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?
From: benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney)
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:38:55 +0930
References: <CAOfQYBsuSe-x+oxEKgzdbwTD4y=jXsppd79V6FF33bvCyLhQ7g@mail.gmail.com>

Although it's the way the art market works, editioning is useful for maybe
0.01% of photographers, and it's a hangover from printmaking which, to me,
doesn't make sense in photography.

I agree with the judge that a different print on a new medium does not
undermine the validity of the earlier edition.  Aside from that, I am also
incredibly sceptical about the plaintiff's claim that the new versions
diluted the value of the earlier editions.  Especially in this case, I
think exactly the opposite is likely.

Marty




On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Phil Swango <pswango at att.net> wrote:

> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from pswango at att.net (Phil Swango) ([Leica] Is Eggleston in the right?)