12201224484?profile=originalHMS Erebus took part in the Ross expedition of 1839–1843, and was abandoned in 1848 during the third Franklin expedition. The sunken wreck was discovered by the Canadian Victoria Strait expedition in September 2014. In a fascinating series of blog posts Professor Russell Potter reports on several visits to see the process of conservation on recovered artefacts. 

One, particularly, is relevant to daguerriean photography. A metal device sparked Potter's interest. He notes: "I was struck at once by the fact that the square seemed similar in proportion to the Franklin daguerreotypes made by the operator from Richard Beard's firm" and thought it might be to do with plate polishing. The hunch was confirmed by Mike Robinson who confirmed it was part of a device patented by John Johnson in 1841 and known to have been used in Richard Beard's studios. 

Potter concludes: "So now we have something we didn't have before: clear evidence that indeed such an apparatus was aboard HMS "Erebus," and that, assuming it was used as intended, Daguerreotypes were almost certainly made during the expedition. It's only one small step to add to the hope that someday such plates may be recovered; if they are, they'll be the earliest photographs ever taken in the Arctic!"

Read the full, illustrated, blog here: https://visionsnorth.blogspot.com/

With thanks to Anne Strathie for the link.

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of British Photographic History to add comments!

Join British Photographic History

Comments

  • I noticed Goodsir's error too - it's frustrating he doesn't mention the photography session more as he probably took an interest and was certainly quick to learn. So fingers crossed for finding Goodsir's diary or even images this season ...

  • There's no indication that time constraints played a role in the making of the original set -- it was commissioned by Lady Franklin and she chose to include the officers of her husband's vessel, and Crozier. I think that additional portraits, while possible, wouldn't have served their purpose if taken after sailing, which was as keepsakes for friends and family (Beard's offered copies by post). The other open question was whether Goodsir -- or whoever took charge of the camera -- would have had any training in its use; nothing of the kind is mentioned in the surviving letters, and Goodsir himself refers to Beard's operator as a "Talbotypist" so he apparently, at least at that point, wasn't aware that it was a different process. I hope we'll someday see the plates -- which may well have been stored together -- and find out!

  • Seeing Russell's and Roger's comments, I'm wondering whether they may have taken the camera so they could make daguerreotypes of the other Terror officers and others who would have been aware of the photographic sessions but not had their images taken. The sessions were quite close to the departure date, so perhaps they ran out of time?  

  • The format was chosen for compactness -- I suspect they didn't plan on taking landscape views -- the camera was likely in the charge of the expedition's naturalist, Harry Goodsir, and his main plan for it may have been to take photos of specimens.
  • Interesting that it was a Wolcott camera as I've only known that camera used for portraiture. You would have thought that a camera taken on an exhibition would be used for views rather than portraits.

This reply was deleted.

Blog Topics by Tags

Monthly Archives