|
Re: Ansel Adams Discovery
From: nancy-dooley@uiowa.edu (Nancy2)
On Jul 29, 10:15 am, "Kris Baker" <parallelcoo...@ggmail.com> wrote:
"Nancy2" <nancy-doo...@uiowa.edu> wrote in message
news:c6bc113d-0f5c-471e-9c68-daa336e9a6ea@q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 28, 1:14 pm, "Kris Baker" <parallelcoo...@ggmail.com> wrote:
"Nancy2" <nancy-doo...@uiowa.edu> wrote in message
news:56c0326a-8b78-42bc-95f4-95071cdd25c2@t2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 27, 11:54 am, "F/32 Eurydice" <f32euryd...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Ansel Adams Photographs Bought at Garage Sale Worth $200 Million
Adams' son denies they are Ansel's, even though handwriting experts
and others say they are. Apparently, the owner has been trying to
prove they are Ansel's for a long time.
N.
----------------------------
Obviously, Ansel's son wants to limit the number of "one-off"
prints that are available. The only way that these items are
worth $200 million, are if they're used to produce more prints.
Otherwise, they are glass with images that will deteriorate.
This isn't the end of the story. The claims will go on forever.
I have a glass plate negative from a photographer's studio of me when
I was about 2 years old - that was almost 7 decades ago, and there is
no deterioration.
N.
----------------------------
Shhhh! You want it to deteriorate, in a sort of opposite
Dorian Gray manner ;)
Kris- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
True, true. LOL.
I saw a little headline today implying the glass negs might have been
taken by an uncle ... which would explain two different photographic
mediums taking essentially the same picture at the same time. Ansel
and the "uncle" (his brother?) working together. I didn't read the
article, so am not sure how the "uncle" fits.
N.
|
