Posted by Erik Aagaard on July 27, 2010 at 2:03 PM
Yeah, I saw that as well. You still couldn't pay me to go to a garage sale - I don't have the patience to dig through all that stuff. What a find, though!!
I once found an original Todd Caudle book at a garage sale. No wait, I was SELLING one at a garage sale, my mistake.......
Just plain incredible if they turn out to be real, looks like Adam's grandson is disputing it a bit according to the article. But still imagine coming across those if so. Just holding original "lost" Adam's negs would be enough for me! (OK, I'd take the 200mil if I had to!)
Posted by Erik Aagaard on July 27, 2010 at 8:20 PM
I have to admit that his grandson makes a pretty persuasive argument. And as for valuation - while I disagree with his implication that the prints should be worth more than the negative, that averages $3.28 million per negative. Even Ansel Adams had to have a fair ratio of duds to keepers. It will be interesting to follow this story and see what, um, develops.
Another look at the same story. The way this guy who has them keeps pushing, the more it looks like the Adam's estate could nail him for using Adam's name. It will definitely be interesting to see how this plays out.
Posted by Grant Collier on July 28, 2010 at 12:27 AM
I think it's unfortunate that the Adams estate is trying to obstruct things as much as they are. If they are newly uncovered Adam's negatives, they should embrace this and be glad these photos were finally found. Rather, they simply don't want anyone else profiting off of Adam's photos. They've filed lawsuits that had little legal basis in the past just to try to intimidate people from legally using photos by Adams that were not the property of the trust. That's why I'm skeptical of their claims. If they had uncovered the images themselves, you can bet they would be saying they were legit and selling them. To sue this guy for commercially profiting from selling these images is, IMO, silly. Everyone who's ever sold a painting of any worth used that painter's name to profit from it. So to say this guy can't say they're Adam's images when selling them even after he had them authenticated is, I think, very questionable.
After the fire, Adams kept his negatives in a San Francisco vault. So, I can understand why the Adams estate is skeptical that he could have lost track of such a large batch. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Getting the press to pick up on that $200 million "estimate" is certainly a stroke of PR genius, especially since the finder is now ready to market them.
I find that number to be extremely unlikely. From my understanding, Adam's earlier work is generally considered to be less desirable compared to his later work. And since the printing is extremely important to the completion of his vision, these should probably be valued like sketches compared to master paintings. Further, if these were images from Ansel's catalog that he never chose to print, I would find it highly unlikely that these would be cataloged with his master works.
I've certainly made some good purchases at garage sales and flea markets (like my excellent condition first edition copy of In Wildness bought for $1), but I think a $200M estimate is gross over valuation of this work even if it can be attributed to Ansel Adams.
Discussion
14 replieshttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/27/national/main6717771.shtml
Only for others and well after you are gone.
Just plain incredible if they turn out to be real, looks like Adam's grandson is disputing it a bit according to the article. But still imagine coming across those if so. Just holding original "lost" Adam's negs would be enough for me! (OK, I'd take the 200mil if I had to!)
Adam's Negatives Story
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/blog_index.html
After the fire, Adams kept his negatives in a San Francisco vault. So, I can understand why the Adams estate is skeptical that he could have lost track of such a large batch. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Getting the press to pick up on that $200 million "estimate" is certainly a stroke of PR genius, especially since the finder is now ready to market them.
I've certainly made some good purchases at garage sales and flea markets (like my excellent condition first edition copy of In Wildness bought for $1), but I think a $200M estimate is gross over valuation of this work even if it can be attributed to Ansel Adams.
Uncle Earl not Adams?
http://www.ktvu.com/news/24432262/detail.html
Link from TOP for a story yesterday from KTVU.
"Adams" Negatives