Ansell (sic) Adam's (sic) at yard sale!

[wogears]

Can you bleeping believe THIS?

 

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.html?hpt=C1

[ridder]

<p>Yes.... i can. :-)</p>

[richsimmons]

<p>One man's garbage is another man's fortune...</p>

[adamhenry]

<p>Just read on Yahoo. Wow, this Ansel Adams character must have been really famous. I think I might have heard his name mentioned before. Now I can see why.</p>

[fullmetalphotograper]

<p>I had the opportunity to photograph and do video of the negatives being authenticated. Well here is the follow up to it. and a link to the story. http://www.businessstreetonline.com/news.php?ax=v&n=1&id=2&nid=2226</p>

<p>One thing do love about doing photojournalism is getting to see history.</p>

<p><a title="FlickrAnselAdamsNegs16101609 by FullMetalPhotographer, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2671/4017432505_43d5211d6f.jpg" alt="FlickrAnselAdamsNegs16101609" width="500" height="382" /></a></p>

<p><strong>Rick Norsigian holds up one of the 60 glass negatives he purchased at a yard sale in Fresno in 2000. The negatives are believed to be the work of famed photographer Ansel Adams.</strong></p>

<p> </p>

[wogears]

<p>Very cool, Ralph!</p>

[justine_k]

<p>But the grandson says no?<br>

<a href="http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/matthew-adams-doubts-lost-negatives-are-grandfather-ansel-adams-works/19570601?icid=main|htmlws-main-n|dl1|link1|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fnation%2Farticle%2Fmatthew-adams-doubts-lost-negatives-are-grandfather-ansel-adams-works%2F19570601">http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/matthew-adams-doubts-lost-negatives-are-grandfather-ansel-adams-works/19570601?icid=main|htmlws-main-n|dl1|link1|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fnation%2Farticle%2Fmatthew-adams-doubts-lost-negatives-are-grandfather-ansel-adams-works%2F19570601</a></p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>I am suspicious. Of course it could be true - that is not the question, though. But something is fishy. More investigation is necessary but 'authentication' has been shown to be way off in the past. Hitler Diaries, anyone?</p>

[william_burn]

<p><a href="http://theanseladamsgallery.blogspot.com/2010/07/response-to-july-27-2010-article.html">Here's</a> the Ansel Adams Gallery blog post on the subject. Well worth reading. </p>

[kfrog]

<p>Seems the Adams family is not too keen on the idea that these are Ansel originals.</p>

[mike_godwin1]

<p>Some updated news:</p>

<p>http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/celebrity.news.gossip/07/29/ansel.adams.alternatives/index.html?hpt=C1</p>

<p> </p>

[billy_xow]

<p>A really good NPR listen on the subject with comments on if it's going to sell for that much.<br>

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128828530</p>

[johne37179]

<p>I think it is highly unlikely that these are Ansel's work. I worked with Ansel in the late '60s. Ansel wa a meticulous note taker. He had built a custom lamp house for his enlarger with a grid of lamps, each on a rheostat. He removed the condenser and instead of burning or dodging on the print, he would set the rheostat over each portion of the neg to accomplish the same thing. Each on of Ansel's negs had notes as to the rheostat settings for than negative.It accomplished two things. It made it possible to reproduce multiple prints that were alike -- and because of the arthritis in his hands, it enabled his assistant to make 'original; prints -- just as he would have. The notes are as important as the negs and were never separated from them. To find a pile of negs without the notes is highly unlikely.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>John, that custom enlarger lamp technique sounds fascinating. Do you know of any photo illustrations or sketches of that enlarger? I'm wondering whether that trick could be adapted to use with LEDs.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm wondering whether that trick could be adapted to use with LEDs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Having recently converted a DeVere54 enlarger to a multi LED light source, I would say yes.</p>

<p>(Details of my conversion can be found on APUG if anyone is interested).</p>

[billy_xow]

<p>Hey John.<br>

I'm wondering, let's assume it is one of Ansel's original negatives, do you think the negatives would be worth 200 million. As you mentioned, Ansel Adams was vicious in details when making his prints so the money comes from the process as a whole - buyers are not just buying a picture, they are buying a picture made through skillful hands in the darkroom. And by someone selling just the negative, it's one step above selling an artist's paintbrush?</p>

<p>Just curious to hear your thoughts</p>

 

[johne37179]

<p>Ansel made very little money from his prints. Their value appreciated greatly after his death. In the '60s when I was with him in Yosemite you could buy an 8x10 for $10 and a 16x20 for $80 to $100. It would have been a great investment. Since it is unlikely you could make a duplicate of one of his prints from the negs without his enlarger and his notes, the negs, if his, would have intrinsic historic value, but would not be worth much for making copies of his work.</p>

[billy_xow]

<p>New developments. Negatives belong to Earl Brooks (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2010/08/ansel-adams-photographs.html)</p>

<p>(btw, I was watching TV when the commercial for the local news came up, "startling developments about the Ansel Adams negatives found, find at more at 11."</p>

<p>Oh look, I have this thing called the internet. I think I can search for news on there.)</p>