Biography

Discussion

Wieger Idzerda is an elusive personality, despite the fact that he left an indelible mark on Dutch photography. He was an important promoter and defender of art photography circa 1900. Through his knowledge and interest in chemistry and photography, Idzerda evolved to become an expert in the area of photographic processes. Even though his high level of education gave him a certain authority, his irrepressible urge to share his knowledge and ideas with others was not always well received. His daughter described him as someone who was difficult in his dealings with others, which statements made by colleagues appear to confirm. Despite a measure of respect for his expertise, they were chiefly repulsed by Idzerda’s haughty, ambitious, and opportunistic behaviour. Such tensions are illustrated in a letter that Idzerda sent in to the Geïllustreerd Weekblad voor Fotografie (‘Illustrated Weekly for Photography’), published in the 10 October 1908 issue (p. 325): ‘It is not my fault that I’m not stepping up as leader myself, and therefore, according to the chief editors of this magazine, am deserting art photography, but rather [the fault] of the publishers of photographic magazines here in this country. No one has ever made such an offer to me, which leads me to the conclusion that no one wants me! Neither “Lux”, nor the “Camera”, nor the “Weekly”, nor the trade publication of the N.F.K. [Nederlandse Fotografen Kunstkring, ‘Netherlands Photographers Art Society’]! We already have four magazines, can it get any worse? That I would force myself upon [others], I wouldn’t even consider this; following my opening speech in Delft, the foreign press has immediately placed their columns at my disposal, which I would like to say can therefore happen! Why people don’t wish to have me as a leader is likely based on this, that I am the only one in the country who dares to emphatically point out our wrongdoings and also because according to many I am too idealistic.’ Idzerda was a member of various amateur photographers associations, but never of a professional trade association. It is striking that he was excluded when the ‘elite club’ of photographic artists in the Netherlands—the NCvFK (Nederlandse Club voor Foto-kunst, ‘Netherlands Club of Photographic Art’)—was founded in 1907 by Adriaan Boer, Berend Zweers, and others, even though he had been accepted as a member. Similarly, Idzerda played no role in the NCvFK’s founding of a photo museum in Haarlem in 1912, a matter on behalf of which he had pleaded in 1910 at the Internationale Fotografische Congres (‘International Photographic Conference’) in Brussels, Belgium. In actuality, Boer and Idzerda had the same goals in mind: a professional education for photographers, the promotion of photographic art, and the founding of a photography museum. Apparently, however, joining forces in the struggle to achieve these goals was never a realistic option. Both men had grandiose egos and aspired to be the leader.

Between Idzerda and the professional photographers in the NFK, the mood was downright hostile—resulting not only from a difference in opinion regarding photographic art. The response to Idzerda’s private instructorship at the TH Delft as expressed in the December 1907 issue of the NFK’s publication of choice, the Fotografisch Maandschrift (‘Photographic Monthly’), was rather belittling (he was ‘admitted’, not ‘appointed’). The magazine’s editor, C.M. Dewald, was completely disgruntled, as neither the board of the NFK nor the editorial board of Fotografisch Maandschrift had received an invitation to Idzerda’s public address. In 1909, Dewald divulged information concerning Idzerda’s ‘merits’ with respect to Dutch photography on the occasion of the Internationale Photographische Ausstellung (‘International Photographic Exhibition’) held in Dresden (Fotografisch Maandschrift, 1 May 1909). While traveling to Dresden by train, Dewald had spoken extensively with J.R.A. Schouten, the chief editor of the magazine Lux, regarding past conflicts that had apparently been brought about by Idzerda: ‘On more than one occasion it became evident to us, that numerous matters were caused by the wheedling and atrocious antics of a certain someone, whose name we shall not name at this time, but whose identity everyone will understand, someone who has continually done his best, under the motto of “elevating Dutch photography”, but has instead only tried to plant discord and division between amateur and professional photographers, to his own advantage, which he unfortunately managed to achieve in the beginning, but which naturally could not be sustained.’ Regarding Idzerda’s contribution to the exhibition in Dresden, Dewald wrote: ‘Thanks to the good care of our work commissioner for this department [the reproduction department, I.L.], Mr. Idzerda, our country shines by [its] absence. While all departments are successful, this [one] has been scandalously neglected for us.’ (Fotografisch Maandschrift, 1 May 1909). Dewald then subtly hastened to add that Idzerda had acted on behalf of the financial interests of the Netherlands, by selling Dutch silver, Delft faience, and Rozenburg porcelain there on the spot.

Towards the end of his life, the once prosperous Idzerda was out of work and destitute. In a letter dated 20 March 1937, he approached P.H. Ritter, a man of letters, for financial assistance: ‘(…) although I have not had the honour of knowing you personally, I would like to ask you out of great need whether you might not be able to do something for me. You can obtain inquiries with Dr. Nico van Suchtelen. (…) We have an utterly difficult life; without help, we won’t make it.’ On 2 April, Idzerda again wrote Ritter, with the following: ‘(…) I understand that you sometimes provide help in times of trouble. Would it now not be possible, please forgive me my request, that you meet our wishes somewhat financially, in order for us to catch our breath for a moment?’

Wieger Idzerda had an unusual youth. He lost his mother as a baby and was subsequently taken in by his grandfather and his young wife. At the age of six, Idzerda’s father committed suicide. Following the death of the grandfather, the step-grandmother continued to care for the nine-year-old orphan boy as his foster mother.

By the time he became a professional photographer, Idzerda had already completed an most of his university studies in chemistry. Prior to this, he had been active as an amateur photographer. After failing to complete his studies at the chemical laboratory of the University of Basel in Switzerland, Idzerda devoted all of his time and energy to photography. His background in chemistry served as an excellent basis for his later activities as an author writing about photographic processes and techniques.

To learn more about his chosen field, Idzerda took study trips to various German cities, including Hamburg, Berlin, Leipzig, Dresden, Munich, and perhaps even Vienna, Austria. Each of the sources concerning his foreign travels provides different information. In his petition to the Ministry of Education, Arts, and Sciences of 1927, Idzerda himself states that he had attended a ‘study abroad specifically in photography’. He provided no extra details regarding the duration of the study or the places he stayed. The 13 July 1907 issue of the Wereldkroniek (‘World Chronicle’) states that Idzerda paid visits to the best art photographers of Europe while traveling abroad for a period of three years. According to Adriaan Boer’s recollections, as he recorded in the jubilee booklet of the NAFV (Nederlandse Amateur Fotografen Vereniging, ‘Netherlands Amateur Photographers Association’) in 1927, Idzerda had worked for a period of time with Nicola Perscheid in Leipzig, Germany. In the 9 January 1938 issue of Het Vaderland (‘The Fatherland’), an anonymous author—writing in response to Idzerda’s death—wrote that following his studies in Delft, he had traveled to Basel for health reasons, where he hoped to obtain a PhD. Idzerda’s daughter stated that her parents lived in Basel from 1898 to 1904. The provincial archive of Drenthe, however, cites that the Idzerdas had lived in a house in Assen at some point during this period and that they departed to The Hague in 1902.

In the foreign cities he visited, Idzerda had an opportunity to make inquiries with the photography industry and gain insights into scientific applications for photography and photographic art. He first traveled to Hamburg, the city where photographic art had already garnered appreciation within the walls of the city’s Kunsthalle (‘Art Hall’). It was also the place where important gum print specialists, such as Rudolph Dührkoop and the brothers Theodor and Oskar Hofmeister, were active. It is certain that Idzerda visited Dührkoop; there are no sources to verify he met with the Hofmeisters. Notably, one year later Idzerda released his first publication, a book entitled De Gomdruk (‘Gum Printing’). One may assume that Idzerda’s contact with Fritz Matthies-Masuren in Halle am Saale—a painter, photographer, and from 1893 on one of the most important promoters of photographic art in Germany—also arose at this time, as well as his association with Hugo Erfurth and Erwin Raupp in Dresden. Idzerda may very well have planned to see Hermann Wilhelm Vogel, a professor of photochemistry and spectral analysis at the Königliche Technische Hochschule (‘Royal Technical University’) in Berlin-Charlottenburg, whom he so greatly admired. Vogel’s sudden death as a result of a heart attack on 17 December 1898, however, may have prevented this. Photos of Idzerda’s time abroad are apparently preserved in an album presented to the photo historian Jan Coppens by Idzerda’s daughter. Besides images of the same woman who appears in various landscapes (probably Idzerda’s wife), most are forest and riverscapes reminiscent of Germany.

Idzerda belongs to the generation of photographers who embraced Pictorialism in photography around 1900. Other Dutch photographers falling under this category are Adriaan Boer, Bernard Eilers, Henri Berssenbrugge, Ernst Loeb, and Berend Zweers. After an initial orientation in the 1890s based on the theories of the British photographers Peter Henri Emerson and Henry Peach Robinson, whose ideas were disseminated in the Netherlands via translations found in Dutch photography magazines, young photographers active around the turn of the century directed their glance chiefly in the direction of Germany. There was the origin of innovative artistic developments already being practiced as well in France and Austria, to be described as a photographic-impressionistic movement. Other techniques were also introduced, such as gum and bromoil printing. Together with carbon printing, which was already known in the Netherlands, these became the favoured processes because they were so well-suited the desired aim: achieving an impressionistic effect by means of obscured contours and a reduction in image detail. The interaction between German and Dutch photographic art arose in various areas, but above all through international exhibitions centred on this genre. There were also the personal contacts, including the desire to receive instruction from well-known photographers. Like Idzerda, the Dutch photographer Helena Goude as well traveled to Hamburg to meet with Rudolf Dührkoop. Various renowned pictorialists from Germany—including the German promoter of photographic art, Ernst Juhl, and the brothers Theo and Oskar Hofmeister—traveled to the Netherlands, as did Heinrich Kühn and Hugo Henneberg from Vienna, Austria, and Frits Matthies-Massuren from Halle am Saale. The last three photographers were members of the jury for the Eerste Internationale Salon van Kunstfotografie (‘First International Salon of Art Photography’), held at Pulchri Studio in The Hague in 1904.

An important platform for exchanging contacts and ideas were books and illustrated publications. German publications were in great demand in the Netherlands. Furthermore, the work of Dutch photographers was also included in these publications on a regular basis. In the Netherlands, the earliest series of illustrated publications produced in the area of photographic art were the German/Dutch collaborative projects of the publishers Wilhelm Knapp of Halle am Saale and J.R.A. Schouten of Amsterdam. The first initiative of their collaborative plans was the production of a series to be published in volumes, entitled Nederlandsche kunstfotografieën (‘Dutch Art Photographs’), which was intended to become a portfolio of photographic art. The volume released in 1904—other volumes are not known and were perhaps never published—is devoted to the photography of Wieger Idzerda: 22 Afbeeldingen naar werken van W.H. Idzerda (’22 Illustrations after Works by W.H. Idzerda’). Accompanying these images is a superficial introduction written by the amateur photographer Count Ignatius Bispinck.

Nowhere in the book are the names of its compilers mentioned, nor is there any explanation with respect to its purpose. To what extent Idzerda himself was involved is unclear. One can assume, however, that the series was meant to be the Dutch counterpart of the series Internationale Kunst-Photographien (‘International Art Photographs’), compiled by Ernst Juhl and published by Wilhelm Knapp in 1900, which is identical in terms of its structure and highly similar in its presentation.

Based on Bispinck’s introduction to Idzerda’s photos in Nederlandsche kunstfotografieën, one may conclude that this illustrated edition was the first of its kind in the Netherlands. Bispinck makes as yet no reference to a volume from another series released by the same publishers, as well in 1904, entitled Fotografie als kunst (‘Photography As Art’), compiled by Fritz Matthies-Masuren and Wieger Idzerda. At approximately the same time, a series bearing the German title of Die Bildmässige Photographie (‘The Pictorial Photography’) was published under the sole authorship of Matthies-Masuren. When comparing the volumes of Die Bildmässige Photographie and Fotografie als kunst that have been preserved, it becomes evident that, while the texts of both books are identical, the images are not entirely the same. As such, one may conclude that the texts are to be attributed to Matthies-Masuren, but that Idzerda was also in part responsible for the compilation and production of the Dutch edition.

These series were aimed to disseminate examples and ideas of art photography among an international audience. The photographic section is pronounced, not only because of the high number of images, but also because of the large—usually full-page—format of the reproductions. The framework of these publications, in which theory and images are equal in significance, can most certainly be described as a new approach. Prior to this time, illustrations had always been allotted a subordinate role in theoretical treatises, with illustrated books including nothing more than an introductory text.

In 1904, Idzerda opened a ‘Salon voor Moderne Kunstfotografie’ (‘Salon for Modern Art Photography’) in The Hague, perhaps one of the most luxurious portrait studios of its day. A description of the salon, including illustrations of the various spaces within, was featured in the magazine Lux, under the title ‘Onze Nederlandsche Kunstfotografen. 2. W.H. Idzerda’ (‘Our Dutch Art Photographers’). Reference is made to an interior furnished in a modern, serene style, but with an atmosphere that was extraordinarily dignified. Through the vestibule, with its floor covered in Smyrna carpets, one entered a waiting room, which likewise served as an office. It was here that Idzerda’s wife welcomed visitors. On the first floor there was a permanent exhibition space, where carbon and gum prints of Idzerda’s own photographic work were on display. In addition, there was a small bathroom with large mirrors, a reception salon, and a closed veranda where a portrait camera was set up, together with background canvases concealed behind a plush curtain. On the second floor, there was a big space for photo finishing, a darkroom, a space for photocopying, and behind this, a large balcony for working outdoors (for instance, when making gum prints). One more floor up, a room was set up for enlargements, including an enlarging lantern with a condenser 30 cm in diameter. This was also where the carbon and gum prints were made: small formats in carbon print only, large portraits in gum print. As Idzerda put it: ‘Everything that leaves my house has to be permanent.’ This implies his portrait studio had been furnished to serve the elite circles of The Hague. Portraits produced in these special processes were unaffordable for the average person, if desired at all. Those few portraits preserved as reproductions or in collections indeed depict individuals of high standing: Prof. S. Hoogewerff of Delft; P.H. Eijkman, the initiator of the Stichting voor Internationalisme (‘Foundation for Internationalism’) in The Hague, along with one of his employees, Paul Horrix; and C. Bisschop and H.W. Mesdag, painters in The Hague. The aforementioned article in Lux includes a self-portrait as well as the portrait of a woman, presumably Idzerda’s wife, based on a comparison with photos found in the private album that Idzerda’s daughter gave to Jan Coppens, subsequently preserved in his collection. In these portraits, the influence of Idzerda’s mentor Rudolph Dührkoop is perceivable.

For reasons unknown, three years later Idzerda moved his home and studio to a building on the same street at Laan van Meerdervoort 5, which he then had renovated into a living and studio space at the cost of more than Dfl. 5,500. On the first floor was a reception room, a darkroom of 1.20 x 1.20 m, a back room, and a newly built closed veranda that served as a studio. The bathroom from Idzerda’s previous location was moved to the new studio. This studio was as well luxuriously furnished, in accordance with Idzerda’s belief that, if wishing to draw a well-to-do clientele to his portrait studio, he would have to receive them in a manner to which they were accustomed. It would appear his plans to establish a solid financial basis through portrait work were ultimately unsuccessful: in late 1909 the building was sold, with Idzerda subsequently pursuing a career as a teacher and a writer instead.

As mentioned above, Idzerda cherished the desire to share his knowledge and ideas. This he achieved primarily through writing books and articles. His most important ideal, however, was the creation of a professorial chair in the area of photography at one of the universities in the Netherlands. Idzerda wished to convey his knowledge to students at the academic level. An educational programme in photography was nowhere to be found at any level in the Dutch educational system: not in a vocational programme, an arts programme (the academies of fine art), or at the university or college level. To become a professional photographer, one was obliged to travel abroad or work as an apprentice with an established photographer. In 1907, the TH Delft gave Idzerda an opportunity to alter this situation. What started out as an honourable initiative, however, soon turned into a disaster. According to Idzerda, the chancellor of the TH Delft, Prof. S. Hoogewerff, had approached him in the summer of 1907 with a request for him to teach classes in general photography (including as well photographic technique and cinematography). He was to start out as a private instructor with the pledge of an honorary professorship within the foreseeable future. While the teaching position itself was to be unpaid, the prospect of a professorial chair was enough of an incentive for Idzerda to accept the offer. The 20 November 1907 issue of Nederlandsche Staatscourant confirmed Idzerda’s appointment with the following text: ‘By the decree of the Minister of Domestic Affairs of 18 November 1907, no. 14241, Department of Education, W.H. Idzerda, art photographer in The Hague, is admitted until further notice of termination as a private instructor in the department of chemical technology and mining engineering at the Technische Hoogeschool in Delft, to provide instruction in the area of photography.’ On 29 January 1908, Idzerda formally announced his teaching position with an inaugural speech, entitled: ‘De fotografie in dienst der wetenschap en hare beteekenis als kunst’ (‘Photography in Service of Science and Its Significance as Art’).

Shortly after Idzerda’s ‘admission’, Professor Hoogewerff resigned both as chancellor and as chairman of the department responsible for photography. The new chairman of the chemical technology department wasted no time in conveying that a professorial chair in photography was not one of his priorities. When Idzerda again addressed the matter in early 1911, it was made clear to him that there was no chance of his ever being offered an honorary professorship. Attempts to sway the board failed, despite affirmations of support from A.W. Nieuwenhuis, a professor, doctor, and ethnographer in Leiden, and Dr. R. Luther, a German professor of photography with the Technische Hochschuhle in Dresden. In 1913, Idzerda gave up his unpaid private instructorship, partially for financial reasons. The TH Delft did nothing more than to provide him with a lecture hall: all other costs, e.g. teaching materials, were to be paid out of his own pocket.

Idzerda described these events in a petition submitted to the Minister of Education, Arts, and Sciences in 1927. In his petition, he again argued for a professorial chair in photographic technique and kinematography at the TH Delft. Idzerda’s efforts were not undertaken on his own behalf: he was instead recommending G.H.A. (George) Ivens, who had completed a university-level study in Berlin-Charlottenburg and was momentarily working as the assistant director of ‘NV Foto-, Projectie- en Kino-handel CAPI‘ (‘Photo, Projection, and Kino Dealership CAPI’) in Amsterdam. Idzerda’s petition was rejected.

Idzerda’s inaugural address ‘De fotografie in dienst der wetenschap en hare betekenis als kunst’ was published in the form of a brochure-like booklet. The subtitle read: ‘Reede uitgesproken bij den aanvang der lessen in de fotografie aan de Technische Hoogeschool te Delft, den 29en januari 1908’ (‘Speech Given at the Commencement of Classes in Photography at the Technische Hoogeschool in Delft’, 29 January 1908′). The booklet opens with an extensive discussion of various discoveries made in the fields of chemistry and optics that had facilitated the invention of photography, followed by examples of photography’s application in virtually every conceivable area of science. The quantity of scientific facts Idzerda manages to explore within the condensed format of this booklet is astonishing. Disappointing, however, is the lack of argumentation when wording his appeal on behalf of photography’s significance as a form of art within the scope of several pages. In this respect, Idzerda’s most important disclosure is his desire to teach photographic aesthetics in the same manner as Prof. Vogel in Berlin.

For the time span 1900 to the mid-1920s, Idzerda is unmistakably one of the most important people writing about photography and photographic art in the Netherlands, alongside Adriaan Boer. With substantial expertise, he described the techniques and processes at the photographic artist’s disposal. His first publication, appearing in 1899, entailed a delineation of the gum printing process. With this book, Idzerda was satisfying the demand for photographic formulas presented in the Dutch language. At the same time, he seized this opportunity to supplement the existing gum printing process by adding his own improvements acquired through his own practical experience. The book was chiefly intended to be a manual for anyone wishing to master this technique. In addition, however, Idzerda conveyed his own ideas with respect to the medium, albeit indirectly and as yet without a clear structure. In the introductory chapter, he wrote that one could observe that photos in gum print were sometimes able to compete with drawings of the highest quality when shown at exhibitions. What he was implying was the possibility of creating a broad conception of a photo with gum printing, without distracting details and in a monochrome colour. Idzerda went so far as to propose that the production of photographic art had largely been made possible through this process: ‘Photography is now no longer a purely mechanical process, it is elevated to a genuine art, and this we can chiefly accredit to gum printing.’ When it came to the ambitions of pictorial photographers, the most commonly heard response was that art could not be produced by means of a mechanical technique. By transforming photography into a manual process, however, some believed they could overturn this standpoint. Idzerda was among them: the big advantage of gum printing was that—by using a wad of cotton balls—one could develop specific areas of a shot, thereby leaving out elements that were viewed as distracting. In this manner, gum printing was presented as a form of drawing art, with cotton balls replacing the drawing marker. With gum printing as well, one was able to make sketches in the form of proof prints—as many as were necessary to achieve the desired result. As a result, mechanical work was eliminated from photography. It was important to be in control of the composition and to distinguish between matters that were relevant and those that were secondary. With gum printing, this could be done more effectively than with other photographic techniques.

This was not to be Idzerda’s only publication on fine printing (‘edeldruk’) processes. In 1917, there followed a book about bromoil ink printing. What makes this book particularly special is that Idzerda had devised a simplified approach to applying the direct method of bromoil ink printing. He developed a bleach bath for gelatin silver printing that could be applied universally with the various factory-manufactured film papers. Consequently, the process could be undertaken by any amateur. Idzerda also describes indirect bromoil ink printing in this book, which according to him was introduced and improved in the Netherlands by Bernard Eilers.

Photographic technique forms an important part of Idzerda’s magazine articles and books. He typically went into great depth regarding the material, writing essays for the professional world. Subjects intended for the amateur photographer were treated more lightly. One of his most popular books was a small manual for beginning and advanced amateur photographers, the frequently reprinted Handboekje der praktische fotografie (‘Little Handbook of Practical Photography’) from 1916. In the 1930s, his activity writing for amateurs took a downturn. In his letter to P.H. Ritter of 20 March 1937 previously cited above, Idzerda also wrote that amateur photographers were having their prints developed by photo dealers and that they were no longer taking the time to read manuals. ‘My Handboekje der Praktische Fotografie entered its fourth edition in 1928 – 19,500 copies. Now, hence after 9 years, the W.B. [Wereldbibliotheek, ‘World Library’] is stuck with half of the stock!’ The decline in sales is also likely to have been partially attributable to the economic circumstances of the 1930s.

In 1909, prior to his Handboekje, Idzerda began working on an extensive standard reference work on general photography to be published in ten volumes. The Leerboek der algemeene fotografie (‘Textbook of General Photography’) was intended to serve both professional and amateur photographers alike. In an advertisement appearing in the 1 July 1909 issue of the magazine De Camera, the entire publication was announced to coincide with the release of the first volume: Grondbegrippen der fotografie (‘Principles of Photography’). The ad stated that ten consecutive volumes would be released, one after the other, on the following topics: 1. Grondbegrippen (‘Principles’); 2. Het objectief (‘The Objective’); 3. Beknopte geschiedenis van het fotografisch objectief (‘Concise History of the Photographic Objective’); 4. De kamera (‘The Camera’) 5. Stereoskopie (‘Stereoscopy’) 6. De projectie (‘The Projection’); 7. De zilverzouten I (‘The Silver Salts I’); 8. De zilverzouten II (‘The Silver Salts II’); 9. De chromaten (kooldruk, gomdruk, oliedruk, enz.), (The Chromates: Carbon Printing, Gum Printing, Oil printing, etc.) 10. Platina, enz. (‘Platinum, etc.).

Idzerda’s purpose in writing this series probably arose from a need for supporting literature to accompany his classes at the TH Delft. His dedication to Prof. S. Hoogewerff at the front of the book as well as the reference to his position as a ‘Private instructor at the Technische Hoogeschool in Delft’ found on the title page indicate this. The first and third volumes of the series were published, but the remaining volumes were not. The series was perhaps never completed because Idzerda’s private instructorship was terminated in 1913.

With this ambitious project—which would have allowed Idzerda to set out his extensive technical and historical knowledge, as well as his theoretical ideas concerning photography—it was undoubtedly Idzerda’s intention to establish a reputation in the Netherlands comparable to that of Dr. H.W. Vogel at the Technische Hochschule in Berlin. In this way, he hoped to eventually turn the proposed professorial chair for photography into a reality. In his introduction to Grondbegrippen der fotografie, Idzerda gave additional support to these plans by arguing that, in his view, a textbook providing insight into the practical application, theory, and essence of photography had been lacking in the Netherlands. What is intriguing about Idzerda’s book is that he always presented his findings within a historical context. In addition to geometrical and physical studies of light (geometrical and physical optics), he also addressed the history of light theory. In addition to elucidating the use of light-sensitive substances (emulsions, binders, supports, etc.), he also provided a historical exposé on the knowledge of light-sensitive materials. Based on this historical context, one can determine what the current state of scientific research must have been in Idzerda’s day.

In his technical books and articles, Idzerda invariably incorporated the potential of photography as an artistic means of expression. This subject was also treated as the main topic in three of his books. His first publication in this regard is the previously mentioned book Fotografie als kunst from 1904. In 1918, Idzerda’s book Schoonheid in de fotografie (‘Beauty in Photography’) followed. Here he handled topics that were fundamental in his estimation, such as the nature and beauty of photography. Although this book primarily has the character of a textbook for beginning and advanced amateur photographers, the aesthetics of photographic art are covered extensively (which Idzerda interprets mainly as landscape photos). This book can be seen both as a recapitulation and an enhancement of what Idzerda had written back in 1909 in Grondbegrippen der fotografie, the first volume of his comprehensive Leerboek der algemeene fotografie. Finally, in 1923 he compiled a book of articles written by a variety of authors, entitled Neerland’s fotokunst (‘The Netherlands’ Photographic Art’). In this publication, Idzerda incorporated contributions made by other writers, including Bernard Eilers. Idzerda’s own textual contributions to this book are more or less summaries taken from his previous standard reference work Schoonheid in de fotografie, thus providing no new insights. The illustrated portion is considerably expanded when compared to Schoonheid in de fotografie and arranged in a completely different manner, with more attention given to the younger generation of photo pictorialists. There are proportionately many more works by younger photographers such as Berssenbrugge and Eilers than in his previous book. The three books cover more or less the same subjects: the landscape and—an important and difficult component thereof—clouds, as well as portrait art, genre photography, architectural shots, and cityscapes. In essence, Idzerda’s recommendations address the following topics: the most important requirements a photographer has to satisfy in order to produce photographic art (mastery of technique, development of an artistic sense, the study of nature and art in order to learn how to observe well), the choice of subject matter, and finally, the employment of photographic visual devices such as composition, exposure and lighting, tone, perspective, and photographic process.

In portrait photography, Idzerda emphasised the representation of an individual’s character, with each model requiring a mode of lighting specifically suited to them. In order to acquire just the right lighting, portraits were to be shot in the studio. Taking a portrait in someone’s own home often gave Idzerda better results, however, as a person was prone to assume an informal pose and reveal his characteristic facial expressions more readily in familiar surroundings.

With landscape photography, Idzerda was a proponent of idealisation versus a realistic depiction of nature: ‘Yet no matter how complete our motif may be as a composition, the photo may never become a ‘print’ of nature. Regardless of whether we are a painter or photographer, the actual case has to be idealised by us, our fantasy must be given a degree of space in which to roam, our idea, our soul has to be expressed in the finished work; it is then first and foremost an artwork, hence a fortunate combination of materialism and idealism, the idea supported by a healthy naturalism.’ Idzerda’s perspective when discussing works based on multiple negatives used to create a single image can best be understood based on his notion of idealised ‘truth in nature’, such as when adding cloud-filled skies to a landscape. It was still extremely difficult to capture cloudy skies and landscapes together on a single negative effectively, because the exposures were too divergent. For Idzerda, the only condition to be met when using two negatives was that the photographer retained one concept when it came to his finished product. In the printed photo, the two shots had to flow into one another to become an artistic unity.

More important than anything, according to Idzerda, was the presence of atmosphere in a photo. In order to achieve this, the photographer was able to choose from among various technical and optical methods, such as the application of the gum printing process, adjusting the objective to create blur when taking the shot, or by enlarging and manipulating the tonal proportions. Besides atmosphere, Idzerda cited visual harmony and unity as important aspects of photographic art. To achieve harmony and unity, the student had to embrace the rules of composition, lighting and perspective previously established in painting. Idzerda also warned against the ill-conceived and excessive application of chiaroscuro, something he observed on a regular basis. Added elements in the landscape were to be avoided: serenity was in fact achieved through emptiness. The mood, the atmosphere, the depth, and the contrast enlivened the motif. In the cityscape, contrast was the main motif, while mood and atmosphere determined the tone. In this case, one had to accept such extraneous elements as they came, but distractions were still to be avoided as much as possible. In short, Idzerda’s description of photographic art comes down to the following: photographic art embodies the psychical impressions that objects (nature) leave on us, regardless of the means. These represented impressions or moods are primary; the objects themselves are secondary.

Determining those who inspired Idzerda in his views are fairly easy to determine. In his speech to mark the start of his private instructorship at the TH Delft in 1908, he describes Prof. H.W. Vogel as an outstanding mentor. Vogel’s influence can be readily discerned in the framework of Idzerda’s Leerboek der algemeene fotografie. This textbook was by no means to be interpreted as a practical class in ‘How Do I Take a Photo’, but as an exposé of knowledge in the areas chemistry, photographic technique, optics, and aesthetics. Vogel’s Lehrbuch der Photographie of 1870 was set up in the same manner, with sections on photochemistry, optics, technique, and aesthetics. The chapter that Vogel devoted to aesthetics is particularly relevant to the origin of Idzerda’s vision of photographic art. It could just have easily appeared in a textbook for novice painters. Resorting to a wide range of examples taken from art history, Vogel instructed the photographer in perspective, lighting, pose, group arrangement, linear rhythm, draping fabrics, the treatment of hands, etc. The section on landscape photography is strikingly similar to the view of H.P. Robinson (Vogel also stated that he had taken examples from Robinson’s book Pictorial Effect in Photography from 1869): the photographer carefully selects a subject and forms an idea of how he his going to photograph it; he then studies how the light falls at various times in the day, determines the angle of view, and checks to see whether he needs to rearrange the composition, for instance, by moving objects into the foreground, or when feasible, shifting or removing things irrelevant to the image. Because the sky in the landscape typically raises problems, Vogel advises that this be photographed separately and then copied or drawn in. Analogous to painting as the designated prototype, the landscape should be above all idealised. This is virtually identical to what we encounter in Idzerda’s book.

In addition to Vogel’s Lehrbuch, other written works on photographic art studied by Idzerda may be ascertained from the extensive bibliography published in Schoonheid in de fotografie. In the text of this very book, he specifically mentions a book by Horsley Hinton that had opened his eyes to the potential of photographic art. Although Idzerda failed to provide the actual title of the book, there is no doubt he was referring to The Art of Landscape Photography and particularly the German translation of this work from 1896, entitled Künstlerische Landschafts Photographie in Studium und Praxis (‘Artistic Landscape Photography in Study and Practice’), which is likewise listed in Idzerda’s bibliography. Idzerda consulted Hinton’s book intensively when writing about landscape in Schoonheid in de fotografie. The main thrust of Künstlerische Landschafts Photographie is to instruct pupils in rules of composition, to teach how one should approach perspective and tone, and how to incorporate clouds in a landscape photo. Hinton’s book is in turn clearly based on Robinson’s ideas with respect to photographic landscape art.

Idzerda’s thinking was as well inspired by his friendship and collaboration with Frits Matthies-Masuren. Matthies-Masuren’s book Bildmässige Photographie from 1903 (not to be confused with the Matthies-Masuren’s series of illustrations published shortly thereafter under the same name Die Bildmässige Photographie) is certain to have had an influence on Idzerda. Bildmässige Photographie is an adaptation of the book Der malerische Effect in der Photographie, C. Schiendl’s German translation of Robinson’s Pictorial Effect in Photography from 1896. Idzerda was evidently a loyal follower of Vogel, Horsley Hinton, and Matthies-Masuren, from which one may also conclude, that via these writers, he was also an adherent of Robinson’s ideas. When it came to the use of chiaroscuro, however, Idzerda deviated from Robinson’s recommendations. Similarly, contrary to Robinson, he preferred to leave out excessive elements in the landscape.

Not many of Idzerda’s photos have been preserved. Besides a handful of originals found in several Dutch collections and a personal album, his photographic work is chiefly known through various publications. All of the reproductions have been made from photos printed with a fine printing process. Originals that have been preserved have indeed been printed with the durable carbon and gum printing processes, in accordance with Idzerda’s own criteria. The small photos in the album originally in his daughter’s possession are printed on simple daylight papers. This album, however, was never meant for a public audience.

In the 1920s, Idzerda became involved in cinematography. In the spring of 1920, he took steps to organise a group of people potentially interested in establishing a film company oriented towards the Dutch East Indies. Further preparations were halted at an early stage, however, upon learning that the government in the East Indies was contemplating similar plans. In late 1924, Idzerda resumed his enterprise, this time in collaboration with the brothers Brand and Iep Ochse, respectively the director and film operator of Polygoon, a Dutch film manufacturer founded in Haarlem in 1919, which produced newsreel films for Dutch movie houses. The government’s plans had led to nothing. In the meantime, there were others who had produced a number of documentaries in the region—including Willy Mullens, the owner of Haghe Film—and who had witnessed the potential that lay there. In 1925, the ambitions of Idzerda and the Ochse brothers led to the founding of the NIFM (Nederlandsch-Indische Film Maatschappij, ‘Dutch East Indian Film Company’) in Haarlem. The company’s aim was to produce documentary films about the Dutch East Indies in order to promote people’s knowledge and an interest in the Dutch colony. The films were to cover topics in the areas of industry, commerce, and folklore. For the company to be profitable, it had to acquire commissions. Mullens had more success in this endeavour than Ochse, as he proved to be a better lobbyist. After a hopeful beginning—including a film account of a boat passage to Batavia with a subsidy from the Stoomvaart Maatschappij Nederland and the board of directors of the KRL (Koninklijke Rotterdamse Lloyd, ‘Royal Rotterdam Lloyd’) shipping company, which premiered at the City Theatre in The Hague in 1926 under the title Naar tropisch Nederland (‘To the Tropical Netherlands’)—the NIFM encountered both financial and operational difficulties. Idzerda’s role in the company was so vague—one of his tasks was supposedly to conduct extensive preliminary studies to garner acquisitions—that in May 1926 the Board of Directors decided that he would have to file a report of his activities every two weeks. Five months later, Idzerda had not yet handed in a single report, because he disagreed with the board’s decision. His imperious response was that the board members understood nothing about his work. Due to the growing commotion with the board, Idzerda was ordered to step down in December 1926, which ultimately led to his resignation at his ‘own request’ during the general board meeting of 1 April 1927. Idzerda would continue to do work for the NIFM in that same year, but not under a permanent contract.

In the 15 September 1924 issue of De Camera, C.A.P. Ivens recalled on the occasion of Idzerda’s silver jubilee that Idzerda had also made films himself: ‘(…) many also know his films (South Limburg, Alkmaar, Groningen, Maastricht, Haarlem, manufacturers, etc.).’

Wieger Idzerda’s significance for Dutch photography lies chiefly in his work as an author. He was by no means a photographic artist without merit, but because so little of his work has been preserved, a comparison of his oeuvre with that of Adriaan Boer, Henri Berssenbrugge, or Bernard Eilers, is infeasible.

Idzerda’s conception of photography was firmly based on the ideas of his predecessors from abroad, with whose perspectives he was able to identify. Despite the lack of originality in his thinking, Idzerda’s books and articles are important to the Dutch history of photography for various reasons. They are academically sound and structurally concise. Moreover, in his publications he brought together a broad representation of images (in the form of reproductions) belonging to the tradition of photographic art in the Netherlands. For Idzerda’s reading audience this was an excellent way to stay up to date on what was being achieved in photographic art in the country. For today’s researcher, they serve as a valuable source of visual information: more often than not, the original photos featured in these publications have not been preserved or their present whereabouts are unknown. Idzerda’s books and writings—together with other works of Dutch-language literature in the area of photographic art—also clarify from what sources most Dutch photographers drew their knowledge, as well providing insights into their ideas and intentions.

Documentation