PhotoLexicon, Volume 5, nr. 8 (March 1988) (en)

Francis Kramer

Mirelle Thijsen


Francis Kramer was a notable representative of Dutch art photography. He produced portrait, landscape, and architectural photos in a large format applying various fine printing (‘edeldruk’) processes. Above all else, however, Kramer was the portrait photographer for members of the noble class in Utrecht, as well as a royal court photographer. He had an enormous talent for organisation, which he applied towards a variety of photographic associations, including the NFK (Nederlandse Fotografen Kunstkring, ‘Netherlands Photographers Art Society’), the NFPV (Nederlandse Fotografen Patroonsvereeniging, ‘Netherlands Photographers Guild’), the AFV Utrecht (Amateur Fotografen Vereniging, ‘Amsterdam Amateur Photographers Association’), as well as the AFB (‘Amateur Photographers Bond’). Kramer also organised numerous events in his birthplace, Utrecht.




Franciscus Antonius (Francis) Kramer is born on 5 March in Utrecht, at Geertesteeg B524, as the eldest son of Johannes Hendrikus Kramer and Petronella Francisca Cornelia van den Eeckhout. His father is a photochemist at the University of Utrecht. On Francis’ birth certificate, J.H. Kramer’s profession is stated as ‘photograaf’ (‘photographer’).

Circa 1894

Francis Kramer quits his study at the HBS (Hogere Burgerschool, an upper-level secondary school) and begins with lessons in drawing, watercolour, painting, and heraldry at the studios of ‘Kunstliefde’ (‘Love of Art’), an association of professional artists and art-lovers. Kramer receives instruction from Anton Grolman, Johan Legner, and Jos. Hoevenaars-Hanau.


In response to an advertisement, Kramer posts drawings to Laurent Colbert, a painter and photographer in Tournai (Belgium) at Rue Royale 58-72. Colbert invites him to Tournai to learn about making ‘photographic artworks’.


In Lille (France), Kramer manages an affiliate of Laurent Colbert for a period of three years. Hereafter, he stays for a brief time in Paris, where he works for a person named Walerie.


Kramer’s father, J.H. Kramer (born 1846), dies on 19 August.


For one year, Kramer studies photochemistry under Professor Otto Mente in Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Circa 1904

Upon returning to the Netherlands, Kramer briefly works for the court photographer Adolf Timmermans in The Hague. He subsequently becomes the manager of P. Clausing Jr.’s portrait studio at Kruisweg 45 in Haarlem.


Kramer establishes himself as an independent art photographer in Utrecht, with a portrait studio at F.C. Dondersstraat 22B.


Kramer becomes chairman of the Vereeniging Koninginnedag Utrecht (‘Association Queen’s Day Utrecht’), established on 11 November of this year.


Kramer weds Petronella Dene on 16 April.


Together with Josephus Bernardus Paulus Biegelaar, Kramer establishes a printing plate factory in Utrecht. (Kramer withdraws at a later point, with the company continuing under the name Biegelaar & Jansen).


Kramer’s wife, Petronella Dene, dies on 19 September.


Kramer is involved in a movement within the NFK (Nederlandse Fotografen Kunstkring, ‘Netherlands Photographers Art Society’) that wishes to change the nature of the organisation. Together with Cornelis Leenheer, Johan Huysen, Bernard Eilers, and Jacob Merkelbach, Kramer strives to establish a nationwide organisation with the following aim: ‘the promotion of the social and economic interests of professional photographers’. In 1919, the conflicts within the NFK lead to a rift among professional photographers, and on 11 March of the same year, the founding of a new association, the NFPV (Nederlandse Fotografen Patroonsvereeniging, ‘Netherlands Photographers Guild’).


Kramer moves to a new and fully equipped studio in a building at Biltstraat 99 in Utrecht. On 21 October, Kramer weds Francina van Rennes. He lays down his function as chairman of the NFPV following a dispute with the management board concerning the association’s publication Licht en Schaduw (‘Light and Shadow’).


Kramer becomes chairman of the NFK.


Kramer is a teacher at the Volksuniversiteit (‘People’s University’) in Utrecht.


In March, Kramer submits a request by letter to obtain the title ‘Hoffotograaf van Hare Majesteit de Koningin’ (‘Court Photographer to Her Majesty the Queen’) based on the following argumentation: ‘The position I hold in photographic circles in Our Country provides sufficient substantiation for this.’ This honourable distinction is subsequently bestowed on Kramer.


As a representative of the Netherlands, Kramer participates in the 2me Congres International du Droit Photographique (‘Second International Conference of Photographic Jurisprudence’) in Paris. Kramer was also previously in attendance at the first conference, held in Brussels.


Kramer is forced to sell the building on the Biltstraat due to the bankruptcy of Vlaer en Kol, the bank financing his mortgage. He loses his home, but also his studio and workshops, as well as all other investments made in the premises. He rents a small home at Willem Barendszstraat 34, which he later buys. He sets up a photo studio at this address as well, albeit on a much more modest scale than at the Biltstraat.


Kramer and his wife are living in Friesland. Kramer’s eldest son watches over the house in Utrecht.

After 1946

After the war, Kramer never resumes his work in the field of photography, which is undergoing rapid changes and innovation. He devotes his time to the documentation and registration of his photographic negatives. In 1947, he steps down as chairman of the NFK.


Kramer’s second wife, Francina van Rennes, dies on 5 June.


On 29 October, Kramer weds Wilhelmina Maria Kanaar.


Francis Kramer dies on 24 April in Utrecht, at the age of 87 years.


Francis Kramer is what one would call a ‘successful member of society’: a personality, who managed to perfectly combine his ambitions as an art photographer and his profession as a portrait photographer with various organisational activities on behalf of photography associations at both the national and local level. With his dominant nature, enormous drive, and talent as a public speaker, Kramer had the authority and capability of a leader. Within the NFK (Nederlandse Fotografen Kunstkring, ‘Netherlands Photographers Art Society’), and the later established NFPV (Nederlandse Fotografen Patroonsvereeniging, ‘Netherlands Photographers Guild’), he therefore assumed a spearheading role. Kramer’s success as a portrait photographer of noble families as well accorded him a certain status.

Kramer’s training as a photographer was obtained chiefly abroad. It was comprised of two parts. One part was based on acquiring a technical knowledge of the field, as occurred at the portrait studio of Laurent Colbert in Belgium and during his year of studying photochemistry with Otto Mente in Germany. The other consisted of learning to master creative skills such as drawing and painting at ‘Kunstliefde’ (‘Love of Art’), an art association in Utrecht. The skills Kramer acquired with the pencil and the paintbrush proved to be extremely useful in his photographic portrait work, specifically for retouching and making backgrounds.

Kramer’s photographic oeuvre includes a sizeable collection of portrait photography. For more than forty years, he portrayed members of the aristocratic class in Utrecht and environs, from which he was able to make a good living. His success in business was largely of his own doing, by creating excellent publicity from the moment he settled in Utrecht. As a journalist wrote in the 5 March 1930 issue of the Utrechtsch Nieuwsblad to mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of Kramer’s business: ‘He began his work in Utrecht with an exhibition, as well in the Building for K and W [Kunst en Wetenschap, ‘Art and Science’], which proved he had not been sitting still while abroad. His work required that two halls be set up, and the exhibition was so successful that even people in the circles of prominent families began to appreciate Kramer as a portraitist.’ In the same year, Kramer was honoured with the title of ‘hoffotograaf’, i.e. royal court photographer. At exhibitions, he presented himself as an art photographer, exuding the allure of a ‘bewegelijke Hollandsche Franschman’ (‘lively Dutch Frenchman’). Kramer also spoke various languages fluently, which certainly increased his clientele’s regard for him. His ‘photo sketches’, in any event, were very much in demand, a technique that involved taking a photo portrait printed on white photographic cardboard, to which a background, colour, and perspective were added in pencil. Kramer’s well-to-do clients were happy to pay a little extra for an extraordinary portrait of this kind.

Throughout his career, Kramer operated various branch studios in Utrecht, and for a brief time, an affiliate in Zeist. His most impressively furnished studio was on the Biltstraat, which he owned from 1920 to 1940. Its interior can be described in detail. The wet finishing space with chemical baths and rinsing trays was in the kitchen, with the pantry functioning as a storage space for the chemicals. The ‘blue salon’ was a stunning studio. The adjacent conservatory was used as a ladies’ changing room, complete with mirrors, curtains, and perfumes. A glass-roofed veranda was used for printing photos with the daylight method.

With his art photography, Kramer proved to be highly adept at fine printing (‘edeldruk’) processes. His themes in this genre are primarily landscape, portraiture, and architecture. These photos were intended for exhibitions and not necessarily for sale. Kramer exhibited frequently, particularly in the 1920s. In 1919, Kramer described the philosophy at the heart of his art photography as follows in the publication Licht en Schaduw (‘Light and Shadow’): ‘In the hands of an art photographer, the negative is like a sketch for a canvas as yet to be painted.’ Gum prints are almost graphics, his bromoil prints—reworked with a paintbrush—are more reminiscent of oil paintings or embellished red-chalk drawings. Kramer reworked some of his fine printing portraits graphically, and on occasion, he rendered them as a geometric linear pattern. Kramer adhered to the same notions as Henri Berssenbrugge, whom he so greatly admired. Berssenbrugge maintained that it was not the beautiful, pure representation of reality that could elevate photography to art, but rather its ‘transformation according to one’s own thought, one’s own soul’.

Kramer worked with a variety of fine printing processes, but especially gum printing, combined gum printing, and bromoil ink printing, but also his own process with ‘lampenzwart’ (a pitch black). He also experimented with ‘fotografiek’ (‘photographics’), a technique applied not only by Kramer and Berssenbrugge, but also by Franz Ziegler. Starting around 1926, Kramer experimented with the newest colour print technique, the Jospé print. In the future development of photography, however, the success of both photographics and the Jospé print would quickly prove to be short-lived. For his regular portrait work, Kramer relied on bromide printing.

Despite the time Kramer spent abroad during his days of training, one finds virtually no trace of a foreign influence in his work. The roots of his photography lie in Dutch painting and artistic photography. Only a few photos from about 1930 betray any interest in contemporary developments occurring in photography outside the Netherlands. The style of the Czech photographer Frantisek Drtikol may perhaps have inspired Kramer to make his Danseres met bal (‘Woman Dancer with Ball’). Kramer’s portraits of women—in profile and with a strong linear execution—are most certainly contemporary in spirit. Man Ray’s solarised portraits, e.g. that of Lee Miller, could also have had an influence. In the finishing of his portraits, however, Kramer’s work is much closer to graphic art than the photography of his day. Kramer’s monumental architectural photos seem somewhat ‘un-Dutch’. While the architectural shots of Martien Coppens perhaps invite comparison, these works were produced from a different approach. When examining Kramer’s detail shot of the Dom Cathedral in Utrecht, one thinks more of work by the major French architectural photographers from the nineteenth century, e.g. Charles Nègre or the Bisson brothers.

As an art photographer, Kramer applied the stylistic forms he so greatly admired in the work of Henri Berssenbrugge, making cubist and abstracted, i.e. ‘graphic’, portraits. In his professionally made portraits, his style is sometimes comparable to that of Godfried de Groot and Willy Schurman: a dramatic lighting marked by strong contrasts, designed to create an atmosphere of glamour. His studio decors were arranged with taste and style. This sometimes entailed painted or neutral backdrops, incorporating several pieces of chic furniture. Group portraits of Dutch noble families were usually taken in their own homes; his compositions were determined by what best suited the atmosphere and entourage. Kramer managed to achieve an allure such as that found in work done by the major European portrait studios, such as Madame D’Ora in Vienna. He was unlikely to have been impressed by the objective nature of New Photography: not a single trace of its influence can be seen in his work.

In 1907, Kramer founded the Vereeniging Koninginnedag Utrecht (‘Utrecht Queen’s Day Association’). This marked the start of a lengthy career as a politically active citizen, organiser, committee member, and chairman for various important events and celebrations. During the First World War, Kramer founded an action committee for Belgian prisoners, and for three years he worked as ‘President du comité de Distraction pour Internes Belges’ (‘President of the Committee for the Entertainment of Imprisoned Belgians’). For his demonstrated effort and commitment, the king of Belgium made him a Knight in the Order of Leopold II. In Utrecht, Kramer was the chairman of the implementation committee, which handled the university’s 300th anniversary. He was also the chairman of the financial committee in charge of decorating the city during for the the student ‘Corps’ (i.e. student fraternities) celebrations held every five years, a position that would later earn him the ‘senaatswapen’ (‘senate coat-of-arms’) and the honorary title of ‘fotografis artis magister’ (‘master of arts in photography’). Finally, Kramer headed the committee marking the twenty-fifth anniversary of the police marching band.

‘He is a Photographer, who can liven things up in a city of approximately 150,000 inhabitants such as Utrecht. Who garners people’s attention and draws them towards him to listen to his authoritative word, just as one used to listen to a born speaker and organiser (…) who conveys faith in his task and the essential faith in oneself’, as it was described in De Fotograaf of 28 February 1930. Considering Kramer’s organisational talent, he was obviously a likely candidate to fulfil important functions in the various photographic organisations. He was not only a co-founder, but also the first chairman of the NFPV. For a period of time, he was the chief editor of the magazine Licht en Schaduw. He was also the first federation chairman of the ‘Nederlandse amateurfotografenorganisatie’ (‘Netherlands Amateur Photographers Organisation’) and chairman of the NFK for more than twenty years. Kramer wrote editorial pieces for photography magazines and even published his own prose in provincial newspapers.

Kramer was in favour of a powerful photographer’s organisation that would serve to promote the economic interests of its members. As an active member, he tried to get the NFK to move in this direction. The NFK, however, was chiefly preoccupied with creative achievements, taking only a neutral stance when it came to problems concerning the business affairs of its members. In 1919, this led to a rift within the NFK, with Kramer and several of his supporters going on to found a new association, the NFPV. In that same year, Adriaan Boer founded his magazine Bedrijfsfotografie (‘Corporate Photography’), hoping that this publication would function as the NFPV’s own trade publication. As the group’s chairman, however, Kramer wanted the association to establish an independent publication of its own. This took the form of the magazine Licht en Schaduw, with Kramer himself as chief editor. One-and-a-half years later, however, the publisher introduced a dramatic increase in the magazine’s production costs. The NFPV’s management board subsequently approached Adriaan Boer for a price quote. To prevent forfeiting his (paid) position as chief editor, however, Kramer suppressed Boer’s offer and extended the agreement with the existing publishers of Licht en Schaduw. When news of Kramer’s action surfaced, the NFPV intervened, as yet signing a contract with Boer. Consequently, Bedrijfsfotografie became the official trade publication of the NFPV in December 1920. Licht en Schaduw‘s existence as an ‘onafhankelijk orgaan der Nederlandsche Fotografen voor beroep en handel’ (‘independent trade publication of Dutch Photographers for Profession and Commerce’) was ultimately short-lived. Kramer’s position on the management board of the NFPV had become untenable. He withdrew from the association and returned to the ranks of the NFK.

Francis Kramer made a qualitative and diverse contribution to art photography in the Netherlands. His experiments in the areas of colour photography and photographics resulted in exceptional photos. In addition, his portrait oeuvre is of critical importance as a reservoir of images portraying members of the Dutch noble class. Kramer continuously played a motivating role in promoting the position of professional photographers, devoting his effort to matters such as authorship rights and education in the field of photography. His vivacious personality and verbal skills were qualities that made him an authority in the world of professional photography in the Netherlands.


Primary bibliography

Diverse artikelen in De Fotograaf (exacte gegevens ontbreken).

Negatieve retouche, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1919) 2, p.5-6.

Negatief behandeling, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1919) 4, p. 9.

Collega Leenheer, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1919) 5, p. 2-3.

De taak van de redactie-commissie, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1919,) 8, p. 1-2.

Sneeuwlandschappen, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1919) 8, p.6.

Voormannen op vakgebied: H. Berssenbrugge, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 7.

Vergaadering NFK, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 15, p. 104-105.

De zondagssluiting en ons oordeel als mensch, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920), p. 108.

Vereenigingsnieuws, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 17, p. 114-115.

Zevende Jaarlijksche Nationale Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 18, p. 126-127.

Vereenigingsnieuws, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 20, p. 135-136.

Vereenigingsnieuws, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 21, p. 143.

Kubisme in de fotografie, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 23, p. 163-164.

Organisatorisch Amsterdam? Open brief aan collega Eilers, Huysen, Huybers en Van Kreveld, in Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 24, p. 169-171.

Belichting-combinatie, in Lux 33 (1922), p. 105-106.

Nederland in beeld, in Bedrijfsfotografie 10 (25 augustus 1928) 17, p. 435-436.

Bij de twee illustraties, in Bedrijfsfotogrqfie 11 (31 januari 1929) 5, p.51.

Een nieuwe last van economischen aard, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (3 oktober 1930) 20, p. 377.

De fotografie als aesthetisch vak, in Licht en Schaduw. (Vakblad Antwerpen, ca.december 1935).


images in

Onze kleeding 11 (1910), p. 20, 133.

Licht en Schaduw 1 (1919) 1.

Kalender N.V. Fotohandel van E. Fischel jr., Amsterdam, 1920.

Lux 33 (1922) p. 101-104, 121, 124.

Licht en Schaduw 1 (1920) 23, plaat 35.

Bedrijfsfotogrqfie 9 (24 september 1927) 20, p. 501-502.

Bedrijfsfotogrqfie 10 (25 augustus 1928) 17, p. 443-446.

Bedrijfsfotografie 11 (31 januari 1929) 5, p. 54a-54b.

Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (14 november 1930) 23, p.432.

Claude Magelhaes, Nederlandse fotografie. De eerste 100 jaar, Utrecht/Antwerpen (Bruna & Zoon) 1969, afb. 54.

Catalogus tent. Het kind in de fotografie, Gent (Museum A. Vander Haeghen) 1981.

Secondary bibliography

J.R.A. Schouten, Boekbeoordeling, in Lux 31 (15 februari 1920) 4, p. 79.

Auteur onbekend, Fotografen Patroonsvereeniging, in Bedrijfsfotografie 2(16 september 1920) 6, p. 61-62.

Auteur onbekend, De N.F.P.V. een noodzakelijkheid! Officieele mededeelingen, in Bedrijfsfotogrqfie 2 (25 november 1920) 11, p. 121.

Auteur onbekend, Fotogeschillen, in Lux 32 (1921), p. 416-417.

Auteur onbekend, Orgaankwestie en ‘t bedanken van den heer Kramer als voorzitter, in Bedrijfsfotografie 3(14 april 1921) 8, p. 117-121.

Adriaan Boer, De kwestie ‘Licht en schaduw’ – ‘Bedrijfsfotografie’, in Bedrijfsfotogrqfie 3(12 mei 1921) 10, p. 154.

C.G. Leenheer, Aan het H.B. der Nederl. Fotogr. Patroons Vereeniging (ingezonden brief), in Bedrijfsfotografie 3 (23 juni 1921) 13, p. 217-218.

Adriaan Boer, ‘De comedie Francis Kramer’, in Bedrijfsfotografie 3 (23Juni 1921) 13, p. 218, 220.

Auteur onbekend, Vereenigingsnieuws, in Bedrijfsfotografie 3 (7 juli 1921) 14, p. 227-228.

J.B., Openingsrede ter Alg. Vergadering der N.F.P.V. gehouden door den voorzitter den heer J. Bockstart te Amsterdam op 13 dec. 1921, in Bedrijfsfotografie 3 (22 december 1921) 26, p. 442.

Auteur onbekend, Kwestie Fr. Kramer, in Focus 9 (g februari 1922) 3, p. 56.

C.G. Leenheer, ‘Barbertje moet hangen’, in Bedrijfsfotografie 4 (30 maart 1922) 7, p. 141-144, 145-146.

J. Ligteringe, Utrechtsche A.F.V., in Focus 10 (9 augustus 1923) 16, p. 418.

C.G.L., De heer Francis Kramer op het oorlogspad, in Bedrijfsfotografie 7 (7 november 1925) 23, p. 503-505.

C.G.L., Een beschouwing, een kort verslag en een conclusie, naar aanleiding van de 24 e jaarvergadering van den Nederlandschen Fotografen Kunstkring, in Bedrijfsfotografie 8 (31 juli 1926) 16, p. 368-372.

P. Brandsma, Ned Fotografen Patroons Vereeniging, in Bedrijfsfotografie 9 (7 mei 1927) 10, p. 234.

W.v.Z., De jubileums tentoonstelling van den Nederlandsche Fotografen Kunstkring, in Bedrijfsfotografie 9 (30 juli 1927) 16, p. 384.

C.G.L., De jubileums tentoonstelling van den Nederlandsche Fotografen Kunstkring, in Bedrijfsfotografie g (30 juli 1927) 16, p. 387-391.

C.G.L., ‘De fotografie in nieuwe banen’, in Bedrijfsfotografie 10 (14 januari 1928) 1, p. 1-3.

A.B., De tentoonstelling der NFPV ter gelegenheid van het tweede lustrum, april 1929, in Bedrijfsfotografie 11 (2 mei 1929) 18, p. 209.

Auteur onbekend, Ledenlijst der N.F.P.V. op 1 jan. 1930, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (24 januari 1930) 2, p. 36.

Em. Muns, Francis Kramer. 7 maart 1905-7 maart 1930, in De Fotograaf 44. (28 februari 1930) 9.

Auteur onbekend, Francis Kramer gaat jubileeren, in De Fotograaf 44 (28 februari 1930) 9.

Auteur onbekend, Francis Kramer’s jubileum. De receptie, in Utrechtsch Prov. en Sted. Dagblad maart 1930.

Auteur onbekend, Francis Kramer. Gevoelig werker met gevoelige platen, in Utrechtsch Nieuwsblad 5 maart 1930.

Auteur onbekend, Francis Kramer, in Utrechtsch Prov. en Sted. Dagblad 6 maart 1930.

P. Brandsma, Zilveren jubileum Francis Kramer, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (7 maart 1930) 5. p. 96.

A.B., N.F.K. tentoonstelling in Pulchri Studio, Den Haag, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (19 september 1930) 19, p. 349.

C.G.L., (reactie op artikel van F. Kramer ‘Een nieuwe last van economischen aard’), in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (3 oktober 1930) 20, p. 377-378.

Auteur onbekend, Bij de platen in dit nummer, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (14 november 1930) 23, p.424.

C.G.L., Wat wel eens overdacht mag worden, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (28 november 1930) 24, p. 453-454.

C.G.L., Wat wel eens overdacht mag worden. II. ‘Een onvoltooide symphonie’, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12(13 december 1930) 25, p. 473-474.

C.G. Leenheer, Wat wel eens gezegd mag worden. III. Meerenberg of De Bilt? Een duo of een trio?, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (27 december 1930) 26, p. 489-491.

L. van Oudgaarden, Een kijkje op de betrouwbaarheid der heeren F. Kramer en Emile Muns, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (9 januari 1931) 1, p. 15-16.

Adr. Boer, Het ‘geval’ F. Kramer, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (23 januari 1931) 2, p. 25.

C.G.L., Een ‘open brief van den heer Francis Kramer!, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (23 januari 1931) 2, p. 35.

C.G.L., Mensch erger je niet want… ons is niets te dol!, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (24 december 1931) 26, p. 485-487.

Auteur onbekend, Vereeniging Koninginnedag Utrecht. Een jubileum in een glazen huis, in Utrechtsch Nieuwsblad 20 juli 1932, p. 9.

v.d.W. en C.G.L. (= v.d. Werf en C.G. Leenheer), Utrecht herleeft!, in Bedrijfsfotografie 18 (3 april 1936) 7, p. 123.

Auteur onbekend, Foto’s met schijnreliëf, in Foto 2 (april 1947) 4, p. 78.

Auteur onbekend, Schitterende fotosalon geopend. Kunstwerken uit 10 landen, in Utrechtsch Nieuwsblad 13 juli 1947.

M. van Hezel (voorw.), 1919-1959. 40 Jaar N.F.P.V., Utrecht, 1959.

Ingeborg Th. Leijerzapf (red.), Fotografie in Nederland 1839-1920, Den Haag (Staatsuitgeverij) 1978, p. 19, 78, 79, 100 (met foto’s).

Flip Bool en Kees Broos (red.), Fotografie in Nederland 1920-1940, Den Haag (Staatsuitgeverij) 1979, p.5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 15, 19, 105, 107, 118, 153 (met foto’s).

Catalogus tent. De tijd wisselt van spoor, Laren (Singer Museum) 1981, p. 252.

Ingeborg Th. Leijerzapf en Caroline A. Rehorst de Westenholz, Kunstfotografie in Nederland rond 1900, Deurne/Antwerpen (Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof) 1982.

Hedi Hegeman en Ingeborg Th. Leijerzapf, Willy Schurman, in Geschiedenis van de Nederlandsefotografie, Alphen aan den Rijn (Samsom) 1984 e.v.

Ingeborg Th. Leijerzapf, Truus Haasbroek- Hessels, in Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse fotografie, Alphen aan den Rijn (Samsom) 1984 e.v.

Ingeborg Th. Leijerzapf en Tineke de Ruiter, Bernard Eilers, in Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse fotografie, Alphen aan den Rijn (Samsom) 1984 e.v.


Vereniging Kunstliefde, Utrecht.

NFK (voorzitter van 1926-1947 ).

NFPV (medeoprichter en voorzitter van 1919-1920, weer lid vanaf 1927).


De Fotograaf (lid van de redactie, hoofdredacteur vanaf 1931).


1930 Hoffotograaf.

1930 Bronzen plaque van de Kamer van Koophandel voor zijn verdiensten als fotograaf en middenstander in Utrecht.

1947 Officier de 1’Ordre spécial de première classe de Belgique.


1905 (e) Utrecht, Gebouw van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, Eigen omgeving fotografie.

1926 (g) Utrecht, Jaarbeurs.

1927 (g) Amsterdam, Koopmansbeurs, De fotografie als wandversiering (Fotografendag NFPV).

1927 (g) Utrecht, Jaarbeursgebouw, NFK jubileums tentoonstelling.

1929 (g) Amsterdam, Odd Fellow House, (tentoonstelling ter gelegenheid van het 2 e lustrum der NFPV).

1930 (e) Utrecht, Gebouw van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, (tentoonstelling t.g.v. het 25-jarig bestaan van de zaak van Kramer).

1930 (g) Den Haag, Pulchri Studio, (NFK tentoonstelling).

1947 (g) Utrecht, Gebouw Voor de Kunst, (tentoonstelling n.a.v. het 25-jarig bestaan van de Kunstkring te Utrecht).

1947 (g) Utrecht, Kunstliefde, (internationale fotosalon t.g.v. het 45-jarig bestaan van de NFK).

1955 (e) Utrecht, Kunstliefde, (tentoonstelling t.g.v. het 50-jarig bestaan van het kunstatelier van Kramer).

1969 (g) ‘s-Hertogenbosch, Noord-Brabants Museum, Nederlandse Fotografie, de eerste 100 jaar.

1978 (g) Leiden, Museum De Lakenhal, Belicht verleden (rondreizende tentoonstelling).

1981 (g) Laren, Singer Museum, De tijd wisselt van spoor.

1981 (g) Gent, Museum A. Vander Haeghen, Het kind in de fotografie.

1982 (g) Deurne/Antwerpen, Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof, Kunstfotografie in Nederland rond 1900.


Den Haag, Koninklijk Huisarchief.

Leiden, Dr. W. Kramer, documentatie en mondelinge informatie.

Leiden, Prentenkabinet, bibliotheek en documentatiebestand.

Utrecht, Gemeentearchief.

Utrecht, Universiteitsbibliotheek.


Den Haag, Franse Ambassade.

Den Haag, Koninklijk Huisarchief.

Leiden, Prentenkabinet der Rijksuniversiteit.

Utrecht, Centraal Museum.

Utrecht, Corpsmuseum.

Utrecht, Gemeentearchief.