It's been a LONG time, but I thought I once heard Adams say that he usually would wait for just the right moment, then take one photo. One of the things the "experts" allegedly used to "verify" the photos was that the cloud patterns were similar in some of the photos this guy had to the cloud patterns in known Adams photos. If what my fading memory tells me is correct, then this would inidcate that the photos were not taken by Adams, but by someone with him.

Geoff_K said:
Unless he stole them, they are his to use as he see's fit in my book.

right, unfortunately your book is not the law. as I already explained.

PB PM said:
I saw another report about these, more claims that they are fakes, or belong to another photographer from the period.

Yeah, it'll be interesting to see what happens. I truly think they are his, crazier things have happened. Although I guess they could be another photographers, although if they are, they must have been acquantences given that in some of the photos are students/friends of Adams.

Lets go what I have in my garage. Maybe I won't need a job anymore :)))
Lucky guy - very good! :)

I saw another report about these, more claims that they are fakes, or belong to another photographer from the period.

Unless he stole them, they are his to use as he see's fit in my book.

FML. . .if I were only so lucky. . .

PB PM said:
I think one of the articles on this matter pointed out that due to the fact that the photos were taken before modern copyright laws existed, and thus they are not protected. That being said, I think that if the photos are authentic they should be returned to the family. Maybe give the guy some kind of reward, but not $200 million.

Doesn't matter. It's more than modern copyright law. It applies even more so in cases where the art is being mishandled. Let's say for example for some bizarre reason you owned the mona lisa. It would be illegal for you to draw a mustache on it. Whatever group is in charge of da Vinci's works would have the right to request the painting back.

I'm torn about the situation though. Part of me wants to say lucky find, but I also understand the point of view you brought up.

I think one of the articles on this matter pointed out that due to the fact that the photos were taken before modern copyright laws existed, and thus they are not protected. That being said, I think that if the photos are authentic they should be returned to the family. Maybe give the guy some kind of reward, but not $200 million.

PB PM said:
He may be lucky, or not. The Globe and Mail quotes some of Ansel's family, making comment on this, they seem to think they many not be Adam's shots.

yeah I read that, but they seem to be more just kind of sore about it happening and that because it seems unbelievable they don't want to believe it. Although I am completely baffled by his plans to make prints and sell them.

A) isn't that illegal (as the family pointed out) Artists have a right to any of their work, and when an artist dies that goes to the artist's trust...

B) Seems like he'd make a lot more money just selling the actual negatives to museums/private collectors...

Yeah, I heard about this about a couple days back. It's pretty appropriate, because I did my final paper on him for my history of photography class.

He may be lucky, or not. The Globe and Mail quotes some of Ansel's family, making comment on this, they seem to think they many not be Adam's shots.

This is my city. Fresno, CA

haha that's so strange. pretty incredible

I'm Niko Doby. I get lucky every night all night :^)

I don't think it is luck but rather the persistence of the painter who get them for 45 bucks. As you can read, it took him 10 years to get them authenticated.

Me? Not THAT lucky!

Heck, I feel lucky if I get out of bed in the morning and my shoulder doesn't hurt!

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/07/27/ansel.adams.discovery/?hpt=Mid

Update: Let the games begin!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/7913901/Ansel-Adams-discovery-sparks-row-as-family-say-negatives-are-fakes.html