Supposed Ansel Adams Negs Found at a Garage Sale

[apeter]

Be The First To See Never Before Seen Images Created By Ansel Adams

Working with a Panel of Experts, we have confirmed that 65 glass negatives found at a garage sale were created by Ansel Adams early in his career. The formal results will be released on Tuesday, July 27 at the David Streets Gallery in Beverly Hills. We will also post the formal report here for feedback and comment on Tuesday.

To view 17 of these never before seen images visit before the media:

http://www.ricknorsigian.com/norsigian_purchase.html

 

[ic-racer]

Never before seen? How were they validated??

 

[jgcull]

Wow! Very cool!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks I really enjoyed them. They look like AA's early work.

Steve

 

[Jon Shiu]

Nice pictures, but wouldn't the copyright still belong to the photographer/estate?

Jon

 

[Q.G.]

Shouldn't this be in the Classifieds?

(With a large Buyer Beware! notice)

 

[jgcull]

I love "Fisherman's Wharf". Thanks for posting the link!

(I mean, not that I'm going to buy it but I sure am happy to look!)

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Excellent photos! Can't get better than that.

Jeff

 

[magkelly]

As others here have said if these are indeed Ansel Adam's work then they are part of his estate. Whether salvaged or stolen from what was left of his work after the fire it doesn't matter. No bill of sale from Ansel Adams to someone else? Then they obviously left his custody in a way that is questionable I would imagine that this will cause quite a fuss particularly since the intent here is not just to show them as being "like" his work, but to actually sell prints of them as Ansel Adam's work.

This is no different from someone during the 30's and 40's illegally taking a master painting from family that owned it legally then selling it to a museum and making prints sans the family's permission. The people in charge of Adam's estate cannot be happy with this. It doesn't matter if they have been authenticated or not, they've being SOLD as Ansel Adam's work without the permission of his estate which does have the exclusive rights to his work.

Me, I foresee one heck of a lawsuit in the making.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

At those prices, I would much rather buy an authentic work from the hand of an artist, rather than a speculator whose prints are of questionable authenticity and whose goods may be recalled following the outcome of what is certain to be a lawsuit. I could also probably afford a genuine Adams print for what is being asked for a silver gelatin print from one of these negatives.

 

[phaedrus]

There's some music in these pictures, but where's the score?

 

[johnnywalker]

Since the Adams heirs apparently denies that these are Adam's pictures, they would have a hard time claiming copyright.

 

[Q.G.]

Since the Adams heirs apparently denies that these are Adam's pictures, they would have a hard time claiming copyright.

They can perhaps build a case on the fact that they are offered as Adams pictures, no matter whether they are or not?

Anyway, i think that "BUYER BEWARE!" thing i mentioned earlier wasn't a bad idea.
(Nor moving this to the Classifieds, because this isn't about discovering lost pictures, but is no more than a simple attempt to flog pictures.)

 

[andrewkirkby]

At those prices, I would much rather buy an authentic work from the hand of an artist, rather than a speculator whose prints are of questionable authenticity and whose goods may be recalled following the outcome of what is certain to be a lawsuit. I could also probably afford a genuine Adams print for what is being asked for a silver gelatin print from one of these negatives.

+1

$1500 for an inkjet print is a joke.

 

[Ian Grant]

+1

$1500 for an inkjet print is a joke.

+2


They seem rather like negatives Adams wouldn't have wanted to use, (at least those on the page linked to).

There's none that match his better images, and of course the interpretation of the negative was more than half the work to him as well. It's also interesting that none of Adam's assistants who helped him print appear to have been consulted, which leads to asking why not.

These look like expensive inject posters of rejected negatives.

Ian

 

[Stephen Frizza]

I'de like to know who's printing them?

 

[andrewkirkby]

I'de like to know who's printing them?

Jesse Kalisher

 

[Ian Leake]

It's interesting to look carefully at the two images the give on the web site: Norsigian Negative and AA Authenticated Negative. Obviously these were made at different times of the day (the shadows have moved) and from slightly different positions; and obviously the AA composition is better. But it would also appear to me that they were exposed on quite different dates because the snow patterns on the peak in the background appear to be different (at least to my eyes). For example, there are two dots of white snow at the right edge of AA's negative which aren't on the Norsigian one.

 

[Q.G.]

And even if...
Even if the patterns of clouds, vegitation, snow, etc. match, it is no proof that the picture was taken by Adams, and not by someone standing next to him, etcetera.

At best, what authentication can do is say it could be that Adams could have taken the photos.
And as long as we don't know, anything could be.

 

[andrewkirkby]

And even if...
Even if the patterns of clouds, vegitation, snow, etc. match, it is no proof that the picture was taken by Adams, and not by someone standing next to him, etcetera.

At best, what authentication can do is say it could be that Adams could have taken the photos.

If he indeed did take the photographs, then he and his estate holders are the rightful owners of the negatives and associated intellectual property.

 

[Q.G.]

They may be the rightful owners of the copyright, yes. Negatives, no.

 

[andrewkirkby]

They may be the rightful owners of the copyright, yes. Negatives, no.

Depending on whether the negatives were sold or taken unlawfully in the first place.

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

+3

And even if anybody can prove the photos were taken from the same place on the same day, they cannot prove they were taken by the same person.

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

By the way, it's interesting that the OP has not even bothered subscribing to APUG yet.

 

[Q.G.]

The OP isn't interested in joining a discusion group.
Just wanted to post advertisements.

I'm a bit amazed that this hasn't been moved to the Classifieds yet.