Re: Steichen image in April's 'Vanity Fair'
 
 
Ah, thank you! The answer to my question.  Happy traveling,
Katharine
On Mar 9, 2009, at 6:17 PM, Tom Hawkins wrote:
 
Hi folks, 
 
I'm traveling just now, and have no access to a scanner, or else  
I'd put the 
image up somewhere for everyone to take a look.  Didn't mean to  
start an 
avalanche.... But the link that Katherine provided is what's in  
Vanity fair, 
though ever so slightly more saturated in the magazine. 
 
Tom 
 
 
On 3/9/09 6:38 PM, "Christina Z. Anderson" <zphoto@montana.net> wrote: 
 
 
Katharine said: 
 
Well,  okay, since no one would answer my question I spent the 
afternoon out in a roaring sleetstorm looking for a copy of the April 
Vanity Fair to answer the question for myself. 
 
You poor thing, but thanks for the sleuth work. 
 
 
Katharine said: 
I was curious which print of Steichen's was reproduced, in an effort 
to make sense of the statement made earlier in this thread:  ""There 
was a good article on this image in Photo On Campus about the one 
that sold for 3 million.  That was a gum print, but it says there 
were three prints of this negative made so I wonder how the third one 
was made." 
 
What's to "make sense??" 
 
Katherine said: 
For the record, the  print that sold for $2.9 million was not a gum 
print,  but gum over platinum. 
 
By whose assertion is this? 
 
Katharine said: 
There were two other prints made from 
the same negative; one of them, which Stieglitz gave to the 
Metropolitan in 1933 and is still in the Met's collection AFAIK, has 
been analyzed and is believed to be hand-applied colori over 
platinum.  The third, which is owned by MOMA,  is platinum and 
cyanotype. 
 
Well, to further complicate your trek, the ArtNews says it was a hand 
colored BW print that went up for the $2.9 auction.  So maybe you  
should do 
some more trekking--right to the Getty Conservation Dept. where  
they can 
scan it with electron microscopy and REALLY prove what's  
underneath that 
luscious print or all three.  Obviously all the auctioneers should  
be more 
aware of what they are selling since there is so much conflicting 
information. 
Chris 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 |