Steichen's Pond-Moonlight

erich6

OK. Calling on all professional landscape photographers or educated photographic imaging folks out there. I can appreciate some of the artistic aspects of this image but I just don't understand what is it about it that has propelled it to such an iconic status. One of three prints sold an at auction recently for $2.9M...the most expensive photograph ever. Can someone explain what is the specific alure of this shot that makes it worth that much? :dunno

cwphotos

The fact that it is over 100 years old......

ziggy53

erich6 wrote:

... Can someone explain what is the specific alure of this shot that makes it worth that much?

The following is all very much my opinion, and, as such, it is worth exactly what you are paying for it. (Nada)

---

The image has several aspects which lend value beyond a simple photograph.

Its age is considerable, produced in 1904, and must be compared with other works of that era. In that context, it stands far above other works in technical merit and in interest.

It is not an ordinary print, having both chemical photographic and hand painted layers. At the time, only monochromatic processes were used in photography. This is a color print.

http://www.vnuemedia.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002033354

"Starting from a black-and-white negative, Steichen used a special printing process to layer different hues of color over it. Sotheby's describes the print sold yesterday as a platinum print with one or more layers of gum-bichromate applied on top of it. Each layer was a different tone, and could have been altered with a brush or sponge. The resulting print is a ghostly blue-green."

The limited nature of the quantity of prints, and that each has its own "personality". Two similar prints are museum pieces, and will never reach private investors/collectors, making this print even more unique, a one-of-a-kind in that regard.

http://www.masters-of-photography.com/S/steichen/steichen_articles1.html

"Part of the reason for its value and rarity is that it is a very early example of colour photography, produced using the autochrome process. Contributing to its high price is that there are only three known copies in existence; there are two in museum collections in addition to the print sold at auction in 2006."

The artist is an established Master, in several fields. The name "Edward Steichen" automatically gives the work investment appeal and additional worth. This is also an early work, which makes it potentially worth more.

The original is also almost a 16" x 20". The images floating around the web are thumbnails and don't do the original justice. I suspect that this image is quite different when viewed at full size. Probably spectacular.

Does this perspective give a greater appreciation to the selling price?

(Actually I hope to have one of my prints sell for a similar amount some day. Of course you'll be able to buy a loaf of bread for similar by that time.)

ziggy53

P.S. I have an alternate theory about the buyer smoking "funny" cigarettes before the auction, but it's just a theory.

ziggy53

Here's a much larger version of the image. I don't think Canon "L" lenses were available (looks kinda soft).

http://www.platinummetalsreview.com/dynamic/figure/view/50-2-78-80/F1

Not sure if this is a valid link.

erich6

Thanks Ziggy! This definitely helps me understand the high value of the photograph...but I think your cigarrette theory probably is true!

In all seriousness, it's clearly a work of art.

Erich

DavidTO

ziggy53 wrote:

(Actually I hope to have one of my prints sell for a similar amount some day. Of course you'll be able to buy a loaf of bread for similar by that time.)

On a long enough timeline, all of our images will be worth that much. Patience is a virtue.

DanielB

DavidTO wrote:

On a long enough timeline, all of our images will be worth that much. Patience is a virtue.

wish we would be alive for it though.:D