Welcome	About	Introduction	Chapter One beginning of time – 999 AD
Chapter Two 1000 AD – 1399	Chapter Three 1400 – 1599	Chapter Four 1600 – 1649	Chapter Five 1650 – 1699
Chapter Six 1700 – 1749	Chapter Seven 1750 – 1799	Chapter Eight 1800 – 1819	Chapter Nine 1820 – 1829
Chapter Ten 1830 – 1839	Chapter Eleven 1840 – 1849	Chapter Twelve 1850 – 1859	Chapter Thirteen 1860 – 1869
Chapter Fourteen 1870 – 1879	Chapter Fifteen 1880 – 1884	Chapter Sixteen 1885 – 1889	Chapter Seventeen 1890 – 1894
Chapter Eighteen 1895 – 1899	Chapter Nineteen 1900 + post cinema	Chapter Twenty 1911 +	Copyright
HOTDOC Internet Archive Channel	HOTDOC X Channel	HOTDOC You Tube Channel

_{Period: 1700 to 1749}

In chapter five I concluded with the Cabinets of Curiosities where anything might be placed, from scientific gadgets to antiquities, and from exotic stuffed creatures to artworks, as long as it had the requisite wow factor. And, as the Magic Lantern and Camera Obscura expanded and grew in knowledge and popularity, the wow factor was there in spades.

Now in the early 18th century, the Camera Obscura was used in the sciences in many ways prior to photography coming into its own. It wasn’t limited to the studies of the heavens either. Physician William Cheselden used it to illustrate the human skeleton. Unlike Holmes however, who used photographs to study human motion, Cheselden had to have his images drawn by an artist.

In the first half of the 18^th century, the Camera Obscura is still very much a drawing aid. We begin to see it emerge however, within art itself. Canaletto’s Piazza San Marco is a good example of the Camera Obscura being used to aid perspective.

1704
JOHN HARRIS (1666-1719)
Harris was the editor of Lexicon Technicum (Dictionary of the Arts and Sciences). A writer of scientific books, Harris presented an improved Camera Obscura that contained a scioptric ball in a wood mount that enabled a Panoramic view.

---

---

John Harris pictured left was writer, editor, and publisher of Lexicon Technicum or, the longer titled Universal English Dictionary of Arts and Sciences: Explaining Not Only the Terms of Art, But the Arts Themselves.

1704
SIR ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
The English scientist, mathematician natural philosopher Newton published his Opticks in 1704 and went on to explain among other things, the Camera Obscura principle using a single convex lens.

Isaac Newton’s epitaph reads “If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants.”

In illustrating his seventh axiom, Newton used the single-lens analogy comparing it with vision. This he argued, embodied the answer to Aristotle’s old problem. He made use of the dark chamber for his prism experiments. READ from p84 of The First Book of Opticks, Part II . . .

---

---

---

---

---

1705
JOHANN CONRAD CREILING
Still further ahead in 1705, Creiling published his thesis Phaenomena Laternae Magicae, which included a more detailed description of a moving slide.

---

These two portrayals below of room cameras showing what appears to be a cupid-like figure on the left and a man in the tinted one on the right, both are from the Four Books of True Christianity in 1706 by Johann Arnds Weiland.

Amazing where we find the Pinhole Image.

1709
ZACHARIAS CONRAD VON UFFENBACH (1683-1734)
Uffenbach was a travelling German ‘observer,’ collector, and chronicler of his time, writing Merkwürdige Reisen durch Niedersachsen, Holland and Engelland telling the tales of what he saw and recorded. And boy, what he saw and recorded.

Uffenbach left behind very detailed travel diaries, published posthumously in 1753–54. In these he described, among many curiosities, a Magic Lantern performance with moving images. The key reference comes from his notes around 1709 (during his travels in the Dutch Republic, especially Amsterdam and Leiden).

He reports having seen a lantern exhibition where the projected figures did not remain static, but actually moved.

---

Revelations in my pre cinema study include the period 1709-1711 when Uffenbach defined the contents of 18th-century curiosity cabinets and seeing a Magic Lantern image “move” in 1709.

This, by a glass grinding optician named Themme in the village of Kassel, Germany.

---

He marvelled at the realism; the fact that images were not mere flat projections but could simulate life. His account is often cited by lantern historians as an early eyewitness to “animated” projection in a public or semi-public setting.

This is one of the earliest written confirmations of moving lantern slides being shown to paying or invited audiences. It helps anchor the transition from static projections (scientific, didactic, or ghostly) to theatrical, proto-cinematic entertainments.

In his book-styled journals, Uffenbach wrote on 19 November having seen a Magic Lantern image;

🎞️ rotating brass wheels stimulated by a filament
🎞️ a Cherub whirling a wheel
🎞️ and a gun that fired

Sixteen years before Musschenbroek’s moving windmill slides.

---

The gun operated by a drawn paper slip that exposed the discharge, reportedly documented to have been on 19 November 1709. Uffenbach remitted ten florins at Themme’s shop to purchase seven of his moving slides even though he had found them “inferior,” like he was some expert in early animation.

Below are pages 50, 51 and 62, of Merkwürdige Reisen durch Niedersachsen, Holland and Engelland.

---

Translated from Latin we can read from Uffenbach, his time spent in the glass grinding shop of Themme, an optician in the village of Kassel, Germany and later his home, the events indicating he was shown movement.

This ‘all round palaeographer of his time built a library of over 12K entries, cataloguing it himself in four volumes between 1729 and 1731. His travel journal on Saxony, Holland, and England was published in 1753 and 1754 and is a valuable source for library history all by itself.

---

Uffenbach defined the contents of 18th century curiosity cabinets and seeing a Magic Lantern image “move” in 1709

---

Zacharias von Uffenbach was a patrician and for a time, the mayor of Frankfurt. He was one of the greatest book collectors of his time and it’s from his travels and chronicling that we find these moving glass slides.

1711
WILLEM JAKOB VAN GRAVESANDE (1688-1742)
Gravesande illustrated a Camera Obscura in the form of a sedan chair or “machine” as Gravesande himself called it, in his lengthy essay Usage de la chambre obscure pour le dessein [An Essay on Perspective, The Hague, 1711]. He went into great detail in describing this portable eye piece in the pages before showing it, and when he did, it was a two-page fold-out, seen here.

Dr. Charles Hutton will describe in detail this camera in 1814. Gravesande was a Dutch mathematician, physicist, and philosopher who played a key role in spreading Isaac Newton’s ideas across Continental Europe.

Born in ‘s-Hertogenbosch [sic], (Den Bosch) Netherlands, he studied law at Leiden University, earning a doctorate in 1707 with a thesis on suicide. This hybrid device combined transportation with scientific demonstration as a portable optical observatory.

---

Gravesande’s sedan chair of 1711 was illustrated by Gravesande in his essay ‘An Essay on Perspective’.  It consisted of a seating compartment where the artist would draw from the image projected down from the roof aperture/mirror (pictured).

It appears in 18^th century scientific literature, especially in discussions of mobile or domestic uses of optical devices. It was essentially a portable dark room. The user sat inside a modified sedan chair fitted with lenses and mirrors to project an external view onto a screen or internal surface.

This was not for casual entertainment, but likely built as a pedagogical or demonstrational tool to teach optics, illustrate projection, or observe scenery in a controlled setting.

Gravesande also invented the heliostat, a device utilizing the sun as a light source in astronomy.

Apparently, there was some sort of foot peddle which allowed fresh air to be pumped into the compartment using a periscope-shaped tube. This illustration does not show this.

Jacob van der Aa’s Biographical Dictionary of the Netherlands (1852–1878) mentions his optical experiments, including adaptations of the Camera Obscura, but doesn’t dwell on this chair.

The Teylers Museum and Rijksmuseum Boerhaave in the Netherlands (which hold early Dutch scientific instruments and works of van ’s Gravesande) include references to his Camera Obscura designs, though the sedan chair itself is not preserved.

In early 18^th century instrument catalogues, there are mentions of “grande camera obscura in forma di seggiola portatile,” a large Camera Obscura in the form of a portable chair, some attributed to van ’s Gravesande’s circle or to instrument-makers following his designs.

Illustrations of similar devices appear in the 1740s–1750s in treatises by Scheiner, Zahn, and later Robert Smith, although they don’t directly credit van Gravesande, but mirror concepts attributed to him.

The sedan chair Camera Obscura illustration from Gravesande’s An Essay on Perspective, appears in the chapter called the Dark Chamber. It was unique and custom-built, intended for elite use or scholarly demonstration.

The vertical rods marked E, D, c, c′ appear to be part of a height or focal-length adjustment mechanism, maybe for tuning image clarity or redirecting the light path slightly. No known surviving physical example remains, but descriptive evidence survives in 18^th century writings and catalogues.

---

1712
JOSEPH ADDISON (1672 – 1719)
This editor of the London Spectator writes in an editorial this year;

“The prettiest landskip I ever saw was one drawn on the walls of a dark room. Here you might discover the waves and fluctuations of the water in strong and proper colours, with a picture of a ship entering at one end and sailing by degrees through the whole piece.”

This popularisation of the Camera Obscura grew after a visit to the Greenwich Park camera by Joseph Addison. The Camera Obscura and Greenwich by Pip Brennan indicates that over the last two centuries, there have been a number of Camera Obscuras at Greenwich.

Here is the original page from the The Spectator dated Wednesday 25 June, 1712 courtesy of @FraserNelson (X) the current Editor of The Spectator showing the Addison camera write-up.

---

Several overviews of lantern history repeat this point including Eder’s The Invention of Projection Apparatus of 1945 (De Gruyter Brill). On the Origins of Moving Slides by Hauke Lange-Fuchs and published in the Magic Lantern Journal also has a page devoted to Ehrenberger.

---

His teacher, a Mr. Hamberger, credited the origin of moving slides to Erhard Weigel of whom I have spoken of and have produced a series on. Hamberger, whose only authored Encyclopedia I visited, claimed Weigel “had made them before 1700.”

Liesegang apparently agreed with Hamberger by citing him, claiming it was 16 years earlier than that, therefore placing the event at 1697. If this is true, then this places Ehrenberger higher up on the list of the earliest moving images we know of, surpassing that of both Creiling and Uffenbach in 1705 and 1709 respectively.

Pictured is the frontispiece of Ehrenberger’s Novum et curiosum Laternae magicae augmentum and his lantern from p13.

---

In Barockberichte (Salzburg) there is an article by Deac Rossell The Magic Lantern and Moving Images before 1800 that refers to Ehrenberger, including the 1713 dissertation.

The article contains some discussion and citation of page numbers. It states that on p7 of Ehrenberger’s Novum et Curiosum Laternae Magicae Augmentum (Jena, 1713) there is textual content relevant to the discussion of moving slides associated with Ehrenberger.

Pictured is the page from Liesegang’s Dates and Sources / A Chronology of Pre Cinema History, Franz Paul Liesegang, Magic Lantern Society of Great Britain, London, 1986, pp14, 15.

READ the pages from Dates and Sources  here at Internet Archive.

Also page 12 of On the Origins of Moving Slides by Hauke Lange-Fuchs and published in the Magic Lantern Journal.

---

The collection also includes oriental manuscripts, Indian manuscripts written on palm leaves, a collection of Greek Graeci-Wessela and an archive of Adalbert Stifter. In total, the manuscript collection consists of over 15 000 library units.

1713
THE ANAMORPHOSIS MACHINE
JACOB LEUPOLD (1674–1727)
During the golden age of painting while the Camera Obscura is being introduced to perfect perspective, Leupold introduces into the theory of anamorphoses, an apparatus which tried to automate the making of anamorphosed images. We find the details in Anamorphosis Mechanica Nova published in 1713.

---

Even though Jakob Leupold, the most prominent scientific instrument maker of his time, created the first published proposal for automating image generation, it received little attention. Pictured here is Table I of his work Anamorphosis Mechanica Nova published in 1713.

Notice that TAB.III was published incorrectly and the two II’s crossed out by the scanner to show it’s actually TAB. I and not III.  

_{Image from The James Marshall and Marie-Louise Osborn Collection, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University}

---

The movement of the device presented by Leupold in 1713 to anamorphose images, was a pair of differential gears that replaced the grid utilised by the originators of these and most other earlier perspective-producing instruments. For instance, I’m speaking of the Sighting Grid of Albrecht Dürer.

Pictured is Leupold’s Anamorphosis Nova (1713), Table. II, The James Marshall and Marie-Louise Osborn Collection, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University.

---

The gears were designed to mimic the artist’s hand, taking artistic control and physical processes away from the eye and hand coordination that Durer would have used. Below is Table II, as well as a replica by Museo Galileo-Istituto di Storia della Scienza of Leupold’s instrument for drawing cylindrical anamorphoses as seen in Table I.

---

Historians of Dead Media and Visual Culture according to my research, present their origins of anamorphosis around the period of Hans Holbein and his anamorphed skull in The Ambassadors of 1533, with references to Albrecht Dürer, Plateau and, on occasion, Leonardo.

Let’s see how the Jakob Leupold anamorphosis apparatus of 1713 has morphed into today’s CNC, by Pablo Garcia. Watch for some perspective drawings you may recognize from the past which you’ve seen in my timeline before.  

---

1717
HONOURABLE MENTION
JEAN-JACQUES D’ORTOUS DE MAIRAN (1678–1771)
Though not a showman or inventor, nor a builder of devices, de Mairan sits upstream in the current that fed the 18^th century love of optical science. He anticipated how the invisible forces of light, magnetism, and electricity could be staged or conceptualized, as well as helping establish darkness as a productive field, not just absence—critical to how early optical shows operated.

He stimulated the thinking minds of Delisle, Nollet, and even Mesmer, who blurred the lines between science and visual entertainment.

De Mairan wrote on perceptual rhythms and biological motion, themes that echo in the newly coined Apparent Motion studies. Though not typically cited in pre cinema history, de Mairan’s writings show a keen interest in how light, colour, and visibility function in optical entertainments.

His ideas show up in the intellectual atmosphere surrounding phosphorescent tableaux like those by Casati, Kircher, or later Etienne-Gaspard Robertson. His major works were;

🔍 Dissertation sur la lumière (1717 & 1719) https://archive.org/details/b31870533_0002/page/n3/mode/2up  a 50 page dissertation covering light’s impact on matter and visibility

🔍 Dissertation sur les variations journalières du baromètre (1735) blending atmospheric optics and empirical data

1718
EARLIEST KNOWN GERMAN LANTERNA MAGICA MANUAL
CHRISTOPH GÄRTNER (1684–1764)
While Christiaan Huygens is generally credited with inventing the Lanterna Magica, the device was popularized mostly by the word-of-mouth of travelling showmen. To find a specifically German contribution to its early popularization, we must look to the early 18th century.

Christoph Gärtner, a German mathematician and inventor wrote a detailed German manual for the Lanterna Magica and published it in 1718 in Jena. It was the first German Technical Guide on how to build and operate the lantern.

This is one of the earliest known, dedicated technical texts in German that explained how to build, operate, and use the Magic Lantern for both entertainment and educational purposes. Before Gärtner, knowledge about the lantern was often passed secretly among travelling showmen.

His manual democratized the technology in Germany, translating esoteric knowledge into a practical, accessible format for a broader technical audience. His work shows the early academic interest in the device in the German states well before it became a Fairground staple.

By providing precise instructions on building and preparing the lantern and slides, Gärtner laid the groundwork for the future network of German optical manufacturers like Plank and others who would mass-produce these devices a century later.

---

Christoph Gärtner was active in the early 18th century. Before his work, the technical knowledge for the lantern was often kept secret among travelling showmen. By translating this esoteric knowledge into a practical, accessible format, Gärtner helped democratize the technology in the German states.

This laid the essential groundwork for the future establishment of German optical manufacturing networks, like Ernst Plank’s. In essence, his work was crucial in shifting the Lanterna Magica from an expensive, secretive and mysterious novelty, to a device whose operation and construction were documented and understood by a wider technical audience in Germany, a necessary step for it to become the widespread popular entertainment that dominated pre cinema visual culture.

Engelbrecht, along with his brother Christian began manufacturing Optical Box views in 1719. Paintings or engravings, enhanced with colours, and enclosed in a case, were observed through one or more lenses.

---

Optical Boxes were varnished wood decorative enclosures with painted colour engravings with a magnifying lens approximately 4.7 inches in diametre having a tilted mirror 8.7 x 6.9 inches and seven successive frames for horizontally arranging the perspective views.

Around 1730, Engelbrecht revolutionized visual entertainment with his Perspective Theatres. These were intricate, hand-coloured engravings typically arranged in layered sets. When viewed through a special optical device or peepshow box, they created a convincing illusion of three-dimensional depth and realism.

His Perspective Theatres portrayed a wide array of subjects, including court life, battle scenes, religious and allegorical themes, and even street scenes and the trades. These works were groundbreaking for their time, offering both entertainment and educational value.

---

---

These images are from the Centre National du Cinéma et de L’image Animée, and Stéphane Dabrowski. The Boite d’optique came in different shapes, sizes, and provided a variety of views.

---

Here is a rare Boite d’optique dating from late in the second half of the 18th century, in a near-original state. This Optical Box is complete, with mirror inclined at 45° and seven polychrome images.

^{Images Antiq-Photo}

This Optical Box has at the base, three levels, each with a shelf that can support the images. The 3 levels make it possible to optimize the observation by choosing the level that matches the images according to their dimensions. The construction is natural wood.

---

the Optical Box was so popular across Europe that even opticians sold them when patrons would come in for spectacles

---

---

English mahogany table converted to a pyramid-shaped Optical Box that’s foldable with magnifying lens 6.7 inches in diametre, c.1830. Patented in 1798 it has 2 brass handles for storing sights. Height unfolded 1.5 metres.

^{Image Antiq-Photo}

---

This is an Optical Box in wood with painted motifs in the ancient Greco-Roman style. Includes a mirror at 45° It bears the name of A. Lyon chez Daudet, an engraver in Lyon during the second part of the 18th century.

^{Images Antiq-Photo}

---

---

You recall not long ago in chapter five I talked about the Savoyards of Europe who travelled mostly on foot from town to village presenting their Galantee So or, Raree Show.

Shown here is a portable Optical box that could also be moved about. It has dual tilted mirrors, and is dated around 1780.

You can still see the Savoyard’s carrying straps.

Optical Boxes were first installed in cabinets of curiosities and after 1770 they joined the equipment of peddlers and itinerant picture exhibitors.

---

CAIXA D’ÒPTICA – OPTICAL BOX (1750-1790)
Museu del Cinema presents how the Caixa D’òptica (Optical Box) is put together and then presented as home entertainment in the late 1700 C. The Caixa D’òptica is a cousin to the Tunnel Book.

This instrument had three functions: it was a Camera Obscura used for drawing; it could be used to see optical views; and theatrical dioramas could be viewed with it.

Besides this, it could be folded up into the shape of a book and easily transported. This video by Museu del Cinema in Girona Spain, one of the great pre cinema museums in the world. It lasts 4 minutes 28 seconds.

---

Here is a three brass-rimmed lens Boite d’optique with polychrome painted wood ordained with a cathedral themed décor. It has folding flaps on three sides and the lower magazine can hold eleven views. Its manufacturer is placed in Italy c.1830. Maker unknown.

Unfortunately the photograph has nothing to compare scale.

This box could entertain three viewers. Dimensions: 37 x 20 x 21 inches.

The eleven views could be successively raised or lowered to focus by strings. This beautifully ornate Boite d’optique had convex glass which, by its ability to magnify objects, produces an illusion of nature.

In the 17th century, complex systems of catoptric theatres appeared in the cabinets of curiosities of optical scientists and inventors.

These were large boxes lined inside with mirrors and in the centre was placed statuettes or objects which will be magnified by the mirrors.

The Jesuit Athanasius Kircher describes a whole plethora of curiosities of this type in his famous work Ars magna lucis et umbrae published in 1646.

Some Optical Boxes were simple like the first one I showed. Others were complex, unlike home theatres of today.

In vogue by the aristocracy between the 17th and 19th centuries, these Boite d’optiques contained a magazine in the lower portion comprising several interchangeable views. Unfortunately, these images offer no scale however it’s dimensions were 37 by 20 by 21 inches.

The Optical Box was so popular across Europe that even opticians sold them when patrons would come in for spectacles. They sold by the hundreds. They became a favourite of the cabinets of curiosities of the aristocrats.

Martin Engelbrecht’s innovative approach to visual storytelling and his significant contributions to the art of engraving and publishing left a lasting legacy, making his works highly sought after by historians and enthusiasts today.

1721
JOHANN ANDREAS SCHMIDT (1652-1726)
Schmidt, a professor at the University of Helmstedt and educated in theology and church history at the University of Jena, made notable contributions to the understanding of optical devices in the early 18th century. In 1721, he published Collegii Experimentalis Physico-Mathematici Demonstrationes, a work that included illustrations of a camera obscura and a magic lantern.

These devices were significant in the history of visual technology, serving both scientific and entertainment purposes. In his work Collegii Experimentalis Physico – Mathematici Demonstrationes, Schmidt illustrates a Camera Obscura, and a Magic Lantern. The lantern is depicted projecting a dancing fiddler onto a hanging sheet.

---

---

This page and two images from Schmidt’s Collegii Experimentalis Physico – Mathematici Demonstrationes of 1721 (table X) were sourced from F. Paul Liesegang’s Dates and Sources / A Chronology of Pre Cinema History, F. P. Liesegang, Magic Lantern Society of Great Britain, London, 1986, p15.

---

---

From Mathematical Elements of Natural Philosophy, Confirm’d by Experiments; or, An Introduction to Sir Issac Newton’s Philosophy in 1721, here are the Gravesande entries on pp98 and 99.

He does not provide an illustration of the four-flame lamp and I have never seen it in 34 years of searching.

From Mathematical Elements of Natural Philosophy, Confirm’d by Experiments; or, An Introduction to Sir Issac Newton’s Philosophy, Willem Gravesande, 1721, we see on pp66, 104, 106, 120 his illustrations of projecting lanterns, pinhole imagery, prisms and the Camera Obscura.

---

1725
ALEXEY PETROVICH BESTUZHEV-RYUMIN
COUNT BESTUSCHEFF (1693-1766)
The Cyanotype was an exciting jolt of blue thrusted into the early days of black and white photography.

The oxidation of ferrous ferricyanide salts resulted in Prussian blue, the distinguishing colour of Cyanotypes. The light sensitivity of iron salts was recognised during the investigations of Count Bestuscheff in the early 18th century.

He was Lord High Chancellor and later Field Marshal of Russia when in 1725 he developed what he called his “Tinctura tonico-nervina.”

Bestuscheff was the first to discover the light sensitiveness of iron salts. He also saw a mild response after waiting some time—the process and colouring reversed itself in the dark.

The inorganic pigment Prussian blue (hydrated iron hexacyano ferrate complex) is the image-forming substance of the Cyanotype.

Count Bestuscheff proclaimed that he employed in it’s production, “the assistance of light.”

---

---

Pictured are three Gem Cyan Angeles Heart Monatomic Andara Crystals. Since 1875 MIT students have been taught to use Cyanotype in Reprography (copying and reproduction of photography & blueprints).

1725
PIETER VAN MUSSCHENBROEK (1692-1761)
The Dutch physicist Pieter Van Musschenbroek presented animated pictures when he caused the wings of a windmill to move. How? A small crank is used to move by interposed pulleys, a glass lantern plate.

On the glass lantern plate are painted the wings on the windmill which turn in front of the painted tower on another fixed glass plate. Pictured is a Mechanical Magic Lantern slide very similar to what Pieter Van Musschenbroek would have used.

---

---

He found that sunlight made the substance black while attempting to make a phosphorescent material by mixing chalk with nitric acid containing dissolved silver, in 1725.

He experimented with forms cut out of paper and set them in the sunlight against a bottle containing the solution, but no lasting image was created. This resulted in dark character reproductions of the text on the contents surface.

The impressions remained until they were washed away by shaking the container or until they were completely obliterated by exposure to light. Schulze’s research with silver nitrates began ten years earlier than his discoveries, in 1717.

---

He saw that sunlight made the substance on the paper black, and that it was not due to heat.

---

WHAT WAS ON THE PAPER
The impressions remained until obliterated by exposure to light. But notice the paper under his right hand in these images, by engraver Johann Jakob Haid (1704-1767), in 1837, a contemporary of Schulze.

Could it be that these are the very images?

I believe they are the images or the forms and shapes he used, otherwise why would Haid have included them in the portrait? And, they are depicted on top of a sheet of paper.

That Schulze collected an image on a prepared page with the aid of sunlight is not questioned. What is questioned, is he the father of photography?

DID JOHANN HEINRICH SCHULZE DISCOVER PHOTOGRAPHY IN 1727?
JOSEF MARIA EDER
The great photography historian Eder, thinks so but with a caveat. His masterful work History of Photography (J. M. Eder, translated by Edward Epstean, Columbia University Press, New York, 1945) makes this claim.

Eder stated on p73 that;

---

Schulze talked about when sunlight was reflected from a mirror or white wall, it caused the colour to darken and that the action of sunlight was much swifter when a convex burning glass or mirror, was focused on it.

Schulze was also aware of the fact that one could intensify the photographic action of light on silver salts by means of optical instruments, particularly by convex condensing lenses.

Eder stated two pages over on p75;

---

EDER PROCLAMATION
At the top of p77 of ‘History of Photography,’ Josef Eder makes the bold statement that Johann Heinrich Schulze “must be declared without doubt the inventor of photography” with the caveat mentioned earlier “with silver salts.”

More on heat vs. light in the coming centuries and chapters.

1727
NICOLAI BION (1652-1733)
Bion was a French engineer, cosmographer, and maker of mathematical and astronomical instruments, renowned for his work under King Louis XIV, who appointed him Ingénieur du Roi pour les instruments de mathématiques (Royal Engineer for Mathematical Instruments).

Born in Paris, little is known about his early life. In 1727 Nicolai Bion fashioned this external Camera Obscura into a drawing aid. The mirror on the stool reflected a specific stream of sunlight within a darkened room, up onto the picture to be copied (supported above the base).

The image of the picture was then seen through the aperture (in the roof of the base) and within the base, on the sheet of drawing paper. The fore-side of the camera box is open to allow the artist to work.

Bion operated a workshop on the Quai de l’Horloge in Paris, marked by signs such as the Quart de Cercle or Soleil d’Or. His shop was one of the most well-equipped of its time, producing a wide range of instruments, including globes, sundials, astrolabes, theodolites, and compasses.

---

N.B.
Bion did not write Neu-eroffnete Mathematische Werck-Schule. This work, published in 1669, is attributed to Georg Philipp Harsdörffer and Johann Christoph Sturm, with later editions by Johann Christoph Weigel.

The frontispiece of Neu-eroffnete Mathematische Werck-Schule credits Nicolas Bion because the work is based on his original Traité.

---

---

---

---

1728
FRANCESCO ALGAROTTI (1712-1764)
Count Algarotti was a Venetian polymath, art critic and collector who experimented in optics. He was a prominent figure in the Enlightenment, known for his wide-ranging intellectual pursuits and connections with leading figures of his time.

Algarotti is best remembered for his work Newtonianismo per le dame (1737), which popularized Newtonian physics in an accessible, conversational style. In 1728 he dedicated the use of a Camera Ottica in one chapter of the his Saggio sopra Pittura.

In his influential work, Newtonianismo per le dame (1737), Algarotti discussed optical phenomena and Newtonian science in an accessible way, particularly for a lay audience. The Camera Obscura was a significant tool in the study of optics and perspective during this period, and Algarotti referenced it to explain principles of light and vision.

Algarotti did not invent or significantly advance the Camera Ottica but used it as a pedagogical tool to illustrate how light rays form images, aligning with his broader aim of demystifying Newtonian physics.

His discussions of optics, including devices like the Camera Ottica, helped bridge scientific concepts with practical applications in art and observation, reflecting his interdisciplinary approach. For instance, the Camera Ottica was of interest to artists for its ability to aid in accurate perspective drawing, a topic Algarotti explored in his writings on art and aesthetics.

I could find no evidence that Algarotti conducted original experiments with the Camera Ottica or made technical contributions to its development. Instead, his involvement was intellectual, using the device as a means to engage readers with the principles of optics and to connect scientific inquiry with cultural and artistic contexts, as was typical of his Enlightenment-era polymathy.

A Camera Ottica can be easily confused with a Camera Obscura. Basically, they are the same in that the Obscura internally projects the Pinhole Image for entertainment and the Ottica (both below) is predominately used for drawing-aid purposes.

The Camera Ottica is less often spoken of, and is seen far less often than the Camera Obscura.

1728
CHAMBERS’ CYCLOPÆDIA
Magic Lanterns and Camera Obscuras seem to pop up everywhere in history. The Cyclopædia, or, A Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences is a two-volume reference work published in 1728 by Ephraim Chambers, a British writer and publisher.

It is considered one of the earliest modern encyclopedias, aiming to compile and organize knowledge across a wide range of subjects, including science, arts, history, and technology.

Written in English, it was designed to be a comprehensive resource for the educated public, with entries arranged alphabetically and illustrated with diagrams. The frontispiece of the 1728 Ephraim Chambers edition of his Cyclopædia has at the bottom of the engraving, a Magic Lantern alongside all the other tools of science.

---

This Magic Lantern engraved into the front cover of the 1728 Chambers’ edition can be seen at the very bottom in this close up. The Cyclopædia was groundbreaking for its time, emphasizing clear, accessible explanations and cross-references to connect related topics.

It drew heavily on earlier works but also incorporated contemporary knowledge, reflecting the Enlightenment’s focus on reason and learning.

---

EPHRAIM CHAMBERS (1680-1740)
Nonconformist and encyclopaedist Chamber’s 1728 Cyclopaedia set a new standard for multiplicity in the sciences. The two-volume Cyclopaedia, or A Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences is considered the first true general encyclopaedia.

---

---

---

1730
MARTIN ENGELBRECHT (1684-1756)
A new type of entertainment arose in the fourth decade of the eighteenth century in a world hungry for looking through lenses, intelligence, and beauty in optics all in the privacy of one’s own home. A celebrated engraver of his time, Engelbrecht dominated the print trade in Augsburg.

Some of his best work was with optical prints. He used these in his perspective boxes and miniature theatres.

Engelbrecht engraved some plates after Rugendas and other masters; his other works included illustrations for Ovid’s Metamorphoses, The War of Spanish Succession, Les Architectes Princiers by P. Decker, 92 views of Venice, and Assemblage Nouveau Des Manouvries Habilles, published in Augsburg around 1730. ^{_{– Stephen J. Gertz}}

Around 1730, he also designed cards for miniature theatres, which when put into a display box revealled religious images and daily life pictures in a 3D perspective format. He dedicated a whole series to the Italian theatre.

This endeavour resulted in home theatre long before 8mm, super 8, 16mm, television, DVDs and computer streaming adopted the notion.

---

Typically, eight cards would be inserted into a Peep Box, consecutively, which provided imagery similar to that of a theatre scene. The view had great perspective. Best known for his portraits of monarchs as well as his intricate landscapes, Engelbrecht’s work is beyond compare.

---

Engelbrecht’s miniature theatres or Dioramas evolved from his large-scale Zograscope images and are regarded as the earliest paper theatres in the world. Each either had, or imitated a theatrical proscenium to add to the experience.

They were the forerunners of the peepshow books, and they have been praised by photographers and cinematographers for their early optical effects, as well as appreciated as a tool for generating dramatic perspective on film, providing imagery and a sensation similar to that of a theatre scene while indicating a story with motion and movement.

To help understand perspective in an artistic and theatrical sense, I highly encourage you to make one for yourself. Make a Peep Box in the form of a Tunnel Book. It’s a great children’s project.

---

for the times, Engelbrecht Miniature Theatres, Peep Shows, Tunnel Books and Dioramas were fabulous pre cinema entertainment

---

Tunnel Books were also a close relation to a Peep Show having a series of panels placed in a row, creating an illusion of depth and perspective. Engineered like an accordion, with the boards pulling apart as it was opened and the illustrated panels lined up and viewed through a front peep-hole or viewer inward and towards the back.

The perspective pull-out Tunnel Book . . . .

The resulting perspective view . . . .

Here is an 1830s portable pocket sized Tunnel Book that’s fits into its own case. Something you could amuse yourself with on your carriage ride, instead of your smart phone. Brought to us by escribano @tuidelescribano on Twitter.

More on Tunnel Books coming up.

1732
JOHN THOMAS PEELE (1822-1897)
A published work entitled The Art of Drawing and Painting in Water Colours (London, J. Peele, 1732), describes how to build a Camera Obscura, its costs, and how it can be used (chapter 8, pp10-11). Here is a Self-Portrait of Peele from 1846 found at the Frick Art Reference Library Photoarchive.

What has Peele painted under his left arm? A Box? A camera?

---

---

Here on p10 John Peele not only tells the reader how much a “camera obscura” costs (“from thirty Shillings to five Pounds a piece”), but also where you could buy one (“Mr. John Fowler’s, Mathematical Inftrument-maker in Swithin’s-Alley”) [sic].

Peele goes on to state “there is another Way of drawing Objects in the Camera Oscura Way, which is by making a Room as dark as may be, only leaving an [sic] Hole in one of the Window-fhutters …”

Below we see the description on p11.

---

---

One of John Thomas Peele’s favourite themes was children and their pets. One was The Pet, 1853 oil on canvas mounted on Masonite housed at the National Academy of Design, New York, and four others.

The Pet is the child in the white dress holding a black cat with a red ribbon. Did Peele use the Camera Obscura for any of these?

EARLY 18TH CENTURY
PIETER VAN MUSSCHENBROEK (1692 – 1761)
During the early part of this century, Musschenbroek very likely was the first to attempt motion through a simple effect in the Magic Lantern. He was a Dutch mathematician and philosopher who took the work of Johannes Zahn a step further by producing two sets of slides.

One would be the background slide and one the foreground slide. The rear slide was typically the background and the slide closest to the lens was of the figure or main character(s).

As Zahn had used a circular disk with many pictures, and Kircher had used a horizontal series of a few slides, Musschenbroek created slides of both the fore and background, thus producing what was a primitive form of movement and perspective. The forward panel of slides were connected to a string which when pulled slightly would give an illusion that the figure was separated.

By using two sets of frames simultaneously, Musschenbroek was able to create a sense of motion for the first time. His work would less than a century later, greatly influence Robertson.

Mechanical slides for a magic lantern seen here as illustrated in Petrus van Musschenbroek’s Beginsels Der Natuurkunde (second edition 1739).

---

WATCH a 13:17 production from the National Film and Sound Archive of Australia, of front and back sliders exactly how Musschenbroek intended (begins at 3:40). Musschenbroek’s work would later, greatly influence the Phantasmagoria of Robertson.

1733
MEDICINE AND THE CAMERA OBSCURA
DOCTOR WILLIAM CHESELDEN (1688 – 1752)
Cheselden was a prominent English surgeon and anatomist, widely regarded as a pioneer in establishing surgery as a scientific medical profession. Born in Somerby, Leicestershire, he made significant contributions to anatomy, surgery, and medical education.

The frontispiece of the book actually shows the camera in use.

At age 15, he was apprenticed to a Leicester surgeon, and later studied in London under the renowned anatomist William Cowper and James Ferne. By 1710, at age 22, he began lecturing on anatomy, demonstrating his early mastery of the subject.

For his book Osteographia (Anatomy of the Bones) in 1753, Cheselden used a Camera Obscura to reproduce the human skeleton on paper.

---

The title page of this book shows an artist peering into a rectangular box camera as long as a man. The skeleton hangs from a tripod upside down a few feet away, thereby providing the draughtsman with an upright image.

This beautifully illustrated atlas was the first comprehensive and accurate description of the human skeletal system. Despite its initial commercial failure due to high production costs (£1,000), it became a landmark in anatomical literature.

It featured life-sized illustrations of human bones and comparative skeletal drawings of animals (e.g., chameleons, dogs, crocodiles) in natural poses.

---

In the introduction to Osteographia, Cheselden notes;

“Then we proceeded to others, measuring every part as exactly as we could, but we soon found it impossible this way: upon which I contrived what I had long before meditated, a convenient camera obscura to draw in , with which we corrected some of the few designs already made, throwing away others which we had before approved of, and finishing the rest with more accuracy and less labour, doing in this way in a few minutes more than could be done without in many hours, I might say in days.”

Pages here from Osteographia showing such clarity the Camera Obscura gave to Cheselden. Doctor Cheselden’s Anatomy of the Bones in 1753 reads like a book on the Phantasmagoria, with all it’s human skeletons.

He was the royal surgeon at the time.

---

Here from Cheselden’s Osteographia of 1733 is his reference in the introduction To the Reader about his use of the Camera Obscura in obtaining the illustrations.

He also refers to the use of a compass and rulers by other artists in drawing lines and circles.

---

READ Osteographia here at Internet Archive.

1735
SEQUENTIAL ART IN PRE CINEMA
A RAKE’S PROGRESS
WILLIAM HOGARTH (1697-1764)
Looking back at sequential images in art, like paintings or illustrations of satire with caricatures and the like, it takes us all the way back past the Pharaohs, to the man in the cave. The terms sequential art and comic book are frequently used interchangeably, although there is much more to it than that.

While comic books are a type of sequential art, many other disciplines fall under this umbrella category such as pre cinema and the formation of images in a sequence that wants to portray movement in storytelling.

My example here, and there are many more coming, is William Hogarth.

WHAT IS SEQUENTIAL ART
As the name implies, sequential art is the use of visuals – such as drawings, paintings, photographs, or any kind of illustration – in a certain order to tell or illustrate a story. It may incorporate a combination of graphics and text in some circumstances, yet writing is not required for it to be deemed sequential art.

The desire is always to imply motion or movement while telling a tale.

Although the comic strip may be the most known type of sequential art in the modern world, this type of artwork has existed for thousands of years before comics. In reality, long before the written word was developed, humans used images to communicate ideas or tell stories while intimating motion.

Paintings on walls is thought to be the first form of graphic communication, predating written communication. The earliest examples of this can be found in caves that house primitive paintings that attempt to convey the prehistoric human experience in a sequential fashion.

---

Egyptian hieroglyphs were a more advanced form of this, depicting their lives in a more methodical and structured manner. We have talked about both here. On friezes and vases, Greek painters used to illustrate images that told a tale. Trajan’s Column at Rome, which dates from 113 AD, is a wonderful early surviving example of a tale told through the use of sequential images.

I’ve talked about that here as well.

_{Animation HOTDOC}

Contrary to its name, the Bayeux Tapestry was actually embroidered rather than woven, yet it continues to be the most famous example of a sequential tapestry piece since it tells the tale of the Norman conquest of England in full motion and begs sound effects from the reader.

There are other examples.

---

American illustrator-cartoonist Arthur Burdett Frost is a more modern example who, after meeting Muybridge and seeing Sallie Gardner running projected on a wall, honoured him by illustrating the horse in motion. Sallie that is, not Eadweard.

---

Nº1
A Rake’s Progress is a series of eight sequential paintings by Hogarth between 1732 and 1733. The series depicts the deterioration of Tom Rakewell, a Prodigal Son of sorts who never returned home.

I present them in the order painted with matched engravings, published in 1735.

Nº2
Hogarth painted several sequenced paintings, not just A Rake’s Progress all being noteworthy to pre cinema as they unfold like a storyboard indicating both motion and more importantly, elapsed time within a story-line.

Nº3
The canvases were produced between the years 1732 and 1733, and then engraved in 1734 and published in print form in 1735.

Nº4
In the mid-18^th century particularly in England we begin to see some of the first satirical illustrations in print. Such political humour carried on into the early 20^th century newspapers, and particularly now in social media.

We call them memes.

Nº5
Hogarth’s work, once made into engravings, was so widely copied as a result of print publishing, that he advocated for the Copyright Act of 1735 to safeguard writers and artists.

Nº6
Besides A Rake’s Progress, Hogarth also completed the sequenced A Harlot’s Progress in 1731 and Marriage A la Mode painted between 1743 and 1745.

Nº7
In a striking piece of sequential storytelling, Hogarth has depicted his characters’ downfall in storyboard fashion, illustrating clumped movement rather than specific motion.

Nº8
These original sequenced series of paintings by William Hogarth are held by Sir John Soane’s Museum in London.

---

the desire in sequential art is always to imply motion or movement while telling a tale

---

Comics were the most recent incarnation of sequential art after the discovery of the printing press. A storyboard is typically a succession of illustrations, photos, or images that allows artists to plan out their projects. Storyboards are increasingly widely used in the creative business.

They are used to visualise a wide range of creative projects such as the planning of a movie, motion graphics, animation, or interactive media sequences such as website interaction.

A graphic novel, as the name implies, is a novel that uses graphics to explain the entire tale. In contrast to comics, which are samples from a broader story that are published piece by piece over time. A graphic book has a beginning, middle, and finish, and it provides the type of ending that one would anticipate from a films storyboard.

Sequential art is a centuries-old practise that has remained relevant in the creative disciplines to this day. Looking back in time, we can clearly describe and comprehend sequential art as the practise of conveying a tale using pictures and, in some circumstances, a combination of visuals and text.

All of Hogarth’s eight sequential paintings of A Rake’s Progress, are seamed together (above) for continuity. I am also curating other sequential series by other artists for publishing here a little later. Stay tuned.

---

FINALLY, WHAT IS A RAKE?
The 18^th century character of Tom Rakewell is described during the time of Jane Austen (1775–1817) who was born just eleven years following Hogarth’s death, by Jane Austen’s World online.

1736
PIETER VAN MUSSCHENBROEK (1692 – 1761)
Pieter van Musschenbroek was a prominent Dutch natural philosopher, a physicist, a mathematician, and an astronomer. He is best known for his pivotal role in the invention of the Leyden jar, the first device capable of storing significant amounts of static electricity.

Born in Leiden, Dutch Republic, in 1692, Musschenbroek came from a family of instrument makers. He was well-educated, studying medicine at Leiden University and later attending lectures by John Theophilus Desaguliers and Isaac Newton in London.

He received his doctorate in medicine in 1715 and in philosophy in 1719. Now with regards to cinematic history, did Musschenbroek successfully simulate motion with the aid of a new kind of Magic Lantern slide in 1736? It appears he did because it is documented that he imparted motion on a screen, of at least two people.

---

Pieter and his family (specifically his brother Jan van Musschenbroek, who was a superb instrument maker) played a significant role in its development and popularization, particularly in advancing early forms of animation and mechanical slides.

---

Pieter van Musschenbroek is recognized for being among the earliest to successfully simulate motion with an optical device of some kind, because various documentations identify seven others who did the same or similar, prior to van Musschenbroek.

Pieter went beyond simply projecting static images however. His innovations, often using two sets of slides (a background and a moving foreground image), allowed for primitive forms of animation to be seen, in a “more controllable” way.

Through the use of several slides or perhaps even just one, Musschenbroek imparted motion on a screen. And Nollet helped Musschenbroek greatly, by returning to Paris to popularise this new sensation in his salon each evening to the scientists of the day.

---

---

Musschenbroek did successfully simulate motion with the aid of Mechanical Lantern Slides and a lantern projector. There is no doubt. The windmill that Musschenbroek presented to Nollet I am sure, would have looked similar to this one obtained from de Luikerwaal.

---

1736
Four sketches obtained with a Camera Obscura by Canaletto prior to painting Campo San Giovanni e Paolo (1736-40) in Venice. Housed at the Gallerie dell’Accademia, Venice.

1737
JACOPO BARTOLOMEO BECCARI (1682-1766)
Beccari conducted valuable experiments on phosphorescence. He studied the calculation of the intensity of emitted light, which was important in pre photography research.

Beccari also studied the action of light on silver salts, and the phenomena of double refraction in quartz crystals.

Newton had previously shown that quartz (rock crystal) seen on the left, such as Iceland spar seen on the right, refracts light rays passing through it. Beccari showed that three different axes of crystal, refract light in different ways.

---

---

These are the four pages of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, published 1761 by Beccari (pp 487-490). READ them here at Internet Archive.

---

Referring to Beccari and the discovery of light sensitivity of silver chloride, this excerpt is from The History of Photography – From the Camera Obscura to The Beginning of The Modern Era (Helmut and Alison Gernsheim, Thames and Hudson, London, 1969) on p32.

1737
Hellot is considered one of the founders of the chemical, metallurgical, and textile industries in all of Europe during the 18th century. With respect to photography which wasn’t far off, he made an important discovery.

Hellot had suggested a system of writing using silver nitrate. As long as the paper was kept in the dark, the traced characters would remain unseen; all that was needed to bring them to life was to expose the letter to sunlight. He published his findings with the Académie des Sciences.

Referring to Jean Hellot and the application of nitrate of silver to paper, this entry is from The History of Photography – From the Camera Obscura to The Beginning of The Modern Era, (Helmut and Alison Gernsheim, Thames and Hudson, London, 1969) and is on p32.

---

---

---

---

---

John Hinton speaks of Jacques de Vaucanson’s automata and shows this illustration in his Universal Magazine of Knowledge and Pleasure in 1752, found on pp252, 253.

As well, Sir David Brewster offers six pages worth on the de Vaucanson automata from his work called Letters on Natural Magic, published by John Murray, London in 1832, pp262 – 265.

Continued…..

……… Sir David Brewster’s thoughts on the de Vaucanson automata from his work Letters on Natural Magic, 1832, pp266, 267.

---

De Vaucanson’s flute finger problem was that even though his levers produced the correct actions, the wooden fingers were too stiff. To simulate real fingers, de Vaucanson fitted the wooden digits with real skin to make them soft.

Where he obtained the skin from, I do not know.

Jacques de Vaucanson made other automata; the Tambourine Player and the most famous being a duck that defecated.

---

But unlike The Flute Player, the duck was far less popular due to what it did vs. the playing of music. The duck met its demise in a fire in 1879.

The de Vaucanson duck shown below in two images showing the internal mechanism, from a publication from the mid-1800s.

---

Below left a replica of Jacques de Vaucanson’s digesting duck automaton, from Le Musée des Automates des Grenoble, Grenoble, France. A small museum dedicated to Vaucanson, this is where the replica of Vaucanson’s famous duck is found.

It’s owned by a couple by the name of Lara, located at 12 rue des Arts, Grenoble. It’s in a home-style setting, likely not an authentic credited ‘Museum’ perhaps, but has quite a repertoire of artifacts all attributed to Vaucanson.

---

From Letters on Natural Magic, by Sir David Brewster published by John Murray, London in 1832, Brewster on p320 talks of the de Vaucanson duck and where he may have gotten his idea and who made it, on p321.

---

In conclusion, I give you Jacques de Vaucanson’s personal description of his duck, in 1738;

1738
ROBERT SMITH (1689 – 1768)
Smith, in his Optical Machines for Making Pictures of Objects, and their Uses in Drawing, brought attention to a sky-optric ball which he had experienced in a “shoppe” of one Edward Scarlett (1772 – 1830) stating it was “the broadest lens of this kind that I ever saw.”

Scarlett had actually projected the street scene outside his shop into the store, taking advantage of his window. Smith reported in his book regarding the use of a mirror to correct the image that, “the people in the street appear upright and without any undulating motion of the heads.”

One of Mr. Scarlett’s business cards from the year 1758.

The upper left corner identifies a scioptric ball lens [second from the left] manufactured and sold by Scarlett. The card also shows a Magic Lantern, camera, spectacles, telescopic lenses, sighting tubes and mirrors.

Scarlett’s projection of the street scene into his shop was an ingenious idea from a business perspective. It would certainly have attracted prospective patrons and hopefully have resulted in some sales.

Robert Smith was an English mathematician who in this same year (1738) also published A Compleat System of Opticks and thereby gained the nickname of Old Focus.’Smith was made senior fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge in 1739, and master in 1742.

Two pages from Smiths A Complete System of Opticks 1738, below.

READ A Complete System of Opticks a Popular, a Mathematical, a Mechanical, and a Philosophical Treatise To which are added Remarks upon the Whole by Robert Smith, 1738 at Google Books.

---

1740
BENJAMIN MARTIN (1704 – 1782)
The Englishman Benjamin Martin was a manufacturer of scientific gadgets and other useable’s. He published several books on said subject throughout his lifetime including one by the name of A New and Compendious System of Optics in 1740.

In it he occupied much space telling how the dark room could be configured for optimum performance. He also spoke about inverting the image, the scioptric ball and the Camera Obscura in general.

Martin is quoted as saying “This is nature’s art of painting, and it is with ease observed, how infinitely superior this is to the finest performance of the pencil.”

His six-volume Biographia Britannica of 1755 made strong references to Della Porta and his Magiae Naturalis.

His ideas were foundational to both early 3D illusion theory and later, optical entertainment. He studied how two eyes generate depth perception, vital for understanding how stereoscopic devices and 3D illusions work.

He embraced optical illusions as a way to understand the limits and plasticity of perception. Portrait of Claude Nicolas Le Cat by Johann Georg Wille, 1747, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

---

Le Cat was not only cited by Étienne-Gaspard Robertson, as a precursor in the science of illusion, but was also mentioned in early histories of optical illusion, Phantasmagoria, and scientific performance.

They were portable optical devices with philosophical and artistic ambitions, made of wooden, lacquered cases, often about the size of a tabletop cabinet. They predicted Moving Panorama aesthetics but with a cosmic, sometimes religious, bent.

Manuscripts survive in fragmented form in Florence’s Biblioteca Riccardiana of Manetti’s works. His Spectra Boxes were interior lined with angled mirrors and semi-translucent panels of coloured glass or mica. Lit from behind or beneath by candlelight or oil lamps.

---

His prints simulate motion, perspective shifts, and impossible structures like static Dioramas trying to move

---

The Biblioteca Riccardiana, in Florence has uncatalogued fragments under “Miscellanea Manetti,” descriptions usually embedded in scientific letters, some addressed to Abate Giovanni Targioni-Tozzetti or Giuseppe Averani, mentioned in a 1762 inventory of Florentine scientific salons.

Targioni-Tozzetti (1712–1783) and Averani (1662–1738) both were key Florentine intellectuals connected to the scientific and optical culture of the 18th century, and either could plausibly have interacted with or influenced Manetti.

Averani’s optical demonstrations may have inspired Manetti’s theatrical light-based Dioramas.

An early 19^th century annotation on optical devices in the Giornale de’ Letterati d’Italia (Journal of the Literates of Italy) relates some references to “scatole spettroscopiche” translated as Spectroscopic boxes, and suspect to be associated with Manetti.

---

THE GIOVANNI BATTISTA PIRANESI INFLUENCE
Though not connected directly, Giovanni Battista Piranesi’s (1720–1778) theatrical use of chiaroscuro and perspective, may have influenced Manetti, who in turn, admired Kircher’s Ars Magna Lucis et Umbrae, which may have yet inspired his celestial configurations.

Piranesi was a genius of chiaroscuro, the best known of his time in this genre, using light and shadow to create space, dread, or grandeur, the skills later critical to Magic Lantern shows and the Phantasmagoria.

His prints simulate motion, perspective shifts, and impossible structures like static Dioramas trying to move. Some of his engravings inspired stage sets, Shadow Play backdrops, and even early film noir aesthetics I’m bold enough to say.

Pictured is a rendition of an apocalyptic vision from the Book of Revelation. Imagine the shimmering light and the fire and brimstone raining down.

Piranesi never built pre cinema machines himself, but he changed how space and light were imagined, which later inventors would turn into actual devices. If Manetti’s Spectra Boxes felt cosmic or sublime, it’s because artists like Piranesi were already priming the 18^th century eye to experience entertainment scenes in that way.

I would say that Manetti’s Illuminated Spectra Boxes share formal DNA with later optical devices like the Eidophusikon and Megalethoscope.

1740
JOHANN ANDREAS VON SEGNER (1704-1777)
As did Frenchman Count Patrice D’Arcy later in 1765, German Segner was perhaps the first to use a glowing piece of coal to experiment on the human optical phenomenon of Apparent Motion. Falling under what is referred to as sensory memory, POV is the ability to retain impressions of sensory information on our retinas (frames on celluloid) after the original stimulus has ceased.

The two types of sensory memory that have been most explored are iconic memory and echoic memory. POV is a fundamental requirement for watching motion pictures.

---

---

He discussed how glass optics work, the magic lantern principle, camera obscura, and the fundamentals of curved mirrors. His work was later investigated by renowned researchers, including master lens maker Joseph Petzval.

1740
LECLERC’S BURNING MIRRORS
GEORGES LOUIS LECLERC, COMTE DE BUFFON (1707-1788)
Comte de Buffon (pictured in the hat) was a French naturalist, mathematician, and writer, one of the most influential scientists of the 18th century. Leclerc experimented with burning mirrors this year, as Archimedes had during the siege of Syracuse (c. 214–212 BC).

Born into a wealthy family, Buffon studied law but was drawn to science and mathematics. He traveled across Europe, expanding his knowledge of natural history and forging connections with leading intellectuals.

Buffon was fascinated by optics and heat as part of his broad scientific inquiries. In the 1740s, he conducted experiments to test the feasibility of burning mirrors—concave mirrors or lenses designed to concentrate sunlight to ignite objects.

Buffon had read about the defense of Syracuse by Archimedes, using mirrors and conducted his own experiment. Buffon constructed a large array of 168 flat mirrors (each about 8×6 inches), arranged in a frame to focus sunlight onto a single point.

This setup, known as a solar furnace, was tested at the Jardin du Roi in Paris. He successfully ignited wood and other materials at distances up to 150 feet, demonstrating the power of concentrated solar energy. He used materials like tarred pine planks and thin silver sheets, achieving combustion in seconds under clear sunlight.

Buffon also experimented with large burning lenses made of glass, capable of melting metals like lead and tin, and even vitrifying (turning to glass) certain substances.

---

---

Pictured is an illustration of a mirror Buffon used, taken from volume II, plate XV of Suppléments à l’Histoire Naturelle, générale et particulière, published in 1763, along with the frontispiece.

---

Leclerc successfully ignited logs at a distance of 150 feet using 168 small mirrors, each measuring 6 x 7.87 inches. Buffon’s experiments aimed to investigate the physics of light and heat for his Histoire Naturelle and test historical claims, such as Archimedes’ supposed use of mirrors during the Siege of Syracuse (214–212 BC).

He felt that Archimedes could have defended Syracuse with burning (concave) mirrors. Buffon concluded that burning mirrors were scientifically viable but impractical for large-scale use due to the need for precise alignment and clear weather.

His work influenced later studies in optics and solar energy.

1743
GIOVANNI ANTONIO CANAL (CANALETTO) (1697 – 1768)
The Camera Obscura is still very much in use as an aid to the paintings of Venice, by Canaletto. The wide angled views he painted are presented by historians and commentators like Links as assurance that Canaletto was greatly influenced by the camera. Canal painted many scenes of the city for traveling aristocrats.

By the mid-18th century, the camera was well established as an aid especially in perspective.

After painting the Piazza San Marco (believed to be between 1735 and 1740), he went to England and painted many landscapes and properties. He returned to Italy in 1755 but his best work is remembered to be his earlier paintings.

Canaletto called the camera obscura the Camera Ottica.

Piazza San Marco by Giovanni Antonio Canal is perhaps the most often used work historians will point to when comparing Canaletto with the Camera Obscura.

It was created sometime between 1735 and 1740 and is a fine example of perspective assisted through the camera. He often used the camera obscura as an aid to composition and this can be seen in his many Venetian scenes.

For a closer look at the works of Canaletto and Vermeer, have a look at The Addio Gallery.

---

By 1850 the camera was well established as a special aid in perspective. Below, Campo di Rialto painted between 1758 and 1763.

Canal often used the camera as an aid to composition and this can be seen in his many Venetian scenes, such as Veduta del Palazzo Ducale seen below.

---

At the Galleria dell’Accademia in Venice, there is a collection of views that Canaletto made in the city with his portable Camera Obscura. They are not simple sketches but rigorous preparatory perspective drawings.

Two examples are immediately below.

---

The collection of Canalettos work at the Gallerie dell’Accademia has eight single sheets, and a unique sketch book, composed of 148 pages (74 each recto and verso). It contains 138 drawings, which includes his sketches seen here of his painting of Campo San Giovanni e Paolo in Venice.

---

Canaletto’s use of the optical camera for use in the preparation of sketches prior to painting is referred to by art historian and specialist in the Venetian painters, Filippo Pedrocco when he states;

Whether the Obscura or Ottica, Canalettos use of an optical camera attracted negative viewpoints as well, when Anton Maria Zanetti (1679-1767) wrote;

---

Here from David Hockney’s Secret Knowledge on p214 is another reference to Canaletto’s use of the optical camera by contemporary painter of Canaletto’s time, Antonio Zanetti.

---

Here below, from the collection of Canaletto’s work at the Gallerie dell’Accademia, another sketch of the Piazzetta Torre dell’Orologio clock tower from 1727-1728 that Canaletto saw through his camera, and the completed painting.

---

Three views of a Camera Obscura owned and used by Giovanni Antonio Canal that we know of, as revealled by the inscription A. CANAL on the protective cover (red box). Housed at the Musei Civici di Venezia.

1743
BERNARDO BELLOTTO (1720-1780)
Bellotto was the nephew of Giovanni Antonio Canal [Canaletto] and called himself Canaletto as well, and not Bellotto. He was therefore known also as Canaletto Belotto or Canaletto the Younger. He painted spectacular natural vistas and architectural scenes.

Like his uncle, it is highly credible that Bellotto used the Camera Obscura in his work. Considered an Italian landscape painter, Bellotto I strongly assume, used the camera to create perspective views of Venice and other cities such as Warsaw and  Dresden.

The faithfulness of his views I believe, can be attributed to the use of the Camera Obscura. This oil on canvas by Bellotto is known as  View of the Grand Canal: Santa Maria della Salute and the Dogana from Campo Santa Maria Zobenigo.

It was painted in around 1738. Image the Getty Museum.

---

Piazza San Marco (looking East towards the Basilica), is an oil on canvas painted by Bernardo Bellotto between 1727 and 1729.

^{Image obtained from Alain.R. Truong}

While in tutelage under his uncle, Bellotto became an excellent apprentice learning and perfecting Canaletto’s style and technique. Bellotto became a master of perspective I think, with the help of the camera.

---

The portrait of German artist Joachimus Franciscus Beich is seen here, from which the Desmarees painting was made. The juxtaposed portrait would indicate a subjective view of what the camera sees. And the magnifying glass in the child’s hand?

Perhaps it suggests the ability of the camera to enlarge the image.

---

---

---

---

Painters did not like to advertise their use of the camera up to around the end of the 1700s. The only other painting that I know of from this time period besides Desmarees, is that of Charles-Amédée-Philippe van Loo twenty years later.

They thought it would hurt their success as painters, if helped by a mechanical or optical instrument. This is why I believe the Camera Obscura is so rarely found ‘within’ art. It certainly aided art, but was hardly ever placed inside a painting.

---

1747
JOHN CUFF (1708 – 1772)
An English maker of optical instruments, such as eyepieces, spectacles and microscopes, John Cuff was also well known for his interest in the Camera Obscura. His advertisements and cards might read camera obscuras for exhibiting prospects in their natural proportions and colours.

An unknown author (perhaps commissioned by Cuff for marketing purposes) provided a poem in booklet form which was called Verses occasioned by the sight of a camera obscura, printed for John Cuff, 1747. The booklet containing the poem was written in 1747 by Alexander Pope.

This poem-story actually tells us of an enacted play of sorts involving ships a-wreck but the picture fades upon the opening of a door and the light entering in. One can easily envision those re-enactments of the showmen Villeneuve in 1290 and Cardano in 1550.

A portion of the poem helps us to remember the importance of the lens to invert the image;

“How the Clown stares! Smit with surprise and love, To see that inverted pretty Milk-Maid move, With pail beneath her head, and feet above.”

The poem acclaims the achieved and imaginative artistry that only the 18^th century English language could say of the Camera Obscura.

Pope describes the apparatus by likening its depictions to those of Cinema itself;

---

---

---

TOP
CHAPTER SEVEN

Welcome	About	Introduction	Chapter One beginning of time – 999 AD
Chapter Two 1000 AD – 1399	Chapter Three 1400 – 1599	Chapter Four 1600 – 1649	Chapter Five 1650 – 1699
Chapter Six 1700 – 1749	Chapter Seven 1750 – 1799	Chapter Eight 1800 – 1819	Chapter Nine 1820 – 1829
Chapter Ten 1830 – 1839	Chapter Eleven 1840 – 1849	Chapter Twelve 1850 – 1859	Chapter Thirteen 1860 – 1869
Chapter Fourteen 1870 – 1879	Chapter Fifteen 1880 – 1884	Chapter Sixteen 1885 – 1889	Chapter Seventeen 1890 – 1894
Chapter Eighteen 1895 – 1899	Chapter Nineteen 1900 + post cinema	Chapter Twenty 1911 +	Copyright
HOTDOC Internet Archive Channel	HOTDOC X Channel	HOTDOC You Tube Channel

Powered by planetelcommunications

© 1990 – 2026

About

Email