Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/04/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Adam Bridge wrote: I read this article over on Digital Photography Review about William Eggleston's issuance of a large-format (44 x 60) ink-jet print set of a previous limited edition dye transfer print (11 x 17). He was sued by a collector who claimed that the new prints reduced the value of his dye transfer prints which were "limited edition." The judge found that Eggleston had created an "essentially different" work from the same transparency and so was within his rights. ======================================== I read that too, Adam, and I had heard of the suit earlier. I happen to agree with the decision, and all of the artist friends I've talked to do also. The ruling was that the artist owns the image concept itself and that any edition represents a limited number of prints in a particular medium. There is a vast difference IMO between an edition of dye transfers (pretty much obsolete now) and the giant inkjet prints that are now in vogue. It could even work to the collector's advantage eventually if the dye series is judged in the marketplace to be a more authentic representation of the artist's original intent. Just for full disclosure, Egg and I were good friends when I lived in Memphis in the 60s, so I hope that's not coloring my opinion. -- Phil Swango 307 Aliso Dr SE Albuquerque, NM 87108 505-262-4085