Ansel Adams Photos Found

[George Stewart]

In a garage sale. They're said to be worth $200M.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/2...ex.html?hpt=C1

[Sascha Welter]

Uhm, how many more threads do we need about this?

[jmooney]

"Norsigian, who has spent the last decade trying to prove the worth of his discovery, is now ready to cash in -- by selling original prints of the photographs to museums and collectors."


Ummmm....unless there is a darkroom with a trap door to the spirit world, I don't see how there are going to be original prints available.

I also think that if AA would have wanted to sell prints from these he would have printed them himself. I know there are things in my files that I'd be happy if they never saw the light of day again.....

Very cool find though and I hope they are able to be properly conserved and studied at some point.

[Brian Ellis]

A bunch of people trying to cash in on Adams name. The dealer who's no doubt going to sell the prints and be paid a commission based on the sales price is also the appraiser. And he puts a very high value on them. What a surprise.

Sorry to be so cynical but I can't imagine how these plates are going to be accepted as Adams' work and prints sold from them to the tune of $200 million when the "experts" who are authenticating them seem to have been hired by the owner of the plates and when others, including IIRC the Adams family, question their authenticity.

[Bill_1856]

"The negative is the score, the print is the performance."
Just as Beethovan's 5th, performed by Spike Jones, would not be particularly valuable, so I presume that the negative plates, even if authentic, are worth more as historical documents than as wall hangings.
I hope they're real.

[Jim Noel]

No matter how much "research" is done on these negatives, there is absolutely no way to prove that they were made by Ansel unless he left a note about it. Even if he was in the location on the day thry were made they could have as easily been made by someone else.

[Eric Woodbury]

If you say it enough times, it must be true.

[neil poulsen]

. . . The dealer who's no doubt going to sell the prints and be paid a commission . . .

Wouldn't the Ansel Adams Trust own the copyright to these plates? Could they both sell the images as being from Ansel Adam's plates, and at the same time, not be free from copyright infringement?

[rdenney]

Wouldn't the Ansel Adams Trust own the copyright to these plates? Could they both sell the images as being from Ansel Adam's plates, and at the same time, not be free from copyright infringement?

No. If they had been printed since the law changed in 1978, then maybe. Before that time, however, photographs (and everything else) did not have copyright protection indefinitely, and not without clear notice of the copyright. And copyrights were issued for one 28-year period that could be renewed once for a second 28-year period. It was quite easy for material to fall into the public domain in those years.

Even now, there is no way to register unknown works. Thus, it would be impossible to register all the works of an artist, known and undiscovered. And given that copyrights must be assigned explicitly in writing when transferred to a new owner, any copyright protection accruing to a work of Adams after 1978 but that remained undiscovered would belong to his descendants, not to his assignee (the AA PRT). But these are plates--they clearly were not created by him after 1978. Works prior to that time had to be marked to be protected by copyright.

Rick "noting that most of AA's most famous works would already be in the public domain under the old law" Denney

[JeffKohn]

Wouldn't the Ansel Adams Trust own the copyright to these plates? Could they both sell the images as being from Ansel Adam's plates, and at the same time, not be free from copyright infringement?

Given the date they were apparently made, that may not be such a clear-cut issue unless the negatives were registered with the copyright office. Copyright protection wasn't automatic back then, and these images may actually be in the public domain.

I think the $20 million appraisal is pretty absurd though. Prints from Ansel's negatives sell through the Ansel trust for as little as $225.00, and that's from negatives that are 100% definitely Ansel's.