philosophy on leaving your work behind

[shadetree407]

whether leaving the profession (or hobby or passion) of photography,

or writing a will with instructions and intent, what should one do

with their work and their negatives? let's say that it's a rather

substantial amount or good quality work on the order of greater than

10,000 negatives, transparencies, and prints combined...

 

a) give them away

b) destroy them

c) other

 

even the fine artists of the past have varied all over the place on

this one. weston, i think, had his negatives destroyed. adams couldn't

bear to do that and he placed his stuff with a center for creative

photography in an arizona university.

 

what do you think?

[ellis_vener_photography]

<I>weston, I think, had his negatives destroyed.</I><P>It was Cole Weston (I think) who

did

that. Edward Weston certainly did not.<P>

What you decide you want to do depends somewhat on the size and condition of your ego.

Destroying your work, presumes that it has no value without you. Trying to give it away is

both a more ego-less gesture (let someone now find more use for these things) and more

ego-filled ( this work is so precious it needs a permannent home so that my art will have a

kind of immortality!). It is also fraught with the possibility that no one wil lwant it. You are

also leaving out the option that it will have (financial/emotional/historical) value to your

pssible heirs

[jameswages]

Personally I feel that my photos will be revered by my descendants. That is part of what drives me as an artist. To leave behind something tangible and an expression of my time here on Earth, how I saw things , how those things made me feel, how those things shaped who I was.Our time is so short in the scope of all things. As far as your question in general I think it would be best to decide as one hopefully decides on what is to become of their remains after their soul,spirit,essence leaves this plane. It is truly a personal decision to be made known to those who we will leave behind. "Happy shooting today for tomorrow is promised to none".

[rafal_m]

I'm a packrat and can not even think of disposing of any of my originals. I keep everything, even the rolls that have been exposed/developed incorrectly. Each one being a stepping stone towards the future, and it would be a crying shame to dispose of them... Yes, I do have a ton of slides/negatives/prints packed away compromising the structural supports of my apartment. :)

 

Cheers,

 

Rafal

[shadetree407]

so rafal,

 

what will YOU do with your negatives when you die?

eventually, you will have to let go.

[randrew1]

Let's assume you have decided that you have a body of work that is worth saving after you're gone. What preparations do you make to save your collection? Even if the media survives the ravages of time, Your collection wont unless someone takes responsibility for it.

[stephen hazelton]

An elderly lady I knew told me her husband loved to hike through the mountains and take pictures. When he died, she said she just got a big box, put all the pictures in it, and carried it out to the garbage can. So much for photographic immortality.

 

Some photos are of interest for historical reasons, but they don't really become of interest until enough time passes that there aren't many of them left. So you can't just assume your collection will someday be important because of this. (By the same reasoning, every possession you own will eventually become a valuable antique, but you can't expect your relatives to save it all away waiting for that to happen). It will be important IF it survives and most other photos don't. It will be more important if every photo is labeled with time and place, and photos are generally documentary, rather than artistic. Most of us don't do photos like that.

 

Very very few of us are doing photography that is so artistically fine that it needs to survive for a century. If you're not selling photos on a large scale now, don't expect interest to perk up when you're gone. It might, but most likely will work the other way.

 

A large collection of photos is a burden on those that you leave it to. To tell your kids that these photos are the love of your life, your life's work, yada yada yada, and then expect them to be perpetual caretakers of a huge pile of crap that they have no interest in, is a tremendous disservice to them. If they want to save everything you ever owned or touched, great. But try to get across to them that these were important to you because you took them, but that doesn't mean they need to be important to anyone else. If a museum doesn't want them, don't assume that anyone else will, either.

 

I'm not trying to be negative, but just know from my own case, that my kids don't think like me, don't value things I value, etc., and I know this is the case in a lot of families.

 

As far as having work survive, probably best thing you can do is print a FEW of your BEST works, put them in frames or albums, label them as to who did them, when, where, who is in them, etc., and pass those around to different living relatives. In 20 years, some will be in the dump or Goodwill, but maybe some will be valued by people you don't even know. The more you cull your photos and negatives, the more valuable the remaining ones become.

[rdkirk]

If nobody besides myself valued any of my photos now, the chances that anyone would value them after I've died are slight.

 

If I had a handful of excellent photos that were HIGHLY valued by MANY people, the chances that someone will value my lesser photos after my death are somewhat greater.

[randrew1]

There is a great story about the preservation of the Albert Stone collection in Rochester. Stone was a newspaper photographer in the early 20th century. He shot on glass plates, one of the most stable media known. His collection was nearly lost three times. When his employer was bought out by another newspaper, he was told to toss those useless glass plates in the river. Instead, he took them home and put them in his attic. After his death his family was going to toss them, but his granddaughter came to the rescue knowing how important those glass plates had been to her grandfather. When the granddaughter had to move from her home, the plates were almost discarded again. Family members made one last try and got the interest of a local museum. Now these images are available to all of us:

 

http://www.rochester.lib.ny.us/central/imlspr.html

 

How many of us would have a family member as devoted as Albert Stone's granddaughter?

[dickhilker]

For over fifty years as an amateur, I've been giving and selling my work to folks who continue to enjoy it in their homes. I imagine that when the terms of my will become effective, those photos will continue doing what they can to give pleasure and that, so long as they do, they will have lives of their own. Since I have no descendents and my only two living relatives are about my age, my work will have little sentimental value to anyone.

 

Consequently, my only comcern for the future of my negatives and computer files is that they be available as long as I need them. Beyond that, as with everything else temporal, they'll become dust in the winds. If my work is worthy, it will survive as long as there are those who enjoy it and it weathers the ravages of time. Beyond that, it would be presumptuos to assume it deserves immortality.

[daniel_ob]

First:

I hope your whole your body is still above the earth and many moons more will be.

 

Second:

Artist do not produce art. They just work as anyone else and producing as anyone else. Whatever they do is nothing special to them. If they wonder about anything it is why other are so sloppy. It is more common that ?Artist? set a such question, and that is why I wonder that you set it.

What Jesus Christ left behind him himself? And is nothing more than just a God. It is nice if one have time to preserve all. But non should hope it is forever. This planet will be destroyed by the Sun that today means life to us, if do we not make it ourself much earlier. Get the answer from Proverbs in Bible.

We all will get photographed one day from a guy in black suit. What he will do with his neg?

[shadetree407]

> Artist do not produce art. They just work as anyone else and producing as anyone else. Whatever they do is nothing special to them. If they wonder about anything it is why other are so sloppy.

 

 

it was going fine up to that point. then this bible thumper stepped in from the christian chat room. can all that dogma be summed up in a materpiece photograph titled "humanities greatest folly" (now that would be worth preserving for as long as we're still here)... yes, what you have to say is open to debate... but this isn't a religion thread... but there are some personal morals involved in deciding what to do with your work... much of which resides in the land of the ego. maybe it's a good idea just to recycle all that archival matting board and create some fine compost and plant a few trees before ya go. that way, we can sorta pay back for all the resource depletion we collectively have contributed to. wait, this isn't an environmental thread either. ooops. <submit> as is.

[daniel_ob]

I think you are right about that seven trumpets. It is so easy just to quote the Bible. But there is no place to criticize the same, for it is best masterpiece ever made by human kind, source of ideas for so many great artworks as in past same and today. But I make space for your own oppinion. Well it is over you are right.

I think that the best answer, and most honest and useful answer can provide artists that are in such skin, in the stage to look for answer. But many before come to the stage to think about the same are interapted by some angels and taken to the heaven. Just recently had conversation with one "old" gay about his retirement. He complains how he will live on such small money. Today it is fine but what will be the same after 40 years. I guess he has about couple of years more and Charly will ger wings. So where is the day when someone should say: now is the time to preserve all. It is different if someone can say now is time to stop. But when artist stop and getup tomorow what he will to do. Make something. So what is it. Is it not art? for he works on energizer batteries.

But if you think that only high quality should be preserved, I think that your work have no question. Yes it should be preserved for new generations. The only question is who will pay for it. Today just anything is business, even and mariage. If you find no museum to get it right now (because they cannot make enough this moment out of that) find someone, like friend to save it until better time. But I am sure, again, your work have to be preserved.

[shadetree407]

well, as for my initial post, the question said "substantial amount of good quality work"

 

the reason i used those words was that if a person (anyone) has a substabntial amount of work, chances are that they think it's also pretty good quality.... and more importantly, there was a SUBSTANTIAL investment in tim,e and energy to make it all....

 

so having done all that work.... what to do with it all at the end of career or of life.

 

for me, i'm thinking of recycling my stuff in the recycle dumpster that hasn't been given away. i'm not so sure i wish to make many more photos cuz it really does tax our resource base - but i have mixed feelings on that one. i think i have a few more darkroom sessions in me down the road.

[daniel_ob]

Coyote

I do not like your question. It smells me bad. Why you are interesting in that matter?

[shadetree407]

ehhh?

[jeffrey_blake_adams]

If you feel they are of importance, either set up a foundation to preserve and share them in perpetuity, or donate them to a college like Ansel did. Jeffrey

[daniel_ob]

If you depost all your work into basement of any museum is it preserved because thay will sometimes restore it and make couple of times exhibition. They runs to make money too.

I think the best way to preserve work is a book. Good one can survive selling, and library expose it to anyone and also restore 'em too. To prepare a book one need to work 4 hours a day might be in two years you look for a publisher, or print it yourself (4 cents a page on the best paper). Looking at your pictures I will buy such a book. I never met AAdams or his original print, but I know so many things about him and I learned so many things from him too. How? from his books. And many around world can say the same story. How many went to moma or washington to see his prints.

Might I am wrong but just got an idea.

To extend moons the perfect way is 35 mm camera, walk, walk, walk, walk, be happy, no stress, eat fruit, proper sleep. So many photogs extended to 80-90 and stiil had a camera in hand.

[byronlawrence]

YOu know I have considered that IF I am ever good at this photography thing and people consider me great, then I have wondered if it might be more beneficial to have x number of archival prints made of my good work and then destroy any negatives.. etc, so that they are one of a kind peices... like paintings. :) the value will go up. if anybody values them that much in the first place.

 

on the other hand for documentary work of my life that will be viewed by generations of my family in the future (hopefully); one copy will be just wrong. I love looking at old photos of my grand parents and great grand parents.

[lee_shively]

My family thinks I'm eccentric because I take pictures of "strange" subjects in black and white and spend time in the dark with foul-smelling chemicals. Many of my friends think I should sell my pictures instead of giving them away or keeping them stored away. Maybe they're all right. But since I do photography for my own enjoyment and fulfillment, screw it...who cares?

 

Once, in my youth, I lived in a cheap apartment that sprang a leak in the roof one day when I was away. The leak was directly over the boxes where I had stored several months worth of negatives and prints. I lost maybe 8-9 months of my photographic life. I tossed the whole mess away and never thought about it again until I read this post.

 

I've had to clean house several times in my life. I've had to toss out stuff that was important to me at one time to make room for those things that were becoming important. I've had to empty a couple of houses of deceased relatives after they passed on. I understand how little most things actually mean.

 

Essentially, I don't think there's anyone other than myself who cares very much about my photography. If anyone does value it after I'm gone, that's for them to decide. As for me and most of us non-famous photographers, it's just gonna be another house-cleaning someone will have to do.

[wigwam jones]

A) I do not intend to die.

 

B) If I should happen to die for some reason beyond my control, I fully believe that this illusion I call 'life' will cease to exist as well.

 

C) I therefore do not care what happens to my work if I am not around to be lauded for having produced it.

 

Best,

 

Wiggy

[twmeyer]

Brett, not Cole... t

[erin.e]

Stephen H made a pretty succinct answer to the posters question that I am in entire agreement with.

[roger_hicks1]

Dear Lost Coyote,

 

Not my problem. My executor knows what's here (including some of her grandfather's pictures too). What she does with them won't affect me. My guess is that she'll keep a small amount that she likes and float-test the rest. We've never even discussed it. Why worry?

 

Cheers,

 

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

[blowingsky]

Any photograph should be taken "for blood". It should have a mission, and meaning and there should be an intention that this photograph be seen, be a communication to another and in some way change them. Therefore, your photographs should have a life while you are alive and already be forwarded by others. In such a case, someone will want the source files and perhaps the relevance of what you did will grown beyond the times you did it in.

 

However, if your photography is simply equipment fondle or technical rendering for its own sake, or you didn't put a piece of yourself inside the frame then when you are talking about enduring value, what you have is a variation on the theme of a snapshot of Aunt Edna in front of the Grand Canyon and you should throw out the slides, negs and prints in your own lifetime. (psst!:they are getting in your way!). Now would be a good time.

 

I'm talking philosophically here and it is not intended as a criticism of anyone on the thread.