Olditmers... placing your archives with a final repository?

[invisibleflash]

Olditmers...have you tried to place your archives with a final repository upon your demise?

[IanG]

Olditmers...have you tried to place your archives with a final repository upon your demise?

Tht's quite offensive, have you planned for yourself ? Tell us and then some might answer

Ian

[Drew Wiley]

Given the fact that even collections of significant historical interest have trouble finding refuge, and that most museums are already both underfunded and stuffed
to the gills, about the only option left is a significant burial chamber inside a pyramid. Hopefully mine will have a high enough ceiling to entomb my Durst enlargers too.

[Kirk Gittings]

There are a few such here, mainly but not exclusively, the State Photo Archives, who is avidly pursuing noted local fine art and commercial photographers. They have approached me and I am considering it. But I am not ready to hang up my guns yet and have no time or interest to put my archives into some transferable state.

[Drew Wiley]

The wise financial strategy if the IRS might place value on a collection is to designate a certain amount to an institution, analogous to a living trust, effective with
decease. Otherwise, your family might get assessed for the whole collection based upon just a handful of peak sales! It's rare, but has hit certain individuals on
their radar. In the worst cases, some poor widow gets her house seized because some painter suddenly got "discovered" after his death, a painting sold for a ton
of money, and forty are fifty are left at home. The poor dude might not have ever sold one in his own lifetime! Rare, but not impossible. And the widow might
not ever be able to sell the rest of the prints for anything. It could be a fluke sale. Estate planning is always a good idea, and not just a will.

[emh]

In the worst cases, some poor widow gets her house seized because some painter suddenly got "discovered" after his death, a painting sold for a ton
of money, and forty are fifty are left at home. The poor dude might not have ever sold one in his own lifetime! Rare, but not impossible. And the widow might
not ever be able to sell the rest of the prints for anything. It could be a fluke sale.

Can you cite an example where this has happened? Because, it's wrong. If the artist's work was "discovered" after his death, at the time of his death the work had no value. The value of the 40-50 left to his heirs is zero, until he is discovered. Once discovered, his work may go up in value, but would be taxed as capitol gains if/when his heirs make a sale. There's no way the sale of a single piece would result in an assessment which would cause a widow to lose her home.

[MikeH]

This is why, at least in the U.S., it is important to have an appraisal done as of the date of death, shortly thereafter, if your estate is of any size. Having an estate appraised more than several months after DOD is risky. It's the value of your estate on the DOD that matters.

[Doremus Scudder]

I'm with Brett Weston on this one: I'll destroy my negatives before I go. They are of no historic value, the prints are the final product, not the negatives and I don't really want anyone else printing my stuff after I'm gone.

Doremus

[John Layton]

Only two reasons why I'd not follow in Brett W's footsteps. One - if my work would be of any value to my own descendants. And/or two - if my work would be of any value in the context of education. Otherwise...it'll be an evening with a few close friends, great food/music, the requisite bottle of Laphroaig, and a spectacular bonfire!

[mdarnton]

I have a body of work from four years of my life that's historically interesting and have initiated discussion with the appropriate museum to place the negatives there. They already have some of it in another form, as it was originally published, and my negs will fit well with that. The rest of it will presumably end up in the trash.