ASTRONOMICAL PHOTOGRAPHY.


During the last few years, or rather decades of years, it has become
rather a trite saying that to advance far in any branch of physical
research a fair proficiency in no inconsiderable number of the sister
sciences is an absolute necessity. But if this is true in general, none, I
think, will question the assertion that a proficient in any of the
physical sciences must be fairly conversant with photography as a science,
or at least as an art. If we take for example a science which has of late
years made rapid strides both in Europe and America, the science of
astronomy, we shall not have far to go to find convincing proof that a
great portion of the best work that is being done by its votaries is
effected by the aid of photography. One eminent astronomer has quite
lately gone so far as to declare that we no longer require observers of
the heavens, but that their place can be better supplied by the gelatine
plate of the photographer; and his words have been echoed by others not
less able than himself. "Abolish the observer, and substitute the
sensitive plate," is a sensational form of expressing the revolution in
observational astronomy that is taking place under our eyes; but, although
it suggests a vast amount of truth, it might leave upon the mind an
exaggerated impression inimical to the best interests of science.

The award of the highest distinction in astronomy, the gold medal of the
Royal Astronomical Society, two years in succession, to those who have
been most successful in celestial photography is no doubtful sign of the
great value attached to such work. Last year it was Mr. Common who