Discussion in 'Collector's Corner' started by Mitica100, Jul 27, 2010.
Wow! Someone got to be instant millionaire:
Great find, now if only they can recover Robert Capa's Normandy beach negatives we'll be set.
LOL It wasn't instant. That guy spent years trying to get those plates recognized as AA's.
Ruh-roh, as Scooby Doo says!
A woman has come forward, and she has told sources in California that the plates were shot by her uncle, Earl Brooks, a Fresno,CA photog who often shot at Yosemite...and she happens to have a print that appears to have been shot just a few minutes after one of the newly found "Adams" plates was exposed, based on the landmark in the photo and the cloud formations shown in her print, and in the newly-found plate...
At this time, the "find" appears to be somebody else's old plates...time will tell...
The Online Photographer: Mystery Solved! They're by Uncle Earl
From the CNN news article claiming the plates were by Ansel Adams:
Thanks a lot for your opinion, Manny. Give my regards to your
friends spending the rest of their lives in prison on your testimony.
So what, some dude was following Ansel Adams around taking all the images he was, only a few minutes later?
Man, if I were Adams, I would of been pissed and bonked them with my tripod a few times..
The thing I don't get is why two shots minutes apart? Those plates and processing couldn't have been cheap (even in 1920s pricing). Was somebody giving lessons? "Ok, so here's how you take a photo. Now you try."
I know I wouldn't carry all of that gear up those hills and only take one shot. Especially if I was worried about the gear not being exactly right. (and I think that gear in the '20s was still a little iffy)
Did you happen to read Matthew Adam's (grandson) blog on the subject. He provides a very detailed analysis of why the negatives would not belong to Ansel.
I was just reading up on the glass plate history and the first GP photo was taken in 1839.
They were shot by an lady's Uncle Earl
The cheep skates trying to pass them off as St Ansel's are Charlatans
I'm a little confused on one point....how can he make any money from the negatives? I mean, put into today's terms, if somebody finds my SD card (especially if it's proved to be mine) then they don't own the copyrights to do anything with those images. Is it different with negatives that are known not to belong to this guy (copyright at least)? Is there a time period on the copyright of negatives or photos? I would think that if it was proved to be ansel adams' negatives (the only way they'd be worth money) then that money would go to his descendants who would own the copyright??
Separate names with a comma.