Ansel Adams negatives, quite the investment

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Jul 27, 2010.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    RichA, Jul 27, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On 7/27/2010 7:41 AM, RichA wrote:
    > http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.html?iref=NS1
    >
    > $10 to possibly $200M in value.


    That's amazing -- though the art world's take on the value of these
    kinds of things kinda boggles my mind. $200M for glass plate negatives?

    - --
    - -Ryan McGinnis
    The BIG Storm Picture -- http://bigstormpicture.com
    Vortex-2 image licensing at http://vortex-2.com
    Getty: http://www.gettyimages.com/search/search.aspx?artist=Ryan McGinnis

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

    iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMTvAiAAoJEIzODkDZ7B1br3wIAJOcOSVJ4Y2pNSi9T5R/+5sx
    tYJ+dEu5+ugMWe/6vsoSS01zUv8D8cjAbNIl80lxP6B3lSaRY0oH+xnEfo9GweBl
    YWsXvPzPeXoC/ZwZ4XxlbUwNqHnkHmzMNfHDpRFEWRfdXYN3qSZNQwwYfc5Bi3SJ
    hxTVP69HkBH2gsGTAnISQBhF8Fr3UoPWpJgUj/nMDf68bxCaVzQlnymHybBbF+EE
    fTTdi1BZq6S0sex3ge6fZmPOUeK7iw8LkN0hEMSWb4sJgdTdh5lSYX3O4jadkOjP
    er30+neYwMW4CG7LNNygo9/mJ5OB3Nn2/bhAjqlrH/FdBYdA5FeU5zzk2eWQMGU=
    =Um1o
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Ryan McGinnis, Jul 27, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    Rich Guest

    On Jul 27, 10:41 am, Ryan McGinnis <> wrote:
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On 7/27/2010 7:41 AM, RichA wrote:
    >
    > >http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.htm...

    >
    > > $10 to possibly $200M in value.

    >
    > That's amazing -- though the art world's take on the value of these
    > kinds of things kinda boggles my mind.  $200M for glass plate negatives?


    Unlike prints, negatives can duplicate perfectly the image over and
    over.
     
    Rich, Jul 27, 2010
    #3
  4. Ryan McGinnis <> wrote:

    > On 7/27/2010 7:41 AM, RichA wrote:
    >>

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.html?iref
    =NS1
    >>
    >> $10 to possibly $200M in value.

    >
    > That's amazing -- though the art world's take on the value of these
    > kinds of things kinda boggles my mind. $200M for glass plate negatives?


    Glass plate negatives are surely the most valuable form of a photograph,
    unlike digital images they are nice large tangible objects, and unlike
    prints they are unique originals.

    Since there are 65 plates, that's 3 million per image. Although it's a lot
    of money I don't think it's implausible given that they are previously
    unknown images by perhaps the most famous photographer ever.

    As other posters have noted though, a major problem in the plan to sell
    prints as opposed to the plates is that the prints won't be genuine Adams
    prints as in "printed by Ansel Adams". However if the owner gets them
    printed by a master printer and doesn't just knock off amateurish prints
    himself, then I'm sure many people would snap them up. Many great
    photographers didn't print their own work, so the fact that these must be
    printed by someone else doesn't in itself invalidate them as works by the
    man.

    Moreover, IIRC Adams decided that no prints made from his negs after his
    death would be allowed out of the Center for Creative Photography where his
    archive is held. If this is still the case, then these new negs are the
    only way anyone will be able to buy a print made from an actual negative
    other than buying one second hand for tens of thousands of dollars.

    To make $3 million per image, this guy would just have to sell ten thousand
    enlargements of each neg at $300 each, or one thousand at £3000 each, etc.
    Would there be enough takers? You bet there would! The only question mark
    to my mind is copyright, since he might own the negs but I would imagine
    his estate would still own the copyright, so some negotiations might be
    needed.
     
    Gordon Freeman, Jul 27, 2010
    #4
  5. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On 7/27/2010 10:13 AM, Savageduck wrote:

    > Not quite. As valuable as those negatives might be, there is half of the
    > Adams creative process missing, the darkroom print work he did himself,
    > or supervised.
    > Without his print specific darkroom notes, you might be able to
    > replicate a close approximation of an Adams print from those negatives,
    > but you would not have an "Adams" print.


    Indeed -- almost doubly so for Adams, who's darkroom wizardry is
    considered legendary.

    - --
    - -Ryan McGinnis
    The BIG Storm Picture -- http://bigstormpicture.com
    Vortex-2 image licensing at http://vortex-2.com
    Getty: http://www.gettyimages.com/search/search.aspx?artist=Ryan McGinnis

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

    iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMT0fVAAoJEIzODkDZ7B1b6/cH/jPy4SuANkirsuVTjMBly0bd
    QwgB9KUsaPHE3/RBw8lBUZNHQZEKNQQtnOrh69Z2OV+2rW3N8/J+TGrvdv3E+xdz
    lwYwpWLxBxHDRti614k3DMYUcbNG4AKRUh7ZZJrcU0FSwbx4nhaXwPcpdiqUBY27
    +/c3amW0TFCW1l18iCrJg34SKhuYrKutWUq7DBiKpeT1Oup1o+Dtc9KyCmWFTmmD
    ukOpR7dHPRy4Eu8r5O/n/otAdBAcX0hEaoxfWDDDzVhLObjxNGhCNXe7/OpBbOZj
    SwQGIGX/1Ug7yeEgCGttWbM8FQC/LL+Fz41vhMUy4lrLsgJdZOT+mEgDH0hGfeY=
    =eX9z
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Ryan McGinnis, Jul 27, 2010
    #5
  6. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Jul 27, 11:27 am, Allen <> wrote:
    > Savageduck wrote:
    > > On 2010-07-27 07:56:48 -0700, Rich <> said:

    >
    > >> On Jul 27, 10:41 am, Ryan McGinnis <> wrote:
    > >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > >>> Hash: SHA1

    >
    > >>> On 7/27/2010 7:41 AM, RichA wrote:

    >
    > >>>>http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.htm....

    >
    > >>>> $10 to possibly $200M in value.

    >
    > >>> That's amazing -- though the art world's take on the value of these
    > >>> kinds of things kinda boggles my mind.  $200M for glass plate negatives
    > >> ?

    >
    > >> Unlike prints, negatives can duplicate perfectly the image over and
    > >> over.

    >
    > > Not quite. As valuable as those negatives might be, there is half of the
    > > Adams creative process missing, the darkroom print work he did himself,
    > > or supervised.
    > > Without his print specific darkroom notes, you might be able to
    > > replicate a close approximation of an Adams print from those negatives,
    > > but you would not have an "Adams" print.

    >
    > In case anyone still pays any attention to Rich, his post(answered well
    > by Savageduck) should provide sufficient evidence of his total
    > ignorance/idiocy about photography.
    > Allen


    Adams prints were being sold in the mid 1980's for thousands of
    dollars and were made by his assistant. If you think his artistic
    talent can't be extracted from the negs, you are just an imbecile.
     
    RichA, Jul 27, 2010
    #6
  7. RichA

    Rich Guest

    On Jul 27, 8:56 pm, Gary Edstrom <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 05:41:25 -0700 (PDT), RichA <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.htm...

    >
    > >$10 to possibly $200M in value.

    >
    > Adams Heirs Skeptical About Lost Negatives Claim
    > BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. (AP)
    > (7/27/2010)
    >
    > 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.
    >
    > Continued:
    >
    > http://cbs2.com/local/Adams.heirs.skeptical.2.1828439.html


    Again, prints made by helpers of Adams have sold for four-figure sums,
    25 years ago, so the idea the negatives are next to worthless is B.S.
    by the family to protect the exclusivity of their estate. They are
    ALL greedy ass-----.
     
    Rich, Jul 28, 2010
    #7
  8. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On 7/27/2010 9:03 PM, Rich wrote:

    > Again, prints made by helpers of Adams have sold for four-figure sums,
    > 25 years ago, so the idea the negatives are next to worthless is B.S.
    > by the family to protect the exclusivity of their estate. They are
    > ALL greedy ass-----.


    - From the article:

    "Turnage said he's consulting lawyers about possibly suing Norsigian for
    using a copyrighted name for commercial purposes. He described Norsigian
    as on an "obsessive quest."

    Copyrighted name? Do they have any clue what they're talking about?
    Trademarked, maybe, but you can't copyright a name.

    Wonder if these plates were ever published in any form? If they were,
    the copyright is likely expired. If they weren't, then the copyright is
    likely in effect for 70 years after the death of Adams, and his estate
    owns the copyright to them. My guess is the latter, meaning that the
    owner of these plates has no right to make and sell prints.

    - --
    - -Ryan McGinnis
    The BIG Storm Picture -- http://bigstormpicture.com
    Vortex-2 image licensing at http://vortex-2.com
    Getty: http://www.gettyimages.com/search/search.aspx?artist=Ryan McGinnis

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

    iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMT7YaAAoJEIzODkDZ7B1bTXsH/2s1QHJzmqZbgDnKyGEmtdE7
    cJdcWFGRhkzPuNJk0rLbe59C6T2Htknr0DPqjOo0sCLqMFZccc2yi+ymmikgHFhE
    5qtGCZESeGolKjXzUPhPhX4WjkSod1ip3B8Nv2ME+HCZ4GVyYxUJqUnfk70cr7GV
    l4Fhf9oAmFuHPnHo+J+Os21OnO6+qh4daEntpd72w4Jm5e4aVg3fMbWUG7lc3YF7
    BXJqq129sYY2j2bRKFrw2uplrp91upvJwjmcqIi8CUgRj5CKKwDMoiYI0TrguAI1
    b08OBT6ppXBtJHljmXaB+et4VbKNcZa7AQJLTQ6ZPTu3p6wEzNmKC/HhHFA3HWc=
    =IzjO
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Ryan McGinnis, Jul 28, 2010
    #8
  9. RichA

    Vance Guest

    On Jul 27, 5:41 am, RichA <> wrote:
    > http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.htm...
    >
    > $10 to possibly $200M in value.


    What you have is a collection of very carefully exposed and processed
    negatives similar in that respect to what many of his contemporaries
    produced. It isn't until you add his skill and artistry in the
    darkroom that you have something special. To paraphrase Adams
    himself, he wasn't that great a photographer, but he was great in the
    darkroom. As things that can provide an insight into his development
    as an artist, they have a value over and above their value as
    negatives, but probably only a few as exemplars.

    Vance
     
    Vance, Jul 28, 2010
    #9
  10. RichA

    Vance Guest

    On Jul 27, 1:58 pm, RichA <> wrote:
    > On Jul 27, 11:27 am, Allen <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > Savageduck wrote:
    > > > On 2010-07-27 07:56:48 -0700, Rich <> said:

    >
    > > >> On Jul 27, 10:41 am, Ryan McGinnis <> wrote:
    > > >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > > >>> Hash: SHA1

    >
    > > >>> On 7/27/2010 7:41 AM, RichA wrote:

    >
    > > >>>>http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.htm...

    >
    > > >>>> $10 to possibly $200M in value.

    >
    > > >>> That's amazing -- though the art world's take on the value of these
    > > >>> kinds of things kinda boggles my mind.  $200M for glass plate negatives
    > > >> ?

    >
    > > >> Unlike prints, negatives can duplicate perfectly the image over and
    > > >> over.

    >
    > > > Not quite. As valuable as those negatives might be, there is half of the
    > > > Adams creative process missing, the darkroom print work he did himself,
    > > > or supervised.
    > > > Without his print specific darkroom notes, you might be able to
    > > > replicate a close approximation of an Adams print from those negatives,
    > > > but you would not have an "Adams" print.

    >
    > > In case anyone still pays any attention to Rich, his post(answered well
    > > by Savageduck) should provide sufficient evidence of his total
    > > ignorance/idiocy about photography.
    > > Allen

    >
    >    Adams prints were being sold in the mid 1980's for thousands of
    > dollars and were made by his assistant.  If you think his artistic
    > talent can't be extracted from the negs, you are just an imbecile.- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    An assistant can produce a print UNDER the direction of the
    photographer in the form of notes, markedup prints, and feedback.
    Over 4 decades ago I spent 3 days in Yosemite with Adams in one of the
    workshops he gave. After learning how to make choices on exposure re
    the Zone System, which he just formalized, but didn't invent, it was
    time in the darkroom with our Type 45 P/N (if memory serves)
    Polaroids. When we produced something he would make suggestions on
    buring and dodging in some detail and explain why he would work this
    area one way and another area differently in terms of the viewers
    experience. It's there that you find what made Adams, well, Adams.
    Without that sensitivity to the viewers experience and knowing how to
    shape it with very subtle manipulations towards a clearly held vision
    of the final print you don't have an Adams print. That can be done
    under direction, but it isn't inherent or even implied in the
    negative. There is no extraction of the artistic intent possible
    anymore than you can tell what the final building will look like from
    the foundation.

    A good printer can take a negative and replicate an existing print,
    but that isn't even close to the same thing. A very, very good
    printer who has become really familiar with Adams' work can produce
    one in the style of Adams, but it is a producton of what would be
    typical for Adams and not necessarily what he would have done with the
    same negative.
     
    Vance, Jul 28, 2010
    #10
  11. On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:10:20 -0700 (PDT), Vance <>
    wrote:

    >On Jul 27, 1:58 pm, RichA <> wrote:
    >> On Jul 27, 11:27 am, Allen <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > Savageduck wrote:
    >> > > On 2010-07-27 07:56:48 -0700, Rich <> said:

    >>
    >> > >> On Jul 27, 10:41 am, Ryan McGinnis <> wrote:
    >> > >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> > >>> Hash: SHA1

    >>
    >> > >>> On 7/27/2010 7:41 AM, RichA wrote:

    >>
    >> > >>>>http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/index.htm...

    >>
    >> > >>>> $10 to possibly $200M in value.

    >>
    >> > >>> That's amazing -- though the art world's take on the value of these
    >> > >>> kinds of things kinda boggles my mind.  $200M for glass plate negatives
    >> > >> ?

    >>
    >> > >> Unlike prints, negatives can duplicate perfectly the image over and
    >> > >> over.

    >>
    >> > > Not quite. As valuable as those negatives might be, there is half of the
    >> > > Adams creative process missing, the darkroom print work he did himself,
    >> > > or supervised.
    >> > > Without his print specific darkroom notes, you might be able to
    >> > > replicate a close approximation of an Adams print from those negatives,
    >> > > but you would not have an "Adams" print.

    >>
    >> > In case anyone still pays any attention to Rich, his post(answered well
    >> > by Savageduck) should provide sufficient evidence of his total
    >> > ignorance/idiocy about photography.
    >> > Allen

    >>
    >>    Adams prints were being sold in the mid 1980's for thousands of
    >> dollars and were made by his assistant.  If you think his artistic
    >> talent can't be extracted from the negs, you are just an imbecile.- Hide quoted text -
    >>
    >> - Show quoted text -

    >
    >An assistant can produce a print UNDER the direction of the
    >photographer in the form of notes, markedup prints, and feedback.
    >Over 4 decades ago I spent 3 days in Yosemite with Adams in one of the
    >workshops he gave. After learning how to make choices on exposure re
    >the Zone System, which he just formalized, but didn't invent, it was
    >time in the darkroom with our Type 45 P/N (if memory serves)
    >Polaroids. When we produced something he would make suggestions on
    >buring and dodging in some detail and explain why he would work this
    >area one way and another area differently in terms of the viewers
    >experience. It's there that you find what made Adams, well, Adams.
    >Without that sensitivity to the viewers experience and knowing how to
    >shape it with very subtle manipulations towards a clearly held vision
    >of the final print you don't have an Adams print. That can be done
    >under direction, but it isn't inherent or even implied in the
    >negative. There is no extraction of the artistic intent possible
    >anymore than you can tell what the final building will look like from
    >the foundation.
    >
    >A good printer can take a negative and replicate an existing print,
    >but that isn't even close to the same thing. A very, very good
    >printer who has become really familiar with Adams' work can produce
    >one in the style of Adams, but it is a producton of what would be
    >typical for Adams and not necessarily what he would have done with the
    >same negative.


    After having seen your tilted-building tourists' crapshots, it's obvious
    you've never been near any photography workshop in your life. Or if you
    have, you've done nothing but be a huge insult to anything they've ever
    done. Your results today are nothing but a huge embarrassment to anyone who
    might have ever tried to teach you anything. I've no doubt that even the
    author of some photography book would claim he never wrote it if you
    claimed to have read it, just to distance himself from anything you've ever
    produced.
     
    Outing Trolls is FUN!, Jul 28, 2010
    #11
  12. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On 7/28/2010 4:27 AM, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:

    > After having seen your tilted-building tourists' crapshots, it's obvious
    > you've never been near any photography workshop in your life. Or if you
    > have, you've done nothing but be a huge insult to anything they've ever
    > done. Your results today are nothing but a huge embarrassment to anyone who
    > might have ever tried to teach you anything. I've no doubt that even the
    > author of some photography book would claim he never wrote it if you
    > claimed to have read it, just to distance himself from anything you've ever
    > produced.


    Trolls used to have so much more talent than this!

    - --
    - -Ryan McGinnis
    The BIG Storm Picture -- http://bigstormpicture.com
    Vortex-2 image licensing at http://vortex-2.com
    Getty: http://www.gettyimages.com/search/search.aspx?artist=Ryan McGinnis

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

    iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMUDo+AAoJEIzODkDZ7B1b5SkH/08VN5pulHwHs5V9JxulQ05M
    RYCY4W2RVWYj9rrLAVKX26DHVIJVnCwDBZrlUaZSUimuLVkcO4BkVyivcttyJAkk
    fzLaxNWNo5pBC71mKH5U6WUug5pu5A6YNaiwaD0ITuxm1SdcjYddPw+4jAI+cZ+H
    hrxTXaVVxMmCTC7+Gge9c7JhAE4p+u1JOnHt/mBR9DFv4pjoewyZ91I8h5+mgccT
    ABtQv/UNEzsQhMBWE+Etfbl5AP9xGko7fdIq/+TwVbOC35Zi3AsfgKYr/TbSqob2
    i2rU8pkDH2fo89WG1bnQMSstreCaeRQNAFlEm5cBx2ywEYvaADM94Br2RKgvlrQ=
    =DzZt
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Ryan McGinnis, Jul 28, 2010
    #12
  13. On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:10:06 -0500, Ryan McGinnis <>
    wrote:

    >On 7/28/2010 4:27 AM, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:
    >
    >> After having seen your tilted-building tourists' crapshots, it's obvious
    >> you've never been near any photography workshop in your life. Or if you
    >> have, you've done nothing but be a huge insult to anything they've ever
    >> done. Your results today are nothing but a huge embarrassment to anyone who
    >> might have ever tried to teach you anything. I've no doubt that even the
    >> author of some photography book would claim he never wrote it if you
    >> claimed to have read it, just to distance himself from anything you've ever
    >> produced.

    >
    >Trolls used to have so much more talent than this!


    It depends on who you are calling a troll. I know for a fact that Vance is
    not only a troll but an image thieving troll. Everyone in this newsgroup
    witnessed his theft of others' photography that he tried to pass off as his
    own. He even admitted it.

    Now, are YOU another troll?

    Think carefully about which side you are taking.
     
    Outing Trolls is FUN!, Jul 28, 2010
    #13
  14. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On 7/28/2010 9:28 AM, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:

    > Herp derp derp derp herp, herp derp derp herp. Derp derp derp! Herp, derp.
    > Derp herp derp derp, herp de derp, herp derp herp derp. Derp derp. Herp
    > derp derp derp derp herp derp. Herp herp derp.
    >
    > Herp derp?
    >
    > Derp herp. Derp.


    I see.

    - --
    - -Ryan McGinnis
    The BIG Storm Picture -- http://bigstormpicture.com
    Vortex-2 image licensing at http://vortex-2.com
    Getty: http://www.gettyimages.com/search/search.aspx?artist=Ryan McGinnis

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

    iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMUJOcAAoJEIzODkDZ7B1bwroH/jgLjdMw6r5ouKXYdVGUQO87
    SZvb8z2ZENnhEj3iUn2qlAcQS8K+0J8QlDZwmkIDLU/8mQ5knT3gzGciF6aOlYGK
    Q0O7PON1/K11H/1kksWvP8G6ij461qS27EFejSzMmp+4QXQXdMyatxWV8yGEZAzR
    IGrtUQQ04KJ/AUwf5gf5OMJt/jTEXp5kjGSK4J5djVyjokcX4k8rOP0jvbFj+EJU
    D6THurlfWp0aZWL9ORFIS71P2tvgxQrALeT8Jtw8Sof0RoQ1fQKXVX5FzEljT5kV
    0/0VB1V3DkrTzw3ADBSdPpgmDZ/EOYzr/KGdgUKD1E5xw1rStlamzo9/ggGr8Us=
    =CqkJ
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Ryan McGinnis, Jul 28, 2010
    #14
  15. RichA

    Vance Guest

    On Jul 28, 7:28 am, Outing Trolls is FUN! <>
    wrote:
    > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:10:06 -0500, Ryan McGinnis <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >On 7/28/2010 4:27 AM, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:

    >
    > >> After having seen your tilted-building tourists' crapshots, it's obvious
    > >> you've never been near any photography workshop in your life. Or if you
    > >> have, you've done nothing but be a huge insult to anything they've ever
    > >> done. Your results today are nothing but a huge embarrassment to anyone who
    > >> might have ever tried to teach you anything. I've no doubt that even the
    > >> author of some photography book would claim he never wrote it if you
    > >> claimed to have read it, just to distance himself from anything you've ever
    > >> produced.

    >
    > >Trolls used to have so much more talent than this!

    >
    > It depends on who you are calling a troll. I know for a fact that Vance is
    > not only a troll but an image thieving troll. Everyone in this newsgroup
    > witnessed his theft of others' photography that he tried to pass off as his
    > own. He even admitted it.
    >
    > Now, are YOU another troll?
    >
    > Think carefully about which side you are taking.
     
    Vance, Jul 29, 2010
    #15
  16. RichA

    John Turco Guest

    Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
    >
    > We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    > drugs began to take hold. I remember Gary Edstrom <>
    > saying something like:
    >
    > >but the iconic
    > >photographer's representatives dismissed the claim as a fraud and said
    > >they're worthless.

    >
    > Even if they are actually real - of course they would say that. The
    > Adams family are living off the old man and have been for years, so
    > don't want any rocking of that particular boat.



    "The Adams Family" -- sounds familiar, no?

    --
    Cordially,
    John Turco <>

    Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
     
    John Turco, Aug 16, 2010
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RichA

    Ansel Adams was right about Hawaii

    RichA, Jul 15, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    29
    Views:
    1,251
    Robert Coe
    Aug 2, 2009
  2. RichA

    Ansel Adams negative's story heats up

    RichA, Jul 29, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    523
    Bruce
    Jul 31, 2010
  3. Robert Coe

    Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

    Robert Coe, Aug 5, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    490
    John McWilliams
    Sep 6, 2012
  4. ray

    Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

    ray, Aug 6, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    239
  5. David Dyer-Bennet

    Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

    David Dyer-Bennet, Aug 7, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    261
    David Dyer-Bennet
    Aug 7, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page