One of the issues I have with the classification of photographs is that they were often made from "negatives" that were not necessarily originals and that existed in multiples. When we used to get a roll of film developed and get prints, we were given original negatives and they were run through the machinery to produce the prints. However, in commercial contexts, as I understand things, that would not happen because it tended to degrade the (valuable) original negative through handling. Instead, to make contact prints (photographs) the actual film itself, the original negative, was used to generate (via a process that I can't fully explain) contact negatives in the size of the intended prints. These contact negatives were often distributed to customers and others who would need to have prints made. I used to deal in Academy Awards materials and I often came across contact negatives in 8 x 10 format that could be used to make "original" photographic prints of classic Oscars moments. They were not the original photographers' negatives but were contact negatives and prints generated from them would be "original" prints but not by the original photographer. Hence the value of stamps, signatures, cartouches, etc. Now, obviously, the paper used to make the prints and the processes used could date some of them to an era after the photo was taken but to the extent that there is old paper stock available (and there is), and someone capable of handling the old processes (and there are some artists who prefer the old forms of photographic printmaking) one could counterfeit original prints from a contact negative.
Last edited by Exhibitman; 08-17-2010 at 08:11 PM.
|
08-17-2010, 08:08 PM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode