RE: [Leica] Migrant Mother sighted--and P.O.'d

["Tim Atherton" <tim@KairosPhoto.com>]

Though they can often be high quality 4x5 copy negs - It's not good to keep
subjecting the originals to regular use.

BTW, the image we all know is considerably retouched, as was the practice in
those times. Quite a difference. I think there are details on the site:

http://lcweb.loc.gov/rr/print/128_migm.html

And here

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/fsahtml/fahome.html

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/fsahtml/faorder.html

http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/guide/price.html

Tim A

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Dan Cardish
> Sent: February 28, 2000 3:19 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: RE: [Leica] Migrant Mother sighted--and P.O.'d
>
>
> I am of the understanding that members of the public can request original
> prints made from the negatives, at basically cost.
>
> Dan C.
>
> At 12:19 PM 28-02-00 -0700, Tim Atherton wrote:
> >Of course, I wonder how much Dorothea Lange directly made from it? It was
> >shot for the FSA (or something similar?) and was owned by them, and was
> >probably, public domain as Govt. work. Hence all the FSA images in the
> >Library of Congress.
> >
> >Anyone know any more about this?
> >
>
>