Steve M.
Veteran
I think it's a scam. Here's an interesting link in the frisco paper on it.
http://cbs5.com/local/anesl.adams.negatives.2.1829597.html
Oops, I see I've duped dcsang's post.
http://cbs5.com/local/anesl.adams.negatives.2.1829597.html
Oops, I see I've duped dcsang's post.
PKR
Veteran
It is beginning to look a little "fishy". I didn't know this thing had been going on for 10 years. For a guy who doesn't know the photo-art world, he seems convinced. i wonder how much money he has invested in "art experts" and "legal experts".
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
There could be a couple of things at work here.
You know how easy it is when you've got an idea, to eagerly seize on any and every piece of information that seems to validate the point of view you've adopted, and to dismiss or somehow devalue anything that supports a contrary position?
And consider the amount of money and organisation that's obviously behind this now. And the fact that the promoter is a district school painter - is it his money or is someone else providing the funds and marketing?
And then this piece out of the newspaper report:-
Quote:For years, he tried to get them officially verified, taking them to experts at the Smithsonian Institution, the Getty Center and others, but no one would venture to authenticate them.
Three years ago, he met Beverly Hills entertainment lawyer Peter, who assembled a team of experts to review the negatives. Unquote:
An "entertainment lawyer" was able to assemble a team of "experts" who are able to do what the Smithsonian and others would not? Just run that past me again.
To me it's starting to sound like there's a mixture of obsession and contingency funding by a group of investors lined up by the "entertainment lawyer" who have found some less recognised but willing "experts" to provide some basis of authenticity. It even makes me wonder if the "experts" aren't also in on the contingency arrangement. Like, if this thing flies you'll each get a percentage but if it falls over then you'll get travel expenses only. Or something like that arrangement.
You know how easy it is when you've got an idea, to eagerly seize on any and every piece of information that seems to validate the point of view you've adopted, and to dismiss or somehow devalue anything that supports a contrary position?
And consider the amount of money and organisation that's obviously behind this now. And the fact that the promoter is a district school painter - is it his money or is someone else providing the funds and marketing?
And then this piece out of the newspaper report:-
Quote:For years, he tried to get them officially verified, taking them to experts at the Smithsonian Institution, the Getty Center and others, but no one would venture to authenticate them.
Three years ago, he met Beverly Hills entertainment lawyer Peter, who assembled a team of experts to review the negatives. Unquote:
An "entertainment lawyer" was able to assemble a team of "experts" who are able to do what the Smithsonian and others would not? Just run that past me again.
To me it's starting to sound like there's a mixture of obsession and contingency funding by a group of investors lined up by the "entertainment lawyer" who have found some less recognised but willing "experts" to provide some basis of authenticity. It even makes me wonder if the "experts" aren't also in on the contingency arrangement. Like, if this thing flies you'll each get a percentage but if it falls over then you'll get travel expenses only. Or something like that arrangement.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Adams now, Capa before, anybody know of any other reputable photographers with disputes about their work's authenticity? I like reading a bit of boulevard press on photography now and then, keepin' it light 
Finder
Veteran
The Exif data should clear it up.
PKR
Veteran
After visiting the site selling these photos, I agree with you. This is likely an organized effort with serious backing. The plot sickens..
Andy Kibber
Well-known
Seems the owner of the negatives may have a Catch-22 on his hands. If the negatives are indeed Adams', I assume Adams' estate still owns the copyright. If that's the case, the owner of the negatives could look at them or sell the negatives to someone but he couldn't make prints from them.
This whole thing is very strange.
This whole thing is very strange.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
As old as they are, copyright has long since expired. Remember that copyright was only 17 years on work back then, which is why you can buy cheaply made books of Ansel's photos made without authorization of his family today.
Andy Kibber
Well-known
Oh! I wasn't aware that the limit was that short. I was thinking life of the author plus 50 years or something similar. Makes sense that all involved wouldn't have missed something so obvious.
_mark__
Well-known
The knives are out!
Sparrow
Veteran
_mark__
Well-known
A situation that should be celebrated, the discovery of lost work from a master photographer, is met with greed and hostility! It actually saddens me.
Andy Kibber
Well-known
I think the issue is whether or not the lost work is from a master photographer.
Pico
-
New information suggests that they are not his prints. For one, the notes written on the plate envelopes have misspellings of places that would be perfectly familiar to any educated person who lived there most of his/her life.
antiquark
Derek Ross
The guy is already selling prints of the negatives: http://www.ricknorsigian.com/ .
The horizon is crooked in many of the shots, you would figure that a master of composition would at least get the horizon level: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/38432829/ns/today-entertainment/
My theory: the photos were taken by his students during a field trip.
The horizon is crooked in many of the shots, you would figure that a master of composition would at least get the horizon level: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/38432829/ns/today-entertainment/
My theory: the photos were taken by his students during a field trip.
antiquark
Derek Ross
The pics aren't any good either. For example, look at this one:
It's a piece of junk! To be specific:
- It's tilted.
- The verticals are converging (something that's easily fixed with a view camera, if you know what you're doing).
- There's a bunch of scrubby lawn and shrubberies at the bottom. Not exactly an Adams trademark.
- The church is precisely centered in the picture, resulting in a featureless pile of visual junk along the right side of the image.
- The lighting is crap.
- A good 33% of the image is blown featureless sky. The photographer should have walked a little closer.
It's a piece of junk! To be specific:
- It's tilted.
- The verticals are converging (something that's easily fixed with a view camera, if you know what you're doing).
- There's a bunch of scrubby lawn and shrubberies at the bottom. Not exactly an Adams trademark.
- The church is precisely centered in the picture, resulting in a featureless pile of visual junk along the right side of the image.
- The lighting is crap.
- A good 33% of the image is blown featureless sky. The photographer should have walked a little closer.
Attachments
ampguy
Veteran
perhaps these were taken by his wife, when he went off to go to the bathroom ...
dseelig
David
This is all about the money. If they are authentic the Adams people make less selling thier own ink jet reprints of Adams work.
Pico
-
The report from Norsigian's hired experts here:
http://www.digoliardi.net/Final_Report_AP_072610.pdf
(It has apparently been recently removed from Norsigian's web site, perhaps for revision or just by accident.)
http://www.digoliardi.net/Final_Report_AP_072610.pdf
(It has apparently been recently removed from Norsigian's web site, perhaps for revision or just by accident.)
ampguy
Veteran
Before this, I've never heard or seen Yosemite's Bridalveil fall spelled as two words. It is spelled that way in the PDF, and apparently on the negative labels. interesting ...
