Posted on 07/28/2010 1:51:47 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
If we can’t own them then they must be fake.
I am not a curator of photographs, but it would seem to me that it would be to the benefit of the Adams heirs for there to be very few of his plates, and no new, additional ones.
Except that is most likely a vintage print by the artist's own hand. Anything that will come from these negatives will be modern prints by someone else (and Adams focused on the Print as much as the Shot).
Fixed it.
They might also carry a "fingerprint" from the plate in his camera that would match other negatives in the Adams' estate.
Copyrighting someone's name. I see.
You can TRADEMARK a business name.
But there can be no defamation of dead guy. And Ansel Adams is dead.
The heirs of Washington and Lincoln don't get to sue when matress firms advertise president's day sales.
That is the Andy Warhol Estate's position when they are stamping "refused" on works that they do not want to legitimize.
This position would be false too, because while any print made from these negatives would not be by the artist's hands, if authentic then these negative ARE by the artist's hands and WOULD have value.
>>and said the negatives are next to worthless.<<
If these are authentic, the value is not in the quality of prints that could be made of them any more than the value of a 200 year old bottle of wine is in the quality of the taste.
I’m not saying they are or are not authentic though
Correct.
The Adams family seem to be the ones with the vested interest in disclaiming authenticity.
Hard to tell the best approach at authentication.
The technology exists today to prove pretty much absolutely whether they are real or fake.
Even if the fellow who bought them was an expert in photography and the history of chemicals, glass, old model cameras, etc. it would be difficult - no, I’m betting impossible - for him to fake them.
I’m betting they’re the real deal.
Yeah, and if the Adams' found a trove of Grandpa's negatives in the attic that they authenticated, they would pronounce them worthless. Right there the interest and bias is glaring.
interesting ping
FWIW, I just love Adams’ work. I decorated my husband’s offices with several of his vintage snow scenes framed in black. They are striking and were an inexpensive solution to large, blank walls. I still love them. Certainly those posters weren’t actually Adams’ work either, They are a facsimile of his work, duplicated in inexpensive form. Still very nice. Everyone admires them.
I hope this gentleman gets to reproduce these negatives because I have more walls to do.
This one is not Yosemite -- this is Cypress Point on the Monterey Penninsula. But, it still could be Adams. THe tree is much smaller than it is in other scenes, indicating that it is a very old photo.
>>The technology exists today to prove pretty much absolutely whether they are real or fake.<<
Based on some of the questions concerning the validity of scribbled notes allegedly by his wife (due to spelling errors, etc.) I’m wondering if it is possible that these are fakes that actually date back to the time that they are claimed to have been created.
But the fact that certain people are actually in the photos, coupled with other info, does suggest they are real.
It's a shame that the Adams estate has chosen to be jerks about this. Some of the statements make it clear they are not interested in the truth of the matter, but only in making sure they have complete control of Adams' portfolio. The statement that negatives done by Adams are next to worthless is beyond silliness. It's a damned lie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.