PhotoLexicon, Volume 6, nr. 11 (March, 1989) (en)

Hans Spies

Adriaan Elligens


The photographer Hans Spies settled as an immigrant in the Netherlands in 1931. It was here that he made a name for himself—initially working in a business partnership with Jaap D’Oliveira—as a specialist in architectural and interior photography. Spies’ clients included various architects who were part of the Modern Movement in architecture as well as New Objectivist interior designers. Spies left behind an extensive archive. Historically significant are his interior shots of passenger ships that no longer exist. Spies’ archive is primarily a reservoir of images that features quality documents in the fields of architecture and interior art.




Karl Johannes Spies is born on 12 September in Andernach (Germany).


Spies meets the Dutch photographer Jaap D’Oliveira while working in the studio of Hugo Schmölz in Cologne, Germany.


In August, Hans Spies moves to Amsterdam with his German wife, Johanna Goerres. Jaap d’Oliveira and his German fiancée follow. Together, they move to a home at Kromme Mijdrechtstraat 13/3, in the newly built neighbourhood of Nieuw-Zuid (‘New South’).


Spies enters a business partnership with D’Oliveira.


In May, Hans Spies moves to Dintelstraat 53 in Amsterdam New South In July, he ends his working partnership with Jaap d’Oliveira and continues further under his own name.


In May, Spies moves to Courbetstraat 2/3 in Amsterdam.


Financial difficulties force Spies to give up his spacious home on the Courbetstraat. He begins anew in the attic above Café Eylders at Korte Leidsedwarsstraat 49-49a. The son of the café’s owner was previously an assistant working for Spies.

Ca. 1957

Spies moves to Blaricum, where he and his wife move into a small home on the grounds of a befriended architect. Although there is a darkroom at this location, the studio in Amsterdam still operates at full capacity. D’Oliveira remains in contact with Spies and his wife by visiting them on a regular basis in Blaricum. In the 1950s, Spies and his wife acquire the Dutch nationality.


On 17 April, Hans Spies dies of a heart attack during a drive in the Haarlemmermeer polder. Spies’ wife transfers her husband’s archive to Jaap D’Oliveira.


Following Jaap d’Oliveira’s death, Maarten d’Oliveira is placed in charge of Spies’ archive.


Anyone who mentions the name of Hans Spies as well brings the name of Jaap d’Oliveira to mind. While more ambitious than his business partner D’Oliveira, Spies was reportedly a calm and amiable, even modest man. This is how the architect Hein Salomonson remembers him. Salomonson describes Spies as the best architectural photographer he knew prior to the war. He was immediately impressed by Spies’ intelligent perspective, which was accompanied by an excellent command of the technical aspects of photography.

Spies was also an extremely ‘precise’ man, as affirmed by the records he kept of his activities, comprising in total seven order books dating from July 1934 to February 1973. He described every shot that he took (as well privately) and maintained this practice consistently for almost forty years.

Hans Spies and Jaap d’Oliveira had both received a solid training in industrial, advertising, and architectural photography at Hugo Schmölz’s studio in Cologne, Germany. Central to Schmölz’s teaching was the functional approach to the photographic subject. He adhered to the basic tenets of New Objectivism, a movement that had taken root not only in photography, but also in architecture, interior design, and the applied arts. It was in these fields that photographers with a modern education, like Spies and D’Oliveira, could develop themselves further.

In 1932, Spies and D’Oliveira established a business in Amsterdam. The location they chose was located in a part of Amsterdam where, in the years immediately following, various photographers from Germany would come to live. Among photographic circles in the city, the arrival of these foreigner photographers did not go unnoticed. In 1935, criticism of their moving to Amsterdam and the growing deterioration of the profession was voiced in the magazine Bedrijfsfotografie (‘Corporate Photography’) with the observation that: ‘In a certain part of Amsterdam, about ten foreign photographers settled within a short period of time’. There is no doubt that such comments were in reference to the ‘Nieuw-Zuid’ (‘New South’) neighbourhood of the city. In this time of economic crisis, more photographers in the city would only mean an even greater dearth of work for the circa 130 professionals already registered there.

From the start, however, Spies and D’Oliveira already had a big advantage in comparison with most of their colleagues, thanks to the quality of their modern education. In addition, in 1932 there were not yet many photographers specialised in industrial and architectural photography working in Amsterdam. Those whose activities did include work of this nature were J. van Dijk, J. Goedknegt, A. Meijer, M. Meyboom, and B.F. Eilers.

One of D’Oliveira and Spies’ first clients was the company Metz & Co., in particular the furniture department, where Elmar Berkovich and Willem Penaat acted as contacts. It was precisely at this time that Metz & Co. decided to focus on functional designs, with the furniture department furnished along these lines. The photos taken were, of course, intended to present Berkovich and Penaat’s functional interiors, featuring light tints, at their very best. The technically pure, New Objectivist photography of Spies and his partner guaranteed the ideal reflection of this functionality. In the end, however, Metz paid a ridiculously small amount for these photo commissions: Dfl. 3.75 per shot (the price had been determined by Berkovich). Despite the skilled professionalism of both photographers, it was never an easy task to acquire commissions. The only major commission Spies and D’Oliveira received in the period of their collaboration was a series of photos for a calendar distributed by the AVRO broadcasting company. The two men were able to live adequately from what they earned on this project for some time.

Notwithstanding, Spies’ ambitions exceeded those of his partner. It was for this reason that he ended their working relationship in mid-1934. Spies was a multi-faceted photographer who wanted to run a business that was broad in its orientation, like what he had experienced at Schmölz’s in Cologne.

Although Spies had worked with various assistants prior to the war, his annual production was by no means impressively substantial. At its height, his pre-war production, in 1939, totalled no more than 1,300 shots. It was in this year that the company Bruynzeel had started to become one of his more important clients.

When Hein Salomonson started up his own architecture firm in 1934, he was advised to contact Spies by a fellow architect, Auke Komter (who would remain a regular client of Spies even into the 1960s.) It is not hard to imagine why Salomonson’s ideas concerning architecture and Spies’ photographic vision were so complementary: Salomonson was one of the protagonists of the Modern Movement in architecture, who practiced function, simplicity, and abstraction as important principles on which to base their architecture. Besides Salomonson and Komter, Spies was approached for commissions by numerous architects prior to the war, including S. van Ravesteijn, D. Greiner, G. Friedhoff, G.H.M. Holt, B.T. Boeyinga, J. Snellebrand, A. Eibink, P. Zanstra, J. Giesen, K. Sijmons, H. Schelling, J.P. Kloos, J. Wils, and F. Eschauzier. During the 1930s, many of these architects realised buildings in the Amsterdam neighbourhood Nieuw-Zuid. Besides Spies, one other photographer frequently hired by these architects for photo assignments was Eva Besnyö. In their approach to photographing architecture, Spies and Besnyö were not all that different from each other.

In the end, however, architectural photography made up only a part of Spies’ overall oeuvre. He also received many commissions in the area of advertising photography. Before the war, Spies’ clientele included companies such as Beiersdorf (Nivea), Leerdam Glass, Ahrend en Zoon, De Cirkel, Linoleum Krommenie, and the advertising agency Smeets & Schippers. After the war, Ahrend/Cirkel and Linoleum Krommenie were his most significant clients. Judging by the large number of photographs Spies shot for Linoleum Krommenie, one may probably conclude that very few of the building interiors designed by this firm had not been photographed by Spies.

It was the war that interrupted Spies’ plans to run a large and successful business. According to his order book, he still managed to keep much of his pre-war clientele for quite some time after the war started. Eventually, however, his photography practice began to decline, due to a lack of commissions. Furthermore, as a German national, Spies found himself in an awkward position—though there is nothing to indicate he made any attempt to garner acquisitions by catering to the wishes of the German occupier. Because he continued operating his business, however, the Germans were well aware of his existence. In the end, Spies was drafted into the Wehrmacht (the German armed forces) in order to serve his country.

Spies’ pre-war and post-war photo archives both hold an astonishing quantity of visual material (in total, Spies took 39,800 shots, most of which have been preserved). Less significant are the many product photos he took for advertising purposes, as well as the numerous shots taken for Leerdam Glass, featuring utilitarian glass and decorative jewellery, e.g. glass penguins, elephants, and anteaters. Far more intriguing are the shots that Spies took for Leerdam featuring single-edition and other miscellaneous designs by A.D. Copier, such as the glass dinnerware and the glass windows for the passenger ship the Nieuw Amsterdam (1937). Also important in terms of subject are his shots of utilitarian ceramic pieces manufactured by the company Fris Edam (from mid-1947 to mid-1952), as well as a large number of photos taken for the company ‘Indoor’, starting in 1951 (lamp designs, lighting for project installations, glass and ceramic dinnerware), the showcases and interiors of Pander, furniture manufactured by the companies UMS, Reens, and Fristho, and shots that were taken on behalf of the Instituut voor Industriële Vormgeving (‘Insitute of Industrial Design’, 1954/55).

The many shots in Spies’ archive that feature the original, but by now lost interiors of ships form an impressive collection in themselves. Various designers and artists were contracted to work on the project for the interior design of the Nieuw Amsterdam (1937). In 1939, the magazine De 8 en Opbouw devoted an entire article to this ship, as well illustrated with an interior photo taken by Jaap D’Oliveira that showed the smoking salon in ‘tourist class’. It was here that Spies and D’Oliveira’s paths crossed once again—something that would occur on numerous occasions after the war, though not when taking interior shots of newly built passenger ships.

For these commissions, Spies was hired on a regular basis by the companies that realised these ship interiors, such as Bruynzeel, Krommenie, as well as Wagemans and Van Tuinen (Artifort). The ship Spies photographed most extensively was the ‘Oslofjord’, completed at the NDSM shipyard in Amsterdam in 1949. In total, 254 different shots were taken, ranging from the first-class ‘Lady Lounge’ (Wagemans and Van Tuinen) to plastic sculptures of a chamois and a squirrel in the swimming pool.

Spies’ archive suggests his commissions were by no means limited to those (furniture) manufacturers collaborating with top Dutch designers—as his later architectural photography likewise indicates. In the 1960s, for instance, Spies received photo commissions from contracting companies involved in the construction of office and commercial buildings, which in architectural terms, were less interesting. Spies’ concessions in this regard stemmed from the fact that, after the war, his business had grown to ten employees. He therefore had no other choice but to maintain a steady production, leaving little opportunity for picking and choosing.

Starting in the days of their studies, both Spies and D’Oliveira adhered to the formal idiom of New Photography and remained staunchly loyal to its precepts throughout their entire career. To a large degree this formal idiom appears to be the same as that found in Modern Architecture, specifically: ‘free of all impressionistic imagery conveying mood, without omitting elements of emotion’, as J.J.P. Oud described the characteristics of Modern Architecture in De 8 en Opbouw in 1932. Although the photographers of New Photography made use of striking perspectives and diagonals in the early 1930s, Hans Spies was never tempted to devise experimental visual compositions. He refrained from strong personal interpretations. Spies’ vision of photographing architecture remained the same over the years. He strove for an ideal representation of the subject, one in in which a building’s surroundings were maximally related to its architecture. He achieved this by taking highly sensitive shots, in which sunlight and the use of floodlights gave these structures clarity. It was a sunny and optimistic mood, after all, that evoked a favourable view with a potential client. Floodlighting, it might be added, played a role not only in New Photography, but also Modern Architecture: architects intentionally took account of this in the design of their buildings.

From the very start, Hans Spies worked with the cool tints of bromide paper (as opposed to gaslight paper, still being used everywhere until about 1930), which give his photos the character of an objective registration.

In 1936, Spies began experimenting on his own with colour photography. In 1952, the Bouwkundig Weekblad (‘Architectural Weekly’) placed a full-page colour shot that was his (one of the few times this magazine is known to have allowed itself such an extravagance). Despite adding the term ‘Colour Studio’ after his name in the 1950s, Spies never really devoted much time to colour, nor did his colleagues Jaap D’Oliveira and Jan Versnel. The increased use of colour in building design of the 1950s and 1960s was not a pressing reason for architects to switch to colour photos. High printing costs are likely to have been influential in this regard.

Spies worked primarily with a technical camera, certainly for his architectural shots. Later on in life, heart problems obliged him to trade in his heavy Linhof standard equipment for a Hasselblad with a 38 mm lens. Among circles of architects and interior artists in Amsterdam, Spies swiftly acquired a reputation as a talented and modern professional photographer. As well after the war, he remained a highly demanded specialist in these areas. The significance of Hans Spies’ oeuvre lies primarily in the documentary aspect of his work. Many structures and interiors of (art) historical significance in the Netherlands can today be studied solely based on his photos.


Primary bibliography

images in:

Filmliga 6 (juli 1933) 8, p. 234.

W. Sandberg (red.), Les Pays Bas et les Indes Néerlandaises, Amsterdam 1937, p. 36c, 37c.

Het prinsenjacht Piet Hein, Schiedam (H.A.M. Roelants) 1937, p.42, 45, 46, 47, 50,51, 52.

Prisma der Kunsten (1937) 7, p. 193-206.

Reflets. Le magazine de la vie beige mei 1939.

Het nieuwe diergaardeboek, Rotterdam 1940.

Landhuis-Op De Hoogte (1940) 4.

Werk (1946 (6), p. 183-184.

J.J. Vriend, Bouwt mee aan uw eigen woning, Amsterdam (Moussault) 1947, afb. 17, 40, 58.

Katholiek Rouwblad 20 (14 februari 1953) 10, p. 148-149.

Katholiek Bouwblad 20 (4 juli 1953) 20, p. 310.

Katholiek Bouwblad 21 (31 juli 1954) 22, p. 338, 340-341.

J.P. Mieras, Na-oorlogse bouwkunst in Nederland, Amsterdam/Antwerpen (Kosmos) 1954, p. 27, 67-69, 140, 152, 173, 184, 185, 226, 228, 229, 248.

Garmt Stuiveling e.a., Willem M. Dudok, Amsterdam/Bussum (G. van Saane ‘lectura architectonica’/F.G. Kroonder) 1954, p. 117.

G. Friedhoff (inl.), Nederlandse architectuur. Uitgevoerde werken van bouwkundige ingenieurs, Amsterdam (Argus) 1956, p. 41, 66-69, 100-102, 121, 134, 135, 188, 189, 237, 291, 292, 368.

Revue Internationale d’Eclairage (1957) 6, afb. 3, 13-15, 17.

Polytechnisch tijdschrift, uitgave B, 13 (27 maart 1958) 13/14, p. 220b, 226b, 229b-231b.

Architecture d’Aujourdhui april 1958, p. 24-26.

Visie. Tijdschrift voor bouwen en wonen in de meest uitgebreide zin (1958) 6.

J.J. Vriend, De schoonheid van ons land. Architectuur van deze eeuw, Amsterdam (Contact) 1959, afb. 114, 160, 168, 180, 183, 184, 204.

Amsterdam Werkt. Tijdschrift voor bouwnijverheid, handel, scheepvaart en industrie 2 (1960) 1, p. 51, 77, 78.

La technique des travaux maart/april 1960, p. 97, 98.

Amsterdam Werkt. Tijdschrift voor bouwnijverheid, handel, scheepvaart en industrie 2 (1960) 3, p.51.

Amsterdam Werkt. Tijdschrift voor bouwnijverheid, handel, scheepvaart en industrie 2 (1960) 4, p. 80, 81.

Amsterdam Werkt. Tijdschrift voor bouwnijverheid, handel, scheepvaart en industrie 3 (1961) 6, p. 69.

Tijdschrift voor Architectuur en Beeldende Kunsten 31 (oktober 1964) 22.

Tijdschrift voor Architectuur en Beeldende Kunsten 32 (september 1965) 18, p. 414-415.

R. Blijstra, Dutch architecture after 1900, Amsterdam (Van Kampen en Zn.) 1966.

Istvan L. Szénassy, Architectuur in Nederland 1960-1967, Amsterdam (Scheltema en Holkema) 1969, p. 19, 67, 63, 85, 86, 87, 90, 94.

Catalogus tent. Friso Kramer, Amsterdam (Stedelijk Museum) 1978.

J.P. Kloos, Architectuur, een gewetenszaak, Den Haag (Staatsuitgeverij) 1985, p. 28, 43.

Peter Vöge en Bab Westerveld, Stoelen, Nederlandse ontwerpen 1945-1985, Amsterdam (Meulenhoff/LandshofF) 1986, afb. 21, 22, 35,50,52, 72, 154, 155, 171.

Catalogus tent. Fotografie en architectuur in de jaren vijftig, Amsterdam (Stichting Wonen) 1986.

Catalogus tent. Hein Salomonson, Amsterdam (Stichting Wonen) 1987.

Kees Rouw, Sybold van Ravesteijn, architect van Kunstmin en De Holland, Rotterdam (De Hef) 1988, p. 15, 17, 24, 25, 29, 30, 3436, 38, 58, 59.


in De 8 en opbouw.

5 (1934), p. 207.

8 (22 mei 1937) 10, p. 86, 88-89, 91.

8 (6 november 1937) 22, p. 206-211.

9 (26 februari 1938) 4, p. 34-35.

9 (1938) 19, p. 183-184.

10 (1939) 9, p. 87-88, 90, 92-96.

10 (1939) 25, p. 269-273.

11 (1940), p. 89-91, 93, 95-98.

11 (8 juni 1940) 11/12, p. 111.

12 (1941) 1, p. 1-3.

12 (1941) 5, p. 61-63, 66-68.

12 (1941) 10, p. 131, 137.

12 (1941) 11, p. 154-155.


in Bouw.

8 (21 maart 1953) 12, p. 206-208.

12 (22 juni 1957) 25, p. 607, 610-612.

15 (februari 1960) 9, p. 263-273.

15 (1 oktober 1960) 40, p. 1176, 1177, 1179-1182.

15 (29 oktober 1960) 44, p. 1314-1318.

15 (10 december 1960) 50, p. 508.

18 (20 april 1963) 16, p.484.

20 (13 februari 1965) 7, p. 212-214, 216, 218-220.


in Bouwkundig Weekblad:

69 (3-10 juli 1951) 27/28, p. 257-263.

69 (25 september-2 oktober 1951) 39/40, p. 355.

69 (18-25 december 1951) 51/52, p. 445-452.

70 (19 augustus 1952) 33/34, p. 259, 262-264.

70 (14 oktober 1952) 41/42, p. 317, 319-322.

70 (11 november 1952) 45/46, p. 348-349.

71 (31 maart 1953) 13/14, p. 114-115, 117-119, 122.

71 (7 juli 1953) 27/28, p. 215-216.

71 (4 augustus 1953) 31/32, p. 243-247.

71 (29 september 1953) 39/40, p. 297-299, 302-304.

71 (22 december 1953) 51/52, p. 408-409.

72 (1954) 17/18, p. 133, 135-137.

72 (1954) 19/20, p. 178.

72 (22 juni 1954) 25/26, p. 223-225, 228.

72 (6 juli 1954) 27/28, p. 235-238.

72 (1954) 37/38, p. 314-317.

72 (9 november 1954) 45/46, p. 384-385.

72 (21 december 1954) 51/52, p.417.

73 (11 januari 1955) 2, p. 14-15, 17.

73 (25 januari 1955) 4, p. 45-46.

73 (22 februari 1955) 8, p. 86-87.

73 (8 maart 1955) 10, p. 109, 112.

73 (7 juni 1955) 23, p. 275-277.

73 (19-26 juli 1955) 29/30, p. 356-359.

73 (25 oktober 1955) 43, p. 470.

73 (6-13 december 1955) 49/50, p. 550, 568-571.

74 (31 januari 1956) 5, p. 52-55.

74 (6 maart 1956) 10, p. 114-117.

74 (10 april 1956) 15, p. 166.

74 (15 mei 1956) 20, p. 239-240, 249.

74 (25 september 1956) 39, p.415.

74 (9 oktober 1956) 41, p.437-440.

75 (19 februari 1957) 8, p. 90-92.

75 (5 maart 1957) 10, p. 109-113, 116-120.

75 (16 april 1957) 16, p. 206-207.

75 (1957) 44, p. 461-463.

75 (1957) 45, p. 473-477.

76 (1958) 50/51.

77 (26 september 1959) 39, titelblad, p. 460, 462-463, 465-466.


in Forum:

4 (1949) 2/3, p. 55, 96-97, 102-104.

5 (1950) 12, p. 474.

6 (1950) 8, p. 194-195.

6 (1950) 12, p. 352-353, 358.

7 (1952) 4/5, p.114.

8 (1953) 2, p. 42-43.

8 (1953) 4/5, p. 141, 146, 156-157, 160, 168, 171.

8 (1953) 7, p. 236, 239.

8 (1953) 10, p. 340.

8 (1953) 11, p. 387.

9 (1954) 4, p. 171, 180-181.

9 (1954) 7, p. 285.

9 (1954) 12, p. 443.

10 (1955) 4/5, p. 151.

10 (1955) 8 , p. 246-251, 262-263.

11 (maart 1956) extra Jaarbeurs editie, p. 24.

11 (1956) 5, p. 152, 184, 186.

11 (1956) 6, p. 200.

11 (1956) 10, p. 342-345.

11 (1956-1957) 11, p. 374-375.

11 (1956-1957) 12, p. 420-421, 424-426.

12 (1957) 1/2, p. 10-15.

12 (1957) 5, p. 132, 134-135, 137-142, 145-147.

12 (1957) 7, p. 242-248.

13 (1958) 4, p. 117, 123, 138-141.

13 (1958) 5, p.148-150, 158-162, 164-165.

13 (1958) 7, p. 238-241.

14 (1959) 4, p.115.

15 (1960-1961) 9, p.315.


in Goed Wonen:

3 (december 1949) 12, p. 189.

3 (oktober 1950) 10.

4 (december 1951) 12, p. 181.

6 (juni 1953) 6, p. 101.

6 (december 1953) 12, p. 201.

8 (maart 1955) 3, p. 50.

8 (april 1955) 4, p. 71.

9 (april 1956) 4, p. 67.

9 (mei 1956) 5, p. 85, 89, 99-100.

9 (juli 1956) 7, p. 141, 143.

10 (juni 1957) 6, p. 115, 120.

12 (december 1959) 12, p. 347-351.

13 (juni 1960) 9, p. 263-273.

14 (mei 1961) 5, p. 160-163.

15 (februari 1962) 2, p. 49-53.

15 (oktober 1962) 10, p. 307-312.

15 (november 1962) 11, p. 317-318.

Selected clients

(Spies maakte opnamen voor onder andere advertenties, catalogi, brochures, folders en jaarverslagen).

Ahrend kantoormeubelen/projektinrichtingen.

Amsterdam Werkt.

E. Berkovich, binnenhuisarchitect.


A. Boeken, architect.

Braat bouwbedrijf.

B. Bijvoet, architect.

De Cirkel kantoormeubelen.

A.D. Copier, ontwerper.

M. Duintjer, architect.

Dura’s bouwbedrijf.

Van Eesteren bouwbedrijf.

Corns. Elffers, architect.

F.A. Eschauzier, architect.

G. Friedhoff, architect.

Fris Edam keramiek.

Fristho meubelen.

Gelderland meubelen.

Gemeente Amsterdam.

J. Giesen, architect.

S. Ie Grand, architect.

D. Greiner, architect.

Van Heezewijk Best bouwbedrijf.

G.H.M. Holt, architect.

Indoor verlichting.

Instituut voor Industriële Vormgeving.

J. Kloos, architect.

A. Komter, architect.

Leerdam glas.

Linoleum Krommenie.

Metz & Co.

H. Mieras, architect.

Nederhorst bouwbedrijf.


Pander meubelen.

W. Penaat, binnenhuisarchitect.

F. Peutz, architect.

J. Pot, architect.

Purfina benzinemaatschappij.

Rath & Doodeheefver behang.

S. van Ravesteijn, architect.

Reens meubelfabriek.

Rotterdamse Marmer Industrie bouwbedrijf.

Ruteck’s restaurants.

H. Salomonson, architect.

J. Schelling, architect.

Sikkens lakfabrieken.

J. Snellebrand en A. Eibink, architecten.

P. Starreveld, beeldhouwer.

K.P. Tholens, architect.

UMS meubelfabriek.

Visie, (Tijdschrift voor bouwen en wonen in de meest uitgebreide zin).

V.d. Vliet bouwbedrijf.

De Vries Lentsch jachtbouw.

Wagemans en van Tuinen meubelindustrie.

O.L. Wenkebach, beeldhouwer.

J. Wils, architect.

S. van Woerden, architect.

P. Zanstra/J. Giesen/K. Sijmons, architecten.

H.T. Zwiers, architect.

Secondary bibliography

Auteur onbekend, De brug tussen wonen en werken, in Visie (1965) 20, p. 14-15.

Els Barents (red.), Fotografie in Nederland 1940-1975, Den Haag (Staatsuitgeverij) 1978, p. 22, 24.

Flip Bool en Kees Broos (red.), Fotografie in Nederland 1920-1940, Den Haag (Staatsuitgeverij) 1979, p. 60, 142, 157.

Willem Ellenbroek, Fotografen van de wederopbouw, in De Volkskrant 9 mei 1986.

Willem Ellenbroek, De benzinepomp als groots monument van de nieuwe tijd die komen zou, in De Volkskrant 9 juni 1986.

Mariëtte Haveman, Nederlandse architektuurfotografie ’30/’60, in Perspektief (september 1986) 25, p. 12-13, 18-19 (met foto’s).

Auteur onbekend, Selected curricula vitae, in Perspektief (september 1986) 25, p. 66.


1937 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, foto ’37.

1978 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, Fotografie in Nederland 1940-1975.

1986 (g) Rotterdam, ‘Westersingel 8’, Nederlandse architectuurfotografie 1930-1960.

1986 (g) Amsterdam, Stichting Wonen, Fotografie en architectuur in de jaren vijftig.


Amsterdam, Gemeentearchief.

Amsterdam, Kunsthistorisch Instituut der Universiteit van Amsterdam.

Amsterdam, Nederlands Documentatiecentrum voor de Bouwkunst.

Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum.

Amsterdam, Stichting Wonen.

Amsterdam, Universiteitsbibliotheek.

Amsterdam, Maarten d’Oliveira,

Mevr. G. d’Oliveira-Leo, Hein Salomonson (documentatie en mondelinge informatie).

Leiden, Prentenkabinet, bibliotheek en documentatiebestand.


Amsterdam, Gemeentearchief.

Amsterdam, Nederlands Documentatiecentrum voor de Bouwkunst.

Amsterdam, Stichting ‘Dutch Photography’.