I still think we could have gotten 5 or 6 of the "Wells Cathedral"
>>prints into commerce without anyone getting wise.
Luis said:
>Pretty good sense of humor Dick:)
I hope everyone knows that was said in jest. It does point out some of the hazards that still lurk in the rare photograph collecting world. Those prints that Paul Caffell pulled were for all intents, indistinguishable from the original Evans. When I was at the Royal, Pam Roberts, Mike Ware, myself, and Paul Caffell looked at Caffell's print next to Evans's. We all agreed there were subtle differences but none that wouldn't be observed between various ones made by Evans himself. I understand there is an underground market for old paper in Europe, mostly used for forging prints and drawings. Put those prints on some 1880 paper and bingo, instant collectable.
It does raise the issue of how many forgeries are extant in the photo collecting world today. My first impulse would be to say alt-photos are more or less immune to forging but interestingly, one of the characteristics of some alt-processes is that images may vary considerably. Working from some original negs, I would say that a skilled modern worker could forge a Demachy, or a Kuhn, gum print. Of course make sure you don't use a modern cadmium pigment or Luis would get wise real quick. The only thing that might keep something like this out of the market would be provenance.
--Dick Sullivan
<center>
Bostick & Sullivan
Http://www.bostick-sullivan.com
505-474-0890 FAX 505-474-2857
</center>
</x-rich>