Biography

Discussion

Wim van Dijk’s outlook on life was this: you have to accept what comes on your path as it is, want nothing more than what is feasible, and never give up if something proves unsuccessful. Together with this view, Van Dijk maintained the discipline required to fulfil every task to the best of his ability, even when the odds were occasionally against him. The creative arts played a major role in his life, including his own music-making, photography, drawing, and painting, as well as listening, looking, and enjoying the arts at exhibitions and concerts. In the 6 July 1940 issue of Focus, he wrote: ‘Why does one then compose, paint, photograph? Only to express an inner urge to create, even when the form is still so very primitive. But there is no guarantee that something that comes from within will find a foothold in material interpretation’. For years, Van Dijk played the German flute, but because he judged his own level of playing to be insufficiently high, he quit. He later went on to play cello and enjoyed making music together with other amateurs. When wanting to learn to draw and paint in order to complement to his photography, Van Dijk took a class in which he was able to meticulously incorporate—just as he was—all of his ability and creativity into the assignments he was given. In the final years of his life, Van Dijk travelled once a week to Utrecht in order to paint at the Genootschap Kunstliefde (‘Art Lover’s Society’).

In photography, Van Dijk was an autodidact, obtaining his knowledge from books and magazines. Long before he made the decision to become a photographer, he built his own darkroom on the basis of a hobby. Here he was able to quickly develop his skills through experimentation and experience. Because Van Dijk ran a store specialised in the sale of cameras, film, optical instruments, photo papers, and other photographic accessories for several years, he acquired a great deal of knowledge about materials and brands. This would come to good use in his work as a professional. Van Dijk also built up experience in the areas of developing, printing, and finishing of his customers’ film. His knowledge of lenses and optics had grown through his activities as an optician. Whenever his expertise was lacking in a given area, Van Dijk turned to Adriaan Boer in the form of a written letter. This led to an almost daily correspondence between the two men in the beginning phase of his photography business.

The developing and printing of his customers’ film ensured Van Dijk a steady income, particularly in the summer during tourist season. For a man of his ambition, however, this was debilitating work. He got much more satisfaction when venturing out on his own, equipped with his camera, to shoot photos of forest views and townscapes intended for the picture postcards of the neighbouring office supply store, or to produce a series of architectural shots in Bilthoven for a local real estate agency.

In the late 1930s, Van Dijk set up a portrait studio in the living area above the store, where he took portrait and passport photos. He also shot family portraits in private homes and photographed their interiors. By having people pose naturally and hanging a flash in the lampshade of a table light present in a room, he gave these photos a special atmosphere.

Besides the work he did for his clients, Van Dijk continued to experiment with 35 mm photography in order to increase his knowledge. His interest in small cameras was derived in part from a practical problem: because of mild heart issues arising at the age of eighteen, he preferred to avoid lifting heavy equipment. For the architectural photos shot on assignment, Van Dijk initially used a 13×18 travel camera with a Goerz Dagor photographic objective. He soon traded in this camera for a 10×15 Nettel. Upon seeing the small Leica camera in a catalogue, Van Dijk fell immediately ‘in love’, and had one sent to his business, despite the high price of Dfl. 150 (including one cartridge). When necessary, he worked with a 35 mm on a tripod. Surprisingly, Van Dijk was firm believer in the potential of 35 mm photography, in spite of his striving for perfection. This was initially an impossible combination. Van Dijk saw that the Leica was built with the highest degree of precision possible. This was true of both the camera housing and the objective. Yet for some time there were still issues with the various kinds of 35 mm film available, as they had to be fine-grain and thin-layered (multi-layered film gives a greater diffusion of light, and accordingly, reduced sharpness). The industry worked hard at finding a solution: furnishing 35 mm film with a perforation already improved the horizontal positioning, while the development of methods involving the application of thinner layers to the film, and eventually a single layer, finally led to a major breakthrough.

In the 1930s, Van Dijk evolved to become the Leica specialist in the Netherlands. He did a great deal for the popularisation of this camera. The Dutch importer was the company Odin, managed by the company’s founder and owner L.J. Dupree. Van Dijk’s enthusiasm for 35 mm photography even went so far that he was prepared to be the technical man for the ‘Stichtse Kleinbeeldclub’ (’35 mm Club’) in Utrecht. In actuality, he was no fan of photography associations.

In 1941, Van Dijk was approached by the headquarters of the NSB (Nationaal-Socialistische Beweging, ‘National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands) on the Maliebaan in Utrecht, where an employee was being sought for the movement’s ‘fotodienst’ (‘photography service’). The position they were offering was to head the service’s technical department. Due to a lack of inventory, Van Dijk was barely able to keep his store and studio up and running. Faced with the need to support his family, he decided to accept the job. With his appointment came the requirement that he become a member of the NSB. Van Dijk nevertheless had no interest in politics. The only positive aspect of this work, in his view, was that it would allow him to raise the level of technical quality found in photographic material for government publications, e.g. for the Dutch railways and the ‘vereniging voor vreemdelingenverkeer’ (‘association of foreigner relations’). Van Dijk was appointed in June 1942, but quit one year later, due to a working atmosphere he described as ‘unbearable’. Van Dijk’s wife was doing her best to keep the store on the Emmaplein in Bilthoven up and running, but with a shortage of inventory, there was very little turnover.

For the remainder of the German occupation, Van Dijk worked chiefly as an optician. After the bombardment in November 1944 during which his house was destroyed, he managed to rescue his grinding machine—driven by the underframe of a treadle sewing machine—from the rubble, thus enabling him to continue repairing people’s eyeglasses through that last winter of the war.

As a consequence of the work he did on the Maliebaan, Van Dijk was arrested immediately after the war. He was imprisoned for more than two years at two military bases in Millingen and Wezep, where internment camps had been set up. At Millingen, Van Dijk was given the opportunity to carry on with his optician’s work for all of the camps in the Netherlands. In addition, he spent his time taking notes and recording observations about future developments in photography. He wrote everything down in notebooks, as well making detailed drawings of improvements to cameras, which he himself had conceived.

During his trial in November 1947, it became apparent that Van Dijk had a reputation for being an inadequate member of the NSB, i.e. someone who had done nothing on the movement’s behalf. Because there were also a sufficient number of witness accounts in his favour coming from ‘good’ citizens in the town of Bilthoven—including Van Dijk’s doctor, and even a member of the Resistance—Van Dijk’s sentence not only gave him his freedom back, but also his right to vote as well as his right to fulfil civil functions, as compensation for the long duration of his imprisonment.

By the end of 1947, Van Dijk was able to start rebuilding his life. Following the bombardment of the family’s house in 1944, he and his wife had decided not to open a new store. Instead, Van Dijk took over the photo studio of Herman Hahndiek, a fellow photographer. Instead of continuing Hahndiek’s portrait work, he established a company for commercial product photography and corporate reportages. To fortify his financial basis—corporate photography had to be built from the ground up—for a brief period Van Dijk combined this with working for a photographer in Breda, whose identity is unknown. Van Dijk acquired his clientele by various means, through his own circle of acquaintances, or by word of mouth among the owners and directors of companies located in Bilthoven and its environs. Another group was made up of amateur photographers who read Van Dijk’s articles in Focus and came to him for advice.

The list of Van Dijk’s clientele began to grow steadily. Among his clients were numerous regional companies and institutions, including: Fibo beeldonderwijs (‘visual education’) in Zeist, Huize Doorn (a manor house), Meubelfabriek ‘Koekoek’ in Rhenen (a furniture factory), Bouwbedrijf Van Laar (a construction firm), Laboratorium De Sphinx (a dental institute) in Utrecht, a timber company in Leerdam, and the ‘Burgers’ laundry company in Zeist. Van Dijk’s biggest clients, however, were the original Iglo factory (frozen foods) in Utrecht, the paint and wallpaper manufacturer ‘Rath en Doodeheefver’ in Duivendrecht, the Liga factory in Roosendaal (biscuits and bakery goods manufacturer, opened in 1953), the Persil factory (a laundry detergent manufacturer) in Jutphaas, Demka Steel manufacturers in Utrecht, and the Werkspoor machine manufacturing company in Utrecht.

Van Dijk’s efforts on behalf of these different companies included photo reportages on the work floor, interior and exterior shots of the buildings, the products, and the manufacturing processes. For the Liga factory, he photographed various aspects of the company, e.g. the building’s facade, the production hall (with its eighty-meter-long ovens), and the machines. Unique to this specific case was the fact that all of the machines required in the manufacturing process had been designed by the factory owners themselves, varying from the machine for pulverising the grain to the apparatus for making the dough. Van Dijk covered every aspect, including the only manual work being done: women packaging biscuits at the end of the conveyor belt. He also photographed topics related to work contracted out to other companies having ties to the production process, e.g. images taken in 1958 that showed the grain fields in the province of Limburg that were being cultivated for the Liga factory. Van Dijk shot these photos together with his assistant, Theo-Ton van Diejen.

For Persil, a detergent manufacturer, Van Dijk photographed the exterior of the building, during the day and at night. He also shot photos of the production hall with its steel silos as well as the products themselves.

For Demka Steel, Van Dijk shot photos at the iron foundry, including images depicting the pouring of fluid materials and the emptying of the melting furnace. For the same client, he also travelled to the Delta Works, where he photographed the on-going construction, including the concrete reinforcement and the positioning of various building elements. Van Dijk worked for Demka from circa 1958 up until his death in 1964. Shortly thereafter, the company was taken over by Hoogovens Steel.

Besides being a professional photographer working for a corporate clientele, Van Dijk was also an obsessed hobbyist, unable to resist shooting photos even in his free time. Cityscapes and landscapes, flowers, still lifes, and children were his preferred subjects. The difference in approach between Van Dijk’s autonomous photography and his corporate photography is striking. The autonomous work is more romantic and less objective. This is partially to be observed in the technical finishing, e.g. prints that were made applying special techniques such as the bromoil printing process. Van Dijk also took soft-focus shots with an Imagon photographic objective, originally designed by Dr. Heinrich Kühn (1868-1944) and introduced on the market as Kühn’s Anachromat in 1928. Rodenstock has been producing this lens as ‘Imagon’ since 1931. According to Van Dijk, it was a unique lens that operated precisely. Besides an unparalleled depth effect, the Imagon also gave a magical atmospheric light: ‘The distinctive character of a good soft-focus photo is the twinkling of light, supported by a suppression of emerging details and a heightened effect of depth, accompanied by a toning down of the background.’

In Van Dijk’s view, both the shot itself and the finishing of a photo were equally important: a perfect location, bathed in the most beautiful light, never led to a good photo if one was unable to develop and print in an optimal manner. Lively contrasts were critical for the final product, well defined in both the highlights and shadowy areas. When this was not the case, a photo became flat and boring.

Van Dijk won awards at various competitions with his photos. As the labels on the reverse of his photos clearly indicate, he submitted them to exhibitions around the world, from Tokyo to Chicago, as well as photo salons in various European cities.

In no way did the small Leica camera oblige Van Dijk to work in a manner that was different from operating larger cameras. In his view, a fast working pace and responding to anything that arose unexpectedly would never lead to artistic photography. Deliberating in advance what was to be photographed, identifying appropriate locations, preferably returning to the same place at different times before taking the actual photo, calmly waiting for the best light, and ideally with no people in the image: this was and would always be Van Dijk’s working approach. For him, the artistic added value of a photo lay in finding stillness and transcending the ordinary. Van Dijk felt no affinity with the new mode of observing that came with the New Photography of the 1930s, with its diagonal angles of view, close-ups, and disorienting perspective effects. Whereas, in fact, the 35 mm camera had functioned as a stimulus for a re-evaluation of photographic observation: ‘To describe the old designated time exposure as static and the modern instantaneous image as dynamic, is a major, widely disseminated aberration. In a certain sense, a photographic image can in essence actually be nothing other than static, because otherwise, it becomes unstable. (…) In my view, dynamic in a photo lies in the composition, and movement in the calm, which is what results from all movement.’ Van Dijk was aware of the criticism regarding his stance and knew that his preference for having no people in his photos was seen by many as being unworthy of the Leica. In no way did this stop him from persisting in his viewpoint, which was also in line with his conviction that the Leica was the best conceivable camera in virtually every area.

Van Dijk enjoyed sharing his knowledge with others and was glad to help out talented amateurs with advice. Whenever amateurs sought their refuge in the latest cameras, new types of film, or film papers, without these leading to improvements in their work, Van Dijk would draw their attention to better shooting techniques. Mastering technique as opposed to being mastered by technique: this was Van Dijk’s credo.

Van Dijk’s desire to share what he knew was what inspired him to write about photography. He was on good terms with Adriaan Boer, the publisher of the photo magazines Focus and Bedrijfsfotografie (‘Corporate Photography’), who was happy to have Van Dijk contribute to his publications as an author. For the Kosmos series Weten en kunnen (‘Knowing and Doing’), Van Dijk wrote a number of popular photo booklets that were reprinted numerous times, just as the Kosmos Fotozakboek (‘Photo Pocket Book’), of which the first edition appeared in 1959. Van Dijk’s reading public typically comprised the engaged amateur photographer who possessed a desire to learn the principles of photographic technique in condensed form, who wished to learn how to make better prints, or wanted to know what kind of camera and film he should choose for the particular goal he had in mind. Van Dijk provided these photographers with concise information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of the mirror reflex camera with a ground glass screen (the ‘seeing’ camera), as well as the 35 mm camera with an attached distance meter (the ‘measuring’ camera).

The professional photographer, however, was also able to gain insight with the specialised knowledge that Van Dijk had acquired through his testing of cameras, objectives, film, and developers. He wrote about topics such as his experiments with developers for film with varying grain structures, as well describing which combinations led to the best results. Van Dijk also devoted attention to the influence of developing time on the grain of a film and the consequences this had for the sharpness of enlargements. In addition, he addressed other factors that played a role in obtaining a sharp print, e.g. the lighting of a shot, adequate focusing, the fineness of film grain, the aperture of the enlarger when making prints, and the surface of the film paper.

Photo sharpness was a key principle recurring in all of Van Dijk’s discourses. He would often expound on the fact that the small camera, with its wide-aperture lenses, produced negatives that could easily be enlarged to 50×60 cm, while maintaining the highest degree of sharpness—provided that the camera has the excellent quality of a Leica or Contax camera and one uses good film. In the long run, the 35 mm film types even won out over larger negative formats of up to 9×12 cm, because of a ‘surplus’ in sharpness and resolving power (i.e. the number of white-black lines still depicted as lines per mm; when this limit is surpassed, then an even grey tone arises). Van Dijk predicted that this could only improve in the future. It was important, however, to know how one acquired the necessary soft negative in order to produce sharp enlargements of a reasonable format. After extensive searching, Van Dijk recommended the Agfa Agepan, a very thin document film with a high resolving power, to be used together with a soft-working surface developer, such as the Neofin Blue (Willi Beuther’s system), on the condition that one meticulously followed the guidelines for exposure and developing. Van Dijk tested the film with the sharpness test card, developed by Carel Tirion, and managed to achieve astoundingly good results with it.

When miniature cameras were brought out on the market in the 1950s, it was Van Dijk’s desire to examine empirically what was to be expected from these cameras. Mini formats were designed for taking photographs inconspicuously, e.g. for spying purposes as well as ease of transport. To gain ready access to these cameras for his experiments, Van Dijk approached the importers. They in turn were more than happy to cooperate, as it might perhaps lead to their brands’ promotion in one of Van Dijk’s magazine articles. Van Dijk tested out 35 mm, the half-frame 35 mm, and super-35 mm cameras and the film types that came with them. Just as with the ‘ordinary’ 35 mm camera, finding a film of decent quality for mini cameras was the first problem that had to be solved. Initially, the sharpness suffered from an insufficient resolving power due to the unduly thick layers of the film, which introduced limitations when it came to making enlargements. One of the first usable types of mini cameras that managed to survive was the Minox, designed in 1938 in Latvia, but produced in West Germany following World War II. For Van Dijk, this 9.5 mm camera soon held no more secrets; the same was true of the 16 mm Minicord (introduced in 1951), the Mec (introduced in 1957), and many others. He continued to follow these developments, as well because automation was always on-going, as well in the mini format such as the Mamiya-16 Automatic (introduced in 1959). In Van Dijk’s series of articles on this topic, he also discussed mini darkrooms, the finishing technique, and the use of colour film for small cameras.

Around 1960, the publicist Hille Kleinste proposed the term ‘mini camera’ versus the somewhat ponderous ‘miniature camera’. At the end of one of Van Dijk’s articles (‘De mini-camera enthusiast 8’, ‘The Mini-Camera Enthusiast 8’), the editorial staff of Focus recommended that Kleinste’s recommendation be adopted.

The areas of interest most suitable for the mini camera in Van Dijk’s view were children’s photography, capturing unexpected events on the street, making reproductions of documents in archives and libraries for academic research, and the reproduction of artworks and photos. As a case in point, he referred to L. Fritz Gruber (1908-2005), the organiser of the Photokina exhibitions, who travelled around the world to make his selections, photographing each with his mini camera. Such a camera allowed one to photograph an object from a short distance (circa 20 to 30 cm) without requiring any additional accessories.

In 1940, Van Dijk voiced a view of colour photography that was still highly negative. In the 31 August 1940 issue of Focus, he wrote: ‘(…) when the time has finally arrived, that we can use our colour image in the same way that we currently do our black-and-white image, then the possibilities will become even infinitely greater. Not just that we will then have to switch entirely to a medium that in essence is entirely different, that requires a totally different approach from the photographer, but the limitations, which we will then have to place upon ourselves, will also be much bigger. I will leave the stage, in which colour photography momentarily finds itself, completely out of the discussion. At this point, it is nothing more than a primitive joke (…)’. This final remark immediately incited protestations from Meinard Woldringh, aimed at Van Dijk. Woldringh was already seriously specialised in colour photography, that were

Prior to World War II, however, Van Dijk had already written a small book about colour photography for the Weten en kunnen series. He was a man who embraced practical experience and someone who was also well aware of developments that were on-going. For this reason, he delved into his subject matter thoroughly. In the mid-1950s, with the second edition of this book, Van Dijk felt it was the appropriate time to instruct the advanced amateur in developing his own colour film and making his own colour prints. In his view, the ability to do work oneself was a condition for mastering the final product. The criteria of perfection that one was required to place upon oneself could hardly be expected from the then existing centres for developing and printing. For colour, Van Dijk found travel photography, macrophotography, and microphotography to be the areas of greatest interest.

The photos that Van Dijk took on behalf of his business clients became the property of those companies ‘without consultation’. There was never any mention of rights of authorship. Following his death, Van Dijk’s wife sold large quantities of photos and negatives to his former clients, including Demka Steel in Utrecht and Liga in Roosendaal. After Demka was taken over by Hoogovens Steel, the Demka archive was transferred to the archive of the latter company in IJmuiden. The Liga archive belongs to the city archives of Roosendaal. Wim van Dijk’s legacy (photos, negatives, letters, notebooks with annotations, and other documents) is managed by his eldest daughter, Edith van Dijk. Following previous donations made by the photographer himself in 1954 and 1957, the Leiden University Print Room received a donation of ninety-four photos originating from the possessions of Van Dijk’s daughters in 2004.

In light of all that has been stated above, it requires little further elaboration: Van Dijk’s photography was of a high technical quality. His autonomous work is sensitive, but provides no modern vision. As a corporate photographer, Van Dijk depicted the subjects he was commissioned to photograph with precision, high sharpness, and clarity. Whether it concerned the employees of a company, the production processes, or the machines that were used, the main subject was distinctly represented, with the surroundings still providing relevant information without detracting from the overall image. One can compare Van Dijk’s working method to other photographers of his generation, e.g. Hans Spies, Jaap d’Oliveira, and Willy Schurman, who likewise combined a clear, unembellished style of photography with sound, technical craftsmanship.

From his articles, W.C. Van Dijk emerges as photographer with a knowledge of materials, techniques, and applications to a degree that few possessed. His knowledge was widely disseminated among Dutch (amateur) photographers. Van Dijk’s advice regarding the selection of cameras and film—specifically in the vast market of 35 mm cameras and mini cameras—undeniably contributed to the popularisation of 35 mm photography in the Netherlands. The same can be said of his articles on the topic of colour photography.

Documentation