photographers, both amateur and professional, against a negative in
which paper is used as a permanent support, on account of the
inseparable "grain" and lack of brilliancy in the resulting prints;
and the idea of the paper being used only as a temporary support does
not seem to convey to their mind a correct impression of the true
position of the matter.

It may be as well before entering into the technical details of the
manipulation to consider briefly the advantages to be derived--which
will be better appreciated after an actual trial.

My experience (which is at present limited) is that they are far
superior to glass for all purposes except portraiture of the human
form or instantaneous pictures where extreme rapidity is necessary,
but for all ordinary cases of rapid exposure they are sufficiently
quick. The first advantage, which I soon discovered, is their entire
freedom from halation. This, with glass plates, is inseparable, and
even when much labor has been bestowed on backing them, the halation
is painfully apparent.

These films never frill, being made of emulsion which has been made
insoluble. Compare the respective weights of the two substances--one
plate weighing more than a dozen films of the same size.

Again, on comparing a stripping film negative with one on glass of the
same exposure and subject, it will be found there is a greater
sharpness or clearness in the detail, owing, I am of opinion, to the
paper absorbing the light immediately it has penetrated the emulsion,
the result being a brilliant negative. Landscapes on stripped films
can be retouched or printed from on either side, and the advantage in