Newsletter for November-December 1998

The first society devoted to the history of photography and the preservation of photo antiques

Be Ahead of the Game...Renew Your Membership for 1999
Send your $20 dues to: Frank Calandra, Treasurer
The Photographic Historical Society,
350 Witting Road, Webster, N.Y. 14580-9009

Welcome to our Meetings:
All regular meetings begin at 7:30 pm at the Brighton Town Hall,
2300 Elmwood Avenue
Guests are always welcome.

The Guest Speaker for our annual dinner in January will be Eaton Lothrop

This Month’s Mystery Question(s)-

Where were the first Polaroid cameras manufactured?
What did the factory normally produce and continued to do so along with the cameras?
What design problem by Polaroid designers/engineers held up production?

Answer at end of Newsletter.
Again...Here’s Polaroid, With a Really Instant Problem...

Polaroid, that perennial collector of bad news, has another worry. Fuji Film announced in early November that it will introduce two Instax “integral” (non-peel-apart) instant cameras and film in the USA. Both are simple point-and-shoot models. Described as a “monster compact”, the larger of the two has a motorized extending lens, though not a zoom and a “high-tech” LCD information panel. A smaller model makes tiny images sized between the new “stamp size” Polaroid and its Captiva model. The small cameras will first be sold only in Japan, perhaps awaiting the reception of the new Polaroid small pix model.

Aside from the potential effect on Polaroid, the news is interesting because Fuji’s original, and apparently present, instant system, was based on Kodak’s ill fated instant product patents. Fuji instants were never sold in this country, apparently not even on the gray market, probably because instant sales were not worth the effort or risk of a Polaroid suit.

Following Kodak’s loss of the 1976-86 Polaroid suit, all equipment for making Kodak instant products was destroyed, the cameras recalled, junked, and refunds made to consumers. Fuji, licensed under Kodak patents, continued to make their own cameras and film for Japanese consumption. The response to a call to Fuji Film USA was a polite statement that instant marketing decisions in the USA were still being developed and no information on Japan instant products or sales was available.

How will Polaroid handle this new competition? Even if is a variation of the Kodak system, lawyers we talked to said that they doubted that Polaroid could afford to sue Fuji. Perhaps because Fuji, even though its total sales are declining in Japan, just happens to have several billion dollars in the bank. While it seems unlikely that even Fuji could jump-start the long decline in instant sales in the US, it might consider buying Polaroid, if for no other reason than the long string of patents the company holds. While Polaroid stock holders and Wall Street would love it, the idea is considered a long shot

LATE NEWS: Polaroid has teamed with toy maker Mattel to develop a Barbie instant camera that comes with “kid-friendly” film. The camera is a version of the One-Step model, marks the first product stemming from a two-year licensing agreement between the companies.

Also, Polaroid (again) says their new throw-away instant model will be available any time now...maybe for Christmas...they hope...and so do stockholders.

Multimillion-Dollar Photography Auctions/Apprising Art (and Photography) Appraisers...Not always a pretty picture

The rapid rise in the art market of the 1980s brought about a demand for more affordable art for aspiring, and recently more affluent, collectors. The answer for these buyers was a turn to other “old” or “not quite so old” art-photographic prints. However, as an October 9th Wall Street Journal headline read Picture Buyers Picky. The article discussed the more “sophisticated and selective” buying that marked the fall series of multimillion-dollar photography auctions in New York. Amid concerns about an economic downturn, a large volume of several hundred works changed hands in a short period and records were set for works of masters including Man Ray (see next story), Margaret Bourke-White and William Henry Fox Talbot. But many other prints sold below presale expectations and nearly a third didn’t sell at all. If this seems a setback, “it is a setback from a lofty climb.” In 1990, the big news was that 21 Alfred Stieglitz prints sold for $360,000. In 1993, a single photograph by him sold for $398,000.

So what makes a photograph valuable today? (1) A high profile photographer’s name certainly helps. (2) “Vintage” signed prints, made by the photographer shortly (usually
within a year) after the negative was made. Example: A signed print of a migrant mother taken by Dorthea Lange in 1936 sold to the J. Paul Getty Museum for $244,500. But a quartet of unsigned images that she did not print herself sold for $7,475. (2) Proof that the picture is not a fake. Not so easy to do with a photograph, even if it is “signed”. (3) A photographer who is “in” for whatever reason. As with other artists, and most other art for that matter, a photographer’s fame can be fleeting and with it the value of his/her works. Much of this can be attributed to one or more groups. Which brings us to the following report:

The American Society of Appraisers has elected Art Appraiser, Richard-Raymond Alasko of Chicago, as president of the 6,100 member trade group. The appointment is stirring controversy over how art works are appraised and how beholden appraisers are to clients.

Mr. Alasko is involved in a lawsuit arising from a 1990 divorce of a Denver cattle baron and art collector, William C. Foxley and his wife Sandra. Each hired two appraisers to set a value of the 132 piece art collection. Using past sales records and trends, three appraisers estimated the art to be worth between $32 and $39 million. Mr. Alasko estimated it at $62.6 million. However, he relied on an uncommon appraisal method that added taxes and dealer markups to the overall value. Normally, these figures are not a part of an appraisal.

Question: Which appraisals are the most accurate? The Foxley dispute raises a delicate question that could affect how art including photographica is valued, not only in divorce settlements, but in estates, charitable giving and even making loans.

Question: just how arbitrary are appraisals? Appraisers are supposed to be above the fray, but according to many lawyers, “appraisers want to please the party who retained them.” In the above case Mr. Foxley filed a grievance with the American Society of Appraisers. It was dismissed. But two members of the society filed suit against the society ‘s executive committee, charging it with fraud, saying it did not properly investigate the grievance and that the appraisal made the group look like it was “talking out of both sides of our mouth”.

Did the money paid for the appraisals have anything to do with the estimates? Mr. Alasko was paid $42,000 for his work. The other appraisers were paid, $15,000, $11 250, & $11,141.

To pay the divorce settlement Mr. Foxley had to sell much of the art at auction at Sotheby’s Holdings Inc. and through dealers. He received $24 million for 57 artwork that Mr. Alasko had appraised at $30.9 million. Although the appraisal was made in 1990 at the height of the art market, the judge agreed with the Mr. Alasko‘s valuation. However, the Colorado Court of Appeals has reopened the property valuation and distribution in the divorce. Trial is set for next July.

And Earlier in the November 6th WSJ...Another Continent, Another Story

“One of the biggest art sales of the year has been clouded by controversy.” Experts are questioning the authenticity and history of a pair of photos by surrealist Man Ray that sold for $607,000 in October at Cristie’s International. The sale was a record for a photographic work of art. The dispute has major implications for collectors of “less expensive, more routine photography”. As discussed in the item above the value of a photograph by a famous photographer can often turn on when it was printed, by whom, and who you want to believe.

In this case Man Ray’s former secretary Lucien Treillard, says the print may have been made years after the picture was taken. In fact, it may not even be the same picture, owned by a famous collector, that was shown in an exhibition earlier-although the catalog implied it was. Cristie’s says the terminology in the catalog could mean either way. Then there is the French Tax audit of one of the print’s original owners, Lucien Treillard. He believes the prints are not “vintage”, i.e. made by the photographer within a year after the negative was taken, made just before WWII, as opposed to 1926. A Mr. Webster of Cristie’s says the paper is uniquely identifiable by the paper Man Ray was using in the mid-1920’s. Did the photographer freeze supplies of the paper and made prints in the late 1930’s. Maybe.

Don’t Miss These Three...

-Polaroid’s Spice Girls camera. Basic black with striking pink flash, it comes with a $5 off coupon for Spice Girls video. About $40 list.

-Kid’s TYCO Video Cam. Makes B&W “action movies with sound”. “Durable and easy to use” The camera measures 7 1/4 “x 3, 3/4x4” high. Just as the original home video cameras, the camera connects to a VCR to record. Requires 6 “AA” batteries. Originally $99.99. From J.C. Penney’s mail-order close-out catalog only $49.99.

-Barbie’s digital camera, an “around $50” camera, must represent the lowest price/lowest quality camera and image in an expanding Kid’s digital image market. Even with the low expectations of the very young set, the results from these cameras could help explain Barbie’s recent sales decline.

Did You Ever Wonder...
How Risky is Your Collection’s Value as an Investment...Or do you care...

Consider your collection (regardless of what it is). Did you create it for:
[ ] Fun [ ] Profit [ ] Sentiment [ ] Because everybody is (or was) doing it [ ] A combination of the four [ ] Some other reason that now escapes you

If for anything other than pure fun or sentiment, you may want to consider some of the following points based on a Chicago Tribune story. Richard Gernady, a purveyor of collectables, recently received a call from a middle-aged insurance agent who was fed up with under performing stocks in her portfolio. She told him she was selling everything and investing the capital in a different class of assets: Beanie Babies. She ultimately spent $12,000. Good idea or bad? Here’s what some of the “experts” interviewed stated:

-From a financial standpoint, collectables as a category, be they art, rugs, Beanie Babies, baseball cards, cameras, etc.-are pretty much in the high risk category as an investment.

-The fact (or hype) that a substantial number of people want “it” (them) today may be enough to drive up the price. But that doesn’t mean it will increase or retain present value forever.

-While limited numbers of an item may make it seem valuable today, it usually takes a long time before the value increases enough to make it worthwhile as a long-term investment.

-Frequently the long term value of an item depends on something other than its normal use.
In fact, sometimes using an item in a normal way may decrease the value. Example: Taking pictures with an unused rare camera that causes it to show normal wear and tear.

-The most frequent reason for a price rise is rarity- which may be temporary or dependent on factors that cannot be predicted or controlled- such as someone finding other like items.

-Rarity may not mean much if there is little interest in the item. Think: Remanufactured Argus C-3’s .

-Value is almost always variable over time and with the times.

-Desirability of an item is seldom universal. You may be one of the few who feels that desire.

-The right price: When the value of an item is worth more to the buyer than the money it costs.

So How Can You Cash-in On That Photographic Collection/Investment?...
Part 1. Know What You Have and What Its Worth

A year or so ago we ran an article about selling a collection at auction. It was one of our most discussed items. Recently, several members have asked about other options that may be less traumatic for some collectors. Here’s a review of points gleaned from other fields.

1.Know what you have. Take an inventory and write it down. Ideally, tag or mark each item with its approximate value and your cost. The cost is optional since it may not have anything to do with the item’s actual value. If you display items you may want to mark the cost in some easy to remember code. Your editor spent a highly educational year in his youth working for Zale’s Jewelry. I always thought their cost code was appropriate to their philosophy, which was in fact D(1) I(2) R(3) T(4) C(5) H(6) E(7) A(8) P(9) 0(X) prices.

2.Update your inventory at least every two years.

3.Keep a copy of that written, updated , inventory, in your safety deposit box or other safe location. This is particularly important should you have flood or fire damage.

4.Establish a value of your collection. Always interesting and often required if you intend to insure the collection Many insurers want an item by item value, others accept a total. Insurers will provide specific requirements, usually photos of each item, receipts or dated ads with prices paid, or written appraisals from a recognized expert. The last can be costly.

Here are some frequently used price benchmarks and opinions of others:

Obvious Hype-Read For Enjoyment, Not Truth- Except when new, photo equipment seldom has the hype of “fine” art, with the possible exception of extremely rare pieces.

Gurus/Appraisers- Fortunately, unlike the art world, we have few, if any, individuals who can simply establish equipment prices at will. However, some collectors have developed track records that make them acceptable to insurance companies as expert appraisers.

Auction Prices in General These are very “iffy” guidelines. As the article on photograph auction items from the WSJ details, auction reports are often as much hype as fact. While they may provide guidelines, you can never be sure of the price obtained for an a item similar to one sold at auction can be replicated, raised, or that the item can be sold at all.

Equipment Auctions- While they are frequent overseas, large photographic equipment auctions in the US are few compared to other collectables. This is important because auctions may establish present or potential future prices. Equally important is that auction prices are published quickly allowing buyers/sellers to track changes.

Used Equipment Advertised Prices - Ads in Popular Photography and Peterson’s PhotoGraphic are often used as basic starting prices for usable items. Some also list “collectables” prices which tend to be fairly uniform. Unfortunately, these magazines also have columns on collectables which often seem designed to help their dealer advertisers more than collectors with value estimates in the upper and frequently unrealistic ranges.

Asking Prices in Specialty Magazines- Used camera prices in less frequently published media are just that, asking, rather than actual. Like used car prices, an insurance company will often consider such prices as negotiable rather than realistic. Camera Shopper gets a lot of discussion but has a relatively small distribution, especially compared to Shutterbug. At least Camera Shopper is thin enough to read before the next issue comes out.

Camera Store evaluations, written on their stationery, signed, and/or notarized if the item is especially valuable, may be worthwhile to establish cost although not necessarily value.

Sales slips may also seem to set a reasonable price standard, but not necessarily with a collectible item. They may only verify how bad a deal you made. Or they may show that you have a good friend with a sales slip book.

Historic Price Guides if frequently published and well respected, such as McKeown’s, while never totally up to date, are the price bibles for many people. They at least provide a stable starting point. General antique books such as the Kovel guides seldom have many photo listings and many believe are of limited value as photographica guides.

Speaking of Value...

The IRS has established an advisory panel that reviews taxpayer valuations of expensive artwork donated to charity. The 25-member group is led by Karen E. Carolyn, also evaluates large numbers of art objects for estate and gift-tax purposes. In 1996, the panel made an offer to make valuations of certain art objects before donors filed tax returns. But they had only 12 takers in 1996 and 1997 and there have been fewer this year. It is assumed that donors may prefer to take their chances they won’t be audited-or perhaps they object to the stiff fees charged by the IRS. Or maybe they never heard of the IRS offer.

What May Have Been Kodak’s First Dealer, Celebrates it’s 100th Anniversary

While no one knows for sure, Rowe Photo (now Rowe Photo-Video-Audio) at 1737 Mt. Hope Avenue in Rochester, N.Y., could possibly be one of the first authorized dealers of Kodak products. This may depend on what the definition of the word “authorized” which, at least in later years, was a phrase Kodak people could never include in reference to “dealers of Kodak products”. Not to downplay the importance of the occasion, it should be noted that although the the year 1898 would seem to fit nicely into Kodak’s general history, Kodak Dry Plates were being sold to photographers as early as 1880 and to dealers at least by 1881.

Incidentally, 1881 was the infamous year when the dry plates were being returned because they had gone bad. The company’s acceptance of the bad plates in exchange for new ones and the extensive efforts to learn the cause of the problem (bad gelatin) led to strong dealer confidence in the company as well as George Eastman’s decision to always “control the alternative”. This led to ownership of gelatin factories which made gelatin of such quality that, by comparison, made gelatin food products like Jello, unfit for photographic consumption. Regardless, if you are near Rowe stop in and wish them a happy birthday.


Whatever Happened to GAF...Johns Mansfield Corp. agreed to purchase the perlite-insulation manufacturing assets from Building Materials Corporation of America, a unit of GAF Corp., a Wayne, N.J.,commercial roofing and insulation company.

Whatever Happened to Johnson Smith & Company
It’s Back and Living in Bradenton, Florida

Once upon a time, longer than some of us care to admit, the number one catalog for preteens and adults stuck in their adolescence, was from Johnson Smith & Company in Racine, Wisconsin (later, Detroit, Michigan, now Bradenton, Florida). For a three-cent stamp you could get their inch and a half thick, 5”x7” catalog mailed to your home and more important,in your own name!

The catalog was an eclectic mixture of toys, games, small electrical appliances and weird books ranging from Secrets of Free Masonry to Houdini’s Magic Tricks. There was also a vast assortment of second to tenth rate photographic items. Cameras ranged from 15 cent Japanese cardboard box cameras to the latest Univex equipment for still and single-8 movies, plus a wide assortment of other makes and accessories. All prices included postage.

By the late ‘40’s Johnson Smith’s fortunes had begun a downward spiral marked by changing, ownerships and addresses. It seemed to disappear, returning via advertising on the back covers of comic books. Never up to its ‘30’s-’40’s glory. Your editor once made a fruitless attempt to visit the company in Detroit, only to be refused entry through a double locked door in a seedy part of town. It was sort of an end to childhood.

Then in November, an unsolicited copy of their latest catalog arrived. A rather flashy
8 1/2” x 11” and only 62 pages, not the wonder of the past, but to we kids, it’s still interesting reading. It’s also in full color, which only the covers had in old days. There are the ever-popular gross-out items for small boys (Electric rat-in-a-trap “You’ll be pulling ‘em down from the ceiling”) false buck teeth, whoopee cushions, fake bullet holes and an assortment of other Adams Novelty Co. jokes for your average preteen boy or his age-retarded father. Magic tricks, Charlie McCarthy dolls, and of course books, including “Instant Grits!” which promises to change your life forever. Some cheap cameras survive, including a 3-D Stereo with film processing “usually available in your locale”. For a catalog call 1-941-747-2356 or Johnson Smith Company Box 25600 Bradenton, FL 34206-5600


Worth A Look...

This year’s Fisher-Price camera for kids is a 35mm even if it is aimed at ages 5 and up. The instructions state that it is kid-proof (wanna bet) with “parent-access film door”. Other features are: manual film advance, flash, a very large oval housing with built-in hand grips on each side plus a large viewfinder, neck cord and colored basic black except for the hand grips and a large bright yellow ring around the lens. $29.99 at Toys-R-Us.


This and That...

-Kodak has introduced the DVC323 Digital Video Camera ($169) that captures 30 frames per second of live-action and downloads images 10 times faster using the new Universal Serial Bus (USB) rather than a serial port. It also doubles as a still color camera.

-Want to franchise a MOTOPHOTO? Their new Quick-Start program lets “selected franchise owners” acquire a store for $75,000, by leasing the facility to the franchisee for a percentage of sales, paid on a monthly basis. Just call 1-800-872-3433

-When should you patent that bright idea? Federal law allows inventors to file a patent application up to one year after the invention has been “on sale”. This point may be a very big deal should you sell your invention but keep perfecting it before applying for a patent. The Supreme Court has ruled that a patent starts once there is a purchase order-even if the invention isn’t perfected. Otherwise someone else can patent the idea, perfected or not.
-Wayne K. Pfaff vs Wells Electronics 1998

-Alan Kattelle sends a clip from the WSJ on the new bargain store TATI. It’s located on, of all places, New York’s Fifth Avenue. Saks it isn’t. Perhaps closer to early K-Mart, but most surprising, it’s French. Actually, the chain of tacky stores is a French cultural phenomenon that has been responsible for turning Paris’s formally gritty Republique district into an area where “sophisticates, left wing intellectuals and all ethnics backgrounds into “democracy in access to the object”. Translated that means the stores somewhat like the US Odd-Lots group have drawn such crowds that other up-scale stores have created a building boom. The French buy from all the stores but are most thrilled with TATI prices “you can’t afford not to buy.” Yes, TATI also carries cameras, along with its plastic raincoats, cheap underpants and all synthetic wedding dresses. One of the cameras is TATI’s own brand disposable, or as Alan calls it “l’appareal jetable”. It sells for less than $8.50 and appears to be either an AGFA or a Konica. Yes, the French are different, but given a chance maybe not as much as some people think. After all they took two years but but now can’t get enough of Disneyland Paris.

-Leica has a new digital camera, the Leica digilux. 1280x1020 resolution, f3.2/7.6mm digital zoom lens, 2” TFT LCO color monitor, Optical true image viewfinder, integrated flash, Titanium w/leather trim. Was $799.99 already reduced to $599.00.

Access More than You Ever Cared to Know...And, No it’s not the Internet...

Anyone who has written an academic thesis or dissertation for an advanced degree knows about having to send an extra copy, plus a few bucks to UMI. University Microfilms, as it used to be called, would microfilm your hard work and store it supposedly in safely, and in perpetuity. It could then be accessed for research by other scholars who had either been assigned to do so or have absolutely nothing better to do. Purchased by Bell and Howell years ago as they shifted from home movies to something more long lasting, UMI seemed like a sure bet. A steady and even growing business, no competition and opportunities for expansion. But one thing stood in the way of increased usage. Accessing microfilm is not exactly speedy, and Hell has been defined as being assigned reading microfilm’s fine print on a rear projection reader.

But time and technology marches on. B&H has announced that they will digitize 500 years worth of publications, including newspapers and magazines, the Gutenberg bible and other historical works. The database will be accessible through libraries. The work will take about four years to complete. Just one little thing they didn’t say. Will they continue to microfilm and digitize new acquisitions . Remember, film is still king for long term storage.

Answer to This Month’s Mystery Question

The first Polaroid cameras were produced in Rochester, NY, at Atlantic and Culver Road by Samson United, a company that made small electric appliances- coffee pots, etc. The bellows were made by Turner Bellows, a company that still operates in Rochester. According to a Turner engineer, Polaroid designers had a number of prototype bellows produced for testing in various camera designs. No sooner were the first bellows delivered than Polaroid engineers called saying that they were faulty and tended to disintegrate when the cameras were closed. Turner sent others only to receive the same complaint. Turner finally made up a checklist of engineering details required for folding camera designs and telephoned the head Polaroid designer. Everything checked out until the need for an air-release came up. “What’s that?” the engineer asked? The Turner engineer replied, “You have to have a hole for the air to get in and out of the bellows.” “Otherwise the bellows won’t open right and they tend to explode when you close the camera.” “Oh.” said the Polaroid engineer. Turner heard no more about faulty bellows.

is published by America’s oldest photographic historical group
In January, March, May, September and November
Materials in this publication are copyrighted
Permission to reprint is granted to other historical groups if credited to TPHS
Some authors may retain copyright. If so noted, permission to reprint must be obtained.
Editor: Joe A. Bailey
Newsletter Address: 191 Weymouth Drive, Rochester, N.Y. 14625 (716) 381-5507
Membership Dues are $20 per year. Send Membership applications with check to:
Frank Calandra, Treasurer
The Photographic Historical Society, 350 Witting Road, Webster, N.Y. 14580-9009
Meet us on the Net @ HTTP://WWW.RIT.EDU/~ANDPPH/TPHS.HTML