Quote:
Originally Posted by billyb
Scott A.
Nice Ruth photo, glad to see you are still keeping an eye on this web site. I may have to start researching the families of photographers, you have some great examples.
Bill Boyd
|
Both my father and grandfather were newspaper photographers. They both had darkrooms in their houses and so, as kids and grandkids, our childhoods were documented photographically as if we were royalty!
I would offer one bit of advice to anyone buying "rare" photos: Every photographer wants his photo to be plastered across the universe. Never, ever assume you are buying the only copy of a photo. If there's one for sale, there are probably at least dozens more out there. With wire photos, probably way more than that since they were distributed to every newspaper across the country who subscribed to that wire service: ap, ups, etc. And anyone who worked at a newspaper had easy access to those photos.
I've been in the darkroom at the Detroit Free Press and News back in the 70's and 80's and I know from experience, those photographers experimented with cropping and different exposures and always made multiple copies of photos. Once the negative was produced, if the photo was a keeper, they made lots and lots of copies and regularly smuggled them out to give away.
And wire photos were considered junk and regularly scrapped as such. I'm blown away by the interest and prices being paid for them. To me they're no more valuable than a photo copy.
Now the guy with the original negative....that's the guy with the gold! But the hobby hasn't quite come to that conclusion yet. Photos are still fetching more than negatives it seems. I really think that will change as time goes on. There's only one original negative.
Crappy wire photo:
