Johan Huijsen, a portrait photographer by profession, described himself as an art photographer. The insights he gained through his experience were conveyed particularly in his autonomous work: cityscapes and genre scenes. In terms of his technical specialisations and craftsmanship, Huijsen was one of the most versatile art photographers in the Netherlands.
Johannes Maria Petrus Antonius (Johan) Huijsen is born on 29 June in Hoorn. He is the son of Ada Wilhelmina Zemsch (born in Amsterdam in 1834) and Johannes Adrianus Jacobus Huijsen, a photographer (born in Haarlem 2 September 1826).
In 1891, the Huijsen family registers with the city of Amsterdam. They live in the homes of people who are the main tenants (in successive order): the Ponk family, the Boers family, the Van Wijngaarden family, and the De Soet family.
Johan studies under Max Cosman, a ‘hoffotograaf’ (‘court photographer’) in Amsterdam. Huijsen later maintains regular contact with Gerrit Leenheer, who also works in Cosman’s studio. This contact concerns photography.
Following the death of his father on 10 October 1898, Johan Huijsen receives his own registration card at the Amsterdam public records office. No profession is stated at this point. Huijsen lives with his mother in an apartment at Haarlemmerweg 81 until 1900. In the three years that follow, they reside at seven different addresses in Amsterdam. On 11 June 1902, Johan Huijsen and Johanna Maria Oltdina Liscaljet (born in Amsterdam, 20 July 1881) produce a son, Johannes. Huijsen and Liscaljet marry on 21 November 1902.
Huijsen collaborates with the photographer Gerrit Leenheer, who runs his own photography studio in an upstairs apartment at Vijzelgracht 27 in Amsterdam from 1903 to 1905. In 1905, Huijsen and Leenheer hold a two-man exhibition at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. They present their viewpoints in a brochure, entitled Moderne kunstfotografie (‘Modern Art Photography’, 1904). A daughter, Maria Johanna, is born on 1 June 1903, but dies on 2 September 1903. From 1904 to 1906, Huijsen resides at Ferdinand Bolstraat 166-III and later moves to No. 161 in the same street.
From 1906 to 1937, Huijsen resides as the main tenant at Willemsparkweg 211. His mother lives with him until her death in 1909.
On 10 December 1907, Adriaan Boer, Ernst Loeb, and Johan Huijsen set up the NCvFK (Nederlandse Club voor Fotokunst, ‘Netherlands Club for Photo Art’).
As a member of the AFV (Amateur Fotografen Vereniging, ‘Amateur Photographers Association’), Huijsen sits on the jury of the Internationale Tentoonstelling van Fotografische Kunst (‘International Exhibition of Photographic Art’), held from 1 to 31 August at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. Huijsen exhibits his own portraits and cityscapes.
On 12 September, Huijsen’s daughter ‘Maria Johanna’ is born.
From the outset (late 1911), Huijsen is involved in plans for a photography collection in Haarlem. On 16 May 1912, these plans come to fruition in a newly created association, called the Vereeniging tot bijeenbrenging eener verzameling fotografieën in het museum van kunstnijverheid te Haarlem (‘Association for the Gathering of a Collection of Photographs in the Museum of Applied Art in Haarlem’). Through his contacts with Adriaan Boer and the NCvFK, Huijsen becomes a member of the board.
During this period, Huijsen presents a number of lectures at the NAFV (Nederlandse Amateur Fotografen Vereniging (‘Netherlands Amateur Photographers Association’) and the NFPV (Nederlandse Fotografen Patroonsvereeniging, ‘Netherlands Photographers’ Guild), on a variety of topics such as ‘Het fotografische affiche’ (‘The Photographic Poster’) and ‘Reclame door de eeuwen’ (‘Advertising over the Centuries’), but also on the ‘Chromate Process’.
Huijsen resides for several years in Heemstede-Bennebroek at Roemer Visscherplein 2. In the spring of 1932, he takes over the studio of A.S. Weinberg (deceased) in Groningen. To fulfil his new function, he moves to Poelestraat 50 in Groningen. In June, a broken femur hinders Huijsen in his work. In January 1933, Huijsen puts the studio up for sale in Bedrijfsfotografie (‘Corporate Photography’), citing health complications. In 1934, he returns to Willemsparkweg 211 in Amsterdam, where he is listed in the telephone book as: ‘art photographer, artist./portrait work, reprod. [reproductions], photos on s. [silk] handkerchiefs, airmail etc.’
Huijsen’s marriage to J.M.O. Liscaljet ends in divorce on 11 November 1936.
In the same year, Huijsen transfers the collection of the former Nederlandsch Fotografisch Museum (‘Netherlands Photographic Museum’) to the BNAFV (Bond van Nederlandse Amateur Fotografen Verenigingen, ‘Federation of Netherlands Amateur Photographers Associations’). On 28 June 1937, Huijsen deregisters in Amsterdam and registers in the city of Haarlem.
Op 15 September 1941, Huijsen moves to Rotterdam. On 8 January 1942, he returns to Haarlem. He then moves to Dordrecht on 22 November 1944.
The address stated on Huijsen’s photos is Vrieseplein 1 in Dordrecht. From the year 1924 on, the ‘Fotoatelier H.G. Beerman en Zn. [and Son]’ is listed at this address. Following Beerman Sr.’s death in 1944, the business is taken over by his son, who specialises in the so-called fine printing (‘edeldruk’) processes.
The photographer Wouter Dijkstra (born in Enkhuizen, 1891) runs a photography business in Vlaardingen at Richard Holstraat 100 from 24 December 1940 until his death on 22 December 1954. Starting in 1946, Huijsen also works at this company. On 1 September 1946, Huijsen officially transfers his address from Dordrecht to Vlaardingen.
In his final years, Huijsen resides in lodgings at Richard Holstraat 100. He lives on municipal welfare.
Johan Huijsen dies on 21 September in Vlaardingen.
‘Better to be a person with “an edge” than one of the masses, as [Bernard] Eilers always said’, Truus Haasbroek-Hessels wrote in a letter to Johan Huijsen in 1954, in response to his endless self-criticism. Huijsen was anything but average: he is certain to have been a man who was fickle, difficult, and not without vanity. Despite his wilful and volatile nature, Huijsen was somewhat conservative in his choice of photographic themes and stylistic notions, preferring art photos of streetscapes and genre scenes. He experimented with many different techniques, which gives his photography a certain vivacity.
Johan Huijsen came from a photography family. His father was a portrait photographer in Hoorn. Johan assisted his father in the production of large quantities of carte-de-visite portrait photos. In 1896, he became an apprentice to the portrait photographer Max Cosman. This was apparently the only training that Huijsen ever received. In addition to practical experience, he was able to sharpen his principles and techniques through photography associations and trade literature.
Business-wise, Huijsen’s success was far from consistent. During the early days of his photographic career, he was not alone. Prior to establishing himself independently, he worked for three years in a partnership with Gerrit Leenheer, starting in 1903. For over thirty years—from 1906 to 1937—Huijsen ran his own photographic studio at Willemsparkweg 211 in Amsterdam. Although his portrait studio was initially successful, the consequences of the economic crisis hit his business hard. In 1932, Huijsen took over the well-established studio of the portrait and art photographer A.S. Weinberg, located in Groningen. Due to an unfortunate series of events, this endeavour was destined to be brief. In 1944, Huijsen presumably entered employment with the photographer H.G. Beerman in Dordrecht in 1934. Both men shared a fondness for fine printing (the so-called ‘edeldruk’) processes, which Beerman may possibly have learned from Huijsen. From 1946 to 1948, Huijsen collaborated with Wouter Dijkstra in Vlaardingen.
According to Leenheer & Huijsen’s brochure of 1904, it was preferable for a client to be photographed in his own surroundings, in order to obtain the most characteristic image. For a photographer with a sufficient knowledge of lighting, retouching was superfluous. Huijsen likewise viewed cardboard mounts full of advertising as undesirable. These principles reflect the ideas and practices then propagated by the early members of the NFK (Nederlandsche Fotografen Kunstkring, ‘Netherlands Photographers Art Society’): Carl Emil Mögle, Piet J. Clausing, H.F.J.M. Deutmann, and Helena Goude. Like Huijsen, these professional photographers aspired to perfection, quality, and purity as opposed to the profit-driven, rush job mentality of numerous competitors. Huijsen alone went one step further than his professional colleagues, however, by producing not only the carbon print, but also fine prints, which were thought to be photographically less ‘pure’. For portrait commissions, Huijsen still usually applied the less time-consuming technique of carbon printing. As late as 1933, he advertised ‘artistic and permanent portrait photos in salon format’, with ‘permanent’ undoubtedly referring to the carbon printing technique.
Huijsen made his own personal contribution to the flourishing of the art photography movement in the Netherlands. In his professional practice as well, he strove for the same high aesthetic standard. Although by no means a trailblazer, he was most certainly a productive participant. In 1904, Huijsen and Leenheer wrote the brochure Moderne kunstfotografie (‘Modern Art Photography’). For their 1905 exhibition at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam, a brochure was handed out to visitors at the entrance of the exhibition hall. The ideas put forth in this brochure closely correspond to Huijsen’s autonomous oeuvre. According to the brochure, photographic technique was to be based on a pure striving for truth and naturalness. It was this striving that distinguished the ‘modern art photographer’ from the ‘generally applied method [of] machine-manufactured little prints, presented in theatrical fashion, consequently as a whole expressionless and unnatural in their representation.’ Theme, technique, and further execution: everything was to be ‘serious in mood’. In the world of Dutch art photography, however, ‘mood’ (‘stemming’) was a word applied indiscriminately. According to De Camera, the photography magazine of the NCvFK (Nederlandse Club voor Fotokunst, ‘Netherlands Club for Photo Art’)—the association in which Huijsen, Boer, and Loeb were all active—claimed that art photography was ‘(…) above all an embodiment of impressions [and] moods that come to us through objects’. Every one of Huijsen’s photographic images served as a reference to a generally felt love for the picturesque, for timelessness, and for melancholic sentiment. Such notions were weapons in his battle to attain general recognition from the Dutch art world. Huijsen’s perfect mastery of photographic technique helped him in his efforts to achieve this goal. Institutions that served as excellent examples of such recognition, as cited by Huijsen and Leenheer, were the Belgian national museum, which had an art photo in its possession (in all likelihood a reference to the Belgian government’s controversial acquisition of Steichen’s photo The Black Vase in 1902), and the Kunsthalle in Hamburg, Germany, with its collection of gum prints.
In 1908, Huijsen exhibited several genre scenes at the Internationale Tentoonstelling van Fotografische Kunst (‘International Exhibition of Photographic Art’) in Amsterdam. The critics found that the naturalism of his sickbed genre scene, entitled Pauvre et Malade (‘Poor and Ill’), was inappropriate for photography. They likewise maintained that, had this work been painted, a dramatic subject of this nature could very well have been artistic and elevating.
Fourteen years later, Huijsen managed to receive positive reviews in response to several Höchheimer gum prints depicting various Amsterdam street types at the exhibition De Mensch (‘Humanity’), held in 1922. Huijsen still preferred loaded themes such as destitute vagrants, a sickly old woman, or a toiling worker. Like many artists and art photographers, he associated poverty and labour with a kind of picturesque beauty. By emphasising the external appearance of the existing social structures, it was a form of photography that did nothing to increase social awareness.
Huijsen’s combination gum prints abstracted scenes of everyday life, thus transforming them into timeless and well-conceived compositions. He introduced dramatic lighting effects and on occasion radical retouching to cover up distracting flaws and to strengthen surfaces. While Huijsen reproached retouching when it came to portrait photography, he felt not the slightest hesitation when it came to eliminating entire figures from a photo to suit his painterly intentions.
The majority of Huijsen’s cityscapes are photos that capture the mood of Amsterdam in the rain, the reflecting water in the canals, and the sparsely lit streets by night. Rarely did he incorporate people in his images. In his images of ghettos and street professions, he sought to portray people at work. In 1916, he displayed several dozen ‘art photos’ at the exhibition Het verdwijnend Amsterdamsch ghetto in beeld (‘The Disappearing Amsterdam Ghetto in Pictures’), chiefly in the category of ‘working-class life’. Photos such as De bedelares (‘The Woman Beggar’), De schoenpoetser (‘The Shoeshine Man’), and Moederliefde (‘Motherly Love’) could be purchased at the exhibition for four guilders each. To avoid crowds and unwanted attention, Huijsen often collected his visual material during photo jaunts in ‘Amsterdam at its darkest’. When visiting impoverished neighbourhoods, he dressed himself up as a ‘poor working man’s type’, to avoid being mistaken for a housing inspector. At such times, he hid his camera inside a bundle of newspapers. Huijsen was very aware of the contrast between this photography—this kind of life—and his professional existence as a photographer making portraits of what he referred to as the ‘best’ classes: ‘then one occasionally pauses to consider the great divides presented in this life!’
A number of Huijsen’s cityscapes are noticeably ‘modern’ for a photographer today known as an art photographer, based on the fact that he worked with fine printing processes. These are bromide prints from the 1920s depicting images of street life in Amsterdam, with people rushing to cross the street, standing in a queue, or having their shoes polished by ‘Isaac on the Dam Square’. Like Bernard Eilers, Huijsen introduced a tension to the city’s historical decor and the dynamism of the modern age, as expressed by advertising and motorised vehicles.
In 1932, Huijsen submitted ‘pigmo’ prints (an older term for bromoil prints) to the exhibition Klank en Beeld (‘Sound and Image’), with birch and beech tree trunks as his subject. In the book Schoonheid in de fotografie (‘Beauty in Photography’), W.H. Idzerda spoke in positive terms about the play of light and dark in treetops and leaves and about movement in relation to the surrounding environment. It seems as if Huijsen had followed Idzerda’s precepts in his approach to atmosphere and other aspects. While his photos lack the biting sharpness of the ‘New Photography’, Huijsen was by no means entirely oblivious to the new interest in objective details and texture. His nature photos taken at the start of the century are more anecdotal in character, based on their timing and the choice of title. In expectation is the title he bestowed upon an atmospheric image of a bench in the woods, flooded by a mysterious play of light. In a photo taken in a farmyard, he catches a white chicken traversing a dark streak of shadow. Huijsen frequently photographed mooring posts and railway bridges as signs of trade and industry. They were photographed as neutral forms in an integrated whole, made up of horizontals, verticals, and diagonals, while at the same time preserving the melancholic mood.
An advertisement for Huijsen’s studio that dates from circa 1933—today preserved in the collection of the Print Room in Leiden—lists reproductions, interiors, advertising photos, and photomontages. The advertising message itself has been executed in photomontage: layers of visual information piled one on top of the other. Nonetheless, one finds not a single trace of the dynamic encountered in photomontages produced by the new objectivist photographers. The few examples of Huijsen’s commissioned work known to exist are clearly less characteristic than his autonomous photography.
Complex photographic techniques and processes were more to Huijsen’s liking. He applied many of them, wrote about them, and demonstrated his findings. As an art photographer, he saw the fine printing processes as an important extension of photography’s potential. With regards to the 1905 exhibition at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam, Piet Clausing wrote that Huijsen and Leenheer’s enlargements were lacking in textural expression. He also rejected the pretentiousness of these fine prints: ‘(…) a photographer simply cannot produce a Mathijs Maris’. Huijsen explained why these fine printing processes appealed to him in his description of the oil print: ‘a wonderful technique, that allows one to build up the entire image, to accentuate strengths, and to preserve certain details.’ He appears to have had no preference for any one specific technique. He often printed the same negative repeatedly with different processes, ranging from a bromide print with a broad tonal scale, to a heavy, high contrast fine print, and in a variety of tints. In Huijsen’s view, technical versatility was essential to craftsmanship and creativity in photography. In his autonomous work, he produced combination prints and Höchheimer gum prints, as well as bromoil and bromoil ink prints.
In the late 1930s, Huijsen even made a futile attempt to spark the interest of the Belgian company ‘Gevaert photo-producten N.V.’ (‘Gevaert Photo Products’) in the commercial production of special papers for carbon printing.
Huijsen applied his technical knowledge not only in his autonomous work. He also used all kinds of experiments to attract professional assignments. An advertisement dating from circa 1933 (with the heading: ‘I make artistically and technically well-made photographic work’) listed the following products: new permanent photo on airmail, stationery or a silk handkerchief, ‘Reproductions of the most difficult originals’, photomontages, colour slides on glass, and artistic art prints. Notwithstanding, all of these technical exploits brought him little financial gain. Huijsen’s years of travelling to learn the different processes, as well as the costly materials they required, proved to be a major burden.
The ability to create a photographic image that underwent no change, and which can then be passed down to future generations, was an aspiration that Huijsen shared with many of his nineteenth-century predecessors. For prints on paper—as well as the aforementioned ‘art photography’ fine prints—various photomechanical processes were available, including the Woodburytype, a nineteenth-century technique applied to other durable materials. Huijsen was extremely interested in experiments of this kind. Even his letterhead in the 1950s, after he settled in Vlaardingen, still read: ‘J. Huijsen, art photographer and photographic ceramic company’. By means of the carbon printing technique, he was able to reproduce photographic images on glazed tiles and plates that had to be baked at 1020º C. He also advertised gravestone plates made from marbarite, a glass sort that was baked at 650º C. According to a small manuscript, entitled ‘Photo Invention by J. Huijsen. The making of photos on porcelain, earthenware, marbarite, glass, etc.’, his method was distinctly different from the older powder processes because it preserved half-tints. This he achieved by using an emulsion of gelatin and enamel. The gelatin base and the possibility of half tones were likewise traits of the Woodburytype. This technique, however, had the one limitation that it had to be executed in large quantities in order to be cost-productive. Huijsen’s invention made it possible to satisfy the criterion of permanence even when desired only a single print: ‘Naturally, everything is indestructible.’
An application for this transporting technique, related to carbon printing, was Huijsen’s method of transferring signatures or fingerprints onto a tile or stone with a small strip of collodion film. He recorded this somewhat idiosyncratic method, which he applied until 1957, on paper for the Leiden University Print Room. He also provided the formulas for a number of his fine printing processes.
Photography produced on durable materials ultimately cost Huijsen a great deal of time and money. He had no oven of his own. His enamel was obtained in Ghent, Belgium, and from the company Regout in Maastricht. For his ceramic works, he used both other people’s negatives and reproductions, e.g. the drummer from Rembrandt’s Night Watch transferred onto glass, or Truus Haasbroek-Hessels’ floral still lifes and a photo by the photographer Meijboom onto marbarite.
Huijsen was an active (board) member of numerous photography associations, eventually switching from one to the other, however, when no longer feeling at home. He cancelled his membership at the NFK (Nederlandsche Fotografen Kunstkring, ‘Netherlands Photographers Art Society’) to join up with the NFV (Nederlandsche Fotografen-Vereeniging, ‘Netherlands Photographers Association’). Upon perceiving a lack of activity, however, he then made his way back to the NFK. In the 1920s, Huijsen presented lectures on various topics to members of the NFPV (Nederlandse Fotografen Patroonsvereeniging, ‘Netherlands Photographers’ Guild) and the NAFV (Nederlandse Amateur Fotografen Vereniging, ‘Netherlands Amateur Photographers Association’).
In addition to these memberships, Huijsen was involved as a committee member in the planning of the ‘Nederlandsch Fotografisch Museum’ (‘Netherlands Photography Museum’) from 1912 on. Following a break in the committee’s activities during World War I, the museum’s small collection of photographs was transferred to the BNAFV (Bond van Nederlandse Amateur Fotografen Verenigingen, ‘Federation of Netherlands Amateur Photographers Associations’), which was later absorbed by the Leiden University Print Room. It was there that Huijsen, then in his advanced years, gave tours of the collection to fellow photographers from Belgium and the Netherlands.
Still holding on to the principles he had embraced at the turn of the century, in the 1920s Huijsen dared to confront his colleagues and former friends, among them Adriaan Boer, in the magazines Bedrijfsfotografie (‘Corporate Photography’) and De Fotograaf (‘The Photographer’). The motivation for his articles were topics such as a comparison with the organisation and quality of professional photography in Germany and the improvement of vocational education in photography. Huijsen’s personal opinion and his substantive arguments often became confused. In response to such polemics, Huijsen’s former colleague C.G.L. Leenheer wrote in 1931: ‘My colleague, Huijsen, is still (besides a writer of articles) a genuinely good craftsman, with a big, pure love of his profession. He could spend his time much better and more productively doing just that.’
Huijsen had various pupils. He names M.G. Meyboom as one of the last. In 1957, Huijsen wrote a letter to the Leiden University Print Room stating that, due to his advanced years, he was dropping all future plans to teach. With the term ‘pupils’, we may presume he was referring to any individual initiated incidentally by Huijsen into one or more of his printing techniques. In another case, he wrote, as well to the Print Room in Leiden, that he had instructed his friend and art photographer G. Middendorp in the Höchheimer gum printing process.
With the formation of the collection of the Leiden University Print Room, Huijsen recommended art photographers such as the ‘1st class’ Truus Haasbroek-Hessels, Mathieu Koch, Martien Coppens, and Godfried de Groot. While it is known that Huijsen obtained some of his technical knowledge and materials from abroad, no information is available regarding his foreign contacts.
Huijsen was wilful, both in his work and as an individual. His inability to accept a kind of photography that was impersonal, by no means suggests he was an innovator. In a sense, Huijsen—as an early art photographer—was a victim of his own running start. His notions of the picturesque elements in art, as well as his artisanship, bound him for many years to art photography, of which he was one of the main advocates in the Netherlands. The diversity of the techniques with which he managed to actualise these notions is what makes Huijsen intriguing.
In the 1920s and ’30s, Huijsen guardedly incorporated the changes initiated by the New Objectivist photographers. This can especially be seen in his cityscapes, but also in the topics of his lectures, with titles such as ‘Het fotografisch affiche’ (‘The Photographic Poster’). Huijsen never sought to connect with this ‘modern’ group. For this, he is likely to have perceived himself as being too much of an art photographer.
(Brochure) Huijsen en Leenheer. Moderne kunstfotografie, Amsterdam 1904.
Huysen en Leenheer, Geachte Redactie! (ingezonden brief), in Fotografisch Maandschrift 1 (november 1905) 3, p. 35-36.
Huysen en Leenheer, Moderne foto-techniek, in Fotografisch Maandschrift 1 (november 1905) 3, p. 37-39.
Geachte Redactie (ingezonden brief), in Fotografisch Maandschrift 3 (juni 1908), p. 148-149.
Techniek -beoordeeling, in De Camera 1 (14 oktober 1908) 2, p. 23-24, 29.
Open brief aan den heer Idzerda, in Fotografisch Maandschrift 4 (1 juni 1909) 9, p. 165-166.
Domperstaktiek!, in Fotografisch Maandschrift 4 (1 juli 1909) 10, p. 181-182.
Ingezonden stukken. Open brief aan den heer W.H. Idzerda, Commissaris der Afd. Land- en Volkenkunde voor de tentoonstelling te Dresden, in Lux 20 (1909), p. 306- 307.
Gratis vergrootingen (ingezonden), in Fotografisch Maandschrift 5 (1 oktober 1909), p. 35-37.
Geachte redactie! (ingezonden), in Fotografisch Maandschrift 6 (augustus 1911) 12, p. 183-187.
Foto-tochten in donkerst Amsterdam, in De Camera 5 (1 juli 1913) 17, p. 156-157.
Foto-tochten in donkerst Amsterdam, in De Camera 5 (15 juli 1913) 18, p. 163-164.
Een vergissing hersteld, in De Camera 6 (15 juni 1914) 16, p. 163.
(artikelen en foto’s), in De Fotograaf ca. 1920-1931.
De kleine baas, in Bedrijfsfotografie 2 (5 juli 1920) 1,p. 31-32.
Geachte redactie (brief) in Bedrijfsfotografie 8 (28 augustus 1926) 18, p. 416-417.
De Nationale Foto Salon, in Focus 13 (6 maart 1926) 5, p. 140.
De Nationale Foto Salon, in Focus 13 (3 april 1926) 7, p. 194.
Geachte redactie (ingezonden stukken), in Bedrijfsfotografie 8 (25 september 1926) 20, p. 465-466.
Het Höchheimer procédé, in Focus 13 (30 oktober 1926) 22, p. 568-570.
Het Höchheimerprocédé (11), in Focus 13 (13 november 1926) 23, p. 596-597.
Techniekbabbeltje, in Bedrijfsfotografie 11 (25 juli 1929) 30, p. 357-358.
Techniekbabbeltje (11), in Bedrijfsfotografie 11 (1 augustus 1929) 31, p. 367-370.
(Advertentie) Vraag en aanbod, in Bedrijfsfotografie 15 (27Januari 1933) 2, p. iv.
Tijdsbeeld, in Cosmorama 1 (juli 1935) 7, p. 99-100.
Foto-forum 18 (ca. juni 1956).
Jaarboek N.C.v.F.K. 1908.
De Camera 1 (8 januari 1909) 8, p. 149-152.
American Photography 4 (maart 1910).
The Amateur Photographer & Photographic News 55 (24 juni 1912) :447, p. 632.
De Camera 5(1913), p. 26.
De Camera 5 (1 augustus 1913) 19, bijlage.
De Camera 6 (1 november 1913) 1, p. 5.
Catalogus tent. Het verdwijnend Amsterdamsch ghetto in beeld, Amsterdam (Stedelijk Museum) 1916.
Focus 7 (5 april 1920) 1, p. 9-12.
Geïllustreerde Joodsche Post 1920/1922.
De Camera 13 (1 juli 1921) 17, p. 133.
Focus 8 (2juni 1921) 11, p. 228.
Focus 8 (16 juni 1921) 12, p. 254.
FOCUS 9 (15 juni 1922) 12, p. 266.
Focus 15 (3 maart 1928) 5, p. 133.
Bedrijfsfotografie 11 (3 oktober 1929) 40, na p. 474.
Focus 16 (26 oktober 1929) 22, p. 597-600.
Belgisch-Nederlandsche Fotokunst 1934/35, Antwerpen 1935.
(Folder) Leiden Museumstad, Leiden (Stichting Leiden Museumstad) 1982.
N.R.C., Een woordje naar aanleiding van de tentoonstelling der vakfotografen Huijsen & Leenheer, in het Stedelijk Museum te Amsterdam, in Lux 16 (1905), p. 454-455.
P. Clausing Jr., Tentoonstelling van moderne kunstfotografie in het Stedelijk Museum te Amsterdam, in Fotografisch Maandschrift 1 (oktober 1905) 2, p. 17-19.
Auteur onbekend, (reactie van de redactie op ingezonden brief van Huijsen en Leenheer), in Fotografisch Maandschrift 1 (november 1905) 3, p. 37.
P. Clausing Jr., Antwoord aan de heeren H. en L., in Fotografisch Maandschrift 1 (november 1905) 3, p. 39-41.
C.M. Dewald, Lezing van den Heer J. Huijsen over Moderne Kunst-Fotografie, den 8en octoberj.1. gehouden te ‘s-Gravenhage; op uitnodiging van het bestuur van den Nederlandschen Fotografen- Bedienden-bond, in Fotografisch Maandschrift 3 (november 1907), p. 37-40.
C.M. Dewald, Geachte Heer Huijsen, in Fotografisch Maandschrift 3 (juni 1908), p. 149-150.
Laura de Berk, De internationale tentoonstelling van foto-kunst, in Geïllustreerd Weekblad voor Fotografie 15 (8 augustus 1908) 32, p. 249-253.
E.A. Loeb, De man en zijn werk. J. Huijsen, in De Camera 1 (8 januari 1909) 8, p. 145-146.
C.M.D. (= C.M. Dewald), Den heer J. Huysen (naschrift bij ingezonden brief van J. Huijsen), in Fotografisch Maandschrift 4 (1 juni 1909), p. 166-167.
Ambassadrice, Uit Dresden, in De Camera 1 (15 juni 1909) 18, p. 334, 338.
E.A. Loeb, Wat er omgaat, in De Camera 1(15 juni 1909) 18, p. 347-348.
A.B., De Salon der Nederl. Club voor Fotokunst, in De Camera 3 (15 januari 1911) 6, p. 48-50 (met foto’s).
Auteur onbekend, De technieken op den Salon der N.C.v.F.K., in De Camera 3 (1 februari 1911) 7, p. 64.
Auteur onbekend, Nederland te Birmingham, in De Camera 3 (1 april 1911) 11, p. 98-99.
Auteur onbekend, Rudolf Dührkoop naar Amerika, in De Camera 3 (15 juli 1911) 19, p. 187.
C.M. Dewald, Mijnheer de redacteur (reactie op brief van J. Huijsen), in Fotografisch Maandschrift 6 (1 augustus 1911) 12, p. 187-189.
P.C., Een museum voor artistieke fotografie, in Fotografisch Maandschrift 7 (1 juni 1912),p. 164-165.
Ernst Loeb, De salon der Nederlandsche Club voor Foto-Kunst, in Lux 23 (1 december 1912) 23, p. 613-616.
Auteur onbekend, Delftsche foto-salon in Amsterdam, in Lux 24 (1 januari 1913) 1, p. 33-34.
Alb. de Haas, Kunstberichten uit Haarlem, Kunst-fotografie, in Onze Kunst 12 (januari/juni 1913) 23, p. 43-44.
Auteur onbekend, Vereenigingsnieuws, in De Camera 5 (1913), p. 132.
Auteur onbekend, Het werk van J. Huijsen, in De Camera 5 (1 augustus 1913) 19, p. 167.
Ing. Bispinck, ‘Salon international d’Art Photographique’ te Gent, in Lux 24 (12 augustus 1913) 16, p. 370-372.
Auteur onbekend, Salon van Fotokunst te Algiers, in De Camera 5 (1 september 1913) 21, p. 188.
H. de Boer, De Vierde Delftsche Fotosalon, in De Camera 5 (15 oktober 1913) 24, p. 207-209.
Auteur onbekend, Onze platen, in Focus 7 (5 april 1920) 1,p. 2.
A.B., De zevende jaarl. tentoonstelling der N.A.F.V., in Focus 7(19 april 1920) 2, p. 24-26, 36-37.
Auteur onbekend, De levende nationale tentoonstelling van fotowerken te Amsterdam, in De Camera 12 (1 mei 1920) 13, p. 102-106.
Auteur onbekend, Demonstratieavond Gevaert, in De Camera 13(1 december 1920) 3, p. 24.
Auteur onbekend, Vereenigingsnieuws. ‘Licht en Schaduw’, no. 13, van 1 Mei, in Bedrijfsfotografie 3(12 mei 1921) 10, p. 152-153.
A.B., De achtste jaarlijksche tentoonstelling der N.A.F.V., in Focus 8 (2 juni 1921) 11, p. 218-221.
Auteur onbekend, De Amsterdamsche Foto-salon, in De Camera 13 (i5Juni 1921) 16, p. 122-125.
C.G. Leenheer, ‘Barbertje moet hangen’, in Bedrijfsfotografie 4. (30 maart 1922) 7, p. 141-146.
Auteur onbekend, Tentoonstelling ‘De Mensch’, in Focus 9 (1 juni 1922) 11, p. 227-228.
B., De negende jaarlijksche salon, in Focus 9 (15 juni 1922) 12, p. 252-255.
Auteur onbekend, De fotografische tentoonstelling in het Stedelijk Museum te Amsterdam, in Bedrijfsfotografie 4 (22 juni 1922) 13, p. 283-288.
G.O. ‘t Hooft, Notulen van de Algemeene Jaarlijksche op woensdag 27 september 1922,in.Focus 9 (5 oktober 1922) 20, p. 468.
G.O. ‘t Hooft, Notulen van de Huishoudelijke Vergadering op woensdag 22 november 1922, in Focus 9 (30 november 1922) 24, p. 567-568.
C.G.L., Ned. Fotografen Patroons Vereeniging, in Bedrijfsfotografie 8 (31 juli 1926) 16, p. 368-372.
C.G.L., Een en ander over het Congres der Duitsche fotografen, mede in antwoord aan J. Huijsen, door C.G.L., in Bedrijfsfotografie 8 (28 augustus 1926) 18, p. 417-421.
C.G.L., Ingezonden stukken (Buiten verantwoordelijkheid van de redactie), in Bedrijfsfotografie 8 (25 september 1926) 20, p. 467-468.
J.W. Boon (voorw.), Veertig jaren fotografie. Gedenkboekje uitgegeven door de Nederlandsche Amateur- Fotografen- Vereeniging ter gelegenheid van haar veertig jarig jubileum 7 sept-5 nov. 1928, Amsterdam 1927, p. 33, 95.
C.G.L., Sluit u aan, in Bedrijfsfotografie 9 (24 september 1927) 20, p. 495.
A.B., De nationale elfde tentoonstelling der N.A.F.V., in Focus 14 (12 november 1927) 23, p. 636-639.
Adr. Boer, Eenige bijzonderheden over Nederlandsche fotografen, in Bedrijfsfotografie 10 (14januari 1928) 1,p. 17-21.
Auteur onbekend, Bij de platen, in Focus 15 (3 maart 1928) 5, p. 121-122.
A.B., De derde tentoonstelling der N.F.P.V, in Bedrijfsfotografie 10 (5 mei 1928) 9, p. 239-242.
A.B., De jaarvergadering der Nederlandsche Fotografen Patroons Vereeniging op 23 april 1929, in Bedrijfsfotografie 11 (9 mei 1929) 19, p. 217-220.
Adr. Boer, Ons vakonderwijs, in Bedrijfsfotografie 11 (4 juli 1929) 27, p. 319-322.
Auteur onbekend, Bij de platen, in Focus 16 (26 oktober 1929) 22, p. 583-584.
W. Roemer Jr., Nederlandsche Fotografen Patroons Vereeniging. Afdeeling Rotterdam, in Bedrijfsfotografie 11 (28 november 1929) 48, p. 563-564.
A.B., N.F.K tentoonstelling in Pulchri Studio, Den Haag, in Bedrijfsfotografie 12 (19 september 1930) 19, p. 348-350.
A.B., Veertigjarigjubileum Jan Amesz., in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (9januari 1931) i,p. 4-5.
C.G.L., Hutspot. Over de verhoudingen tusschen Vak- en Amateur Fotografie, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (6 februari 1931) 3, p. 47-48.
C.G.L., Hutspot. II, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (20 februari 1931) 4, p. 62-64.
Adr. Boer, Critiek of kift, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (20 maart 1931) 6, p. 101-102.
Bern. F. Eilers, Ingezonden stukken. Naar aanleiding van ‘Hutspot’. Geachte Redactie, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (20 maart 1931) 6, p. 114.
C.G.L., Ingezonden stukken. Naar aanleiding van ‘Hutspot’. Wij hebben …, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (20 maart 1931) 6, p. 114-115.
A.B., Jaarvergadering der N.F.P.V. op dinsdag 19 mei 1931, in het gebouw I.O.O.F., Amsterdam, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (29 mei 1931) 11, p. 205.
C.G. Leenheer, Ingezonden. (Buiten verantwoordelijkheid der Red.), Waarde Vriend Boer, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (29 mei 1931) 11, p. 213-214.
C.G.L., Critiek en “Critiek”, of, “wie kaatst moet den bal verwachten”, in Bedrijfsfotografie 13 (10 juli 1931) 14, p. 265- 266.
Adr. B., De fotokunstsalon “Klank en beeld”, in Focus 19 (30 april 1932) 9, p. 259-262.
C.G.L., Nederlandsche Fotografen Patroons Vereeniging, in Bedrijfsfotografie 14 (17 juni 1932) 12, p. 224.
C. de Jong, Verslag der vergadering gehouden op maandag 15 april 1935. Huijsen over de vervlakking der fotografie. Het Höchheimer procédé gedemonstreerd, in Cosmorama 1 (mei 1935) 5, p. 78.
J.J. Hens, Het Fotografisch Museum, in J. Akkerman, Frits Gerhard en G.A.W. Wagenaar (inl.), Gedenkboek uitgegeven door den Bond van Nederlandsche Amateurfotografen Vereenigingen. Ter gelegenheid van zijn 25-jarig bestaan maart 1922-maart 1947, Hengelo 1947, p.46-49.
Aug. Grégoire, Honderd jaar fotografie, Bloemendaal (Focus) 1948, p. 28, 37 (met foto).
M. van Hezel (voorw.), 1919-1959. 40 Jaar N.F.P.V., Utrecht 20 april 1959.
Catalogus tent. Kunstphotographie um 1900, Essen (Museum Folkwang) 1964, p. 43,afb. 27.
Ingeborg Th. Leijerzapf (red.), Fotografie in Nederland 1839-1920, Den Haag (Staatsuitgeverij) 1978, p. 57, 79, 97-98 (met foto’s).
Flip Bool en Kees Broos (red.), Fotografie in Nederland 1920-1940, Den Haag (Staatsuitgeverij) 1979, p. 5-6, 9, 24, 43, 151 (met foto’s).
Catalogus tent. Kunstfotografie in Nederland rond 1900, Deurne/Antwerpen (Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof) 1982, ongepag.
Catalogus tent. Zien en gezien worden. Fotografische zelfbespiegeling in Nederland van ca. 1840 tot heden, Nijmegen (Nijmeegs Museum ‘Commanderie van Sint-Jan’), 1983, p. 87.
Ingeborg Th. Leijerzapf (red.), Het Fotografisch Museum van Auguste Grégoire, Den Haag (SDU) 1989, p. 43, 107, 183 (met foto’s).
APV (Amsterdamsche Photagraphen Vereeniging), vanaf maart 1876.
NCvFK, vanaf 10 december 1907.
NFK, vanaf ca. 1905 (ook voorzitter geweest).
Jury, Internationale Tentoonstelling van Fotografische Kunst. (Salon 1908), Amsterdam 1908.
Jury, Nationale Fotografie-Wedstrijd en de daaraan verbonden tentoonstelling (Vereeniging tot Verfraaiing van de Gemeente Zeist en tot Bevordering van het Vreemdelingenverkeer), Zeist 1908.
Jury, Nederlandsche afdeeling vakfotografie voor de Internationalen Photographischen Ausstellung, Dresden 1909.
Jury, Salon der Nederlandsche Club voor Fotokunst, 1911.
Jury, Salon der Nederlandsche Club voor Fotokunst, 1912.
Bestuur Vereeniging tot bijeenbrenging eener verzameling fotografieën in het Museum van Kunstnijverheid te Haarlem, vanaf 1912-1937.
NFPV, vanaf 1919 (mede-oprichter), vanaf 1927 tot 1942 en vanaf 1946 (medeheroprichter; voorzitter in 1946).
Jury en Commissie van Bijstand, Zevende Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV), Amsterdam 1920.
Jury, Focus-prijsvraag, 1920.
Jury, Achtste Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV), Amsterdam 1921.
Jury, Focusprijsvraag, 1921.
Jury, Negende Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV), Amsterdam 1922.
Jury, Focusprijsvraag, 1922.
Jury, Lantaarnplaatwedstrijd uitgeschreven door de NAFV.
Jury, Tiende Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV), Amsterdam 1924.
Jury, fotowedstrijd ‘In de stad’ en ‘Jubileumfeesten’ van NAFV, 1924.
Jury, Elfde Nationale Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV), Amsterdam 1927.
Jury, Fotografendag NFPV, Amsterdam 1929
Jury, Fotoschouw NAFV, Amsterdam I931.
Jury, NFK, 1931.
Jury, Eerste Nationale Kerstsalon van Fotografische Kunst (AAFV), Amsterdam 1934.
Jury, Derde Amsterdamse Kerstsalon van Fotografische Kunst (AAFV), Amsterdam 1936.
The Photographers Association of America.
1907 Eerste prijs, Afdeeling B, Foto-tentoonstelling Nationale Fotografiewedstrijd van de Vereeniging tot Bevordering van Vreemdelingenverkeer, Leiden.
1909 Zilveren medaille, Internationalen Photographischen Ausstellung, Dresden.
1910 Plaquette, ie Jaarlijksche Salon. De Delftsche Tien, Amsterdam.
1911 Diploma d’Onore, III Congresso Fotografico Italiano, Rome.
1911 Certificaat, 26e Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling, Birmingham.
1912 Plaquette, Derde Jaarlijksche Delftsche Foto Salon, Delft.
1913 Medaille de Vermeil, Le 3me Salon International d’Art Photographique, Algiers.
1913 Plaquette, Salon International d’Art Photographique, Gent^
1914 Hoogste onderscheiding en certificaat, tentoonstelling Birmingham Photographic Society, Birmingham.
1914 Hoogste onderscheiding, Koloniale Tentoonstelling, Semarang.
1915 Hon. Mention, tentoonstelling Toronto Camera Club, Toronto.
1922 Eerste prijs, tentoonstelling De Mensch, Amsterdam.
1922 Eerste prijs (tesamen met Eilers, Oepkes, Van Oyen en Ebbinge) voor inzending namens de NAFV naar internationale fototentoonstelling te München.
1905 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, (Huijsen en Leenheer).
1907 (g) Leiden, Foto-tentoonstelling (Vereeniging tot Bevordering van Vreemdelingenverkeer)
1908 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, Internationale Tentoonstelling van Fotografisch Kunst. (Salon 1908).
1909 (g) Dresden, Internationalen Photographischen Ausstellung.
1910 (g) Delft, Korenbeurs, 1e jaarlijksche Salon. De Delftsche Tien.
1911 (g) Birmingham, 26e jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling.
1911 (g) Amsterdam, Concordia, Salon der Nederlandsche Club voor Fotokunst.
1911 (g) Rome, Castel S. Angelo, Esposizione Internazionale di Fotografia Artistica (III Congresso Fotografico Italiano).
1911 (g) Hamburg, Ausstellung für Bildnis und Figurenbild (Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Amateurphotographie).
1912 (g) Delft, Derde Jaarlijksche Delftsche Foto-salon.
1912 (g) Amsterdam, Gebouw ‘Lux’ (Reguliersdwarsstraat 108-114), Delftsche Foto-salon.
1912 (g) Londen, The A.P. Little Gallery, (NCFK).
1912 (g) Haarlem, Kunstnijverheidsmuseum, Salon der Nederlandsche Club voor Fotokunst.
1913 (g) Algiers , Palais de la fïlle du Sultan, Le 3me Salon International d’Art Photographique.
1913 (g) Gent, Paleis van Schoone Kunsten, Salon International d’Art Photographique.
1913 (g) Delft, Concertzaal Stads Doelen, Vierde Jaarlijksche Delftsche Foto-salon.
1914 (g) Birmingham, (Birmingham Photographic Society).
1914 (g) Semarang, Paviljoen van den Semarangschen Kunstkring, Koloniale Tentoonstelling (rondreizende tentoonstelling).
1915 (g) Toronto, (Toronto Camera Club).
1916 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, Het verdwijnend Amsterdamsch ghetto in beeld.
1919 (g) Amsterdam, Gebouw Heystee (Heerengracht 545), Zesde Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV).
1920 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, Zevende Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV).
1921 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, Achtste Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV).
1922 (g) München, (internationale fototentoonstelling).
1922 (g) Amsterdam, Paleis van Volksvlijt, De Mensch.
1922 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, Negende Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV).
1924 (g) Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, Tiende Jaarlijksche Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (NAFV).
1927 (g) Amsterdam, Gebouw Heystee, Elfde Nationale Tentoonstelling van Fotowerken (t.g.v. 40-jarigjubileum der NAFV.
1928 (g) Amsterdam, Gebouw Heystee, Fotografendag NFPV.
1929 (g) Amsterdam, Odd Fellow House (Keizersgracht 428-430), Fotografendag NFPV.
1930 (g) Den Haag, Pulchri Studio, N.F.K. Tentoonstelling.
1931 (g) Batavia, Bataviasche Kunstkring.
1931 (g) Amsterdam, Gebouw Heystee, Fotoschouw NAFV.
1932 (g) Den Haag, Gemeentearchief, Jubileumtentoonstelling van de HAFV.
1932 (g) Amsterdam, RAI, Klank en Beeld.
1934 (g) Amsterdam, Verenigingsgebouw AAFV (Keizersgracht 428-430), Eerste Nationale Kerstsalon van Fotografische Kunst (AAFV).
1935 (g) Amsterdam, Verenigingsgebouw AAFV, Tweede Amsterdamse Kerstsalon van Fotografische Kunst (AAFV).
1936 (g) Amsterdam, Vereningingsgebouw AAFV, Derde Amsterdamse Kerstsalon van Fotografische Kunst (AAFV).
1950 (g) Brussel, (tentoonstelling Belgische Vakfotografen).
1956 (g) Amsterdam, (BNAFV).
1962 (g) Leiden, Stedelijk Museum De Lakenhal, Samen op de kiek.
1964 (g) Essen, Museum Folkwang, Kunstphotographie um 1900.
1964 (g) Hamburg, Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe, Kunstphotographie um 1900.
1978 (g) Leiden, Stedelijk Museum De Lakenhal, Belicht verleden. Fotografie in Nederland 1839-1920 (rondreizende tentoonstelling).
1979 (g) Den Haag, Gemeentemuseum, Foto 20-40.
1982 (g) Antwerpen, Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof, Kunstfotografie in Nederland rond 1900
1989 (g) Gouda, Stedelijk Museum Het Catharina Gasthuis, Het Fotografisch Museum van Auguste Grégoire.
Leiden, Prentenkabinet, bibliotheek en documentatiebestand.
Leiden, Prentenkabinet van de Rijksuniversiteit Leiden.
Rochester, George Eastman House.