150 year old print of slave children found in attic and sells for $30,000

Derek Lofgreen · Jun 11, 2010

I can't imagine them finding too many prints with this historic significance 150 years from now, considering most people shooting digital don't print. Something seeming so ordinary at the time might just be deleted never to be seen again.

link to story here...

TimmyMac · Jun 11, 2010

Nice find. That's amazing.

mr rusty · Jun 11, 2010

Except it ain't the only one. Look here

Dead Link Removed

interesting that this report

Dead Link Removed

says it sold for $30,000!

Mainecoonmaniac · Jun 11, 2010

Amazing photos, but those poor kids eyes seem to show resignation. So I'm wondering if the photo is considered an art piece or a piece of ethnography?

cowanw · Jun 11, 2010

By Wilson or Brady, that is the 30,000 dollar question.

ic-racer · Jun 11, 2010

Purchase by Keya Morgan, a "noted scholar, historian, and entrepreneur."
I suspect the image was purchased for anticipated resale value.

A 'real' Brady they have. No price listed. The "Brady" lettering does look similar.

ic-racer · Jun 11, 2010

cowanw said:
By Wilson or Brady, that is the 30,000 dollar question.

Picture in question from e-bay said to be a Wilson:

Original Wilson from National Archives (front and back):

ic-racer · Jun 11, 2010

cowanw said:
By Wilson or Brady, that is the 30,000 dollar question.

Or a Brady?? Here is the $30,000 "find":

And a real Brady:

ic-racer · Jun 11, 2010

My own personal and biased opinion. The "Brady" is a fake.

1) Why fake a Wilson? No monetary gain.
2) You can't fake a stereo photograph, but you can easily take one of the stereo images as a non-stereo. (that is a real stereo pair).

cowanw · Jun 11, 2010

Brady, as well as all the other commercial photographers of the day, thought nothing of copying another's print and putting thier own name on it.

John Koehrer · Jun 11, 2010

curiouser and curiouser ain't it? Same kids & background but a narrower frame. Did Brady's studio copy Wilson's work?

ic-racer · Jun 11, 2010

cowanw said:
Brady, as well as all the other commercial photographers of the day, thought nothing of copying another's print and putting thier own name on it.

Rhetorical question, so if it were faked by Brady's gang for Brady is it still an original Brady...?

I guess years from now historians will be trying to figure out "is it Richard Prince or Jim Krantz?" whenever someone finds an old cigarette ad in the attic...

ic-racer · Jun 11, 2010

In keeping with true internet speculation and non-substantiated opinion, I wonder who got the $30,000, the deceased owner??

New York collector Keya Morgan said he paid $30,000 for the photo album including the photo of the young boys and several family pictures and $20,000 for the sale document. Morgan said the deceased owner of the home where the photo was found was thought to be a descendant of John [boy in picture?].

And why fake a sale? Well, maybe a museum would pay you what you have invested in a piece:

Morgan said, he is keeping the photo in his personal collection, but he said he has had an inquiry to sell the photo to the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

150 year old print of slave children found in attic and sells for $30,000

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency