/ Ansel Adams - Moon Over Half Dome
I just got an alert from an art website to say that the original, signed, 1960 Moon Over Half Dome print is coming up for auction on the 1st Feb.
The other thing - I'm not a premium member to this website so there's no details of where the auction is or the reserve price (unless I pay). my guess is 2-3k
Any ideas on how to find where the auction might be?
Sorry, can't help with your question but how many of these prints exist, just the one?
I'm no expert on photography sales, but I reckon you'd be very lucky to get it for that price. Hell, I'd buy it for that and I don't really have a disposable income.
Ten times that maybe?
> Hell, I'd buy it for that and I don't really have a disposable income.
But I would outbid you.
Exactly and you'd still get a bargain! :)
> Sorry, can't help with your question but how many of these prints exist, just the one?
> I'm no expert on photography sales, but I reckon you'd be very lucky to get it for that price. Hell, I'd buy it for that and I don't really have a disposable income.
> Ten times that maybe?
Dunno - I did a bit of googling and I think it sold for about 2000$ in 2006.
> Dunno - I did a bit of googling and I think it sold for about 2000$ in 2006.
Blimey, fair enough. Good luck with the bidding. Don't create too much interest here though! ;)
Don't think I'll be bidding - as much as I'd like it 3k would easily finance my next trip to climb the bloody thing!
Ha, true that.
I'll make do with the basic print - 20 quid :-)
Amazing really how cheap (relatively speaking) photographs are. I wonder how many prints of this exist? In iconic terms, it kind of seems like paying that sort of price for a Lowry or something.
yeah saw that too - it was 2004.
Is it because halfdome is initialed and winter storm is signed?
Barking mad that anyone would pay $45k for a photo.
> it kind of seems like paying that sort of price for a Lowry or something.
But there is only one original of each Lowry. You aren't paying for the negative of the print, you are just paying for a signed copy of a print.
Presumably because multiples prints are made.
I'm sure that if, like a painting, there was only one print in excistence of an iconic Ansel Adams photo, trhen it might be worth a million or so.
Yes of course, but that's why I wondered how many prints there were in the run. If there's only ten say, it's still a fairly exclusive object. Given that that sort of price will barely buy you a decent second hand car for example, it still seems relatively cheap - to me at least. Of course, he might have printed and stamped thousands of the buggers...
There was a BBC series on photography a few years ago, and one programme looked at the commercial side of photography. Apparently with Adams, his early prints are much more highly valued than later interpretations. The number of editions and who actually printed them also makes a huge difference to value.
> Presumably because multiples prints are made.
> I'm sure that if, like a painting, there was only one print in excistence of an iconic Ansel Adams photo, trhen it might be worth a million or so.
Yeah that sounds about right doesn't it.
On a slightly related not. When I worked s an odd job person at the Royal Geographical Society, I 'discovered' some original prints by Carlton Watkins.
Carlton Watkins was in some respects the forerunner to Ansel Adams, being the photographer who's pics of Yosemite Valley had some time earlier provided some of the impetus for the establishment of Yosemite as a national park.
Unfortunately, there was a fire in his Studio which destroyed his original plates and prints which weren't already in collections.
I wrote my dissertation on Carlton Watkins whilst at university, so I knew what I was looking at and it was something of a shock to find them sitting neglected in a drawer at the RGS.
Nobody knew anything about them and the collections staff's response was a shrug when I mentioned it to them, the things must be worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. I suppose when you've got a bunch of Mercators knocking around, the odd Watkins goes largely unnoticed!
I found some Hokkusai prints in a drawer there too similarly uncatalogued and received a similar response. Crazy.
I saw why when I went to the Adams centenary exhbition ten years ago. Adams' printing style in the 60s and 70s was much more dramatic and contrasty than his early work from the 30s and 40s. But to my eye - and apparently I'm not alone in this - the later prints look harsh and heavy-handed if you view them directly side by side with earlier ones.
Reproductions in books are a completely different story. Here the later contrasty prints, that look so much worse "in the flesh", reproduce much better than the earlier prints whose subtleties are lost in the book printing process.
Elsewhere on the site
This years ROCfest will be slightly different. We've decided to run a Climbing Festival, not just a competition! Over... Read more
With four photos in this week's top ten, and a UKC gallery of stunning images we thought it was time we had a chat with... Read more
F ounded in 1993, Mountain Hardwear are a pretty young mountaineering clothing and equipment manufacturer but are also one of... Read more
Steve Dunning has made what is likely the tenth ascent of The New Statesman, the classic and bold gritstone arete at the Cow... Read more
Climbing Technology’s range of winter hardware continues to grow and for winter 2014 they have a crampon in the range to... Read more