Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/04/09

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Is Eggleston in the right? What is the meaning of "limited edition"?
From: kcarney1 at cox.net (Ken Carney)
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 19:06:42 -0500
References: <2C55998C-6C95-4A87-BB86-3E27ECAFC300@mac.com>


-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Adam
Bridge
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 8:54 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: [Leica] Is Eggleston in the right? What is the meaning of "limited
edition"?

>I understand that many of Ansel's prints weren't made directly by Ansel but
by those under his supervision. But they were not mass produced. I have the
feeling that for every print that made it out of the darkroom there were
many "failures." Maybe I'm wrong. And I don't think Ansel claimed to do
limited editions although I could be completely wrong on this.

I think AA was very picky, whichever assistant printed.  I have read that
when he became famous, collectors would spend hours with loupes going over a
print to be sure there were no imperfections.  Part of the Ansel lore is
that he would keep a number of his famous prints that were flawed in some
way.  When a photographer came to visit and show Ansel his or her work,
Ansel would critique it and then call for someone to bring him one of his
prints, such as Moonrise, to compare.   He would study the student's print
again and then declare he could never print again, ripping his print in
half.

Ken



In reply to: Message from abridge at mac.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] Is Eggleston in the right? What is the meaning of "limited edition"?)