Lucky Find!!

[bread]

A collection of early Ansel Adams negatives long believed to have been lost in a fire were discovered in a box purchased for $45 at a garage sale in Fresno, California. Read the article here:

http://www.knx1070.com/Negatives-of-...-at-a-/7780590

Be sure to click on the radio news podcast at the top!

Why can't I be so lucky????

[winger]

There's a fair amount of question whether these really are Adams'. The guy has had them for 10 years and it's taken him this long to get them authenticated. It kinda sounds like it's taken that long to find "experts" who would say they're Adams'. There are some long threads on apug about it 'cause the lawyer posted over there. I want to see the actual report that they're releasing tomorrow. And I doubt I'd cough up that much money unless I knew for a fact that it was Adams'. And the examples on the site don't strike me as great ones either.

[Jim Jones]

An indistinguished unmounted and unsigned Ansel Adams print was sold in a $200 lot of photos near here a few years ago. Someone got it at an Edward Weston and AA workshop in 1940, and an area man eventually got it and photos the student took at the workshop. The AA print didn't interest me, but a photo of AA and EW setting up their big cameras did. Also, there was one of EW critiquing someones's print. There were a few dozen photos all together. Some hadn't been perfectly fixed, though. The AA print was fine. I didn't get around to buying them, so they were sold to someone in St. Louis. A few people in this area are familiar with AA photos through books and calendars. However, most wouldn't buy one of his photos unless it came in a nice frame.

Occasionally good equipment shows up in auctions. I got a real steal on some Leica gear from the early 30s. On the other hand, at another auction someone paid about $125 for two Minolta 101s with a WA and a zoom lens, metal case, and cheap tripod. I didn't bother to bid on that one. Years ago, while people still valued film cameras, the first item up at an estate auction was a Yashica model D TLR. I had to pay $2 for that. Looking for such deals isn't worth the time and travel expense.

[bread]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

An indistinguished unmounted and unsigned Ansel Adams print was sold in a $200 lot of photos near here a few years ago. Someone got it at an Edward Weston and AA workshop in 1940, and an area man eventually got it and photos the student took at the workshop. The AA print didn't interest me, but a photo of AA and EW setting up their big cameras did. Also, there was one of EW critiquing someones's print. There were a few dozen photos all together. Some hadn't been perfectly fixed, though. The AA print was fine. I didn't get around to buying them, so they were sold to someone in St. Louis. A few people in this area are familiar with AA photos through books and calendars. However, most wouldn't buy one of his photos unless it came in a nice frame.

Occasionally good equipment shows up in auctions. I got a real steal on some Leica gear from the early 30s. On the other hand, at another auction someone paid about $125 for two Minolta 101s with a WA and a zoom lens, metal case, and cheap tripod. I didn't bother to bid on that one. Years ago, while people still valued film cameras, the first item up at an estate auction was a Yashica model D TLR. I had to pay $2 for that. Looking for such deals isn't worth the time and travel expense.

We don't seem to ever have estate auctions or yard sales with interesting finds--at least not photographic-wise. Folks around here don't seem to value 'old stuff', mostly just calling it junk and throwing it away. The same holds true for our heritage buildings--if it weren't for the work of our local heritage organization, we'd have few buildings of local historical value left. Come to think of it, that's all we have: a few.

A new twist in the story. A Bay area woman claims the negatives likely belong to her Uncle Earl. http://www.ktvu.com/news/24432262/detail.html

[Jim Jones]

If I was Mariam Walton, I wouldn't have turned the original four of the disputed images over to anybody for anything. If Scott Nichols has been studying AA fr so long, he should be able to photograph them (or have someone else do the camera work) with enough detail to compare with the disputed plates. Uncle Earl Brooks' original prints will be worth something while such a fuss is being made over the whole dispute. Walton or someone in the family might possiblly prove to be the copyright holder, but probably not the legal owner of the plates. This might result in neither Walton nor Rick Norsigian being able to profit much from the find while lawyers gather like vultures.