Quote:
Originally Posted by GKreindler
That Ruth is pretty darn gorgeous. I know Corbis has the uncropped image on their site, and every time I pass it on my searches, I want to paint it.
But I still dream about that Greenberg negative. Yes, I said it.
Graig
|
That image on Cornis is nice. The face on the original negative is crystal clear. Appears to be either damaged or dicked with sometime in the process on the said photo. Illy eyes go directly to it rather than the good parts of photo. If it was like the one on Corbis I would prob give it a mini run.
the main problem I have is the description. It could potentially be very verv very misleading to newbies in the photo world. It is just simply not THE or one of the best Ruth photos on the planet. Not even remotely close. I am just tired of the auction houses making statements like this. I guess it has always been this way but has become just so extreme.