Naming conventions for photo processes

[John Davies]

Is there a convention for naming photographic processes? I seem to recall that if the process is named after a person, the name starts with a capital - Talbotype, Daguerreotype, but if it is just the substance, it is lower case - albumen, wet plate, etc.

Is this still the case?

Thanks

John Davies

[John Davies]

Thanks Gawain. I would also like to hear other views particularly non-US. How do the French treat their fellow country person?

Gawain Weaver said:

I tend to capitalize the names when they are a commercial process like Autochrome, but not when it's just a common name like albumen print. I don't capitalize solely on the basis of being named after a person, though others may. There is no universal convention to my knowledge. Getty's AAT does not capitalize daguerroetype though, and the AAT is probably the closest we have to an authority on this matter, despite its many flaws. AAT does capitalize Talbotype, though it doesn't use it as a primary name, preferring calotype.

I put together a list for the purposes of a museum cataloging project here, in case it's useful:

http://gawainweaver.com/processID

best,

Gawain

[Gawain Weaver]

I tend to capitalize the names when they are a commercial process like Autochrome, but not when it's just a common name like albumen print. I don't capitalize solely on the basis of being named after a person, though others may. There is no universal convention to my knowledge. Getty's AAT does not capitalize daguerroetype though, and the AAT is probably the closest we have to an authority on this matter, despite its many flaws. AAT does capitalize Talbotype, though it doesn't use it as a primary name, preferring calotype.

I put together a list for the purposes of a museum cataloging project here, in case it's useful:

http://gawainweaver.com/processID

best,

Gawain