Let the Bloodbath begin.. Show your Henry Yee winnings

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by packs

I have a question about the negatives. What is the incentive to buy them if you can't then make your own copies? Also, would buying a negative and printing your own prints really be worth the cost of the negative? I'm just not understandng aside from the negative being cool, why people pay so much money for them.

Nobody said you can't make your own copies (for personal use). You just can't sell or distribute the image or printed copies without going through proper channels and also obtaining the proper rights for reproduction. If you're motivated enough to obtain the rights as well though, you can't beat having the original negative for source material.

Also consider that for a particular image, going back to the original negative enables you to get the absolute highest-quality depiction of that image possible rather than having to settle for a vintage print that may or may not have been produced by a skilled hand and may have damage from being handled over the years. For someone like, for instance, Graig Kreindler, who adds an insane level of detail to his paintings, having an original negative of a scene or portrait he is painting is like gold because of the level of detail held within the negative. Even if you're not reproducing the actual image, being able to see details in the negative that are not as visible or clear in the printed reproduction can often be useful.

And, utilitarian purposes aside and looking at it from a purely "collectibles" standpoint, it's always neat to move up the chain to have the thing-that-made-the-thing that you collect. I would liken having the negative of a popular image to having the printing plate for a popular baseball card. In and of itself it is not particularly "displayable," but it takes on a level of desirability because of its association with and use in the creation of the more-recognizable final product.

Just my 2 cents on the subject