The Actress as Photographic Model

Some of my own ancestors from this period

• Photographic Records
• English Actresses Being Photographed With Their Children

In the late part of the nineteenth century, the development of flexible celluloids and the subsequent availability of factory produced photographic stock led to a great expansion in the number of professional photographers and photographic studios operating in the World's major cities, and catering to all levels of society. Portraiture, by means of these new cheaper photographic processes, was suddenly made available to a far greater cross section of the population than ever before. Even the average man in the street could afford to make a record of his family for future generations and thousands of people sought out the skylight studios every with the fell intention of being "took," thus swelling the wallets of the many photographers.

The Actress and the Camera

Actresses were always amongst the photographers best customers, wanting photographs of themselves to distribute to their friends and admirers. At first, the actresses would pay the photographer for his work, the same as any other customer except that she would order many more copies of the photograph than most and therefore would rank amongst his most valuable clients. It was not just vanity that made the actress a regular visitor to the photographers studio, in many ways it was a necessity. An established popular actress would receive many requests each day for photographs of herself from her many ardent admirers as well as from newspapers across the country, whilst the rising starlet found it invaluable to send photographs to managers in her quest to find work. It was not unknown for young women in this position to almost starve themselves, spending virtually all of their earnings on photographs to be used in this way.

But it was not long before the photographers realised that the photographs they took of these young women were in themselves a valuable asset. Consequently, many photographers began to offer to take photographs of an actress free of charge, and supply her with as many copies as she desired, in order to take their chance at making a profit on the transaction by selling some of those pictures to newspapers and periodicals.

The advent of the photographic postcard then changed the situation radically, by creating a mass market for photographs of a whole range of subjects that appealed to the public at large - with actresses being one of the most popular. Subsequently, although actresses would continue to be quite happy to allow themselves to be photographed free of charge, they were certainly no longer content with just a few gratis copies of those photographs as their part of the arrangement.

When one considers that hundreds of thousands of post cards bearing the portraits of popular actresses were sold every year, and that every time one of those photos appeared in a magazine or newspaper it would bring payment of a fee to the photographer averaging about half a guinea, it will at once be seen that it was unreasonable of the actress to expect some financial consideration for allowing those images of themselves to used in this manner. Instead of paying a royalty to the actress against each usage of each particular photo, however, the majority of photographers would enter into a contract to pay popular actresses a fixed sum each year for the sole right to take and sell their photos. These contracts would often cover a period of several years, and to some actresses could represent a substantial addition to their annual income.

The actual amount an actress might earn from a contract of this type varied greatly depending on the level of her beauty, her public popularity, the length of contract being negotiated, and last but by no means least her business acumen in negotiating a deal. Gabrielle Ray, for example, whilst understudy to Lily Elsie negotiated a photographic deal for herself that was significantly more lucrative than that that had been offered to her equally beauteous and better known colleague.

Apart from the income thus derived, substantial though it may be (a rising starlet for example might well double her income by this means), such a deal also represented splendid publicity would could only further her career. The photographer would quite naturally, for his own financial benefit, "push" her photograph in every possible direction. The result was that her picture would be continually before the public — either being displayed in the picture post card shop or emblazoned across the pages of various papers.

From the photographer's point of view also, the actress made an ideal subject. They understood the laws of photography and conformed to them. They would often assume the direction of the performance for themselves, and the photographer was willing to let them since they knew innately how to strike a pose. Some actresses would also be quite insistent about every aspect of how their image was represented. Mary Anderson's London photographer, for example, would always, in accordance with that good lady's wishes, adjust the negative of any photograph he took of her to make the outline of the cheek appear a little flatter than it naturally was - Miss Anderson felt that the contour of her face was not oval enough and so was desirous that any photograph of her should remedy the imagined imperfection. Anna Pavlova, also, would not permit herself to be photographed without first gaining assurance from the photographer that the appearance of her feet would be adjusted under her direction in the resultant photographs so as to enhance the delicateness of their appearance.

Promotional Photographs

As well as the actress having her photograph taken for her own promotional purposes, she also regularly be involved in photographic sessions arranged by the manager of the theatre in which she was appearing for the purposes of publicising the current production. It was not at all unusual for active rehearsals to be halted in mid flow when the photographer arrived to do his work. And this was taken very seriously, all fun and banter would stop, costumes and makeup would be rearranged to look their very best, and the ominipresent stage-manager would be sure to oversee that everything was as it should be. He understodd the newspapers demands and the contribution that these pictures, published in the right quarters, could make to the success of his production. He knew that the photographs must be attractive and tell a story, they must be appealing and intriguing to entice the public into his theatre, and so would ensure that his most popular stars were prominent.

When a number of pictorial magazines sprang up, each issue dedicated to one particular production, the theatre manager was quite happy to cooperate with their editors and allow their photographers access to rehearsals and to stage set pieces for them since he could get no better advertising.

Property in Photographs

Problems sometimes arose over the use of photographs of popular actresses because copyright laws in those days, on both sides of the Atlantic, were still in their relative infancy. In many respects those laws were incomplete, unclear, poorly understood and, consequently, little respected.

In America, for example, the cigarette and tobacco firms in particular frequently made free with images of prominent actresses, over which they had no right of ownership, for use in their advertising. Worse, to add insult to injury, these misappropriated photographs were often mutilated in sensationalising ways that were most unflattering to the subject. Take for example the case of Miss Ada Rehan. A cigarette manufacturer took a photograph of the popular actress that had long been exhibited in shop windows, cut it off at the waist, and attached it to the lower half of a disreputable (by the arrangement of the skirts) photograph obtained from some other source. Many copies were made and distributed as part of the company's advertising, leading to considerable humiliation for the innocent actress. There was much talk of a legal battle, but to save herself further embarrassment Miss Rehan withdrew before the matter went to court. Other victims of this kind of abuse were more resolute, however, leading to a succession of court rulings against the tobacco firms that tightened the legal constraints and established the subject of the photograph as being the prima facie owner of the image.

The situation in England was not quite so open but was still subject to abuses. In 1904, for example, actress Marie Studholme filed a claim for damages against Edward Foley, a London dentist, for alleged misuse of her portrait in illustrated booklets that he had produced for advertising purposes. The object of the booklets was to emphasise the importance of beautiful teeth, and attempted to acheive this by comparing photographs of a charming woman with a perfect set of teeth against one with irregular or incomplete dentition. For this purpose, Mr. Foley had purchased a photograph of Miss Studholme which he noticed in a shop window. Foley had then taken the photograph to a photographer who had made two copies, one as the original, and one in which certain of Miss Studholmes front teeth had been blacked out. These two images were then reproduced in an advertising booklet, of which half a million copies were produced, wherein the implication was that the 'doctored' photograph showed Miss Studholme's real teeth whilst the genuine photograph was the result of corrective dental work. Finding, upon legal advice, that he was clearly in the wrong, Foley attempted to extract himself from the situation by offering Miss Studholme a private apology plus money compensation. Intent upon protecting her reputation for good looks, however, Miss Studholme's solicitors insisted upon satisfaction in the fullest possible measure. Consequently, Foley was forced to pay £50.00 in damages and all of the actress legal costs, as well as destroying all remaining copies of the offending booklet and issuing the following public apology:

"I, Edward Foley, of 79 Westbourne Grove in the county of London, managing director of Foley's (limited), do hereby humbly and sincerely apologize to Marie Studholme for having wrongly and without her authority used her portrait for advertising purposes, in a manner calculated to induce persons to erroneously believe that certain of her front teeth are missing and have been replaced by false ones, and I admit that the advertisement so issued by me is libellous, and I authorize the said Marie Studholme to insert this apology at my expense, in such public newspaper or newspapers as she may select."

But, if an actress might gain recourse against misuse of her images in cases such as the above, where she had signed a legitimate money deal accepting a big fee from a photographer to have exclusive sittings from her it was a very different story, and unless the contract was clear and unambiguous she might have little or no recourse over how those photographs were used. In 1907, for example, actress Gertie Millar instituted a suit against the London photographic publishers Dunn & Co., over faked photographs they had published of her in which she was shown scantily clad in a nightdress creeping from an egg shell. The face in the photograph was an accurate representation of her own, but the body was that of another. Miss Millar asserted that the photograph held her up to public ridicule, by leading people to imagine that she had permitted herself to be photographed in such a ridiculous position and wearing so little. In the resulting court case, however, the judge, Justice Darling, instructed the jury that there was nothing to complain about in the photographs which were the rightful property of Dunn & Co, and consequently the jury ruled for the publishers.

This ruling caused great consternation amongst the actresses in London, many of whom had seen their own images misused in similar ways. Edna May, for example, had not only been caricatured emerging from egg shells, but had also complained about represented as sitting on a rock by the sea pulling on her stockings (a somewhat risque image for the time). It was her head that had been used, but another girl lent herself for the body of the photograph. Other actresses were up in arms, and banded together to form a collective to protect themselves against indecent outrages and ensure that the contracts they signed were much tighter in terms of how the photographs to which they submitted themselves might be used.

Anaconda Standard - 15th March, 1908
PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORDS.

People in the United States have very little idea of the intense loyalty to their favorites which is one of the best characteristics of the English theater-goers. Once enshrined in their hearts a player is assured of a generous support the rest of his or her career. No better evidence of this devotion could be adduced than the story of Phyllis Dare, one of the most popular of the younger actresses in London.

Although she will not be out of her teens for several years yet, she has already a large following that guarantees her an immediate success whenever she appears. She it was who took Edna May's part in "The Belle of Mayfair" when that independent American actress quit in a huff because too much prominence was given to Camille Clifford, the erstwhile "Gibson Girl" who was in the same show. Phyllis Dare is now playing in pantomime in one of the provincial towns but will shortly come to London as a full-fledged star.

The story in London is that like many other popular favorites in London she has been charging a slight fee for attaching her signature to the many thousands of post cards which are sent to her for that purpose by her admirers.

During the year just passed she collected in this way a little short of $2,000 (£400), all of which she has devoted to relieving poor families which have come to her notice. Some of these fees are said to be as large as $2.50, while others are as small as six cents. There is no fixed figure for the prized signature, the young actress using her own judgment in fixing the price in accordance with the applicant's circumstances.

The picture post-card mania has reached enormous proportions in England. Some enthusiastic collectors with money to spare even boast of collections running to 6,000 and more cards. The public taste inclines to actors and actresses much more than in the United States, and many collectors leave standing orders with their dealers to supply them with new cards immediately upon publication.

Although Phyllis Dare is a big favorite she is by no means tho most popular actress with these collectors. That honor must be accorded to Gabrielle Ray, a young actress who appears under George Edwards' management and who is now playing in the London production of "The Merry Widow." One firm of picture postcard makers has issued no less than 300 different poses of this actress and they are busy turning out others as fast as they can get her to pose.

Phyllis Dare comes second in the number of poses of her that are on the market. About 240 different ones are now scattered about Great Britain. Her older sister. Zena Dare, a great favorite with the "Johnnies" of London, and now appearing with Seymour Hicks, Charles Frohman's London "prodigy," presses her closely for honors, for she looks at one in 200 different ways from the shop windows. Not content with these varying views of the two sisters, the industrious postcard publishers have invaded their home and snapped their mother and father and brother, so that the combined family is responsible for 500 cards.

Some American actresses have proved big sellers for the London postcard men. Billie Burke, who is now appearing with John Drew in "My Wife" in New York, but who was a big favorite in London up to a few months ago, is an Instance. One hundred and twenty-five different pictures of her may be bought in post-cardom. Pauline Chase, who is now playing Maude Adams' part in "Peter Pan" in London, but who will be remembered as one of the Pajama Girla in "The Liberty Belles" when it was produced in New York some years ago, boasts 100 cards. Camille Clifford, who married a peer's son and has now retired from the stage, but who will be recalled as a show girl in "The Prince of Pilsen," who went to London and caused a sensation by her shape and her pose in an original creation called "The Gibson Girl," still has 62 varieties on the market, despite the efforts of her husband's family to buy them all up and prevent further publication.

Then there is Maude Fealy, she of the classic features and the homemade marriage views. Thirty varieties of Maude may be discovered if one searches very hard. Marie George, one of the mainstays of the early pantomime at the Drury Lane theater is responsible for an addition of 30 to the already long list, while the Joyous manner of Happy Fanny Fields, a favorite of tho vaudeville stage and of pantomime as well, has charmed the picture man into 18 attempts to catch the inimitable humor of her smile.

Among the actors we find that George Robey, the favorite music-hall Comedian of England, makes a brave show. Thirty-five, pictures of him have been transferred to postcards. Harry Lauder, recently in New York, and who longs to come back to the United States and accept a salary of $260,000 a year (so he declares), can point to 25 that look more or less like him.

There is a wide difference between the number of cards of the matinee hero twins, Lewis Waller and George Alexander. The former is now playing the part that William Faversham made famous at Wallack's theater, New York, in "The Squaw Man," and no less than 40 views of him have made their appearance in the markets. Alexander is now playing in "The Thief,' a big success, but he can only boast 15 representations of his handsome person.

The Washington Post - 2nd October, 1910
ENGLISH ACTRESSES BEING PHOTOGRAPHED WITH THEIR CHILDREN.

London, Sept. 21 - The latest fashion among English actresses is to be photographed with their children. The family life of English theatrical people has always been of interest to the British public, and the new postcards and photographs of actresses holding their children in their arms or on their knees have sold better than any other pictures of the same gifted yet domesticated ladies.

Ellaline Terris, Seymour Hicks and Baby Betty

It seems to please theatergoers to know that the leading lady of the company is in private life a good mother and excellent housewife, and they give her an extra round of applause for these qualities. Middle-class England does not believe in the artistic temperament, and any little idiosyncrasies in the private affairs of an actresses meet with disapproval. Domesticity is the drawing card. The knowledge that a stage favorite is comfortably settled in her own home with a devoted husband and one or two future actors learning their lessons at her knee is unction to the British matron's soul.

Mr. and Mrs. Seymour Hicks lead in public favor as examples of domestic theatrical life. The public knows their menage intimately, and takes a tremendous interest in Baby Betty, the little daughter of the household. Both Mr. Hicks and his wife, Ellaline Terrlss, take the audience into their confidence, and in the course of a musical comedy they have been known to mention Baby Betty and the state of her health or the fact that she sent her love to everybody, and such announcements are received with cheers of delight.

Betty once wrote an ode which was published. She is just 5 now. If no news of the child is forthcoming admirers have been known to call out from the depths of the pit and inquire for the latest news. Naturally, Mr. and Mrs. Hicks have been photographed with Betty countless times, and their pictures in plush frames adorn many British homes.

Mr. and Mrs. Gerald du Maurier are another couple in whom great interest is taken. On the stage Mrs. du Maurier is Miss Muriel Beaumont. She rarely acts now, as home interests are engrossing. Her little daughter Angela is 4, and promises to be a real Du Maurier in appearance as well as in ways. She has not yet any stage aspirations.

Mr. and Mrs. Fred Terry, who are soon to appear in America, are very proud of their tall daughter, who has just made her debut in "Priscilla Runs Away." She calls herself Miss Neilson-Terry but is known to her intimates as Phillida. Though she is taller than her mother, and very well developed, she is only 17. She is very pretty. At present the post card shops are filled with a variety of pictures of the Fred Terry family.

Miss Mae Ash, who married Stanley Brett, a brother of Seymour Hicks, a year or so ago, is the proud mother of a very recent baby and she has lost no time in being pictured with her little son. Miss Ash was one of the prettiest of the pretty girls in Mr. Hicks company, and was a musical comedy favorite. Just now she is playing a sketch with her husband.

Miss Eva Moore, who is Mrs. H. Edmond in private life, has two children, and is a devoted mother. Her stage career takes her from her family a good deal as she is in demand to create parts in her husband's plays as well as others, but she has her children with her all she can. The Moore family of girls, five of them, is a type of a theatrical family often found in England. Every Miss Moore went on the stage when she arrived at years of discretion, and two of them, Miss Eva and Miss Decima Moore have become successful actresses.

Miss Violet Vanbrugh and her husband, Arthur Bourchier, are having a difficult time to persuade their daughter Prudence that 12 is not the proper age to begin a stage career. Prudence has had dramatic aspirations since she was little more than a baby, and Mr. Bourchier confesses that before long she is likely to get her way and appear at his theater in a Christmas play.

Mr. and Mrs. Cyril Maude are another couple in whom the public is interested there, and though their one child, Winifred, is seldom seen on post cards or photographs, her clever sayings and doings are well known, and her debut is looked forward to.

Miss Nancy Price, who for years has played adventuress parts in risky French gowns and red wigs, is really, to the joy of her audiences, a model wife and mother. She, too, has a small daughter who is kept carefully from the glare of the footlights out in the suburban home where Miss Price makes her way after the fatigues of Drury Lane performances.

Mr. G. P. Huntley's small boy has seen his father act very often, but not his mother, as for the last few years she has seldom appeared on the stage.

Mr. and Mrs. H. B. Irving have a daughter very like her mother, with silky flaxen hair and blue eyes. She dances prettily, and can recite yards of poetry.

Mrs. Kendal, who used to be regarded as, an example of theatrical motherhood, seems to have dropped out in recent years. One sees no pictures of her with her children, who are grown now.

Miss Ellen Terry is probably the most devoted mother in the theatrical world, yet she is never pictured with her son or daughter. She has never figured before the public in the role of mother, but those who know say that her devotion to her children is the greatest thing in her life. She has started both of them several times in various careers in which they wished to embark, and she is always the kind friend to whom they go in their difficulties. To see Miss Terry and Miss Edith Craig, her daughter, together is to realize the strong bond between them.

Miss Annnie Hughes, whose forte is playing the part of catty, sneaky, little ladies of the "Country Mouse" variety, has a son, who is her special joy and pride.