"Ansel Adams" plates found at garage sale

There is an interesting story in the LA Times about a man who found some glass plate negatives for 75 cents each, and who is convinced they were made by Ansel Adams. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...home-headlines

The story mentions a discussion with Adams's assistant at the time of his darkroom fire, who said that he does not remember any glass plates damaged in the fire. Not to take sides, because I have no way of knowing whether they are AA's or not, but wasn't "Monolith" made on a glass plate? It was one of the negatives damaged in the fire.

People sometimes get caught up in quests of the type described in the article. Apparently it is causing tension with his wife, and it has cost him a lot of money. Of course, if they are AA's glass plates, then they are probably worth lots more.

It is an interesting article. I got the impression after reading it this morning that the plates were not taken by Ansel; there were just too many experts and people that worked with him in the early years saying they were not, and not a single one saying they thought they were. It was especially telling when his early assistant stated that Ansel would not have composed the way some of these photos were taken, and his son said the handwriting was not his.
I wonder who did take them; another early Ansel Adams-like photographer who ended up unknown.

yet there's also the common hint from the experts that these weren't good enough to be Adams - yet like all photographers, he took some really crappy pictures - especially in his early years. I've also just been looking through tons of his manzanar pictures - there's an awful lot of duffers in there too.

Quote:

---

He's sick of weak-willed experts, their hopeful words in private melting away in public. "I'm 100% certain, no matter what they feel," Norsigian said. "I've got all this evidence."

---

I found the story a little saddening - how the fruit of his labour is divisiveness between himself and his wife; how the obsession with the belief that he holds Ansel Adams' work has to be true, and if an expert refutes this, then Norsigian seems to slide into conspiracy theory & paranoia, and on another tangent journey to find someone else to back him up.

This is all the more impressive from a man who claims to have known nothing about photography before he purchased the collection of plates.

Quote:

---

Page after page yielded coincidences.

Adams, who was born in San Francisco in 1902, worked early in his career with 6 1/2-by-8 1/2-inch glass-plate negatives just like the ones Norsigian had found.

---

For a "blue collar worker" who knew nothing about photography to suddenly decide that a whole plate collection of negatives shot in 1902, had to be the work of Adams is a little extreme. Whole plate photography was universal in 1902 - anyone who's seen plate photographs and ceremonies of Queen Victoria's death in 1901 in England will know that.

If Norsigian was gracious enough to loan the plates to a public gallery, then his journey (and spiralling costs) might be a turning point in his diminishing returns.

Seems fingerprint analysis might be the way to go about this if he really cares about it?

What a wonderful story, David. Thanks for posting it.
At last, photography may have an "attributed to Ansel Adams," like the old paintings..."attributed to" one old master or another.
I wish him luck.

"Seems fingerprint analysis might be the way to go . . . ."

Apparently they tried it. No luck.

The sad thing about the story is that most likely the quest is ultimately about money. If those plates are AA's, then they are worth a lot of $$. If the result so far is failure, anxiety, dissatisfaction, mistrust, and marital discord, then that is the real shame.

The photos look nice, but I don't think they are Adam's. The LA Time's photo #5 has a road in it, and I don't think Adams would have framed it that way. The photo #7 in the guy's hand (attached) doesn't like Adams.

I wonder if these were from Albert Bender, the guy who owned a 1926 Buick and was Adam's road buddy. Consider it: who else photographs their car?

To me, the question might be what is the quality of the images, regardless of who made them. If they are of the quality associated with Adams, maybe there is a great unknown photographer waiting to be discovered.

Another interesting detail comparing photos #1 (real Adams) and #4 (unknown). Judging by the height of the trees at the top of the cliff, especially the pine tree closest to the fall and accounting for the difference in angle of view, it would seem they were taken at approximately the same time, give or take a couple of years or so.

If so, Brian may be on to something wondering about Bender...

If Norsigian has all that money to spend on an Ansel Adams wild goose chase, I can probably come up with some equally convincing photos by Leonardo da Vinci for him to check out. That should really bring in the loot from a Leonardo collector like Bill Gates. I'd be tempted to do it myself, but I've wrestled with Windows too long to want any more to do with Microsoft.

I don't get it. Here is a box of negatives that for all we can tell, even if they were from Adams, never got printed. Outtakes? OK, tell me why they are interesting. The University of Arizona has hundreds to thousands of Adams' outtakes. Even the library in Los Angles has Adams negatives, some of which did get printed. Interesting to photohistorians, maybe, valuable in any true sense as "Art", no. And if they are not Adams'? ...

I agree that there isn't too much value in the images artistically... but its always fun to speculate. Sad that this guy lost that sense of fun, and turned a hobby into an ruinious obsession, though we all might be guilty of that to some extent ;)

As for the images; the light is totally wrong for someone who mastered to art of knowing when, and in what light to shoot. Even in his early days I am not sure AA would have shot some off at any old time.

All the old nature guys who had to lug around pounds and pounds of plates and camera gear would never shoot something in the wrong lighting if it could be avoided. They shot very conservatively for the most part, according to what I have read. They waited for the right time of day and right light. In all those "out-takes" maybe the composition was off or they never quite got what they were looking for (or more likely nobody was interested in in the subject) but from what I understand they never wasted a shot if they thought there was a better shot to be had at a different time or from a different angle.

The images in question all seem to shot in the middle of the day with the light coming in at a bad angle. Also the road is something that evan an early AA would have avoided if possible, I would think. That shot has it composed right into the scene. I agree, I think the images are from a traveling companion or assistant or somebody that was watching AA work and decided to do some of his/her own.

Quote:

---

The images in question all seem to shot in the middle of the day with the light coming in at a bad angle. Also the road is something that evan an early AA would have avoided if possible, I would think. That shot has it composed right into the scene. I agree, I think the images are from a traveling companion or assistant or somebody that was watching AA work and decided to do some of his/her own.

---

c'mon - Ansel wasn't above making midday look like midnight and having a good go at trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

I love how so many people seem to think Adams never took a bad shot or took 10 or 20 tries at something to get the one that worked

before (straight work-print)

Attachment 3253

after (final print)

Attachment 3254

I found it an interesting read. My first thought was how many people were running around with a full plate camera in the glass plate era? 1000's. How many took pictures of places in California? 100's Yosemite and San Franciso? 40? I think the evidence is against them being Adams. The most telling to me is Michael and his wife going to the guys house in good faith and in the interest of history and immediately thinking out loud it isn't Ansels writing.

I think it would be wonderful if the guy would investigate who Ansels earliest camera club shooting buddies were and go find their relatives to compare hand writing. I'd be fascinated to hear of someone finding Cedric Wright's lost plates, etc.

Also, the lack of quality doesn't make me think they couldn't be Ansels. Emulsion technology in the glass plate era and the earliest stages of the photographer could easily preclude the later quality. I'm sure Ansel filled his own dempsey dumpster just like the rest of us.

Me, I'd get some finger print dust and look on the glass itself. I hope the identity is ultimately found even if they're only worth what the fellow paid in the first place.

I must admit they look close to adam's work. Although I'm sure no matter how good ansel was at the time there were people taking comparable shots of the same area. The most publicly gifted are the only ones we know about!

I think he has found 5 minutes of fame and nothing more. As everyone says close, but not exact enough to say yes to the authenticity.

Still on the whole a good story in the "filler" section rather than woman with a 2 headed cat or something as trivial.

Steven

Albert Bender was Adams' financial patron and the backer of other artists including Edward Weston and Robinson Jeffers. As always, I certainly could be wrong but FWIW I'm not aware that he was Adams' "road buddy" or even a serious photographer.

I still bet that the photographer is the owner of the 1926 Buick in that photo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tim atherton

yet there's also the common hint from the experts that these weren't good enough to be Adams - yet like all photographers, he took some really crappy pictures - especially in his early years. I've also just been looking through tons of his manzanar pictures - there's an awful lot of duffers in there too.

---

And it's more likely for the duffers to end up in the 75 cent bin than the masterpieces!

This happens a lot ... work that the artist kept around for personal reasons, or no good reason, ends up in the public's hands after they die. And unfortunately you rarely see a disclaimer that says "ansel only kept these around to line the cat box--don't take too seriously." I've seen Strand and Weston prints on gallery walls that I'd bet anything were never meant for public consumption. Half of what Kafka wrote he'd wanted destroyed. Buyer/viewer/reader beware.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulr

And it's more likely for the duffers to end up in the 75 cent bin than the masterpieces!

This happens a lot ... work that the artist kept around for personal reasons, or no good reason, ends up in the public's hands after they die. And unfortunately you rarely see a disclaimer that says "ansel only kept these around to line the cat box--don't take too seriously." I've seen Strand and Weston prints on gallery walls that I'd bet anything were never meant for public consumption. Half of what Kafka wrote he'd wanted destroyed. Buyer/viewer/reader beware.

---

An interesting point. Some fuss has been made over Brett Weston's decision to destroy his negatives at the end of his life rather than to leave them for others to print: had that philosophy been more widespread there certainly would be fewer crummy prints made of deceased photographer's negatives in order to fill out a gallery or museum show.

On the other hand, feelings change and if everyone did as Brett did we'd never have recognized some really exciting photographers. There are arguments on both sides of the coin.

Me, I don't save negatives for "posterity". I'm just a pack rat! :rolleyes:

Mike

I am the entertainment attorney who has been working with a group of experts for the past three years to once and for all prove that over 60 glass negatives purchased at a Fresno garage sale were in fact created by Ansel Adams. Our experts included two court qualified hand-writing analysts, the former Curator of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and a meteorologist who was engaged to examine an authenticated Ansel Adams print and one virtually identical negative among those found at the garage sale. The task of this expert was to determine whether by looking at the cloud formation, shadows and snow drifts, it was possible to determine if the two images were captured on the same day and at the same time. Last but not least, on our team was Mr. Patrick Alt who I had the pleasure to work with and learn from. His expertise in this area is beyond reproach. After obtaining written reports from these experts, we asked a former FBI Agent and Section Chief and a former Assistant United States Attorney and Legal Commentator on ABC News to tell us if the evidence was sufficient under the highest standard used in US courts (beyond a reasonable doubt). In essence, we put the negatives on trial. We anticipate releasing the final results of our investigation later this month. If you are interested in being notified of the results and findings, please register at www.ricknorsigian.com. As an added inducement, those individuals who register on the website will have the opportunity to view before anyone else in the world 17 never before seen photographs we believe were created by Ansel Adams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian C. Miller

The photos look nice, but I don't think they are Adam's. The LA Time's photo #5 has a road in it, and I don't think Adams would have framed it that way. The photo #7 in the guy's hand (attached) doesn't like Adams.

I wonder if these were from Albert Bender, the guy who owned a 1926 Buick and was Adam's road buddy. Consider it: who else photographs their car?

---

Brian,,

This is most pleasing and mysterious

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by apeter

I am the entertainment attorney who has been working with a group of experts for the past three years to once and for all prove that over 60 glass negatives purchased at a Fresno garage sale were in fact created by Ansel Adams. Our experts included two court qualified hand-writing analysts, the former Curator of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and a meteorologist who was engaged to examine an authenticated Ansel Adams print and one virtually identical negative among those found at the garage sale. The task of this expert was to determine whether by looking at the cloud formation, shadows and snow drifts, it was possible to determine if the two images were captured on the same day and at the same time. Last but not least, on our team was Mr. Patrick Alt who I had the pleasure to work with and learn from. His expertise in this area is beyond reproach. After obtaining written reports from these experts, we asked a former FBI Agent and Section Chief and a former Assistant United States Attorney and Legal Commentator on ABC News to tell us if the evidence was sufficient under the highest standard used in US courts (beyond a reasonable doubt). In essence, we put the negatives on trial. We anticipate releasing the final results of our investigation later this month. If you are interested in being notified of the results and findings, please register at www.ricknorsigian.com. As an added inducement, those individuals who register on the website will have the opportunity to view before anyone else in the world 17 never before seen photographs we believe were created by Ansel Adams.

---

When you say you are putting the negatives "on trial," do you mean you're presenting these various expert opinions in a court or administrative proceeding so that the "other side" (i.e. the Adams family and anyone else who disagrees) have an opportunity to cross-examine these various experts and/or to present their own witnesses? Or is only your side being presented?

Without knowing anything about this question other than what I've read in this thread and a few newspaper accounts, it strikes me that this is a situation in which one "side" (i.e.your client) cares greatly about the attribution of these images and so has gone to a whole lot of time, trouble, and expense in an effort to obtain the result he wants. But that those holding an opposite viewpoint (i.e. those who disagree with his desired attribution) don't have a sufficient interest (monetary or otherwise) to put forth a similar amount of time, effort, and money in an effort to obtain the opposite result. So that this is like a trial in which only one side shows up.

Dang, when somebody sez "lawyer" I just gotta wince- like I would trust ANY statement made by one-NOT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EdWorkman

Dang, when somebody sez "lawyer" I just gotta wince- like I would trust ANY statement made by one-NOT!

---

That's unfair. My lawyers have been informed and helpful in my time of need, and earned their money. If I were in legal proceedings without a lawyer I'd be SOL.

As I understand it, Brett only destroyed a few negs, mostly as show.

About the Fresno negs, there are some things that were not mentioned in the article. First, of the negs that AA lost in the 1938 fire, many had been printed or proofed before and these images of those burned negs survive. Is it not odd that a print or proof of none of the Fresno negs has been found? Second, there are a number of negs in the Fresno negs that are of a subject not ever known to have been photographed by AA. Maybe these are the "17" that "apeter" talks about above.

apeter,
Definitive evidence that these plates were or were not associated with Adams might be obtained by microscopically comparing the edges of the images on these plates with plates known to be made by Adams in the same period. The plate holder edge leaves a shadow on the plate that is a unique "finger print".

If these shadows are sharp and clear enough, a match would provide unequivocal evidence that these plates were made in holders used by Adams for other images.

I expect your experts are on top of this already, as museum professionals familiar with photography would expect to see the edge examination and comparison data as part of the evidence brought forward. I wish you well with your work to identify the provinence of these plates.
Bill Peters
Vice-President
Alberta Museums Association

Not sure if this has been posted already:

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

The story is mostly old but what i new to me is the plan to sell prints from the negs--a quick Google and here we are:

http://ricknorsigian.com/norsigian_purchase.html

A mere $7500 a pict...

But at least we get to see the images (at last) and make our own conclusions about whether they are Ansel's or not...

--Darin

with tongue firmly in cheek....

I fully expect this "flooding the market" of Ansel's work to result in a significant DECREASE in the price of actual AA original prints. If we all wait 3 weeks we ought to be able to pick up a Genuine AA print for about $130......

Those are some pretty high prices.

I always get a kick out of the way someone will spend five times as much for something at an auction as it costs at even a retail gallery. I remember when some of
AA's most famous images were selling for around $6500 just before he died. Then you
started seing auction sales in the thirty to forty grand range, every started selling, and
the prices dropped right back down. Now we're apparently in for another round; but
overall, his images aren't all that rare. It's all about supply and demand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darin Boville

The story is mostly old but what i new to me is the plan to sell prints from the negs--a quick Google and here we are:

http://ricknorsigian.com/norsigian_purchase.html

A mere $7500 a pict...

But at least we get to see the images (at last) and make our own conclusions about whether they are Ansel's or not...

--Darin

---

That makes the Special Edition prints, which are expertly made prints by Alan Ross from AA's original negatives, a real deal at a few hundred bucks.

Rick "wondering if these guys will hire a printer as good as Alan Ross" Denney

if the A.A. trust were to acknowledge the negs. were A.A.s, who would own the rights to the images, which would be different, i think, then who owns the negatives. ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Curt Palm

if the A.A. trust were to acknowledge the negs. were A.A.s, who would own the rights to the images, which would be different, i think, then who owns the negatives. ?

---

If they were created before the Copyright Law of 1978 went into force (which they were), then their protection by copyright would depend on being so marked. Then, that copyright protection would have lasted for a term of 28 years, which could be renewed once. Registration would have been required to get protection during the renewal period.

So, if the photos were made before 1950, and the copyright never marked or registered, they are in the public domain and nobody owns the copyright.

If they were created before that time and copyrighted by AA and subsequently renewed, then they would have been under copyright protection when the new law went into effect, and would be protected until 90 years after his death (2074).

But, of course, had they been registered, there would be no argument about whether he made the photos in the first place. The presence of that argument indicates to me that they were not registered. If they fell into public hands without an attached copyright notice, it could be argued that they fell into the public domain. That seems to me the most likely possibility.

Thus, it is likely that nobody owns the copyright to these images. And if that's the case, then the owner of the negatives themselves must control how they provide access to the negatives. If they allow someone to make prints, it will either be considered work for hire, allowing the negative owner to claim copyright in the resulting print, or at least the fine-printing techniques applied to that print, or the copyright on the print with those techniques would be owned by the printer.

Without documented copyright registration, I don't believe AA's descendants or the trust can claim ownership of the copyright unless they can show that the work was treated as copyrighted material, which is clearly not the case (else how would they have gotten in someone's garage?). Also, one cannot claim copyright ownership to something whose provenance they have discredited.

I suspect that Ansel Adams's name has been registered as a trademark, however. That would restrict the ability of the negative owners to use that trademark without being able to prove the provenance. And it may not be trademark but some other protection owing to a person's name.

Rick "doubting the value of prints made from the negatives even if they are authentic" Denney

I duuno, with scepticism (and money) the way it is today, $7500 is an awful lot of money for a photograph that's not actually printed by AA himself even if the plate used in the process *might* have been made by AA (I'm still not convinced). Still, you know what they say about fools and their money, especially those who have a lot of it to burn.

Couldn't help but chuckle at the notion that there's "gold in dem dar garage sales."

Also, now that the cat really appears to be out of the bag, I'm curious to see if AA's Trust will now attempt to do anything about it. Simply because of what the LA Times printed back in 2007 ("William Turnage, the trustee who propelled Adams to financial success, dismissed any interest in Norsigian's negatives, warning that the trust " owns all rights to Ansel's name and likeness" and that any unauthorized use would be referred to attorneys.").

This could backfire big time. By trying to establish some kind of exhorbitant value to
this sort of collection, the IRS can come in and tax you for it. You could end up owing
them for a helluva a lot more than the collection is actually worth. Works both ways.

It doesn't matter if the glass negatives were created by Adams. Adams created lots of images, and the real majority of them weren't that great. I didn't see one stunning image in the bunch. One of them is even labled as an "aerial view."

If someone has the money ($7,500) then I think the person would purchase a known good print.

Nobody with half a brain is going to plop down any large sums because it is not 100% conclusive that these are genuine and without question AA's. The potential buyer would be in the same position trying to maintain the value of what he paid and similarly attempting to find the document or other "proof" they are what the seller hopes they are.

In the game of collectibles it is about documentable provenance. Without it it is throwing craps in Vegas and the people that have this kind of jack hire people to advise them on decisions like these.

AA spawned droves of wanna bees even in his early days and this trend continues to this day. I would bet that someone else with considerable proficiency made these negatives at the time they are claiming and that when it is all said and done they will sell for the low six figures and possible the high five figures and that will be it. A considerable return on a meager investment. An auction in the millions I do not see because the owners of these negatives have been trying to prove they are genuine AA for over 10 years and the questions linger and will continue to do so for a very long time.

As a follow up I do not "buy" the results of investigator hired by the owner of the negs and his conclusion that these materials were in fact produced by Ansel. Where the pavement will hit the pedal for me will be the sales price that will be finalized when the auction concludes. I assume that they will strike while the news is hot and it will take place fairly soon. This will tell us if the participating buyers are arriving at a similar conclusion as those being boldly stated by the author of the article.

Put this into perspective. If this cache of suspicious origin is worth $200 MM can you imagine what the family is legitimately holding in irrefutable AA produced materials? Can you say SELL?

The latitude of today's authors masquerading as journalists is simply amazing.

I have some of my grandfathers glass negs from India. Pretty nice but not a lot of resolution, I have no idea how they were made.

Easy to scan ... that's fer sure.

Where is that dude who got on my case for marking up a lens I bought for a low price? He really needs to call these people out and set them straight!

BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. — A trove of old glass negatives bought at a garage sale for $45 has been authenticated as the lost work of Ansel Adams and worth at least $200 million, an attorney for the owner said Tuesday, but the iconic photographer's representatives dismissed the claim as a fraud and said they're worthless.


The love of money and greed in its purest form are convalescing to try to pull a rabbit out of a hat and even the corporate news picked up in this story this evening. The $45 innocuous "garage sale purchase" is likely going to cost the owner that cannot accept mediocrity his life's savings chasing a rabbit down a hole. It is simply sad. Reminds me of the stubborn engineer that invented the intermittent wiper that Ford stole that Greg Kinnear played in movies.

I don't see how they could do anything with the plates beyond selling them outright...

Maybe I just don't 'get it'....

I REALLY don't understand how they could produce copies of something they didn't actually create....especially without some sort of acknowledgement from the artist, or heirs...or something...

If I were rummaging garage sales and found an original AA print, I surely wouldn't feel I could make prints of it because I had 'found' it....nor if I had bought the print in a gallery....

Same would be the case of an original negative, ambrotype, tintype, etc...

Thanks,
Dan

It's the lead story on the online Wall Street Journal....

Even the printer doesn't seem convinced....

Kalisher commented that, “I am thrilled to be part of the process to bring these remarkable photographs to light. Whoever captured these images was a photographer of immense talent.” (http://ricknorsigian.com/norsigian_purchase.html)

Dan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Bowen

It's the lead story on the online Wall Street Journal....

---

Slow news day,
and since the Feds have made it illegal for media to get close to the oil spill......:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Woodbury

As I understand it, Brett only destroyed a few negs, mostly as show.

---

Eric, partly true. The negatives that he burned in his fireplace on his 80th birthday were for show; the international press was there for the occasion and the burn party was typical Brett. He was a true "Pyromaniac", in more than one sense.

However, the majority of his negatives were otherwise destroyed, except for a few in the vault when he died. Also, there were a few, which Cole showed me at the 80th birthday celebration, that were punched with holes and are at CCP in Tucson.

Now, to the topic of Ansel and the garage find windfall. Suppose, for the sake of arguement, that they were Ansel's images; so what. At that point in his career, the summer of 1937, he was not so far behind with his printing to not have printed what he thought was worthy. So, assuming that these are in fact his negatives or plates, they would have already been rejected by him as representations of his best vision. We all go through this process, some save and some discard.

So, at best, we have discarded Ansel Adams negatives that are going to be printed by printer Mr. X (not Alan Ross) and be sold for huge amounts of money. Perfect nonsense for the evening news tonight: "Ansel Adams Prints Found at Garage Sale Worth $200,000,000. I don't think so.

There were other photographers who used Ansel's darkroom in Yosemite before the fire, working in similar formats and with similar subject matter.

My old friend Rondal said it best when shown the great garage find: "Oh no, not Ansel. These are not compositions Ansel would have made". Ron might know, he was there the night of the darkroom fire and was also Ansel's assisstant.

Each of us can only hope our own bones are so thoroughly picked after our deaths. It is, perhaps, the truest form of artistic validation, regardless of whether such images are actually our own or not...

please see below this excerpt from a email i recieved from my friend Alan Ross




Dear Mitch,

This is going to be a quick message in response to numerous emails I have received concerning some glass plate negatives purchased by a Mr. Norsigian at a California garage sale, and which he attributes authorship of to Ansel Adams. He now seems to be claiming that the plates have been "authenticated" at a value of $200,000,000. The Norsigian group contacted me earlier this year, and I have seen jpegs of all the images. I do not believe they ARE the work of Ansel Adams. See below for my opinion.

Cheers,


alan@rossimages.net
www.alanrossphotography.com



CNN Newsbreak:
"Experts: Ansel Adams photos found at garage sale worth $200 million"

Interestingly enough, the New York Times has not seen fit to provide coverage of this claim as yet.

The images in the Norsigian collection do seem to be the work of a competent photographer working in Yosemite, San Francisco and Carmel. In a format used by AA in the late 20's. The camera locations are similar to known Adams favorites - but then, most of those were primary tourist viewpoints offering an obvious place to plant a camera.

Some of the images are of yachting scenes on San Francisco Bay. Nothing of any similarity in subject or format exists in the Adams Archive. LIkewise some utterly bland images of a Spanish-style mission.

A major claim in the voice for authenticity is that one image - I believe of the Jeffrey Pine on Sentinel Dome - shows some same/similar cloud formations as exist in a known Adams image. Anyone who knew Ansel also knows that he very often had fellow photographers at his side - either by invitation or coincidence - when he was out photographing. The clouds could easily have been recorded by a different camera a few feet away.

The plates seem to show signs of fire damage. Yes, Ansel's Yosemite darkroom caught fire in 1938 and a number of prized negatives were lost. For me, this is the weak-link/downfall of the authenticity claimants. Ansel was working with a 6.5x8.5 plate camera when he did Monolith in 1927. The fire was in 1938. A good number of negatives made prior to the fire had been printed many times - Pine Branches in Snow comes to mind, for one example. As well as I know Ansel's work, and as far as I have otherwise heard, not ONE authenticated AA print from ANY of the Norsigian plates is known. If it was a good image - and some of these are - Ansel couldn't have NOT resisted making more than one print of each - and even then SOME would have survived to exist in Ansel's own archive or in the collections of photgapehr and Sierra Club friends.

They are some nice images, but I cannot believe they are the work of Ansel Adams.

And 200 million dollars is ______. You fill in the blank.





Alan



This message can be forwarded - so if you have anyone in mind who would be