Ansel Adams Fakes

[Jim_5508]

Just a note to caution people that someone is selling Ansel Adams prints on eBay and passing them off as originals. These are actually made from copy negatives he bought on eBay. I won't name names, just be careful...

[Jeffrey Sipress]

If you're sure about what you're saying, why hold back the name? It's a useless warning without it.

[Mark_3632]

Or you could report the fraud. If this is true I am sure those who control the rights to Adams' name and works would be quite interested in it.

[Jim_5508]

The sellers name is ryanmcintoshphotography. You can tell by looking at his bid history that he bought an Ansel Adams copy negative and 2 weeks later turned around and sold an "original" print from the same negative. Amazing how he "just happened" to have an original print lying around which matches this copy negative he bought. Oh yea, print just happened to be unsigned. How convenient.

[Donald Qualls]

Interesting. He's a regular over at APUG. Perhaps you should ask him what he's up to?

[David A. Goldfarb]

A regular also on the Azo forum, too.

[David A. Goldfarb]

It is curious that the seller of the copy neg mentions that he had four more Adams copy negs, and indeed, Ryan sold a total of five Adams prints at around the same time. Another possibility, though, is that these may have been guide prints for repros or offset prints from the copy negs, and they may have come from the same seller, outside of eBay (i.e., after purchasing one copy neg, Ryan may have asked the seller what else he had, and the seller may have only later realized that the prints were from the copy negs). They could also have been produced in Canada from these copy negs in the 1970s, as there is nothing that seems to indicate that they were actually produced in Carmel. If they were indeed guide prints from Carmel, it would be unfortunate if they were separated from the copy negs.

I'd like to hear Ryan's side of the story before jumping to conclusions.

[Ryan McIntosh]

I figured I better reply to this thread since it relates to a few prints from my Adams collection that I recently sold. First off, I am an Ansel Adams Collector (along with many Edward Westons, Cole Westons, Brett Westons, Minor White ect). The few prints that I sold on Ebay were the few of the unsigned Adams prints that I have had in my collection for many years now. I also have FOUR more unsigned Adams prints which I will be selling very soon as well, including a beautiful print of "Lower Yosemite Falls, 1983" which was one of the LAST images that Ansel made in Yosemite before passing away. Again, this print is not signed, and only titled and dated on the back. After doing some reseach on this image, I found that it was most likly printed by Adams but he passed away before the prints were signed. There were MANY fine prints and portraits that adams produced before his death that went unsigned.

I currently work at The Center For Creative Photography which houses the LARGEST Ansel Adams collection, so I am VERY familiar with all the different Adams prints drifting around in the world. Things from work prints, educational prints, SEP prints, reproduction prints, proof only prints, and not to mention all the prints made by photographers like Chris Rainer, Alan Ross and more assistants over the years. Many prints went unmounted, unstamped, unsigned, and many were VERY poor print quality as well! These few that were sold were intended for Reproduction Purposes ONLY, not for display or exibit (But what would stop someone now from hanging it on their wall?) Being at the Center, I had the opportunity to research hundreds of Adams prints to find out more information. In fact, one of the images of an CA coastline I sold...I had to seach to truly verify that it WAS Adams image, and not another photographer. I knew that it was, but because it was unsigned there was no way of knowing. Luckly, The Center houses both the negative and prints of this image (along with different cropings and a horizontal frame of this image too.)

Yes, I have several other Adams collectibles in my collection BESIDES fine prints. This includes many engraved items from his darkroom in Yosemite, signed letters and envelopes, loose work prints, and a single 8x10 (Actually center image was 5x6.5 with gray scale on side) copy negatives of one of the images I sold. The reason I wanted this in my collection is because not only did I have a print to this image, but it bears Ansels handwritting on the front, and contains Ansel stamp, adding a slight value to it. Unfortunally, it is far from printable because the silver has oxidized on several small spots and it has worn off onto the folder that it had been in. This can be seen when held at an angle, the negative appears metalic like. These items will remain in my collection, and will hopefully be valuable when I become older...but for now, I am a collector of neat things as thus and they all sit in boxes in my bedroom. Maybe when I am about to pass away myself, my whole collection will be donated to a museum as well.

Im sorry to stir up any concerns with people, and I am very glad that there is individuals that care about issues such as this. Luckly, I am one of those individuals as well. Because I work in Right And Reproductions at the center, I am familiar with all "reproduction" images that Adams had made, and I have found several more in this exact format and style as the ones I sold. The few buyers of the few prints were highly informed of this, and they all recieved a letter of certification that it was indeed Adams prints, and was intended for Reproduction/reseach purposes ONLY. So, to sum this up...the many Adams prints that I own, are housed at the Center, and probably many other people own... are NOT fakes if they are not signed and stamped. They were simply intended for reasons other then a "fine print", but as they were crafted to nearly the same quality (Usually abit flatter in contrast to retain values in low and high values when reproduced), many people still place a price value on these prints because they are still beautiful images that can surly be framed. As you can see thought, the value of these prints is WELL below the value of a "Fine print".

If anyone has ANY questions about my collection, Adams history, my personal photography, or questions about The Centers collection, or Right And Reproductions of the Center, please feel free to contact me.

Thank you for your concerns,

Ryan McIntosh

[Mark_3632]

Sounds cleared up to me.

[Bill_1856]

Why did you buy copy negatives on ebay?

[Ryan McIntosh]

Bill,
I made it very clear in my first post that I am a collector of photography related items. Why does someone purchase a peice of art? Simply for visual satisfaction or investment purposes, hoping that someday it might be worth something. I purchased that copy negative because not only did I have a print of that image (which was larger then the copy negative itself) but it is something neat to have in your collection if your a collector. I have already reseached it abit, and found that it was most likly used in the production of one of the earlier printings of "The Negative" by Ansel Adams. You can lay the negative on top of the image in the book, and it matches up perfectly. When I get back to work on Thusday, I will reseach it more to try to find out more about what it was used for. I will be glad to post scans or text of the information I found.

Just for your information, I also own 8x10 copy negatives of a few Edward Weston's images. One of "Pepper #30", a portrait of a man, and one of the chambered nautilius. These were all made by Brett before Edwards death and I am unsure of these reason of making them. Althought, I have came acrost several loose Edward Weston prints made from copy negatives in the CCP's collection, printed mainly by Brett.

I could easily make myself a beautiful print of Pepper #30, but I have no desire or reason to atempt to print from ANY of these copy negatives I own, mainly out of respect for the photographer and preserving their vision in crafting the fine print. When a print is made of a photographers negatives by another photographer, the original vision is manipulated and lost, unless the photographer who made the image is there to instruct the printer and aprove the print.

There is one photographer that I know that still makes prints of "copy negatives" but he is the grandson of a famous photographer, and makes these prints for educational purposes only...then the print is destroyed. Althought there is no laws ect to stop him from printing these, but he knows that a "Fine print" cannot be truly obtained by a reproduction negative.

If you have any other questions for me, or are interested in discussing this topic with me in person, feel free to email me.

Thanks,

Ryan McIntosh

[Mike Davis]

"Althought there is no laws ect to stop him from printing these, but he knows that a "Fine print" cannot be truly obtained by a reproduction negative."

Ryan,

While I would agree with you generally. My reading of the Daybooks indicates that many if not most of Edward Weston's portraits were negative enlargements from Graflex negs. This includes many of the 20's and early 30's nudes, the Mexico portraits, etc. It may even include the Charis shots as well (though I have not read that this is the case). This is the same camera that Brett used for his earliest shots in Mexico.

[Will Strain]

Mike - I think the difference here is not that it is an enlargement/copy of a neg (that sense of reproduction)...

but rather that they are negatives shot in a repro camera with the necessary screens for lithographic reproduction. So - a print made from that negative would have a halftone (or stochiastic) screen pattern.

I could be wrong.

[Ryan McIntosh]

Mike,
You are correct. In the very early Weston years, Ed used a 2 1/4x31/4 Graphex camera. A VERY large portion of his early portraits were made with this camera, along with a very famous series of nudes of his son Neil. His nudes of Charis however were made with his 8x10 and 4x5.
At a later date, these were enlarged and made into copy negatives for the ease of contact printing by Edward and Brett. If you would like to see some truly wonderful examples, The Center For Creative Photographer here in Tucson, AZ has his "box set" of 2x3 platinum prints of Neil on display in the gallery, along with 8x10 silver prints from these negatives.

Thanks,

Ryan McIntosh

[Bill_1856]

Ryan, I thought Weston's first Graflex camera was 3.25x4.25. Incidentally, there has been much speculation on the forums about exactly how both Weston and Paul Strand made their enlarged negatives. Do you have any information about that?

[Ryan McIntosh]

Bill,
Sorry...that was a typo on my behalf. It was a 3 1/4 x 4 1/4, not 2 1/4 x 3 1/4.
As for how Weston and Strand enlarged negatives... I am unsure off the top of my head, but I will be glad to get the answer for you (and anyone else wondering) on Thursday when I return to work. I have not done much research into Strands work, but I will surly find out on Thursday. We are currently working on a VERY large project at the Center which will make the complete collection of over 70,000 "fine prints" available for research online. We are in the process of scanning every print in our collection from every photographer, and along with each image will include the title, date, size, photographic process, where and when it was exhibited, and when and where it was published.
We are also scanning Edwards COMPLETE Negative Log book so viewers online will be able to virtually flip thru the pages of his book to research a certain negative that he made. We are doing the same with both his Daybooks and many important letters from Edward. You will be able to view the actual handwritten pages, rather then just a transcribed text version.

Thanks,

Ryan McIntosh

[Gene Crumpler]

FWIW-I saw Weston's graflex at Wild Cat Hill and Edward's darkroom. Kim
Weston and his wife live and work there.
They have a cottage on the property that is available for nightly fee. I hope to stay there the next time I'm out there at Point Lobos. I don't think they include any workshop in the rent!

[Ryan McIntosh]

Gene,
Kim and Gina rent out "Bodies House" as a guest house on their property (Which is truly lovely of course!) The cost of staying on their property does not include a workshop, but Kim's workshop prices are VERY reasonable for what you get. I have taken his Nude, large format and platinum printing workshops and they have all been REALLY fantastic! The last Nude workshop I did with Kim, I was able to build a whole photographic series of nudes. Kim also gave me a beautiful framed photograph of one of Edwards negatives printed by him! Just for the cost of paying the models, and Kim and Gina feding you a few good dinners...it is WELL worth more then the price.
If you decided not to take a workshop, you still have the opportunity to photograph around the property and visit with the Westons. Kim is a VERY kind photography (unlike many arrogant photographs I have met over the years), and always willing to talk with other photographers.

I HIGHLY recommend going over there when you get time.

Ryan McIntosh

[Mark Sawyer]

I'm afraid if I went to the workshop, I couldn't help but do an 8x10 of a nude woman in a gas-mask lying by some rocks on the beach with a nautilus shell in one hand and a pepper in the other. And maybe a dead pelican and some kelp in the foreground. Contact print it on Azo and develop it in Amidol...

They'd probably throw me out of the workshop.

But it would be a great photograph...

[paulr]

It might already be a great photograph ...
i forget the name of the photographer ... if that's what you'd call him. i saw an exhibit of his work in chicago, years before there was such thing as photoshop. he had weston's "exquisado" photograph of the toilet, but with a big hairy man sitting on it, his pants down around his ankles. and there was one of edgerton's freeze-frame bullets blasting through pepper #17. there was much more, of course.

[Mike Davis]

Hey, I know I'm probably in an extreme minority, but I like "Civil Defense." While critics have generally panned it, I think that it represents an interesting and topical reaction to the times (much the same as the plantation photos of the 30's).

Ryan, I wish that I would have the opportunity to get to Tuscon in the near future.

[Ryan McIntosh]

Mike, I am with you on liking Ed's photograph "Civil Defense". It was so different when compaired to his other work, but also VERY modern looking. The meaning behind the photograph was very strong and I think the image tells of an important moment in American history.

I am not sure where you are from, Mike...but if you are ever in this area be sure to set aside a few hours to spend at the Center For Creative Photography. Even before I worked there, I could spend hours in the gallery, library, and doing the "Print viewing" of all the photographs I have always dreamed of seeing. I consider myself VERY lucky to have the opportunity to be working hands on with these photographs now.

Take care,

Ryan McIntosh

[Ellis Vener]

I'm also a big fan of "civil Defense". I thought it was pretty witty when i first saw it. an obvious joke but a good one and beautifully done which only adds another layer to the joke.

[Gary Bjorklund]

Ryan and other contributors,
I wanted to add a few corrections to a several mistakes I discovered on this thread. The proper title of Edward Weston's photograph of his wife Charis on the couch with the gas mask is "Civilian Defense, 1942." Edward's home in Carmel Highlands, California is "Wildcat Hill." And the outbuilding on the property where Charis wrote their book about the Guggenheim travels, "California and the West, " is Bodie House. It gained its name from the stove that originally heated the building.

[Ryan McIntosh]

I just wanted to take a moment to clear up some recent confusion about a few recent comments I have made on my postings. First off, even thought I have extensive knowledge and research in photography, I have no authority to speak for, or in association with The Center For Creative photography. I have NEVER been employed by the Center, but yet only a volunteer at the Center for a very short time, in hopes to learn more about the amazing field of photography and better my knowledge in the field. Over this time, I was able to learn abit about the amazing archives at the Center, but I do not have the knowledge nor the authority to speak or discuss about their current projects/collections or ANY other information that regards the Center. The comments I made were based on my own personal knowledge in photography, and not hard facts that came or could be associated directly from The Centers.
My photography collection, and any sales of my collection and (personal photography) are in NO WAY related too the CCP’s collection, archives or database. My photography collection and/or sales should not be associated with or confused with the CCP’s collection, as they are in no way related. I am a photographer and collector, and knowledge of my collection is from my own personal research in photography, and should not be confused with the information and research done at The Center.
I am truly sorry for any confusion this may have caused. If you have ANY questions regarding The Center Of Creative Photography, please contact them direct and not thru me. I do not have the authority and permission to respond to important questions regarding the CCPs collection, archives, current projects, or research. The Center is an amazing wealth of information, and anyone interested in learning more about them should visit the museum in person or contact them directly thru their website or the University.
Also, On the topic of Adams and Weston’s unsigned prints and copy negatives, these photographers placed items such as these in the collection at the CCP in trust that they would NOT be circulated in the gallery/market world as “Fine prints”. The Center makes items such as these available for research and examining for people interested in learning more about Adams and Weston. These photographers did not make these prints to be sold as “fine art”, so I have realized that they should not have be treated and sold/displayed in this manor. Even thought they may be beautiful prints, I discourage now against using prints as these for “fine art” because the artist would not have wanted them used for that.
Again, I am sorry for any confusion. Please do not reply back to me with ANY questions concerning the CCP, as I am not authorized to speak for or about the Center and I will no longer with serving them from this point on.
.
Thank again,

Ryan McIntosh

[Juergen Sattler]

So you fell into the hands of a lawyer................................................!

[Ryan McIntosh]

Juergen,
No. Just conflict between myself and The Center For Creative Photography about my past vollenteer work that I have done for them. I did not have any athority to discuss matters regarding photography and the CCP. The comments by myself regarding the Center collection ect, should not have been made on my behalf, I appologize.

Thanks,

Ryan

[Jim_5508]

Ryan,

Sorry, but your stories are so full of holes that they just don't hold any water. The fact that you're selling unsigned Ansel Adams prints which are identical to copy negatives you bought on eBay only weeks before is highly suspicious in its own right. On top of that, you tried to use your connections to CCP as a way of giving yourself and your transactions credibility. Then you back peddle and reveal that you don't really work there after all, you're just a volunteer. At worst, you're a liar and a thief, at best you have a serious conflict of interest considering the access you've had to the archives of these legendary photographers. Either way, you've done a discredit to the CCP and yourself in handling this the way you have. Your position at the CCP is irrelevant to my original post and your comments only served to take the focus away from the real issue here.

Another piece of advice, stop rambling and get to a point in your posts.

[Mark_3632]

JIm,
If you have solid proof that Ryan has commited a crime or in anyway infringed on some law you should contact the proper authorities. If he hasn't then what are you complaining about?

I have never met Ryan nor have I ever had any dealings with him.

[Ryan McIntosh]

Jim, I have already explained many things here on this chat room about the few prints from my collection that I sold. If you still dont believe me, or have a problem with me...I went ahead and contacted you personally to your email. I went ahead and forwarded you several attachments and images as well. Please feel free to contact me in person by email or phone you can call me so we can discuss this matter more. This whole thing has been a complete waste of time for me and has truly got taken out of hand. I dont want to cause anymore problems or situations so please just contact me in person and save my time of constintly checking this little chat room.
I want this little situation settled right away, and it seems as thought you have a problem with me of some sorts, and keep dragging it on. So, please just reply back to me or call me okay so we can get this settled. I have school, work and other more important things to deal with then you trying to disagree with me about photographs that I sold and photographs that I own in my collection.

Thanks,

Ryan

[J.Medlock]

Truly fascinating...




"I currently work at The Center For Creative Photography..."



"Because I work in Right And Reproductions at the center..."



"If anyone has ANY questions...questions about The Centers collection,
or Right And Reproductions of the Center, please feel free to contact me."



"As for how Weston and Strand enlarged negatives...I will be glad to get
the answer for you (and anyone else wondering) on Thursday when I return to
work...We are currently working on a VERY large project at the Center...We are
in the process of scanning every print in our collection..."



"...be sure to set aside a few hours to spend at the Center For Creative
Photography. Even before I worked there...I consider myself VERY lucky to have
the opportunity to be working hands on with these photographs now."



And then the legalize clincher...




"I have NEVER been employed by the Center, but yet only a volunteer at
the Center for a very short time..."



Like Mark, I have never met Ryan nor have I ever had any dealings with
him.  I think I'll keep it that way.

[Ryan McIntosh]

Jim, since you never replyed back to my email and are not willing to talk on the phone about this matter, I am not going to carry this on any longer, trying to explain myself. There is only one way to settle this so you can have peace of mind when you sleep at night.

Why dont you contact the seller from which I purchased the Ansel Adams copy negative from, and ask him/her about the few other copy negatives that they had. Chances are, they still have them and might even be willing to sell them to you! As for the single copy negative I have, I will be donating it to the CCP in a very short time. I dont regret purchasing this item, but if it causes people like you to get your shit in a knot...then its best that people do not have things like this.

Im not going to bother with you anymore and waste my time here. Next time, please do not start accusing me of things as this and wasting your time to start rumors. Also, when you see a photograph for sale that is not signed...don't think right away that its a "fake". Chances are, you are some old retired man that has nothing better to do then worry yourself over things like this.

Anyways, contact the lady/man that I purchased the negative from, if you want. If you are not willing too...I will just do it myself.

Goodbye.

Ryan

[Ryan McIntosh]

Jim,
Since you never replyed back to me here, my emails or my messages...I went ahead and contacted the lady who was the seller of the AA Copy Negative. After she sold that one single copy negative on Ebay to me, a week or so later she sold the remaining 3 at a local FleaMarket that she often takes part in up in Canada. They were sold to some random individual up in Canada at the swapmeet.

Please do not contact me, or say anything back to me...because I will not reply to you. I hope to never hear, speak or see you again from this point on. I am offically done with this.

Goodbye.

Ryan

[Jim_5508]

Ryan: "Im not going to bother with you anymore and waste my time here."

That was 2 posts ago, meanwhile you've left 3 messages here since my last post. For somebody who is "officially done" with this, you're sure beating it to death.

You are correct, I am an old retired man. Congratulations - in addition to destroying your own credibility, you've also succeeded in offending a healthy percentage of the people who participate on this forum. Despite my apparent senility, I still know how to spell and craft a proper sentence. Mastering these two skills might be a good place for you to start on your journey to earn the respect of your peers.

As for the Ansel Adams prints, I am truly sorry if I offended you. However, considering the astronomical odds relating to this coincident and your subsequent failures to tell the truth, perhaps you can forgive me as well.

Kind regards,

Jim.

[Ryan McIntosh]

Jim,
I apologize to you. Take care.

Ryan