I know Ryan and these negative inferences to his integrity are uncalled for.
It is quite possible that Ryan, a photography student in college in Arizona, has sold more prints in his few years as a student than the majority of photographers posting on forums. I find this quite encouraging. Keep up the good work Ryan!:)
Dave in Vegas
I see in a different thread that Ryan has become sick from the Peter Pan Peanut Butter.......
Better purchase Ryan's images in a hurry, they will increase in value substantially if the Peter Pan contributes to Ryan's untimely demise.....
Nothing like the ultimate "limited edition" to increase print value....
Hope Ryan is feeling better real soon :-)
I don't understand how some alleged scam a few years in the past has any relevance. What is important is Ryan's artistic vision and the quality of his work today.
Caravaggio was a murderer. But does that mean his "David with the Head of Goliath" is in some way flawed? Of course not.
This is really disgusting. I have known Ryan for a long time and he is one of the most honest people I have ever known. I am honored to call him a friend. This really sickens me and you shoudl be ashanmed of your self.
Have you ever seen Ryan's work or prints in person? I have and they are outstanding! He is one of the better AZO printers I have seen and as young as he is he will become one of the next masters period.
As to the OP question, I happen to have a print by Ryan that I acquired through a print exchange, and I'm very proud to have such a good work hanging on my walls.
I don't know Ryan personally and have no reason to doubt his honesty nor his integrity, but I don't believe the post by PhotoHistorian was a troll or someone with a personal grudge. Instead, I think it was a post by someone who honestly responded to the question about collecting Ryan's work with a link to the thread on the LF forum as something to ponder.
I don't own any of Ryan's work and my budget is too small to allow me to buy work at this time (I can either buy it or create my own and I'd rather do the latter), but if I had the funds I would add a McIntosh or 2 in my collection. He is a young photographer who is out there doing what he loves and that alone deserves respect.
If one reads the cited thread on the LF Forum, it was plainly evident that it was started on a totally preposterous aalegation. The originator claimed to have noticed a pattern in Ryan's auction site buying and selling. The assumption made was that Ryan bought Ansel Adams negatives, then shortly after, marketed prints made from those negatives as original Adams prints. There was never any more evidence offered than this singular assumption.
Why someone would make such flawed allegation is beyond me, but it happened. I suspected the original thread was started by a troll for whatever reasons trolls start vengeful threads. That leads me to suspect Mr. PhotoHistorian may be connected to whomever started the LF Forum thread, because how could one say what he said if one actually read and understood the original allegation?
2. Ryan auctioned off a print of the same image as that the copy negative was of
I don't think that this is a preposterous allegation at all, Alex, but I also trust in Ryan's integrity and he promptly responded to the post with answers. What was misleading to me is that Ryan multiple times used the term "work" in reference to the CCP and then later had to recant his use of this term and said he "volunteered" at the CCP. I don't believe he did this to mislead people on purpose, but that while volunteering he was literally working (just for no $$$) at the CCP and this is how he saw it--he had no hesitations in stating that he probably misused the term "work" as it could be misconstrued and replaced it with "volunteer."
Is there anything other than circumstantial evidence of any wrong doing? Nope, not at all--is there circumstantial evidence? As stated by Jim_5508 on the LF forum "You can tell by looking at his bid history that he bought an Ansel Adams copy negative and 2 weeks later turned around and sold an "original" print from the same negative," to me this does make me perk up my ears--but as I said above, I have no reason to doubt Ryan and as someone mentioned above: his personal life has no bearing on the actual images which he creates (gotta love that Iceland work).
[quote] "Why someone would make such flawed allegation is beyond me".
I think that on the basis of the facts, as they were presented, the allegation was certainly with basis. To not come to that conclusion based upon the facts presented would seem to be biased. Having said that, I have no knowledge of what happened with the copy negative and the print sales that Ryan was involved in.
I guess that if we want to come to a true determination on this matter, then Ryan may want to provide the substantiation of where he got the prints, from whom, the dates that he obtained them and furthermore a verfiable accounting of the respective owner(s) of the print(s) from the date of their production until the most recent sale.
Anything else is simply arm waving our respective opinions and does not amount to a hell of a lot more than that.