- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 14,172
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Arthur - yep. It all depends on the repute on the dealer. I really locked horns with a particular gallery once. They specialized in rare irreplaceable very early photos. The owner contacted me for technical advice. He had just remodeled his storage area with particle board shelving, and wanted to know how to best seal it. I told him he it was a terrible material around photographic prints (it outgases formaldehyde), and that he should replace it as soon as possible with ventilated stainless steel or chrome wire racks. He cussed me out and turned for advice to someone in the British Museum who specializes in marble sculpture restoration, who recommended a particular marble sealant which happens to be high in sulphur - even worse!
A number of people made purchases from him adding up to hundreds of thousands of dollars. The pieces looked good, then when they opened back up their portfolio boxes a few months later, there was no apparent image at all ! Well, that did lead to a series of nasty lawsuits. But it couldn't be classified as fraud, because that was never the intent. It was due to sheer incompetence on the part of this particular dealer and an otherwise highly respected antiquities conservator who knew nothing about photographs per se. And of course, the dealer lost all these lawsuits, and had to refund all the money plus legal expenses.
Art fraud per se is so bad in particular "tourist trap" gallery towns that specialized FBI agents have been stationed there. But only certain states have real teeth when it comes to defining what fraud means. Ignorant or misleading claims about image permanence rarely factors into that, since that kind of issue is almost ubiquitous. More often it's about mass-produced fare being marketed as if original. In one case, a famous seascape painter in France turned out to be an assembly line in Mexico.
NY and CA laws forbid mass-produced photolithographs being sold as real lithographs, although it still happens. "Collectible"
fancy posters which cost $15 wholesale get sold to naive "investors" for four of six thousand dollars apiece, and by the thousands. That's the kind of thing which usually attracts fraud charges. Now even shady galleries are more careful to avoid referring to "investment value", although they have roundabout ways of distinctly implying it.
A number of people made purchases from him adding up to hundreds of thousands of dollars. The pieces looked good, then when they opened back up their portfolio boxes a few months later, there was no apparent image at all ! Well, that did lead to a series of nasty lawsuits. But it couldn't be classified as fraud, because that was never the intent. It was due to sheer incompetence on the part of this particular dealer and an otherwise highly respected antiquities conservator who knew nothing about photographs per se. And of course, the dealer lost all these lawsuits, and had to refund all the money plus legal expenses.
Art fraud per se is so bad in particular "tourist trap" gallery towns that specialized FBI agents have been stationed there. But only certain states have real teeth when it comes to defining what fraud means. Ignorant or misleading claims about image permanence rarely factors into that, since that kind of issue is almost ubiquitous. More often it's about mass-produced fare being marketed as if original. In one case, a famous seascape painter in France turned out to be an assembly line in Mexico.
NY and CA laws forbid mass-produced photolithographs being sold as real lithographs, although it still happens. "Collectible"
fancy posters which cost $15 wholesale get sold to naive "investors" for four of six thousand dollars apiece, and by the thousands. That's the kind of thing which usually attracts fraud charges. Now even shady galleries are more careful to avoid referring to "investment value", although they have roundabout ways of distinctly implying it.
Last edited: