You can be sure that if he left it to a commercial enterprise, they would follow these things and try to make money from them creating much more notoriety and distribution to the world and people who would like to have samples of his work hanging in their homes
Let's assume he didn't make the decision in the dark. He likely discussed it with his family. Perhaps his children are secure enough to not need whatever limited amount of income his work is likely to generate in the future. Unlike Vivian Maier, he is established and doesn't have an interesting story to fuel the production and purchase of 20 million coffee table books. He probably expects that being responsible for his archive would be more of a headache than it's worth. And likely his kids already have their own lives and don't need the added responsibility. You can't make money from an archive unless you actually push it.
Really? How many people do you know who buy original prints by the great photographers to hang them in their home—apart form the traditional Ansel Adams Yosemite calendar, that is? I don't know any. I don't, and I love photography. I much prefer spending on a well-done, well-printed exhibition catalog from a museum that owns the prints or negs and whose mandate is to reproduce them perfectly and faithfully. That's how museums contribute to people appreciating and enjoying photography at home.
He couldn't find anyone who felt they could make enough money to do all the associate work.
five dealers were selling Adams's prints for $100,000 or so. Lot's of people would like to hang his work on their walls.
Magnum represents photographers in life and afterward. I assume there are arrangements made that profits of some amount goes to their estate. Do you think the museum has a greater interest in distribution than Magnum? I'm sure there are others like them. Not every photographer can get into Magnum.As I said, it's not about the prints, it's about the negs. Museums are already equipped to preserve them forever in perfect condition. There isn't a single commercial enterprise that is. The cost of doing so would be astronomical and cancel any profit you'd think of making with the sale of prints.
It's not that he couldn't find a commercial enterprise to make a deal with, it's that it never would have crossed his mind—him or any photographer—to do so.
At that price, very few people could. So, basically, you're leaving the enjoyment of photography to an economic elite.
Ansel Adams is the perfect example of all that wrong about this logic. At the end of his life, he became more of a business rather than a photographer. And $100,000 for a print is pretty much a scam.
Interesting passage about all this in Mary Street Alinder's biography of Adams:
"The backbone of the Ansel Adams gallery’s inventory is its special edition prints, or SEPs, a selection of Ansel’s Yosemite images printed by an assistant as a high-quality souvenir. Measuring approximately eight by ten inches, each carries a stamp on the back of the mount identifying it as a Special Edition Print. Up until 1972, Ansel signed all prints and probably made most of them himself.
He shifted to simply initialing them when an assistant began to print all of them from 1972 to 1974. In 1974 he stopped initialing them. SEPs are worth but a fraction of what prints made and signed by Ansel himself bring; when articles appear touting the prices of Ansel’s original prints, many people get excited, mistakenly thinking they own one of these very valuable photographs rather than a much more common SEP.
Each print is made from the original negative. These are not investment pieces but enjoyment photographs. Alan Ross, who served as Ansel’s photographic assistant from 1974 to 1979, has printed all of the SEPs since 1975, a total of many tens of thousands, including some five hundred each year of Moon and Half Dome. This one aspect of the business has grossed impressive amounts."
Why would you deny their families after their death?
Why do you assume that Kenna's family has been denied anything? Where do you get that info?
And again, I'll repeat myself: there is no commercial business that has the means to store and preserve a lifetime of negatives. The cost of setting this up would be astronomical. Ansel Adams is an exception, essentially because the business side of it was set up long before he died.
That was nice of Mr. Kenna to do that.
Maybe I'll leave my archive to him!
Really? How many people do you know who buy original prints by the great photographers to hang them in their home—apart form the traditional Ansel Adams Yosemite calendar, that is? I don't know any. I don't, and I love photography. I much prefer spending on a well-done, well-printed exhibition catalog from a museum that owns the prints or negs and whose mandate is to reproduce them perfectly and faithfully. That's how museums contribute to people appreciating and enjoying photography at home.
It's an ego trip preserving all that Kenna stuff like 150,000 negatives. There are probably no more than 50 pictures that anyone else would want to see mounted on their walls.
I couldn't care less about Ansel Adams prints or calendars.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?