The full-article on Archive The London based Art-Union Journal became the Art Journal and the full series 1839 to 1912 is also available on Archive

The earliest editions were almost devoid of images so the journal had a great interest in ways of reproducing cheap high-quality images. This interest expressed itself in regular articles and demonstrations of new image technologies. Before this extended demonstration of the Electrotype see: “New Process of Copying Engravings” in Jan. 1845 p.8 and “Anastatic Printing” Feb 1845 pp39, 40

The Art-Union Monthly Journal of the Fine Arts Vol 9 1847 Page 62 facing full page electrotype engraving of the title work.

[note: the spelling “Greatbach” is used in the text but under the engraving “Greatbatch” is used See: BM - William Greatbach (1802-1894) “Name sometimes spelled Greatbatch, but Greatbach was usual”]

 THE CHILDREN IN THE WOOD.* [* Engraved by W. Greatbach from a drawing : the landscape by W. Westall A. R.A. ; the figure by ----Benwell. ]

THE ELECTROTYPE

We have two objects in the introduction of this print into the Art-Union Journal :—first, to supply. to our subscribers a fine and agreeable example of Art; and next, so to test the process of  ELECTROTYPE as to place its capabilities beyond dispute — a result which has not, hitherto, been arrived at, inasmuch as experiments have been tried on a limited scale, or have been encompassed by difficulties that prevented facts from being ascertained with sufficient accuracy.

The capabilities of the electrotype, in the unlimited reproduction of incised metal surfaces for the multiplication of print, seem to have been but little tasked save by the Art-Union Society. On the announcement of the beautiful process, it was at once determinable how far its utilities were available in Art and in Commerce. With respect to results obtainable by this means, we have some facts to adduce which must effectually  repress all doubts of its efficiency.

Like the obstacles standing in the way of every new utility, the difficulties opposed to the ultimate perfection of the electrotype have been unduly magnified. The reproduction of large plates was at first pronounced impracticable ; and when small ones were attempted, no allowance being made for the softness of electrotype copper, there were many failures in printing. Before means were employed for the acceleration of the deposition, plates were frequently removed from the trough before they acquired a substance sufficient to withstand the roller. Again, in order to afford them as much support as possible against the necessary pressure, the plate was subjected to the process of printing exactly as it had been removed from the trough, having the back rough and coarsely granulated; the result of which was, that this inequality caused an inequality of pressure, insomuch as to destroy the printing surface of the plate, the remedy for which is to obtain a substance sufficient to admit of the back being filed down to an even surface, and then to be left sufficiently thick as not unduly to yield to the roller in printing.

The process of inducing metallic deposition by means of the battery is extremely simple; and the public lectures, by which the discovery was daily illustrated, gave the electrotype an extensive celebrity as a philosophical toy. The apparatus, and the means of obtaining results, were so simple as to be employed even by persons entirely unacquainted with the nature of the agent. Still, by various hands, various results are producible, and very little of the metal produced experimentally would at all assist the great end for which we contend the electrotype is so peculiarly adapted. We have seen, with every generally-known means of commanding success, a metal produced which would crumble under the slightest pressure; and this has been do frequently the end of the experiments in electro-metallurgy, on an extended scale, at to have impressed many inquirers with an opinion of the impossibility of producing a good metal, and others with a conviction that the difficulties standing in the way of success were so obstinate—and that success itself, even if attained to, might be of little value—so that, of numbers who addressed themselves to elector-metallurgy with the hope of advantage, few have realized their expectations with regard to Fine Art.

We have from its discovery advocated the electrotype as an invaluable agent in Art, and our most sanguine hope justified. In the plate "The Children in the Wood, we have instituted an experiment and a comparison which establish the character of electrotype metal as equal to beaten copper of the best quality for yielding prints—-as well in number as quality; an attestation of which fact has been supplied to us by the many printing firms into whose hands the plates have been given , for the purpose of testing the electrotype plate against the original.

This small plate was originally engraved by Mr. Greatbach, and six electro were made from it, five only of which have been used ; and the number of impressions which have been struck from these five—ten thousand—is certified by the printers respectively.

These electrotypes were made by Mr. Vaughan The first really successful result, as a large plate, was the, well-known plate from, Mr. Leslie's picture, entitled ‘May Day’ ; the electrotype from this plate was produced by Mr. Plamer, in whose hands it was placed, after other attempts to repeat the plate had failed. The time occupied in obtaining this facsimile was eight. weeks—a period much too lengthened for ordinary purposes ; it was, therefore, a great point with Mr Palmer to produce a similar plate in less time, and he succeeded in reducing the time to fourteen days, producing a plate in every respect equal to that which occupied the longer period in formation. For large plates, of the size of that in question, fourteen days are understood to be the time usually necessary, and this is believed to be the minimum: there are no known means of further accelerating the deposition. This electrotype, it was generally believed, would not pass uninjured through the press: it was, however, proved in the usual way, and afterwards subjected to an extra power, which required two men to draw it; but it withstood this severe trial, and came from the press uninjured and without. having curled. The next reproduction was Turner’s ‘ Modern Italy’ ; and this plate when finished was subjected to closest inspection by glasses, but no imperfection could be detected. An impression was compared with a proof from the original plate, and the comparison told favourably for the electrotype impressions, one of which was sent to her Majesty at Windsor—an example of the first-fruits of the discovery. This print was followed by the pendant, ‘ Ancient Italy.’ Among the large plates executed by Mr. Palmer those most known are the Art-Union plates. The first of these was Hilton’s ‘Una’; and this was perfectly reproduced by Mr. Palmer after others had entirely failed. This was succeeded by Callcott’s ‘ Raffele and the Fornarina,’ and Stanfield’s ‘ Castle of Ischia’; and these works will demonstrate the infallibility of the electrotype as a minute copyist more clearly than the earliest essays, because, in the latter case, the plates were perfectly new when copied, and thus each imitation was fitted for throwing off impressions of the quality of proofs. Whereas, on the other hand, as, for instance, in the case of the ‘May Day’ plate, it was already considered worn out when placed in the hands of the electrotypist ; hence an old plate is by no means a air test. The original plate of the ‘Una’ was engraved by Mr. W. H. Watt, who expresses his opinion of the electrotype in a testimonial, of which the following passage is the conclusion :--” In fact, if a plate is well electrotyped before it is worn, I am certain that, out of a dozen prints, no engraver could select those taken from an electrotyped plate from those taken from the original plate.” Columns might be filled with similar evidence.

With respect to this small print, the figures in which are by Mr. Benwell, and the landscape by Mr. Westall, A.R.A., impressions of one of the electrotype plates, worked by Messrs. Dixon and Ross, lie before us while writing.

They have been taken at various stages of the printing, as, for instance, at intervals of five hundred: one of the first five hundred, one of the second, one of the third, &c. On a close inspection of one of the last of two thousand five hundred it does not present that worn appearance which an ordinary plate generally does after yielding so many impressions—the last impression will, in short bear comparison with the earliest impressions, and the plate is, we are assured by the printers, in a condition to yield copies yet to the amount of many hundreds, and that without any of the assistance usually afforded to plates when under process of working. We have also before us prints from the original plate, between which and those of the electrotype plate, there is not the most minute perceptible difference.

The following certificate is from Messrs. Dixon and Ross, in which they record their opinion of the electrotype plates, and declare the number of impressions they have drawn from them :— “We have taken 5500 impressions (i.e., 2500 from each) of the two plates (electrotypes) of ‘The Children in the Wood,’ engraved by Mr. Greatbach, and have no hesitation in saying each has stood the number equal in every respect to the original plate, or any other original plate we have ever —. “We have also printed 2500 impressions from the original copperplate of ‘ The Children in the Wood’, and consider that the electrotyped plate has stood equally well with it. “J. Ross, Dixon and Ross.”

The following is another certificate testifying g to a like result :--

"I certify that. 2500 impressions have been taken from the electrotype plate of “The Children of the Wood” and the plate is still in very good state, and would yield 500 or 1000 more.

“H. Wilkinson, Copperplate Printer, “Jan. 14, 1847.” Prujean-square, Old Bailey.

Mr McQueen is also printing one of the electrotype plates—but has not yet finished working it ; his statement, therefore, must be postponed.

We have thus, it will be seen, instituted a comparison and established a result of the highest importance to Art and Art-education. The task of the mere “collector” is that which has hitherto been sought to be gratified, and that turns to nothing in common—favours nothing promotive of open-hearted intellectuality. The great result of our great experiment is this—if we declare a proof of a fine print the price of five guineas ; if a print, we pay for it two or three, as it may be; this is according to the current price of engravings. Now we say that, by means of this process, the public might be put in possession of  high-class prints at a price of about one-tenth of their present cost, provided, of course, that publishers could ensure so extensive a demand as to warrant the undertaking of works which, under any circumstances, should not deteriorate quality of impression, for the last print of the hundredth thousand should be equal in all respects to the first proof.

We wish it to be understood that this is not a question of low or mediocre taste—any advocacy of the electrotype as promotive of mediocre Art is unworthy of support. The certificates we have embodied show the numbers that one plate will yield ; each of these certificates speaks only of one plate; but there have been another six plates electrotyped, a part only of which have used to return fifteen thousand impressions, according to the proportion of two thousand five hundred each, with the discretional power of making them produce respectively from five hundred to a thousand more.  We know the value of steel in returning a large number of impressions : in such a result as fifteen thousand from a steel plate there would be an appreciable difference between progressive impressions, a difference much more evident at the end of two or three thousand and so much more so at the end of a few thousands additional as to render the plate of no value ; and here ends the utility of steel.

Another result of the electrotype would be to destroy the ridiculously exclusive preference given to “proofs” –the value of which is of a ratio inverse to the progress of the plate : as for instance, a proof from a plate by Morghen of any famous work—say ‘The Last Supper’ by Leonardo – might be valued at a hundred or a hundred and twenty guineas, provided certain of the heads or the table-cloth were unfinished ; but, if the same were finished, then the value might be seventy guineas, thus graduating inversely. The gratification of possessing unfinished proofs is an irrational taste, which, lie many others, cannot be accounted for by the collector – upon other than selfish grounds – and this false value to certain impressions would be destroyed by the electrotype, by which at any time any state of a plate could be represented ad infinitum. Further proofs of the value of this means we shall hereafter bring forward.

But the production of works of Art by means of the electrotype is an endless multiplication, fitted above every other known means for extending the knowledge of Art, without which no system of education is perfect. It is not by limited thousands we would distribute the best works of all times, but by unlimited tens of thousands. The electrotype is like the fabled power of some Eastern tale—we cannot overtask it—we have hitherto asked only for trifles ; it is a talisman disposing at will of the treasures of the beautiful, to which, for ourselves, we promise to have abundant recourse.