Dissapointing business practice by the Ansel Adams Gallery ("museumsgraphics")
Hi here's a story, (see also the attached images)
In 2007, I went to an Ansel Adams exhibition in Vienna. On display were original prints by Ansel himself - most of his well-known work. Anyway, also offered were reproduction-prints for purchase, the kind of prints you can find here:
Obviously, the gallery in Vienna has ordered them online, and sold them for some 40Euros - They are sold for 22.50$ online. So far so good.
For reasons not quite clear to me, I did not frame the matted print, neither did I hang it. It was leaned towards a wall on a book-shelf. Time passed, and two years later (this year) and after some re-arranging, the glue (used to attached the backside, strong card-board) got brittle and the back-side of the print separated from the print and the matting - See image above.
Then I was able to see the back-side of the print as such. See image(s) below.
The "reproduction-print" is a sheet of a calendar! It is the month may, and the 1st may was a monday. So I checked and the most recent year that had may 1rst on a monday and that was 2006. One year later they sold it as a "reproduction-print". This is a bit foul, don't you think so?
So my conclusion is: If they don't sell all their calendars in one year, they can't sell them the following year. So they re-use the individual calendar-sheets, put a matt around it and sell it as "Stunning Ansel Adams Lithographic Reproductions"
Quite a way to make some extra-cash - recycle your old calendars and sell em again.
I don't know what they charge for one calendar, but I assume it is less that 12X22.5$...
(anyone remember the scene in fight-club: steal body-fat, make soap out of it, sell it back to those who "donated" the fat... haha)
Maybe I am naive. But I can't help but finding that dishonest. Because if I would have known how they "produced" the matted reproduction I for sure would not have bought it - not for 40 Euros, not for 22.5 dollars. Maybe I would have taken it as gift that comes with the entrance-fee.
Anyone out there that is not surprised by such a practice? Heard such a story before? Should I contact the ansel-adams gallery and complain or ask about that practice? How much stuff they try to sell is recycled? Is this how a respectable company works?
Ha, and i got an AA-quote in my signature - how ironic...
Posted by Phillip Noll on April 15, 2009 at 2:59 PM
I noticed that the link you gave is www.anseladams.org (Notice the ORG). The official Ansel Adams Gallery is:
http://www.anseladams.com/
The official gallery has reproductions but they are much more than $22.00. Who did you purchase from? The .org or the .com? Are these two related? (The .org site seems to be a Yahoo site and I have a hard time believing that the Ansel Adams Gallery would use a Yahoo site to conduct business.)
I guess you need to find out who you are dealing with and then you need to know exactly how the product you purchased was advertised. If it is not as advertise--then you have a right to ask them to explain themselves.
In either case it does seem rather cheesy to be selling recycled calendars as "prints". Godd luck!
Hi Phillip, thanks for your reply and for pointing that out. The print has a sticker on it's backside saying: produced and distributed by MUSEUM GRAPHICS, www.museumgraphics.com. Additionally something like: "Courtesy of the trustees of the ansel adams publishing rights trust." When I google this website or enter that address I end up on "anseladams.org" - "the ansel adams store online". This looks pretty "official" to me.
Seems like a sleezy practice to me, but I'm still unclear about the culprit. Did the matte have the URL on the back, or just the 'print'? If you purchased this at an exhibit, I wouldn't make any assumptions unless you know how many and whose hands it went through to get into yours, and know those hands weren't the swindlers. For what its worth, from what I gather (based upon whois and a bit of googling), the '.org' site is owned and run by (no jokes please) The Adams Family.
Posted by Mary Dennis on April 15, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Hi Dietrich,
It's way more than "cheesy" as Phillip mentioned above. It would be cheesy if you did this with your own calendar (which, I'll admit, I have done). For them to do it, it is unethical and very deceptive and I'd be pretty darn angry about it. They adverstise the prints on the website as "stunning, high quality lithographic reproductions." Unless they load up their calendars with "stunning, high quality lithographic reproductions" and charge well over $100 for them, this is trickery. They probably assume nobody will ever open the mat and that is taking a real risk and jeopardizing their reputation a great deal if you ask me. The site appears legitimate. Do you still have your receipt or any record of the purchase?
Sheesh, they should have used a better glue if they wanted to be sure of getting away with something!! Please let us know how this goes if you decide to pursuit it with them. I think they should be duly embarassed.
I would contact the Adams gallery (the one at anseladams.com) and see what they can/will tell you about anseladams.org. You might explain to them what happened and see what they say. The anseladams.com website has contact info. You can even email Ansel's grandson per an address on their site: matthewadams@anseladams.com.
Dietrich, from the looks of it, the disappointing practice is actually from Museum Graphics, not the Ansel Adams Gallery, which are two separate entities. I suspect that if you contact the Ansel Adams Gallery, you will likely be referred to Museum Graphics.
Museum Graphics and maybe the Vienna gallery are the ones you will need to contact.
Good luck,
André
Posted by Todd Caudle on April 15, 2009 at 10:48 PM
I'm going to be a contrarian here. In all likelihood, the printing of Ansel Adams' calendars can be considered offset lithography. The AA site even says they use a duo tone process for printing. If you've ever picked up one of his calendars, you must admit they are of the highest quality. The paper is thick, and the reproduction is fantastic.
I have lots of older calendars of my own photos that I thought would one day find new life as individual matted prints in this same way. I've just never gotten around to doing it. I've actually heard from quite a few customers over the years who told me they've taken photos from my calendars and had them matted and framed.
If you were to buy an AA print matted for $22.50, and hang it on your wall instead of leaning it against the wall, you'd still be enjoying it today, none the wiser of the actual origin of the print. This is just a way to use unsold calendars, and it's a whole lot better than seeing them end up in a landfill. Think about it: You got a matted Ansel Adams print to hang on your wall for a very reasonable price. Next time, pay the $15-$20 for a whole calendar, buy some mats, and then you'll have a whole bunch of AA prints for your wall.
I doesn't seem that bad to me. If you liked it when you bought it, why would the back of it change your mind?
We had a Les Blacklock (sp?) calendar on our kitchen wall every year when I was a kid. I imagine it was litho printed kitsch, but I'd love to have one of those pages matted and framed on my wall now. Looking back, I think those calendars, the Minnesota Conservation Volunteer and, perhaps, a book of Ansel's photographs, were what drove me to try photography.
Hi, thanks again. And sorry for being a bit sloppy in the beginning explaining the source of the print. So the sticker was on the backside of the card-board - so it was outside and not on the actual "print". As I purchased it, the matted print was wrapped in plastic - you have seen this for prints like this before. So I assume that the Gallery in Vienna simply purchased the prints online at "museumgraphics.com" and sold it at the exhibition. I do believe anseladams.org and museumgraphics. com is the same company, beause the full headline on the front-page is: "Ansel Adams Museum graphics - the Ansel Adams Store Online".
Thanks for your opinions about it. I will try to strengthen my suspicion that actually the anseladams.og (or com) site is responsible. I will let you know.
Todd, I agree. That sheet is of very thick high-quality paper, the reproduction looks excellent. I guess it is a great basis for making a matted reporduction-print. BUT: If they would advertise it like that: "Buy one of our re-cycled calendar sheets for 22.5 dollars, while we sell our whole calendars for 20$, and help us make some extra cash with our calendars we cannot sell anymore". Add poor production so that the whole thing separates into its parts after two years. The even only used one small piece of adhesive tape to hold the print in place. Not one stripe for every side, no, just one - minimal effort and care.
I simply feel a bit "ripped off". You explanation is the technical rational side. But they advertise the prints not as what they are. and I purchased it with the satisfaction and "proudness" of having bought some high quality matted reproduction, not a calendar-sheet...
Posted by David Bostedo on April 16, 2009 at 9:02 AM
...high quality matted reproduction, not a calendar-sheet.
Maybe in this case these are the exact same thing? (except for the mat of course) If they use the same stock and printing process (or at least similar quality stock and process) for both, that's really the case.
I understand how disconcerting it is that they could re-use calendar pages like this...I'd probably be upset too, because my gut feeling is that calendars are cheaply done and prints are well done. Maybe that's not the case here?
After a good long look at both websites I see that there are major distinct differences between them. The REAL Ansel Adams Gallery website versus the http://www.anseladams.org site are not even close. In fact the .ORG site is fairly amateurish at best in it's construction. Also terminology is very different. Something like what you might find in a Nigerian or Chinese Scam only with better command of the English written language.
The real gallery site is run from the company Family Owned and Operated Since 1902 according to the site and the .org site says it's from a business that was co-established by Ansel and Virginia Adams in 1952. The real store has Matthew Adams as a main contact while the .org site has a general box.
One might think that they are separately run and thus the product and quality are going to be very different. So before saying that one company did you wrong by Name before contacting the company you actually delt with would be to set yourself up in a bad light.
It would be like saying you just tasted the worst Beer ever made Naming a tap award winning Brewery and took out a Time Magazine ad about it, when what you really drank was a beer made in your neighbor's bathtub.
You need to be a little more careful when you say you were done wrong by a company and actually Name the company you dealt with, not the one you didn't.
I again compared the two and the Lowest Reproduction price on the Ansel Adams Gallery site is $45.00 US and only an 8 x 10. I'm sure if you bought that print it would be better than any Calendar print made. And the Mounting would be better too.
Another thing to look at. The Anseal Adams Gallery Site is a Top Level Domain and the Other site is Hosted by Yahoo. Does that tell you something? "Is it real, or is it Memorex?"
Buyer Beware, if you want real, buy real, if you want Knock off, buy somewhere else cheaply.
yes, I would feel cheated too.
yes, the reproduction is probably good, but it still is no print to sell.
No, I don't believe the AA trust has anything to do with it.
I would tell the westlicht gallery and show them the print, it's practice as this that makes people shy away from buying decorative photography.
and yes, I still believe if you pay just 40 euros for a print, you can't ecpect all too much but a kind of quality poster...
georg
Thanks for the responses!
James, I agree, you are right. One should not blame the wrong company here. I changed the title of the post. I will write a mail to the "real" and the org.-site and ask what's the story with the other site to the former and the calendar-recycling to the latter.
Georg - yeah I did not expect to get a high-quality print either, but I simply don't like this strategy.
I was not suggesting the two anseladams.* were the same. I was thinking the real one, which is affiliated with the gallery in Yosemite, might be able to give you some insight into the practices of the other one, the .org site. That is why I suggested you contact them. My guess is the gallery-related people are all too familiar with the others and may be able to give you some useful information.
As a photographer and a framer, this was not "quality mount" or anywhere near it. Such a work should be hinged with mulberry paper with rice or wheat paste on a acid free mounting board and the top mat hinged with linen tape over the image. You can already see the damage the tape has done to the back of the "Print" and if this was "real" it would be a great sin against the artist. That said however, if you can find conservatiion mounting for that price, not even talking about the cost of the print you would be very lucky! Caveat Emptor !!
Aside from the failed mounting/matting, I fail to see the dishonest business practice, Dietrich. Assuming they did call it a "reproduction", that is EXACTLY what a calendar is and that is exactly what you got. Many of Ansel's "reproductions" are of superb quality.
Thanks for your opinions! Here's the fact. Whoever did it: They took a product, produced for one purpose (calendar). The product was outdated, not sell-able anymore. They de-mounted it, and re-used its parts to make a new-product out of it so they can still sell it. This is still ok. But what's not ok is to make the buyer believe he buys a new product, produced for that purpose. It's all about customer-perception. Same as if Audi would use the older Volkswagen technology in their new Audis. In fact it is and should be the other way, new Volkswagens use technology from older Audis... at least that's what a friend told me
Posted by David Bostedo on April 20, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Well, to continue your auto analogy, after Ford bought Jaguar, they did their best not to tell anyone about which parts in the new Jags were from more "lowly" Fords (although you could see some of them in a direct comparison). Same with Mercedes and Chrysler, and a couple of others I'm sure. (For that matter, many US car brands have multiple model lines with nothing but cosmetic changes
I agree that in this case, it seems shadier. But logically, if the page is produced in the same manner that a print that size would be, there's really no difference. The big problem is the difference in price - if I paid $30 for a calendar, and chose to frame the pages, no big deal. But if I pay $30 for a print, there's an assumption that something about the print (method, longevity, craftsmanship, etc.) makes it worth as much as 12 calendar pages. I guess in this case that assumption was wrong, which is what leaves me feeling like you got taken.... and that's certainly not a business practice that should be encouraged.
Ah - David - exactly. Rationally and technically - the process is ok. But since we all have our expectations and perceptions - at that's what companies and the market work with - we can get dissapointed...
Discussion
22 repliesHi here's a story, (see also the attached images)
In 2007, I went to an Ansel Adams exhibition in Vienna. On display were original prints by Ansel himself - most of his well-known work. Anyway, also offered were reproduction-prints for purchase, the kind of prints you can find here:
http://www.anseladams.org/large-matted-reproductions.html
Obviously, the gallery in Vienna has ordered them online, and sold them for some 40Euros - They are sold for 22.50$ online. So far so good.
For reasons not quite clear to me, I did not frame the matted print, neither did I hang it. It was leaned towards a wall on a book-shelf. Time passed, and two years later (this year) and after some re-arranging, the glue (used to attached the backside, strong card-board) got brittle and the back-side of the print separated from the print and the matting - See image above.
Then I was able to see the back-side of the print as such. See image(s) below.
The "reproduction-print" is a sheet of a calendar! It is the month may, and the 1st may was a monday. So I checked and the most recent year that had may 1rst on a monday and that was 2006. One year later they sold it as a "reproduction-print". This is a bit foul, don't you think so?
So my conclusion is: If they don't sell all their calendars in one year, they can't sell them the following year. So they re-use the individual calendar-sheets, put a matt around it and sell it as "Stunning Ansel Adams Lithographic Reproductions"
Quite a way to make some extra-cash - recycle your old calendars and sell em again.
I don't know what they charge for one calendar, but I assume it is less that 12X22.5$...
(anyone remember the scene in fight-club: steal body-fat, make soap out of it, sell it back to those who "donated" the fat... haha)
Maybe I am naive. But I can't help but finding that dishonest. Because if I would have known how they "produced" the matted reproduction I for sure would not have bought it - not for 40 Euros, not for 22.5 dollars. Maybe I would have taken it as gift that comes with the entrance-fee.
Anyone out there that is not surprised by such a practice? Heard such a story before? Should I contact the ansel-adams gallery and complain or ask about that practice? How much stuff they try to sell is recycled? Is this how a respectable company works?
What do you think?
Thanks for your opinions!
Regards
Dietrich
http://www.anseladams.com/
The official gallery has reproductions but they are much more than $22.00. Who did you purchase from? The .org or the .com? Are these two related? (The .org site seems to be a Yahoo site and I have a hard time believing that the Ansel Adams Gallery would use a Yahoo site to conduct business.)
I guess you need to find out who you are dealing with and then you need to know exactly how the product you purchased was advertised. If it is not as advertise--then you have a right to ask them to explain themselves.
In either case it does seem rather cheesy to be selling recycled calendars as "prints". Godd luck!
It's way more than "cheesy" as Phillip mentioned above. It would be cheesy if you did this with your own calendar (which, I'll admit, I have done). For them to do it, it is unethical and very deceptive and I'd be pretty darn angry about it. They adverstise the prints on the website as "stunning, high quality lithographic reproductions." Unless they load up their calendars with "stunning, high quality lithographic reproductions" and charge well over $100 for them, this is trickery. They probably assume nobody will ever open the mat and that is taking a real risk and jeopardizing their reputation a great deal if you ask me. The site appears legitimate. Do you still have your receipt or any record of the purchase?
Sheesh, they should have used a better glue if they wanted to be sure of getting away with something!! Please let us know how this goes if you decide to pursuit it with them. I think they should be duly embarassed.
Museum Graphics and maybe the Vienna gallery are the ones you will need to contact.
Good luck,
André
I have lots of older calendars of my own photos that I thought would one day find new life as individual matted prints in this same way. I've just never gotten around to doing it. I've actually heard from quite a few customers over the years who told me they've taken photos from my calendars and had them matted and framed.
If you were to buy an AA print matted for $22.50, and hang it on your wall instead of leaning it against the wall, you'd still be enjoying it today, none the wiser of the actual origin of the print. This is just a way to use unsold calendars, and it's a whole lot better than seeing them end up in a landfill. Think about it: You got a matted Ansel Adams print to hang on your wall for a very reasonable price. Next time, pay the $15-$20 for a whole calendar, buy some mats, and then you'll have a whole bunch of AA prints for your wall.
We had a Les Blacklock (sp?) calendar on our kitchen wall every year when I was a kid. I imagine it was litho printed kitsch, but I'd love to have one of those pages matted and framed on my wall now. Looking back, I think those calendars, the Minnesota Conservation Volunteer and, perhaps, a book of Ansel's photographs, were what drove me to try photography.
Pete D.
Thanks for your opinions about it. I will try to strengthen my suspicion that actually the anseladams.og (or com) site is responsible. I will let you know.
Todd, I agree. That sheet is of very thick high-quality paper, the reproduction looks excellent. I guess it is a great basis for making a matted reporduction-print. BUT: If they would advertise it like that: "Buy one of our re-cycled calendar sheets for 22.5 dollars, while we sell our whole calendars for 20$, and help us make some extra cash with our calendars we cannot sell anymore". Add poor production so that the whole thing separates into its parts after two years. The even only used one small piece of adhesive tape to hold the print in place. Not one stripe for every side, no, just one - minimal effort and care.
I simply feel a bit "ripped off". You explanation is the technical rational side. But they advertise the prints not as what they are. and I purchased it with the satisfaction and "proudness" of having bought some high quality matted reproduction, not a calendar-sheet...
Maybe in this case these are the exact same thing? (except for the mat of course) If they use the same stock and printing process (or at least similar quality stock and process) for both, that's really the case.
I understand how disconcerting it is that they could re-use calendar pages like this...I'd probably be upset too, because my gut feeling is that calendars are cheaply done and prints are well done. Maybe that's not the case here?
The real gallery site is run from the company Family Owned and Operated Since 1902 according to the site and the .org site says it's from a business that was co-established by Ansel and Virginia Adams in 1952. The real store has Matthew Adams as a main contact while the .org site has a general box.
One might think that they are separately run and thus the product and quality are going to be very different. So before saying that one company did you wrong by Name before contacting the company you actually delt with would be to set yourself up in a bad light.
It would be like saying you just tasted the worst Beer ever made Naming a tap award winning Brewery and took out a Time Magazine ad about it, when what you really drank was a beer made in your neighbor's bathtub.
You need to be a little more careful when you say you were done wrong by a company and actually Name the company you dealt with, not the one you didn't.
I again compared the two and the Lowest Reproduction price on the Ansel Adams Gallery site is $45.00 US and only an 8 x 10. I'm sure if you bought that print it would be better than any Calendar print made. And the Mounting would be better too.
Another thing to look at. The Anseal Adams Gallery Site is a Top Level Domain and the Other site is Hosted by Yahoo. Does that tell you something? "Is it real, or is it Memorex?"
Buyer Beware, if you want real, buy real, if you want Knock off, buy somewhere else cheaply.
yes, the reproduction is probably good, but it still is no print to sell.
No, I don't believe the AA trust has anything to do with it.
I would tell the westlicht gallery and show them the print, it's practice as this that makes people shy away from buying decorative photography.
and yes, I still believe if you pay just 40 euros for a print, you can't ecpect all too much but a kind of quality poster...
georg
James, I agree, you are right. One should not blame the wrong company here. I changed the title of the post. I will write a mail to the "real" and the org.-site and ask what's the story with the other site to the former and the calendar-recycling to the latter.
Georg - yeah I did not expect to get a high-quality print either, but I simply don't like this strategy.
I agree that in this case, it seems shadier. But logically, if the page is produced in the same manner that a print that size would be, there's really no difference. The big problem is the difference in price - if I paid $30 for a calendar, and chose to frame the pages, no big deal. But if I pay $30 for a print, there's an assumption that something about the print (method, longevity, craftsmanship, etc.) makes it worth as much as 12 calendar pages. I guess in this case that assumption was wrong, which is what leaves me feeling like you got taken.... and that's certainly not a business practice that should be encouraged.