Ansel Adams Garage Sale Mystery Apparently Solved

Michael Zhang · Jul 29, 2010

The mystery of the Ansel Adams garage sale negatives keeps taking on new twists, but the latest twist might have solved it once and for all.

KTVU in Oakland is reporting that a Bay Area woman named Mariam l. Walton has come forward with apparently solid proof that the photographs were not taken by Ansel Adams but her Uncle Earl. She was watching KTVU report on the story Tuesday when she suddenly saw a photograph of the Jeffrey Pine on Sentinal Dome and recognized it as a print her uncle Earl Brooks made back in 1923.

You can watch the segment and check out the pictures here.

Upon hearing this story, the fact that the clouds in the two photographs were different made me quite skeptical that the found photo was the same as Uncle Earl’s. However, I decided to investigate a bit further. Here’s a screenshot of Uncle Earl’s photograph shown in the segment:

Now, taking that screenshot and a screenshot of the photo found by Rick Norsigian in Fresno, I used Photoshop’s Auto-Align feature to match up the features in the photograph for comparison. Now here’s Norsigian’s photo aligned with the previous one. You can hover your mouse over it to overlay Uncle Earl’s for comparison:

Although the Jeffrey Pine that stood on Sentinal Dome was a well known landmark and often photographed, the fact that the lighting in the photographs match exactly seem to indicate that the two photos were in fact taken in the same session. Furthermore, notice how the branches and leaves in the two photos seem to match exactly. The uncanny similarity between the lighting and the trees seems to show that Norsigian’s photograph was indeed taken by Uncle Earl.

Keep in mind that we’re doing this comparison based on low resolution screenshots of the two photos. If we had access to the real things, this technique might reveal an even higher degree of similarity.

Oh… and did we mention Uncle Earl lived in Fresno (where the negatives were purchased) and often took photos in Yosemite?

If the photographs are indeed Uncle Earl’s and not Ansel’s, then it would appear that much of the “evidence” that was examined by experts and presented to the public was faked, and that the whole story is indeed a $200 million con.

What do you think?

(via The Online Photographer)

Image credits: Screenshots taken from broadcast by Oakland’s Channel 2

Bobmc502

Nice try tho…Those negatives were no doubt burning the box under his pooltable!
You just have to understand the nature of a bright young entrepreneural lad of Armenian decent. Fresno Bob
Frank Vizfam

With today's digital equipment and Photoshop technique, most anyone can take a picture as good as Ansil Adams. And they would be worth nothing. Go figure.
Emrocque

Oh…wait….may be not :(
Gvanderhae

The clouds are different. Yea. Cumulus clouds can completely change in less than 1-5 minutes with the winds of a front moving through. (Former pilot) How about the snow line on the mountains? Kind of matches perfectly too. Someone's yard sale treasure just went up in smoke…
Tsan10663

If you look at the shift in the shadows on the rocks from the tree (like a sundial), it appeard that IF TAKEN ON THE SAME DAY, they were shot about 30 min to an hour between them. Also, look at the cloud in both shots at the left end of the tree (very similar). To me it appears that the clouds grew while Uncle Earl took a drink from his canteen, or decided to wait for a better composition from the clouds. I give Uncle Earl credit for both!
Andreas

Minutes apart, not days apart.
Roni

LMAO!!
Mary McGrath

I can tell these are separate images by the cloud formations. Probably taken a few minutes later, in my opinion. And so many photographers try to emulate the masters. I've interviewed a number of photographers who cite specific mentors as those who influence their work.

http://www.marymcgrathphotography.com
JuneGem615

It would be the position of the sun, not the clouds in the distance, that would control the shadows. Clouds may affect the depth of shadow, but not the direction of said shadow. Also, clouds move … sometimes quickly. I do not doubt that these were taken by the same person within a very short time period and deliberately in consideration of the changing “cloud scape” for more pleasing composition.
Marty

1. This is a pine tree. It loses pine needles one at a time, but the branckes will look the same days apart, even weeks.
2. The clouds move within seconds.
3. Teh sun moves within minutes.
3. The snowline on a sunny day can move within hours.
4. The tree looks the same in both images, even the shadows and the angle of the sun is very similar. The clouds are completely different in formation, nevertheless they look like the same altitude and shape. The snowline is exactly the same in both images.
Both images were taken on the same day, less than 6 minutes apart, from exactly the same location with different exposure and/or aperture. Ansel worked alone, without Virginia or apprentices. Bracketing in those days took a couple minutes to perform. It looks to me like that's what Ansel was doing.
Uncle Earl is a phony story.
indi_progressive

Not true, I am a photoshop expert and it is impossible to reproduce exactly the warm deep textures and cold sharp detail in Ansel Adams photos, not only is his choice of subject and composition impeccable but the chemical treatment of his negatives produced an unmistakable quality which can not be reproduced.
Bluedoggie1

The clouds move. Its evident that they are the same photo by looking at the snow on the mountains in the background…the snow is the same in both pics! Much discussion about shadows and clouds…its the snow…dead giveaway that they are both dear Uncle Earle's!
Mario63nj

So I guess clouds are like fidgety kids, you can't get them to keep still. The mear fact that the tree lines up perfectly is proof enough that they were taken by the same person. My money is on Uncle Earle.
Isaac

Mi question is for someone knowledgeable about the fine art market in photography. Even if these were Ansel Adams' original negatives, isn't it completely unreal to ascribe a value of 200 million? Isn't it the print, executed by the photographer what can command those kinds of values in the market? My impression is that negative would have more of an archival/preservation value.
isaac

Dear Frank: Why don't you stick to subjects you know something about, instead of making an ass out of yourself.
nzm

Absolutely. Adams was one of a kind. His work in devising the Zone System was followed by thousands of photographers for years – and still is. His negatives are perfect exposures, and coupled with his amazing darkroom techniques, the prints Adams produced are still better than most anything printed today.

The value of Ansel Adams' work was predominantly in his printing expertise – only he could extract the best out of his plates and negatives.
Mimefull

How about looking at other works by Uncle Earle before one jumps to any decision! Mighty hard to duplicate anything of that beauty! Check the age of the negatives. Find out more about this Uncle Earle and what he used as a photographer. Dates of AA publications… Silly to talk about the movement of the clouds when AA might have just changed the film on a slow moving cloud day. How could this Uncle Earle get such similar shadows, leaves and clouds? Too many things that would have been impossible to replicate.
Telecasters

Looks like the same photographer took both pictures. Perhaps experimenting. One is slightly out of focus. The confirmed Uncle Earl in my opinion is the better shot. What is the round image on the right of the mystery picture? Maybe that is why the shot was retaken.
Archie319

Well, NOW the mystery is,,,,,,,,, Is Uncle Earl?????? Or is it Uncle Earle?
Since they are both late, maybe no one is Early
Rockola23

UMM… the ''uncle earl'' proponents have nothing to GAIN..

Only the claimants asserting that these are AA plates have anything to gain.

The only salvation that the AA claimaints can hope to fall back on now is to assert that uncle earl somehow bought the print his grand-neice possesses now FROM AA..

problem is, the plates in question are all found in Uncle Earls neighborhood in Fresno.. SO ALL the cirumstantial evidence is in favor STRONGLY of these being the work of Uncle EARL almost beyond any reasonable doubt.

the AA proponents had $$$ signs in their eyes and I can see why they would never have considered a case unfolding like uncle bobs great neice still being around with a mental-recognition of all her uncles work, or at least one of the prime examples used to publicize this deal..

whats really amazing is how close they almost came to pulling this off,

if only they had hidden this particular tree photo from public release, or from TV broadcast, or this lady had passed on, or were not unusually mentally astute and knowledgeable for her years..
the garage-sale crew would have no doubt played this off successfully for millions of dollars.

NOW they have only one option to try to work this- try to claim that Uncle Earl bought the print FROM A.A. back in the day. With all the circumstantial evidence against them, and the plates bought from one of uncle earls neighbors.. this is already over.
http://twitter.com/rpenguin rpenguin

There is no roll of film. These are done with glass plates that the photographer often prepared himself. If you have a chance to see an exhibition in a gallery or museum made from glass negatives, I highly recommend it. They can be very stunning.
http://twitter.com/rpenguin rpenguin

No one is claiming they are the same image. They are claiming the are the same photographer, i.e. Uncle Earl and not Ansel Adams. You wouldn't have happened to have skimmed the article just so you could post your URL here, would you?
Il Gavilan

Seems to me there are subtle but important differences in the branch ends and needle bunches.
andrea

What a letdown; that was really exciting for a few minutes! I was so jealous of that guy a few days ago… man I feel bad for him.
Richard

I agree. Is a photo judged by the name of the photographer of by it's quality. This type of valuation comes from pepole trying to out do each other and not from a genuine appreciation of the atr itself. Do we purchase objects because of branding or because we have a true understanding of the object? Ansel's work is stupendous, there are other photographers who's work is also brilliant, many of them unknown.
Mycarisatruck

if you toggle back and forth between the pictures in the overlay, some of the differences in the foliage on the tree, however slight, are evident. also, some of the clouds are positioned differently and the shadowing has varience. not substancial, but there are differences none the less.
Jigokurei

As a nature photographer myself, it is my belief, based upon the two photos, that they're nearly identical in day and time; probably only off by a few minute apart. They cloud formation in the background are so nearly exact in spatial reference to discount it as being in the same place at the same time. Now, did Uncle Earl happened to be there while Ansel Adams was just finishing a shoot?

Maybe Uncle Earl had a similar camera system at the time, which is not unprobable. There really weren't that many different field cameras available at that time in history. So, the similarity and focal length and aperture were nearly the same, perhaps it's just a matter of being in the same place at nearly the same time. Unfortunately, it's really hard to say.

I say the cloud formation is the key to this being taken in the same spot at nearly the same time, only being off by a few minute apart. When you watch clouds move slowly across the horizon, they tend to change quickly or gradually with the warm air current rushing up from the ground. But if you look closely at the three clouds to the left of the shot, you will see that they do indeed seem to match up just right. That is nearly an impossible feet to pull of at some random later event. Even if you look at some of the other clouds over the top of the tree, you will see similar formations. But keep in mind that clouds do tend to boil quickly (figuratively speaking) and dissipate as fast as a few minute apart.

I'd say, Uncle Earl was extremely lucky to be in the exact same spot that Mr. Ansel Adams was in – a one in a million shot. Or that, Uncle Earl quite possibly hung out with Mr. Adams, at least for that day. Or, that the prints are in fact from Mr. Adams himself, but were discarded due to them being of seemingly lower quality images and gave them to Uncle Earl…again, perhaps.
Andreas

Ladies and Gentlemen,
These two photos are taken within less than ten minutes of each other from a stationary camera.

Note: The shadows have moved minutely, and correctly with the rotation of the earth and the time period pased for shadows to move within such a short time.

The clouds progression is easily shown with computer modeling, even with bare eye it is easy to see which photo was taken first, and which later, which is confirmed by the shadow rotation.

Ergo.
The pictures are taken by the same hand.
Case closed.
http://kgelner.myopenid.com/ Kendall Helmstetter Gelner

They do now, but not so much back when it cost a lot of money per exposed plate.

There is no way they CAN be taken a “moment or two apart” given the technology. It takes a bit of time to extract the exposed plate and load in a new one.
uglyMood

What worries me more than the questionable provenance of the “found” Ansel Adams photographs are the number of people here that do not seem to have the ability to understand what they are reading.

According to the article, the photograph we know is real is Uncle Earle's. Uncle Earle definitely took one of the photographs of a pine tree. That is not in question.

What IS in question is whether or not the photograph being marketed as being taken Ansel Adams is an actual Ansel Adams photo.

Yet most of the people commenting here seem to be under the impression that Uncle Earle's photo is being compared to a known, cataloged Ansel Adams work, and spinning bizarre theories that Uncle Earle just set up his camera in the same place as Ansel Adams. Either that or they think that somehow both photographs are being represented as being identical, but they're not because “the clouds are different.”

The Uncle Earle photograph is plainly from the same photo shoot as the supposed Ansel Adams photograph. They were taken by the same camera, which was not moved, within half an hour or so of each other. The clouds are different because they have drifted, and more than that, if you bother to compare the two images sequentially, you will see that the clouds at different altitudes have moved at different rates, but in the same direction. They are of course not absolutely identical because clouds change shape continually, but the movements and masses of the clouds indicate they are the same.

The question here is not whether Uncle Earle was copying Ansel Adams. The question is whether the photographs being sold as Ansel Adams' work are the real deal. Uncle Earle's picture says no, they are not.

But of course you would have to understand the question to answer it. Not that that's stopping anyone here…
everyone's an expert

I personally believe that the glass negatives were Earl's. And maybe, just maybe, Earl and Ansel knew one another. The niece, Miriam, stated that the print she has was made by Uncle Earl in 1923, seven years before Ansel became a professional photographer. Maybe they “trained” together but for one reason or another, Ansel became famous and Earl didn't. Wouldn't that be a great story?!? Might explain why their styles are similar yet Ansel's are more advanced.
http://macemoneta.myopenid.com/ Mace Moneta

The difference between the images could have taken place in the darkroom. It's the way images were improved before photoshopping. A little dodge here, a little more exposure there. Same source.
Thuner

Absolutely taken by the same camera mounted on the same tripod within a few minutes of each other. If Uncle Earle took one of these for sure, he took both.

PS. You don't duplicate clouds in pictures taken minutes apart. They only last a few seconds in one location. And no, clouds don't affect tree shadows. The sun does.

Absolutely not an Ansel Adams photo.
mike

I think the craft and history of photography is not widely understood. Perhaps we are witnessing the loss of the conceptual understanding of the intermediary 'negative' in the old craft of silver emulsion camera photography. Dodging and burning and contrast filters are now just odd tool icons on software menus.

A camera that takes a a 6 x8″ glass plate negative, with it's wood tripod, was a heavy beast. Getting that camera up to Glaciar [sic] Point was work! I think we can safely say Earl Brooks was a man with a commitment to get his camera to beautiful and historic places and to bring home images to share with everyone. Our digital distribution of images is making them very common, but back in Earl's day, a sharp detailed image from Yosemite would be bragged about. I sure hope Uncle Earl's spirit is watching this and getting a smile. Mrs Walton, Thank You!!
Mattlazy2003

I thought that some of the photos in the collection where of known associates of Ansel Adams?
DWN2DV8

For cripes sake! I can go take a photo of a tree and come back a year later and take a photo of the same thing….
Diane in NC

LOL…positively snarkily funny comment in response to others' negative ones. Pardon the pun!
A guy with an eye.

I can't believe how many people are saying these are not taken at the same time by the same guy. Thank you for your brilliant statement. You are absolutely correct. Why is it the more a guy says he is an expert the more gullible and likely to be fooled they are.

Obviously these are taken at the same time with the same cloud mass. Not days apart and NOT by two different people.
A Guy with an Eye.

They are not the same photograph. Did you read the article? They are so similar that they had to be taken by the same camera, in the same exact spot, minutes apart. The clouds move, but notice the leaves didn't, the snow line on the mountains didn't, the shadows didn't. The angle the camera is at is EXACTLY the same for both photos also. Anyone with an ounce of brains can see the TWO photos are taken by the same guy, Uncle Earl. The fact that YOU think people are saying they are the same photo means they are so close to being the same photo you can see where people could make that mistake.
Doug

Is there any possibility that Uncle Earl knew Ansel Adams? Did Adams ever teach or do seminars? And, while I can understand Mr. Adams being very careful about cataloging and indexing photgraphs, negatives and plates; surely he didn't keep ALL his negatives?
We have one example of Uncle Earl's work; are there any others? Is it possible that, in the case of the picture shown, that Uncle Earl was attemptnig to recreate a photograph Adams had taken, simply to see what differences, if any, there were when the same scene was photographed by a different photographer?
Call Waiting of Cthulhu

The fact that photographers would think that someone would waste two glass plates on the same subject tells me that you damn kids should get off my lawn (and take your digital cameras with you.)

If Uncle Earle shot two pictures of the same subject in succession, he was using film. No large format photographer would: 1. Waste two plates on the same image. 2. Carry more gear than he had to. Back in the thirty's, Sentinel Dome was not the hike it is today, particularly carrying large format gear.

Plus, Auto-align? Really?
SDborn

Just shows what fools people are ! Essentially the same photograph, taken by 2 different people, one “worth” millions, the other worth pennies !!

Keep chasing that money people !! The upper class needs slave labor.

( if these photos were possessed by someone wealthy, i'm sure they'd be “authentic” )
Mfaphoto

It is about supply and demand, which is largely a function of brand. Ansel Adam's work is known and respected worldwide by anyone who knows the finer points of photography.
Barry

From the account that I read the hand writing of Adams's wife was on many of the sleeves that protected the original negatives.

How would Uncle Earl have done this. Fresno? What's the chance that Earl was a collector and later many of his own negatives were mixed with this collection? Not so hard to fathom. Not from where i set anyway.

As to the grand son not digging the idea. Of course not. Politics are politics but why on Earth would the family truly be happy with someone else making huge profits from negatives dating from before the 1937 destruction of Adam's early work (basically negatives that they never had.) that is much sought after. Get real. It can go either way.

Fake? maybe. Real maybe but there are deciding factors that people simply aren't talking about.
Barry

Also what people aren't telling you is that the “Adam's” photo has been skewed in an application like Photoshop so that it perfectly overlaid the “Earl” If they wanted us to make a true comparison of the two photos why would they do that?
Myname

Just a huge waste of time, who really cares about old photos? All I see is an buttload of money being wasted in an economy that sure as hell cant support it. Really just a stupid waste of time.
LF Photographer

>>No large format photographer would: 1. Waste two plates on the same image.<<

Actually, very common. Ansel himself talks about shooting multiple plates or negs of the same subject. In fact in the story of his famous “Monolith” image–shot on glass plate–Ansel tells of his frustration of being out of plates to shoot another one. Same with “Moonrise” in the film days–wanted to shoot a duplicate but the light changed.

Remember, you couldn't see the image when you shot it. Add to that the fragility of glass negs. Shooting multiple versions makes a lot of snese now as it did then.
Offers1999

I'll give you $10 and a case of peanut M&Ms. Shipping and handling is on you.
LF Photographer

It could be possible. Ansel often led trips in Yosemite and made photographs along the way. Ansel might very well have been there on that very day.
Darin

You are misunderstanding the situation. The two picts being compared are one known to be by Uncle Earl and one of unknown origin. Thus, the rest of your logic (which is correct) leads one to see that the images must *both* be Uncle Earl's since they do indeed match up so closely.

While there is a known Ansel Adams image of this tree, it is taken from a different angle.

Ansel Adams Garage Sale Mystery Apparently Solved

Related Posts