Follow me on Mastodon:
@adcoleman@hcommons.social
 
 
|
If a “fight against the sale of the Polaroid collection” does take place, it will do so because, and only because, plaintiffs with standing — photographers with work in the collection — file either a Motion for Rehearing of the August 27 court decision or an appeal thereof. In relation to that fight, should it ensue, I will function as a cultural journalist commenting on it. What I do lead presently, have led since July ’09, and intend to lead until this situation plays itself out and culminates, is the effort to inform the photography/art audience — including those with work in the collection — of what’s happening in regard to this auction, and how we got to this sorry point. This is a journalistic project, not a legal one, and should be understood as such. […]
The proposed sell-off of the historic Polaroid Collection has moved a step closer to reality with the announcement by Sotheby’s of dates for the auction: June 21-22, 2010. If the sale does go through as planned and on schedule, it will take place well after the spring art-market season has come and gone and the art and photo worlds have closed up shop for the summer — not to mention in the midst of a deep global recession that has hit the art market hard and the photo market especially hard, with no immediate improvement on the event horizon. […]
Given that a single Steichen print went for close to $3 million just a few years back, and a single Gursky sold for over $3 million shortly thereafter, the notion that no one in what Maneker calls “the photography market” can afford to buy the Polaroid Collection is laughable on its face. If price is no object, then what is? This brings me to the logical conclusion that every potential buyer has discovered in examining the collection’s documentation that the bulk of it is contractually encumbered in ways that prohibit (or at least problematize) its sale, thus also making perilous its purchase as a whole. . . . […]
I don’t know if something’s rotten in the state of Denmark, but something’s definitely off in the state of Minnesota. Evidence accumulates that Polaroid has known all along that it never owned most of the work in its collection outright, yet the contents of that collection now move toward the auction block with the approval of the Minnesota Bankruptcy Court. . . . […]
Coverage of the situation relating to the pending sale of the Polaroid Collection continues. Here’s a story from the September 22, 2009 issue of the Boston Globe, “Through the lens of time,” by Globe staffer Alex Beam. Beam quotes Sam Yanes, formerly of Polaroid and instrumental in the formation of the collection, as follows: “I […]
|
SPJ Research Award 2014
Thought for the Day Ignorance is a condition; dumbness is a commitment.
Copyright Notice All content of this publication is © copyright 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 by A. D. Coleman unless otherwise noted. All materials contained on this site are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced for commercial purposes without prior written permission. All photos copyright by the individual photographers. "Fair use" allows quotation of excerpts of textual material from this site for educational and other noncommercial purposes.
Published by Flying Dragon LLC.
Neither A. D. Coleman nor Flying Dragon LLC are responsible for the content of external Internet sites to which this blog links.
|
Polaroid Collection: Update 14
If a “fight against the sale of the Polaroid collection” does take place, it will do so because, and only because, plaintiffs with standing — photographers with work in the collection — file either a Motion for Rehearing of the August 27 court decision or an appeal thereof. In relation to that fight, should it ensue, I will function as a cultural journalist commenting on it. What I do lead presently, have led since July ’09, and intend to lead until this situation plays itself out and culminates, is the effort to inform the photography/art audience — including those with work in the collection — of what’s happening in regard to this auction, and how we got to this sorry point. This is a journalistic project, not a legal one, and should be understood as such. […]