When one looks at a photographic image rather than a final photographic print, one often perceives the former in a way that is not at all what the author intended. After all, when viewing an image, especially in today's situation where smartphones and tablets are used, the parameters of the physical size of the author's work, the degree of its detail, and the environment in which the work is displayed escape the viewer. Certainly there are images initially oriented towards digital viewing, but one should not perceive in the same way all visual artifacts, especially those created long before the invention of computer technology.

Moreover, even in the case of viewing the final work, the viewer, if not properly trained in history or art history, can make mistakes in interpreting the work in question. For example, the unsophisticated viewer rarely questions the hidden meaning of a shot of architecture, dwelling more often on the external appeal of the image or the strangeness of the captured construction. However, it was architecture, as well as its competent representation, that was one of the most effective tools for demonstrating the power, might and cultural influence of the "sponsor" of construction, especially at a time when not everyone knew how to draw or photograph. In the field of photography, Pierre Ambroise Richebourg was among the first photographers who were able to solve the problem of taking pictures of architecture within the framework of ideological orders.

These days, no significant event in the life of a country, especially when it comes to official events, is without a photo or video correspondent. It is difficult for the modern viewer to imagine the world without the rapid flow of news materials, on the shooting and publication of which many thousands of employees of news agencies work ceaselessly. However, such a picture of everyday life with the active involvement of the media in the mid-19th century would probably have been mistaken for another fiction writer's fiction. But despite the considerable technical limitations of Louis Daguerre's process, early in the history of photography there were characters who dared to devote themselves entirely to photography. Among these visionary adventurers, one of the most sought-after and famous to this day was Pierre Ambroise Richebourg. It was this French photographer who was one of the first to offer the "recipe" for success that is still relevant in the photographic environment today.

Like his compatriots J. Like his compatriots J. Verne and F. Arago, A. Richebourg had a weakness for the latest scientific discoveries and, even more importantly, responded to them in a timely manner. Richebourg's original area of interest was the field of optics, and his direct teacher in the field of photography was L. Daguerre himself, one of the inventors of daguerreotype. From the beginning of his career, Richebourg became known as a pioneering photographer. For example, he was one of the first to technically carry out photography with a solar microscope, the results of which were subsequently handed over to the Paris Academy of Sciences. In 1851 he was one of the first French photographers to master the new wet-collodion technology, which made it possible to make several prints from a glass negative. Soon after, in 1853, Richebourg took the initiative to carry out passport photography for the Ministry of Justice, and in 1869 he shocked the public with some of the first forensic crime scene photographs.  Thus, among other features of Richebourg's work is his pronounced commercial orientation. Unlike his fellow contemporaries, such as Gustave Le Grey, Richebourg was less interested in artistic photography, even though he did not neglect it. Nevertheless, the key principle of Richebourg's work, on the basis of which he subsequently achieved universal recognition, was the competent satisfaction of customers' demands, both private and public. In the latter case, the photographer became a true pioneer.

Richebourg's involvement in politics grew steadily as his career progressed. In 1855 he became a member of the French Photographic Society, and the same year he photographed Queen Victoria's visit to Paris, and in the following 1856 he photographed the events of the birth and christening of the Crown Prince. However, Richebourg's most ambitious project was his unique photography of the interiors of the palace at Tsarskoe Selo and of the majestic edifices of Petersburg, which he undertook in 1858-59 under the direction of Theophile Gautier. This series, which consisted of large-format albuminous prints, was made to provide a convincing visual rebuttal to Astolphe de Custine's ideas about Russia, which the author had expressed in his popular European book, Russia in 1839. This book caused considerable damage to Russia's foreign policy image abroad by, among other things, asserting the invalidity of the use of the antique order in Russian architecture. In order to refute this extremely unflattering criticism, it was decided not only to invite Gautier to Russia as a writer of great authority in Europe, but also to support the textual judgments with visual materials. It is no coincidence that among other technologies preference was given to photography as having a high persuasive power because of its naturalism. After all, it was impossible to persuade foreign guests with words alone - convincing visual confirmation of the pro-Russian point of view was required. In these circumstances, Richebourg carried out his highly responsible commission on a level of technical execution that was unprecedented for its time - he produced photographs that were printed in large format in order to impress the foreign diplomats for whom these photographs were prepared. The results were so impressive that the photographer received similar commissions on his return to France, including taking photographs of the interiors of Fontainebleau in 1863 and the Élysée Palace in Paris in 1864, this time to glorify the greatness of the French state.

Artem Loginov, for "History of One Photo"