Ansel Adams Negatives

John,
It's estimated to be a $200 million find.
They should be easy to authenticate.

 

Well, now their worth $1.50.

How's that for a crash in the economy.....

 

Maybe Ansel Adams is Uncle Earl!

On a more serious note, John, thanks for keeping us in the loop.

 

Wow. Can you imagine what the guy is thinking...

I'm RICH, I'm a millionaire... umm... oh cr*p!!!!

 

At least Uncle Earl's Niece may pay the guy back.

 

How do we know that Uncle Earl just didn't have some old Ansel photos? LOL

 

Uncle Earl must have been a good photographer to be mistaken for Ansel.
I hear tell around the street there was a guy named Earl that Ansel tried to copy.
I'm just sayin'!

 

one thing boggles me

The photos are worth millions because they were shot by Ansel Adams and now that it's almost certain that this Uncle Earl shot it, it's now worth a dollar?

I though photos should be judged by their quality, not by who shot it?

 

igi,
It's fairly obvious you don't deal with collectors.
Watch the auctions and you'll see over inflated prices by name only.

 

Hail Earl

Ansel is the fake ? ...... Oh No..... Now What?

 

Very interesting story ...

At any rate, Ansel Adam's prints would be more desirable. He spent lots of time in the darkroom post processing to get the magic, and for sure, no print would be exactly alike (unlike in digital pp), it's like a fingerprint of Ansel himself


.

 

Hmmmmm, so the saga continues....
hmmmmm

 

I guess the guy has to cut his loses.
- Will he think he lost 200 Million or only 45 bucks?

 

If they are of good quality I would say, because of the history, they should be worth much more than $45. It would be interesting to see them on display. Another contemporary perspective compared to Adams would be very interesting to see.

 

That talked about the sleeves and writing.
No one has really talked about the images themselves.
But the again, when $$$$ gets involved, they will be the determining factor.

 

This all says more about the state of art photography than the worth of the images. If they are by Ansel Adams they are worth a fortune if they are not they are almost worthless. What gives? Surely the images haven't changed. It seems, in this case, the signature is worth more than the images.

Says a lot about the sad state of art photography.

 

It is virtually impossible to define objective standards to translate art into money. So if one tries to translate art into money, things will become absurd rather quickly.