To keep or to sell?

[snegron]

I'm curious to know everyone's thoughts on the following concerning keeping or selling equipment handed down by a deceased family member.

For years I have read many posts and advertisements on Craigslist and ebay where the seller lists items indicating that they belonged to his/her father or other family member who passed away. While I am aware that photography equipment can be viewed by some as mere material objects, I also know that others might associate a sentimental value to equipment used to capture extremely important life moments.

Do people hold other tools used to create art in higher esteem than photography equipment? Is there any difference between selling dad's old paintbrushs, easle's, and other materials he used to paint amateur (although very nicely executed) portraits of us as opposed to selling dad's old cameras/lenses he used to capture the most memorable moments of our lives?

I wonder if my children will hold any sentimental value for the Nikon F3HP with 35mm 2.0 AIS I used to capture images of them on the day they were born as well as images captured throughout their childhood? I wonder if they will see the F3HP as just another expensive-looking metal object that might get them a few extra dollars for movie tickets someday, or will they hold on to it to show their children the camera that documented their lives?

What are your thoughts? Do you keep photography equipment handed down to you by family members, or do you sell them first chance you get?

 

[removed account4]

hi snegron

i am kind a skeptical about the ads i read when they say that stuff ..
to be honest, i think a lot of it is a marketing ploy so the potential buyer
thinks differently about the seller or about the stuff being sold.
often times that marketing tactic is used when the seller doesn't want to
accept any responsibility for the things being sold ...

i use equipment that was handed down to me.
i am kid of a packrat, but at the same time i feel
a kid of connection with the equipment ( if that makes sense ) ...

john

 

[Vaughn]

Depends if anyone in the family would ever use the equipment...I bet some of the dead, if asked before they died, would rather see the equipment used by somebody (not just family) rather than stored in a box.

Personally, I would keep equipment passed on down, hoping to be able to use them someday.

Vaughn

 

[bsdunek]

I do have some of my Dad's things just to keep his memory close. His Olympus XK is a common carried camera. Not in the same vein, I use his Schaffer pen and pencil set every day, and carry his pocket knife.

I've got a few of his things in the darkroom too. I gave my son his OM-1 and OM-2 set of equipment, and he likes using it also.

I could go on, but I won't.

 

[snegron]

hi snegron

i am kind a skeptical about the ads i read when they say that stuff ..
to be honest, i think a lot of it is a marketing ploy so the potential buyer
thinks differently about the seller or about the stuff being sold.
often times that marketing tactic is used when the seller doesn't want to
accept any responsibility for the things being sold ...

i use equipment that was handed down to me.
i am kid of a packrat, but at the same time i feel
a kid of connection with the equipment ( if that makes sense ) ...

john

Makes perfect sense to me! There has always been a unique relationship between an artist and his tools. I view equipment handed down to me as tools that have chosen me instead of tools that I have chosen to buy!

 

[MattKing]

I recently purchased a number of darkroom and slide projection related items from a gentleman who posted on Craigslist. As it turned out, they were from his father-in-law, who sadly was suffering from dementia, and would never again be able to enjoy using them. The gentleman who sold them to me made it clear, however, that he was most interested in making sure that he sold them to someone who would make sure that they would be used, rather than just re-sold.

I passed a couple of items to someone else on APUG who wants to try something new, and the rest I'm either using now, or will use soon.

Matt

 

[mark]

I know I will cherish my dad's cameras when he goes, unless the booger sells them to buy more digital stuff. I have my father-in-law's camera set up and, while I don't shoot it it is a nice thing to have. His camera was with him whenever we went out bouncing through the southwest. He always complained about how slow my big cameras took to damn long to set up and shoot.

I don't use the camera and I feel guilty not using it. Sentimental value or not, an instrument needs to be played and a camera needs to be used. It will be really hard for me to sell though.

 

[winger]

I have a few of my great-grandfather's cameras. One is a revolving back auto graflex (with a non-working shutter) and two others are Leicas. I had one of the Leicas repaired and it currently has a roll of film in it. If I could fix the graflex, I would - maybe someday.
I would LOVE to have some of grandaddy's negatives, but I have no idea where they are.
Anyway, I'm of the "use it" group. These have enough sentimental value to me that I wouldn't sell them. Other cameras that have been given to me by non-family are fair game, though. I'm not using any of those either (most aren't worth it).

 

[BetterSense]

To me, sentimentality is an indulgence.

One of the reasons Iove film is film cameras. They are made of metal and wood and leather. Like firearms. They are good machines. Beautiful ones. I love my cameras like my OM2 and my Speed graphic, but I shouldn't. They are just tools. But I allow myself to maintain the sentimental appreciation of them. This is art afterall, I'm allowed that.

 

[Q.G.]

Indulgences are what make life worth living. We do not need excuses for wanting to live lives worth living. We all are allowed that. Noone or nothing is allowed to say we shouldn't.

 

[Stan160]

My grandfather was a very keen photographer, two of his cameras were kept by my grandmother (who survived him by 18 years), then passed on, one to my mother and one to her sister. Neither my grandmother, mother, or aunt, used these cameras and kept them purely for sentimental reasons. My mother eventually donated hers to a local museum fund-raising sale, but I'm fortunate enough to have the other one, and will be using it once my back-ordered quarter plate film arrives. Having never known my grandfather, I wouldn't have been interested in the camera as a keepsake if I hadn't intended to use it.

On the other hand, my father has already given me the FED-2 that he documented my early years and family holidays with, and one day, hopefully a long way off yet, I plan to keep his Gnome slide projector and boxes of Kodachromes that were shot with the FED. I don't think it would make a difference if I was interested in photography or not - the personal connection means I would like to keep these things.

Ian

 

[benjiboy]

My children, although they haven't the slightest interest in photography, say they would never sell my cameras and lenses when I die, because they say the're a part of who I am, or was.
I still have and use regularly a set of woodwork tools that belonged to a much loved uncle, who was a coachbuilder ( no not stagecoaches, I'm old, but not that old) he built cars, and buses in the 1940s and 50s and often think of him with when I use them.

 

[IloveTLRs]

My grandfather was heavy into cameras for most of his life, unfortunately I wasn't able to get any of the before greedy relatives sold them off

My mother gave me her Rollei 35 saying I could sell it if I want, but I won't.

 

[mablo]

My father gave me his Rolleicord when he didn't use it anymore. He had bought it new in the fifties and all childhood photos of me are taken with it. I'm kind of paying back now when I'm taking photos of my old father with it. I would never sell his camera.

 

[Fotoguy20d]

I'll start by saying that I still have my grandfather's Leica IIIc and Ihagee parvola although I haven't used in either in quite a while. They aren't for sale, they never will be - for me they're mementos - those cameras held particular value (not monetary) and memories for my grandfather - he gave them to me knowing I would enjoy owning them and using them. While I'd perhpas like to use them more they only come out of their cases once in a while. The Parvola because it's not a great camera and 127 film is hard to come by. The Leica because the covering is cracked on one side and I don't want it to come off altogether.

Someday I'll make sure my son knows why those cameras are special where all the other vintage cameras I own (Graflexes, another IIIc, etc) aren't. For the same reason, I hold onto my first SLR, a used Canon A-1, which replaced the IIIc as my everyday camera around 20 years ago - maybe someday he'll want it as a keepsake.

But that's me. Not everyone holds "things" in particular esteem. Not everyone's a packrat. So, I can see someone's perspective in letting a potentially valuable item go.

 

[colrehogan]

I have a number of old cameras which belonged to my father and grandmother. I have used most of them,and have a roll ready to go through grandma's Conley Junior (I forget the exact model, it takes 122 film) and probably a roll to go through her Brownie. When dad did her estate sale (his hobby was auctioneering) when she moved in with them, that was so hard for everyone. She and I had talked about the cameras and I wasn't about to let some stranger buy them. I don't think that she had kept any of the negatives and I never recalled seeing any of the prints, but I know that she used them to take photos of the family (long before I was born).

 

[Anscojohn]

To me, sentimentality is an indulgence.

But I allow myself to maintain the sentimental appreciation of them. This is art afterall, I'm allowed that.

*********
Bethe and BetterSense have expressed my thoughts. I really like the machinery; I like the sentiment, also. I have my Dad's Argoflex--see my avatar, one 8x10 Burke and James stainless steel tray, his print roller and his developer funnel.
Plus this one: my closest friend (who died in 1989) was coming from Okinawa and had a virtually new Yashica 12 TLR. He said he wanted to sell it and, with me standing there, my Dad chimed in first "I;ll buy it." I was miffed.
When Dad died, and I was sorting through his stuff, I found the Yashica 12, probably never used--with a corroded battery terminal and all. I sent it to Mark Hamma who repaired it. That camera, with sentiment attached to a pair of important guys, is one I use and shall not sell.

 

[Steve Smith]

I inherited my father's camera collection earlier this year. Although the thirty cameras are going to stay in their cabinets at my mother's house, I will take them out and use them.

I could never think of selling any of them.


Steve.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I also inherited my father's camera collection and uncle's camera. Rather small collection but still nice cameras none the less. When I pass away I hope someone gets them and appreciate them.

Jeff

 

[Joe Lipka]

I have my Dad's Argus C-44 and a Kodak 8 mm Brownie camera on the top shelf of our bedroom closet. Haven't been used in decades and probably will never be used again. I just can't bear to part with them.

But the big question to be asked, is what have you done (or not done) with non-family photographs accumulated over the ages? It is conceivable that a family might have as many as three or four generations of family snapshot albums. It's also conceivable that their might be three or four generations of photographers that made more than family snapshots. What's been done with those photographs.

I think we share an interest in camera gear passed down from generation to generation, but what about the photographs made with those cameras?

Hope this isn't too much of a thread hi-jack.

 

[cmotta]

I recently sold a Polaroid Pathfinder Land Camera 110a for $80 on Apug. The camera was in excellent shape, it belonged to my grandfather, who I incidentally had never met, he died well before I was born. I am the only one of my siblings who has interest in photography, so I acquired the camera by default. For me the $80 is much more valuable than a camera that is unusable without some type of conversion, where even when converted is not consistent with the type of photographic work I am doing right now. If I wish to shoot with a land camera in the future, I'll track down a converted model and buy it. It won't be my grandfather's, but for now from a nostalgic stand point I could consider the $80 a gift from my late grandfather. I have old negatives that were made by family members, along with old pictures, to me those are the memories that I would fight to safeguard.
On the other hand my Mother, still living, has given me her old FM Nikon 35 with an F series 50 1.4, and an Md-12. Really cool old nikon 35, works fine, decent shape. I could sell it, but it's worth more to me than the $100/200 I might get for it. And not so much because it's her camera, and I see her in it, well kind of, but more because I can still use it. I'm not sure that I would keep it, if it didn't have utility for me. And if I did hold onto it for sentimental value, it would be most relevant because of my passion for picture making. I don't imagine that I would keep old brushes and an easel, maybe I would, but I'm not a painter and so the painting tools simply wouldn't hold the same value for me. I'm not a camera collector, more interested in making pictures. Photographs/negatives on the other hand, that's a different story, those I feel are cultural artifacts and worth preserving.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I inherited my father's Mamiya C-330. It had not been used for ten years and needed a CLA. He loved the camera. I never liked the camera, but I used it for 10 to 20 rolls of film in two months. I just did not like the camera so I sold it with all the lenses, prism and paraminder to Samys who would sell it to someone who would love it and use it. I used the money to buy a Hasselblad. Everyone wins.

Steve

 

[snegron]

But the big question to be asked, is what have you done (or not done) with non-family photographs accumulated over the ages? It is conceivable that a family might have as many as three or four generations of family snapshot albums. It's also conceivable that their might be three or four generations of photographers that made more than family snapshots. What's been done with those photographs.

I think we share an interest in camera gear passed down from generation to generation, but what about the photographs made with those cameras?

Hope this isn't too much of a thread hi-jack.

This is a project I have been attempting to start for some time now. I have several boxes of albums and loose pictures that belonged to my grandmother. I have been meaning to scan them all and correct the faded colors on some of them before they are lost completely. My scanner broke last year and I have been looking into getting another one.

I also found my old high school yearbook with all the black and white negatives I shot when I was yearbook photographer (a tad bit over 26 years ago)! Many of these images were never printed. Interesting thing is that I checked my old high school's homepage and it has photographs of every year except for the year I graduated! I tried contacting the person in charge of the website to inform her that I had dozens of negatives that showed students in every day life from that year and would donate them to her for free, but she never bothered to reply. I do plan on scanning them (as well as my old family pics) as soon as I buy a new scanner.

I hope that the images I scan will bring back memories to friends and family members and give a glimpse to my kids of what life was like when dad was a kid!

 

[2F/2F]

When my dad died, I inherited everything. I am STILL sorting through it.

Some of what he left was a treasure trove of musical instruments. The gems include a 1927 Martin 00-28K2 guitar (of which there were five produced per year for a relatively short period), a '68 SG (which is not particularly valuable except in the sense that it is a fine, fine instrument with perhaps the fastest neck I have ever played, and was one of his only guitars for most of his life, so has sentimental value), a '68 ES-330, a Fender Esquire, and various other excellent and/or sentimental instruments. These I will always keep. However, I am not a professional guitar player. My main instrument is the bass. I don't need 30 guitars and 10 amps. So, over the years, I have gradually stripped down the pile of musical instruments and converted them in to photography equipment, which I will actually use. I don't feel bad about doing this at all. It is practical for me. It reduces clutter and the number of unused items in my life. I will keep what is really important to me, but it is important not to have too many emotional ties to things, in my opinion.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I have my dad's AE-1 which I will always treasure but if he had my grandfathers camera to hand down I would be downright thrilled.