Geoffrey Crawley, the world-esteemed former editor of British Journal of Photography, has died
Seventies' portrait of Geoffrey Crawley at his editor's desk in the Southampton Street offices of BJP. Image © John Minihan.
Geoffrey Crawley, a former BJP editor, photographic inventor, author, and the man who uncovered the world's longest-running photographic hoax has died [further updates]
Author: Simon Bainbridge
01 Nov 2010 Tags: Obituary
Geoffrey Crawley, the world-esteemed former editor of British Journal of Photography, has died.
According to a report in Amateur Photographer, for whom he worked as an occasional contributor in his latter years, he had been suffering from a long-term illness.
Crawley joined BJP in the 1960s, working first as a contributor and then as technical editor, eventually becoming the editor-in-chief around 1967, a position he held for more than 20 years. From 1987, when the magazine was sold to Timothy Benn Publishing, he continued as technical editor, working through into his seventies up until 2000.
His reputation as one of the world's leading figures in photographic science was without parallel during this period, and in all probability, no one in the post-analogue age will likely command the same all round technical expertise and authority. In addition to his brilliant technical articles, he developed many chemical formulae, in particular Acutol, a range of monochrome developer chemicals produced by Patterson. He also provided invaluable technical help to the industry during this time, advising Stanley Kubrick during the making of 2001 (after which the filmmaker kept in touch with Crawley, suggesting article ideas for BJP), and he foresaw the impact of digital long before it became mainstream, embracing the new technology with his usual vim. Among his many talents, he was an accomplished concert pianist, and probably could have made a career as a musician, but he will probably be best remembered for his work uncovering one of the greatest photographic hoaxes of the 20th Century.
In 1979 he was contacted by Brian Coe, the curator of the Kodak Museum in Harrow, which marked the beginning of his journey into “fairy land”. Coe had been approached by Sidney Robinson, a fan of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (the author of the great Sherlock Holmes adventure stories, who was also a keen photography enthusiast and occasional contributor to BJP in the late 19th Century, and a committed Spiritualist), about the writer’s involvement in the 20th century’s longest-running photography hoax, carried out by two Yorkshire schoolgirls.
Doyle lent his considerable standing to effectively verify the authenticity of two pictures taken by Elsie Wright and her cousin Frances Griffiths, aged 16 and 10, capturing them playing with little fairies at the bottom of her garden in 1917. With his backing, and the eager support of Edward Gardner, a leading theosophist of the day, further pictures of the "Cottingley Fairies", were presented to the press in 1921, causing a sensation that captured the public imagination and rumbled on over the next six decades.
Crawley undertook a major scientific investigation of the photographs and the events surrounding them, publishing his research in a series of articles in BJP between 1982 and 1983, finally proving them to be fakes, gaining the “confession” of Wright, and putting an end to the hoax, which eventually culminated in two films, Fairy Tale: A True Story, starring Peter O'Toole as Doyle, and Photographing Fairies.
As Crawley noted, the story revealed as much about society at the time as the technical prowess of the two schoolgirls. Recalling his part in the story in BJP’s Millennium edition, he told of how he had written to Wright with his findings, and how he understood why she had felt unable to reveal the truth once Gardner, Doyle and various experts had proclaimed them as evidence of otherworldly beings. The two became friends, and he wrote kindly about her and the myth surrounding the fairies in the conclusion of the article in 2000.
“Of course there are fairies – just as there is Father Christmas. The trouble comes when you try to make them corporeal. They are fine poetic concepts taking us out of this at times too ugly real world. Conan Doyle, after the horrors of the first world war in which his son died, wanted to suggest a realm where spirit forms just might exist.
“At least Elsie [Wright] gave us a myth which has never harmed anyone and it looks like continuing to fascinate and entertain well into the future. How many professed photographers can claim to have equaled her achievement with the first photograph they ever took?”
Crawley’s famous lens tests would often extend to multiple pages and issues, but as the previous passage suggests, he was also a very entertaining and thoughtful writer. In BJP’s Centenary edition of 1964 (celebrating 100 years since the magazine adopted its current title and moved to a weekly format), he wrote a “letter to 2064”, attempting to predict some of the likely changes. He speculated with curious accuracy the impact of electronics, and foresaw that “no doubt cinemas and televisions will be in three D colour”, but also considered how this would affect out understanding of the medium:
“In view of our doubts today as to what status the silver halide photo-sensitive system will hold in 50 or 100 years time, it is very difficult, regarding this as we do as primarily the photographic process, to decide to what extent we would consider possible electronic replacements for it in the future [as] truly photographic. Here again is an attitude that will no doubt cause as much ridicule as the suggestion that photography ended with Daguerreotype. After all, photography is the creation of an image of an original subject drawn by light waves, and presuming something of high quality and interest can be produced, by all means let us go about it the easiest possible way.”
Reuel Golden, who edited BJP during the 1990s, pays tribute to Crawley’s enthusiasm for technology he has already predicted:
“I worked with Geoffrey for around six or seven years at BJP. His official title was "technical editor", but that doesn't really do justice to Geoffrey's intelligence, charm, eccentricity and photographic knowledge, which was quite rightly world renowned.
“Geoffrey loved taking pictures, but his overriding passion was the mechanics of the medium and working out how to produce the best results whether it was film, paper or a particular obscure lens. When the digital revolution came about, Geoffrey welcomed it with open arms and embraced it with the same enthusiasm that he had with silver halide. In fact, it presented him with new technical challenges and problems that in typical Geoffrey fashion he mastered in a matter of a few months.
“He was a one off, a unique talent, a supportive colleague and a man who enriched our daily working life. He was one of photography's greatest champions and will be badly missed."
Chris Dickie, who followed Crawley's editorship in 1987,writes:
Photography’s debt to Geoffrey Crawley can be divided into words and deeds: the latter his various darkroom formulations marketed by Paterson Products, the former his thoroughgoing and thoughtful reviews of equipment and materials, and the weekly “Ex Cathedra” unsigned editorials, often running to thousands of words over the opening pages of BJP.
His involvement with the magazine exceeded 30 years, first as contributor, then technical editor, then editor for 21 years, and latterly as the technical manager until 2000. Under his stewardship BJP’s technical coverage was second to none, due in large part to his own authoritative contributions, but supported by a formidable multidisciplinary team of writers that covered the entire field of imaging. When I succeeded him in 1987 I inherited a line-up that included L Andrew Mannheim (cameras and lenses), HJP Arnold (astronomical and remote imaging), Peter West (cine and broadcast), Barry Scott (patents), Graham Saxby (holography – and much else besides), Maurice Wooller (historic cameras), Reg Miles (video), and so on. Geoffrey tended to keep reviews of chemistry and materials for himself, which was understandable. Also, some of the 35mm cameras.
The history and culture of the medium, and its practice, were well catered for too, with regular contributions from Walter Nurnberg, Jozef Gross, Margaret Harker, Bill Jay, Michael Hallett, Colin Osman and Bill Bishop, among others. During his time the pictorial content of the Journal was less reliable: if a colleague described one of your photographs as worthy of a BJP cover you were supposed to feel insulted. In fact, technical content aside, Geoffrey devolved a great deal of the editorial role to his deputy and the art editor, adopting more of an overview position from his very large chair and desk. Neither did he appear in the office every day. He wrote everything longhand in fountain pen for transcription by his secretary, and once a week sat down with her to dictate the news items. Several years later, by which time Geoffrey had passed retirement age, they married and had a child.
His position as editor of BJP and his international reputation brought opportunities for diversion outside of the business of producing a weekly magazine. I don’t believe for a moment that he seriously considered it necessary to debunk the Cottingley Fairies, but he will have found it an amusing interlude. Shortly after my arrival we published a research paper setting out photographic evidence suggesting the fine example of Archaeopteryx displayed in the Natural History Museum might be a fake. My suspicion is that we did so because it afforded Geoffrey the opportunity to meet one of the authors, the astrophysicist Fred Hoyle, whose formidable intellect fascinated him, and not because the evidence presented was compelling.
Similarly, he jumped at the opportunity to assist the production team making a film about the controversies and urban myths surrounding the killing of JFK, helping in the analysis of archive stills of the “Grassy Knoll” and the famous Zapruder movie. He loved alluding to the dark forces at work and the possibility of Mob involvement. Occasional commissions such as this, and research work and royalties from his Paterson chemical range, provided additional income that will have supported his passion for sailing. He recounted pulling alongside a yacht, somewhere off the south coast, to discover a former prime minister and an international yachtsman in flagrante. He had a remarkably smutty sense of humour.
In the 15 years or so that we worked together I saw hundreds of his photographs, made in the investigation of a new camera or lens, or testing a new film or paper, or one of his own concoctions. He loved photography and knew its processes inside out – after all, he invented some of them – but he couldn’t take a picture for toffee. In his development of superior processing formulae he followed in the tradition of photography’s early pioneers and was held in a similar esteem as a result. But we’re not going to see his like again. Geoffrey Crawley’s time in photography spanned a sea change in imaging: from an analogue tradition, essentially unchanged over 150 years, to a constantly evolving digital rush. Until it becomes possible to construct a better imaging chip on the kitchen table there will be no more Geoffrey Crawleys.
Jon Tarrant, the last editor of BJP to work with Crawley adds his own tribute:
“Geoffrey was the most important BJP editor of the last 50 years, having occupied the chair throughout the rise of reflex cameras and digital photography. His knowledge was encyclopaedic and he was also a keen photographic chemist who formulated Paterson’s Acu- products, from Acutol to FX-39. Geoffrey had worked behind the camera prior to becoming editor and it was he who changed BJP from a purely technical, word-heavy publication into a more varied, picture-bearing magazine. He was also famous for his work with the Cottingley Fairies pictures and for helping to analyse the photographic evidence collected at the assassination of John F Kennedy. Nobody else can claim anything like this range of experiences and expertise: Geoffrey was a very special person and I was hugely sorry when our ways parted.”
Do you have any personal memories or stories about Geoffrey Crawley? If so, leave a comment below, or contact the editor at bjp.editor@bjphoto.co.uk.
Comments
When ever Geoffrey Crawley's name is
mentioned I always fondly remember
Acutol, a wonderful developer that made
my 35mm negatives that little bit special.
Geoffrey Crawley's name on a magazine
article or editorial was a magnet for anybody
who loved or made a living from photography.
I had the pleasure of working alongside Geoffrey during my time as News Editor on BJP. Aside from his unquestionable technical talents, Geoffrey was a true gentleman, always considerate and a pleasure to be around. His enthusiasm was infectious.
He'll be greatly missed.
During the 1970s I had six covers on the BJ (I think; maybe 7); never felt insulted at all; chosen by Geoffrey Crawley himself or Mark Butler, picture editor for a while. I remember Geoffrey Crawley as a sympathetic editor, and a gentleman. His technical knowledge was enormous and his comments always worth hearing.
It seems I've been reading the Crawley view since I was a youngster. He should be remebered for more than the Fairies. As another poster has mentioned he was Mr Acutol, highly technical but always interesting and you knew that he knew what he was talking about.
Photography has lost a giant with his passing, I doubt we'll ever see his like again, I know that I won't.
Dougie Salteri
Scotland
K Brown wrote: "It's really too bad he worked so hard to destroy such a wonderful, harmless mystery..."
You miss the point entirely, a point Crawley understood: they are not mysteries if there's a picture of them. By debunking the images he in fact returned the fairies to the land of mystery.
Just wondering: Do you also drop by funerals of people you don't know to insult the departed?
Geoffrey's reviews were the only ones I ever thought worthwhile. I think I must have read his review on every Nikon product that I ever bought during those years, and I was never disappointed with his evaluations.
R.I.P. and thank you.
Rob C
It is almost 50 years since I invited Geoffrey to speak to our Camera Club in Greenwich.He was greatly appreciated speaking then and at susequent meetings, with great insite into existing and future devlopments.A man of great intellect and integrity, he will be missed not only by his family and friends but by all those , industry and individual alike ,who recignised his unassuming geius.
I first met GC around 1972 though his 1968 book on the Nikon system (a compilation of reviews) was already familiar. Geoffrey 'taught' me how to judge lenses and almost invented the English terminology for reviewing equipment, lenses in particular. The Paterson chemicals were far more just Acutol (FX-14) though it had the distinction of being the one formula he never published in the BJ Yearbooks. Almost all the other FX-series developers were put into the public domain. He took the concept of the diluted compensating acutance developer (Beutler, Neutol) and used chemical composition rather than over-dilution to achieve the same enhanced sharpness, with half the development times, great shelf life and less risk of streaked or patchy processing.
Geoffrey also designed the Paterson Lens Test Target, the first modern over the counter test tool which any photographer could use. Most magazine technical editors, myself included, used his target in the 1970s and 80s.
Paterson received industry, design and export awards but GC was not formally honoured or recognised enough in his lifetime. Too little (Hon FRPS) and too late - now. He should have been a candidate for the Honours List, and certainly for honorary Fellowships of the professional bodies as well as the RPS.
I would add to the list of his seminal research articles the work he did studying camera shake - he established rotational shake as the major cause of unsharpness, and I'm sure his articles (some years before stabilisation appeared) helped IS/VR/OS etc arrive. He also helped end the myth that 18% grey was the best metering target. He actually made photography better through his articles, because the industry read them and took note.
Finally, I have a strange souvenire of Geoffrey. In the 1980s I was a partner in a small company importing Chimifoto Ornano photo chemicals. Ornano did not copy Paterson, but they did use Geoffrey's BJP formulae. Their special 'extra grain' developer was based on FX-16. They got his name wrong, confusing him with the Great Beast, and I still have a vintage Ornano pack (unused) of 'DX-16 Crowley' developer!
As the years roll I sadden to hear the passing of the ‘names’ associated, however loosely, with my brief excursion of 39 years as a professional photographer.
I remember the good old days of BJP and the many technical reviews from this giant of the photographic world. I even have somewhere a very nice reply from Mr Crawley to a question I posed, the mind fogs but it must have been early in my career. He knew how to write and worked hard to get it right. I wonder what he would have said of the typo...
Conan Doyle, after the horrors of the first world war in which his son did,...
Please, especially when paying tribute to an esteemed colleague of your own, read and then re-read before publishing. I stumbled part way through your tribute and it was spoilt for me.
I first met Geoffrey in the nineteen sixties when as a young colour laboratory worker I was brash enough to write a regular 'Colour Topics' column for the BJP, and he was very kind to me and never patronising. Many years later when Iwas President of the BIPP he featured me and the BIPP extensively in the magazine. He was in fact awarded Honorary Fellowship by the BIPP, but with his modesty never published this after his name. Latterly the highlight of my annual visit to FOCUS has been meeting him and enjoying a wide ranging chat. I always came away with a valuable new piece of information relevant to my latest photographic activity. The last sentence he spoke to me was "There aren't many of us left" referring to those of us who wrote for the BJP in the sixties. Now we are one less.
Very simply, Geoffrey was more than special, he was unique. He lifted the quality of technical reviewing to a new, higher plane, and he enriched the lives of those who worked closely with him.
Chris Dickie is absolutely right - the uncovering of the Cottingley Fairies hoax was just an amusing interlude to Geoffrey, and its significance is now being overblown. What fascinated Geoffrey was the difficulty in proving that the photographs were fake by using photographic evidence alone. Problems of that kind were certain to arouse his interest. On another occasion, thanks to the initiative of Gary Woodhouse, then picture editor of 'The Mail on Sunday', Geoffrey showed that the water of one of the US Great Lakes was so polluted that it could develop the latent image on an exposed film.
The work that Geoffrey accomplished before he joined the BJP is also worth a mention. In 1960-61, he reviewed in detail every film emulsion on the market, a project that partly led to his formulation of Acutol. The review was so lengthy that his editor playfully threatened to shuffle the pages if Geoffrey refused to concede a point on which they disagreed.
Geoffrey Crawley Never Forgotten
I worked from the late 1970’s for several years with Geoffrey Crawley as art editor of the BJP during which his inspiring enthusiasm and kind generous nature made office life very enjoyable with never a dull moment. I often think of Geoffrey whenever I drag out the heavy cast iron griddle pan he gave me one Christmas with the message “for cooking and domestic disputes”. Sadly I never got the chance to tell him that Neils, my partner then and now, still has his head intact.
His lens reviews were brilliant, I still have the BJP pages in a folder of the Pentax 67 ones I have, still re read again occasionally.
I came here via a notice on AP's website saying that Geoffrey had died ..and I went to AP via an American site selling 'Bluefire' film, which quotes Geoffrey, saying "..Noted authority Geoffrey Crawley reviewed Bluefire Police in the July 11, 2005 issue of Amateur Photographer, Great Britain's weekly photo magazine, and called it "...an exciting new b&w material capable of outstanding image quality, especially in the definition of the finest detail".."
Whatever Geoffrey wrote, you could be sure that it was well-considered and authoritative.
I knew Geoffrey when I worked on 'Practical Photography', about 30 years ago! And even 30 years ago, when he was in his fifties, he looked as if he was 83 ..the archetypal 'mad professor' with hair - well, wisps - in all directions!
We went to a presentation by Zeiss, Yashica, Hasselblad and Schott glass in Provence, and spent about three days there discussing new - and old - types of lenses; Geoffrey looking forward to glass which changed refractive index when a current passed through it, thus allowing more compact zoom lenses, for instance.
He was great company, though I couldn't understand why he'd brought the cheapest, most downmarket 'Waltham' cassette recorder to tape all the discussions, but I think his attitude was "it works perfectly well enough for just recording speech, so why bother with anything more elaborate" ..he wasn't an equipment snob, which - I think - is very refreshing. He appreciated great products - and created several himself! - but would happily use something utilitarian if it got the job done.
His friendship, affability, and lack of any pretentiousness and snobbery were wonderful antidotes to so much of the world around us.
Another gentleman gone - but never forgotten.
I contributed dozens of articles, commissioned by Geoffrey in the late 1960s and early 70s and knew him fairly well. He was a true gentleman and always made me feel welcome when delivering my pieces to his office. It was he who invented a psuedonym for me - Hugo Richie - when he wanted to publish more than one of my articles in the same issue but didn't want to give me two bye-lines. He will be sorely missed.
Geoffrey Crawley's way with words
Was honed on the nitty-gritty, not off with the birds;
When he unmasked the Cottingley fairies for what they were,
They vanished into ethereal air.
Geoffrey Crawley – great days:
I have only just learned about the sad death of Geoffrey Crawley last November.
Bryn Campbell made a, beautifully and succinctly put, comment about Geoffrey Crawley, but I want to say a little more on a personal level.
I was art editor and erstwhile features editor on the BJP for four and a half years in the early nineteen eighties. John Minihan's portrait of Geoffrey Crawley is exactly how I, very affectionately, remember him. There are so many memories, but how I adored Geoffrey, always with a twinkle in his eye, his wonderful laugh and his extraordinary intellect. And Bless him, he let me 'get away with things' allowing me to take the journal, by redesigning and re-organising it, to somewhere it had never been before. I looked forward to coming in to work every day at Great James Street, partly because it was Geoffrey who would be there every morning sitting at his desk dictating away to his secretary, on the phone to a contributor or feet up reading through a technical article, pencil in hand, tapping it against his teeth. His enthusiasm was infectious and he set the tone for everybody.
And, I even have Geoffrey to thank in that I met my husband, photographer and regular BJP contributor Tim Imrie, at the journal. Tim always said that Geoffrey accepted his first contribution on a gamble - and it paid off for all of us. I am absolutely delighted to read in his obituary that Geoffrey found happiness himself in later years, also through the British Journal of Photography.
We lost contact over time but I have never stopped thinking about him occasionally, nor ever will I. RIP Geoffrey. They were great days.
Anna Tait. January 2011.
Related Articles
BJP Daily
Most Popular Articles
Updating your subscription status 
About us
BJP is the world’s longest running photography magazine, established in 1854, and online since 1997. A high-quality monthly printed edition is available as a subscription or from selected newsagents in the UK and around the world.
Jobs
Junior Furniture Photographer
We currently have an opportunity for a Junior Furniture Photographer at our Park Royal location. You will be part of the London Photographic team.
Digital Retouching Specialist
Stu Williamson Photography looking for an experienced digital retoucher to join its busy studio in Dubai. Experience with portrait retouching a must and you need to be proficient with photoshop.
Junior Sales Team Member
The Flash centre are looking for an enthusiastic Junior to join their London Sales team.
Knowledge of Photography and an understanding of Lighting would be a benefit...
Popular Topics
