darkened when exposed to light. The resulting images were in negative, that is, dark was registered where there was light exposure. To produce an adequately strong image, exposures took many minutes and hours, depending upon such variables as time of day or season. Most, like Florence, stopped their experiments when they saw the examples of Daguerre’s process, which was far superior to anything else they had achieved. The Daguerreotype process employed a highly polished metallic plate instead of paper, it required minutes instead of hours to form an image, produced a highly detailed and finely modulated direct-positive image, the virtual equivalent of visual experience in a neutral monochrome.
One can not but feel sympathy for Florence and the others who, in all sincerity, felt that they had conceived a technology of “printing with light”. Obviously, something common to all had stimulated that concept and motivated their efforts.
Historians, in accounting for the emergence of photographic technology, identify the rapid progress of science in the late 18th and early 19th century. The discoveries of new elements and the exploration of their properties certainly contributed. But, perhaps more importantly, it was international competition in finding practical applications for those discoveries that led to photography and many other novel technologies.
We are today very far removed, technologically, from the era in which Florence lived. In 1824, when he arrived in Brazil, steam engine technology was just beginning to spread. The first railroad in Brazil came in 1835. There was no technology based upon electricity. Something as basic as a bicycle with pedals did not exist. Printing was the only communication medium. However, there were technological advances, significantly in printing technology, in the form of lithography, which revolutionized the graphic arts, making, as it was said, “good pictures cheap and cheap pictures good”. At the time, it was widely acknowledged that technology could “[...] ease the burdens of humanity, contribute to its comforts, and make Nations wealthy.” Governments encouraged technological innovation in various ways and many more individuals sought discoveries and inventions than in the previous century. Indeed, what may well be called the “Age of Technology” had just begun.
When Florence departed from Monaco, he was not yet an inventor. His stated profession was “Draughtsman”. He came from a family with a direct connection to the Fine Arts, and Florence evidently had an aptitude for drawing and must have had some formal training to claim to be a professional draughtsman. Draughtsmen had to make precise linear drawings, architectural plans, maps, and designs for machines. They also met the need for copies of the same originals. The labor required great attention to accuracy in all its aspects. Certain mechanical and optical drawing aids were commonly used, such as the camera obscura, camera lucida, and pantograph, to save time and assure precision. Such tools required much practice in order to be efficiently and properly applied. Florence would have been familiar with these instruments when he reached Brazil. There he soon found employment in the Langsdorff’s Expedition as a “Second Draughtsman.” For the next five years, he constantly produced drawings, visually recording the discoveries of this mission to probe the unexplored regions of the Brazilian interior.
In essence, his services were those that photography came to replace. He was in the company of many highly educated and privileged Europeans, bent on discovering unknown natural resources. One of them was Karl Drais, a prolific inventor of mechanical devices whoin 1818, in Baden, was appointed, “Professor of Mechanics” for his invention of the velocopede, the first steerable bicycle with an adjustable seat. By 1827, he had also invented a device to record piano music on paper, the earliest typewriter with a keyboard, and an early stenographic machine using 16 characters. It is reasonable to assume that Florence had direct contact with Drais and with others who inspired him to invent. While serving in the expedition, Florence conceived and executed a system to accurately record, by musical notation, the songs of newly encountered birds. He named this invention Zoophony.
A transition from “artist” to “inventor” was far from unique in that period. Telegraphy had been invented by Samuel Morse, an actor and play-writer who was seeking to cheaply publish his plays. When he conceived the telegraph, he was a portrait painter. Likewise, Daguerre was a celebrated stage designer and artist when he invented the Diorama, the acknowledged precursor of the Cinema.
Florence was very familiar with the invention of lithography, evidently having read Alois Senefelder’s A Complete Course of Lithography, published in 1818. In it, Senefelder gives an account of how he conceived of the invention, struggled with refining the process over years, faced poverty, and ultimately succeeded after 18 years of effort in introducing it to France, where it flourished. Florence refers to this story many times in his journals, relating his own struggles to those of Senefelder. Most importantly, it was the principle of lithography, which Senefelder first called “Chemical Printing,” that Florence took as the starting point for his printing experiments.
Lithography was a new graphic medium. It inspired many of the others who conceived of photography not only as a way to make pictures, but, more importantly, as a way to make money. Significantly, Josef Nicephore Nièpce, commonly credited with being the first to achieve a true photograph, began his work trying to find an alternative to stone as the basis of lithography. Like Florence, he thought to use a metal plate instead of a heavy, bulky stone block.
Before the introduction of lithography, there were only three types of printing: stencil, relief and intaglio.The principle of transfer of pigment or special ink formulas, either by slight pressure or migration, hadbeen applied in early letter copy technology since the late 18th century. Such methods could onlyproduce a few low quality copies. The common “letter copying press” was known to Florence, since herefers to it as being in use in businesses in Brazil.
Florence began his printing experiments by modifying the Lithographic process. Eventually, he named his method Polygraphy, which was a modified form of lithography. It was the main focus of his inventing efforts, the one he sustained the longest, the one he felt was most significant. As a graphic artist, he had greater familiarity with the materials and methods of printing. Astonishingly, he claimed to have been capable of printing five colors at once, something that no one achieved until the 20th century.
Florence’s photographic experiments necessarily had a secondary focus. Because of his limited knowledge ofChemistry and narrow access to information, he progressed slowly. His first efforts followed the principle ofStencil printing. He covered a sheet of glass with an opaque coating and, with a stylus, made a lineardrawing. Coating paper with a solution of silver nitrate, he placed the glass sheet in contact and exposedit to sunlight. This resulted in light passing through the clear areas of the drawing and darkening thesilver nitrate, thus forming an exact copy. This method of forming a photograph is known as “printingout”. Florence had achieved “printing with light”. He continued to perfect this system, employing silver chlorideand gold chloride, which formed an image faster than silver-nitrate and with a more pleasant color. Thefixation of the image presented the next challenge. This he accomplished to an encouraging degree withurine, a common source of ammonia at the time and a known silver solvent.
Amazingly, Florence had conceived of the glass negative-paper positive system of photography, which came to be the dominant system used from the 1860’s until the year 2000. He used this method to print pharmacy labels, advertisements, a masonic certificate, and copies of his drawings from the Langsdorff expedition. Examples of this achievement survive to the present and were the subject of a recent laboratory analysis effort.
Having demonstrated the possibility of chemically printing graphics by the action of light, Florence progressed to attempting the capture of the image projected by a lens. His first camera used one of the lenses from a low powered telescope, which he fixed to the thumb opening of one of his palettes. Behind this, he fixed a small cardboard box with a mirror, as in the drawing Camera Obscura, tobounce the projected image upward to a ground glass screen where he placed hissensitized paper. With this, he made his first camera exposure of four hours, capturing the view out of hiswindow. He enthusiastically wrote in his journals:
“The action of light has drawn me the objects in the dark chamber: it fixed only the large shapes, the prominent contrasts: and that, with the defect of making the lights becoming darks and vice-versa, but this method of obtaining drawings by means of nature and not by human hand, is it not, despite its current precariousness, a new fact in the arts; and a fact of great interest? Is it not susceptible of being improved? Will I not have initiated the most wonderful art of drawing any object, of taking a view, without going to the trouble of doing it myself?”
These are the words of a soaring mind, with a romantic vision of a glorious destiny. His subsequent notes reveal a remarkably clear and sophisticated grasp of what had to be done to improve his results and of the potential benefits of the technology. Among his drawings, his second camera design was found a major advance on his first precarious palette camera. Florence added an adjustable lens tube, an observation portal to assure correct focus, and suppressed the mirror in order to reduce exposure time. With this camera he made a number of photographs out of doors of nearby buildings. Regrettably, examples of his camera produced imagery have not yet been identified among what survives of his legacy. It is for this reason that historians in the 20th century tended to doubt the achievement.
However, the efforts of a Brazilian historian, Boris Kossoy, together with descendants of Florence, who had preserved his legacy, brought the evidence of his work to international attention in the 1970’s. The photographic industry, based upon silver-halide chemistry that Florence had first begun with, was at its peak of development. As of the year 2000, however, digital photography gained dominance. The issue of “Who invented Photography?,” no longer has the interest and importance it once had. Many different answers that were given to that question can be found in history books, are often determined by national biasesand assume a very vague definition of “Photography” and “Photograph”.
In Florence’s case, it is very important to have a clear definition of both. “Photography” is a technology. As it was said before, technology is a way of extending the natural limits of human capacity. In its first significant applications, Photography was essentially a memory technology. It extended visual memory and did so with greater accuracy and less specialized labor than the picturing ability of artists. A “Photograph” is fundamentally a record of varying degrees of radiant energy formed at a certain time on a certain surface. With such an understanding, it should be recognized that Hercule Florence did invent and achieve Photography in the 1830’s, in isolated circumstances, independently of others, and before the public awareness of the technology. Until the recent analysis, it had not been completely confirmed that his surviving prints of labels and other drawings were truly based on silver chloride and gold chloride. Although it may seem improbable that Florence truly invented photography, it is now a proven fact. Most importantly, it is clear that these are among the earliest surviving examples of photographically generated graphics. Therefore, they are artifacts of the greatest value to the understanding of the origins of this profoundly important technology.
Clearly, had Florence been in Europe, with ample resources, he might have made greater progress and earned both Glory and Fortune. He surely and sadly felt that this was so. His fascinating story goes far beyond a tale of human tragedy. It must be understood in a much broader context than the invention of Photography. He was quintessentially a man of the 19th century. The product of the French Revolution, which recognized the Rights of Man of all classes and encouraged new individual endeavors. His other inventions, particularly those relating to printing, have yet to be fully investigated. His entrepreneurial spirit and endeavors must also be considered in a historical context. Although this is a story of the 19th century, it has a direct connection to the present, as the technology initiated in his time is ever more a factor in current life.
Justice has yet to be fully done to Hercule Florence, but is very much in process. Through the manifest efforts of his descendants, most notably Antonio Florence, his legacy is being preserved, studied, and widely published, thus fulfilling the hope of Florence to have his voice heard one day and his achievements recognized.
Grant B. Romer
Rochester NY, February 2023
Grant Romer, photographic historian, scholar, daguerreotypist, conservator, is recognized as a world authority on early photography, particularly the history, practice, and conservation of the daguerreotype. He has written and lectured extensively on many other aspects of photographic history. In 1976, he joined the staff of the George Eastman House, becoming its Conservator of Photography in 1989. He served as curator for many exhibitions while at Eastman House. The Daguerreian Society awarded him its Lifetime Achievement Award in 2010. He has also advised many of the world’s most important institutional photographic collections. In 2014, Grant and Ariadna Romer founded the Academy of Archaic Imaging, dedicated to exploring the history of the application of technology to depicting visual experience.
*** The IHF congratulates Grant Romer on his birthday, celebrating his career and his invaluable contribution to the history of photography. ***
Tags: photography invention
