Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/04/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]There's a big discussion of it on Rangefinderforum. The people with no understanding of the history or art and photography were all angry that Eggleston "Got Away With" something they think is "Dishonest". The rest of us were surprised it even made it into court. Photographers have always sold multiple limited editions of the same photos. Each edition was considered separate and collectors valued them differently based on when they were made, size of the prints, process used, etc. Ansel Adams sold a number of limited edition portfolios, each portfolio containing a collection of prints that were sold together in one box, and labeled as part of that specific portfolio. The same prints were sold outside the portfolios in unlimited numbers. This didn't affect the value of the prints from the limited edition portfolios, which had value if kept together as a set, and were rare for that reason. -- Chris Crawford Fine Art Photography Fort Wayne, Indiana 260-437-8990 http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work! http://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-Crawford/48229272798 Become a fan on Facebook On 4/4/13 3:23 AM, "Gerry Walden" <gerry.walden at me.com> wrote: >I found this an interesting ruling on limited edition prints: > >http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/04/03/judge-eggleston-dispute-collector > >Gerry > >Gerry Walden >+44 (0)23 8046 3076 or >+44 (0)797 287 7932 >www.gwpics.com > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information