has it ever surfaced on EBAY?...i am still in the hunt for it...in case anyone hears of one for sale....Thank you

it surfaces on ebay fairly regularly, so adding it to your "favourite searches" there
is probably the best way to keep track of it. a month or two ago two copies were sold
within about a week - one went for something like 4000 USD, which was ... extreme

$4,000! That is extreme since they are still available: Let It Bleed

does anyone have it? and if so which edition?

>> That is extreme since they are still available: Let It Bleed <<

um ... Let It Bleed is not the same book as Exile.
Exile is the book of Dominique Tarle photos from Nellcote, and it's only available second-hand.
usually it goes for around 1200 USD, so the 4000 USD auction was an anomaly. someone lost control.

I have the standard edition. An excellent book and document of the '69 tour. I'm surprised that one was on ebay for 4 grand though. The list on even the deluxe edition is far less.

ChrisM, Let It Bleed is a beautiful book i hear, but the thread is trying to be about Exile.
different book. different photographer. different year.

rockman has it I believe. No, he has Let it bleed



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-28 22:45 by Harm.

I wasn't trying to hijack the thread, I got my wires crossed! Of course I know about the Exile book and what it documents (and even the year and photographer too)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-28 22:56 by ChrisM.

there there, ChrisM - let me stroke your forehead.
you were dazzled for a second there. and/or checking to see if anyone was paying attention :E

Quote
with sssoul
there there, ChrisM - let me stroke your forehead.
you were dazzled for a second there. and/or checking to see if anyone was paying attention :E

Yeah, it was definitely the latter!

Dominique Tarle will be having an exhibition of his Exile photos this July at the San Francisco Art Exchage.

This, I believe, is a first. Per the SFAE (great people by the way), the photos are quite 'large' in size, not your standard 8 X 10 Glossy.

I have a copy of 'Exile'. It's fantastic. Worth every penny.

rockman has it I believe.....

Yeah I have one Harm....It's a class act



ROCKMAN

StonesVault are looking for a copy or copies.........they are offering $950. Thought about it, but, nahhhhh.........I love the book too much

thanks for all the info...i have the Let It Bleed book, but always been ineterested in "EXILE"....$4000...yikes is right....

My comment from another thread :

Genesis Publications sucks. Photography has been invented to spread images (especially this kind of images which are more documentary than ART per se), not to put them in ellist/limited edition books. Tarlé is not Picasso, is he ? And even you can buy for cheap books with Picasso reproductions. I'd like to see the Exile pictures. I now know I'll never will as they are blocked by Genesis copyright and never will be published again. I though these photographers were working to archive moments in history for everybody to see. They were just working for their wallets. Disgusting.

This is true as well for the "Let it Bleed" book and all those "I can pay $1000+ for a book" publications. This is stealing collective memory from the masses... this is much more stock market speculations than art or information, without even thinking about RnR.

It's hard to disagree with your analysis, RichardHurrah.

actually i can disagree with that analysis. professional photographers do their good work for a living,
and we've all enjoyed plenty of it all down the decades, whether or not we've paid for the privilege.
like any other artist, they're entitled to decide for themselves how much of their work to make available, and how.
meanwhile, no one's forced to invest in high-class editions if they don't want them,
and folks who want low-cost prints have miles and miles and miles of them available on the internet.
let's not be so greedy, or imagine it's "our right" or "our collective memory". it's someone's work.

ps: maybe i ought to clarify right away that i don't own any of these luxurious editions -
can't afford them - and i do love looking at beautiful photographs of the Rolling Stones.
but the photos are someone's work anyway.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-30 00:46 by with sssoul.

Quote
with sssoul
let's not be so greedy, or imagine it's "our right" or "our collective memory". it's someone's work.

Sure, taking pictures of people actually creating something and then selling it for big bucks (remind me of people selling downloads on eBay)... it's the subject that makes the photographer not the opposite, in this precise case without the Stones Tarlé had only the see to photograph. Photographers don't create anything, they report, show, archive. That's the whole point of the profession.
Anyway, my point is we could have had a very expensive limited edition for the riches and a cheap edition on toilet paper for all the non rich, just allowing them to see the pictures.
That's what I think as an (ex)photographer.

'Exile' is unique because 1) it was an extraordinary time, 2) Tarle was there and 'unobtrusive' as Keith has said, and 3) it's really the only day-to-day (photographic) record of their time in France. The publication from Genesis is well-crafted - they really put a lot effort into making this book.

Given the huge interest in 'Exile' it seems only a matter of time before they either re-release it, or (and even better) re-release a less-expensive version.

I have heard that Tarle's prints are very expensive - about $3000-$3500 per print (which is apprx. double Ethan Russell's going rate for basic prints).

Enough said.

Three cheers for fruitless comparison and spirited conjecture!

>> Anyway, my point is we could have had a very expensive limited edition for the riches
and a cheap edition on toilet paper <<

well, that's a gripe with the publishing companies, not the photographers. as an (ex-)photographer
you may have some idea how easy it is to interest a publisher in putting out a cheap-edition photo book.
i also disagree with your diminishment of what these photographers have done - but anyway
there are loads of Tarle's, Russell's, et al's photos available for nothing on the internet, so ...
enjoy the hell out of them, and good health to you



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-30 09:52 by with sssoul.

Quote
mcparty
I have heard that Tarle's prints are very expensive - about $3000-$3500 per print

The prices of the prints were (in January):

16 X 20 - ED 50 - £1600 plus vat

32 X 40 - ED 25 - £2100 plus vat

48 X 72 - ED 25 - £3500 plus vat

DT PRICES /SIZES - SILVER GELATINE PRINTS

The three prints were "Anita/Keith on floor with guitar/Gram/Gretchen", "Keith topless lighting a cigarette" and "Keith strumming acoustic with Mick smoking" (my titles )

Best,
RB

Has anyone here purchased one of Tarle's prints?

How I wish I had the money!

Quote
RichardHurrah

Quote
with sssoul
let's not be so greedy, or imagine it's "our right" or "our collective memory". it's someone's work.

Sure, taking pictures of people actually creating something and then selling it for big bucks (remind me of people selling downloads on eBay)... it's the subject that makes the photographer not the opposite, in this precise case without the Stones Tarlé had only the see to photograph. Photographers don't create anything, they report, show, archive. That's the whole point of the profession.

come on thats nonsense!
so then everybody who has a camera is a photographer and all the pictures taken have the same quality! you need the eye for the picture, for the moment. you have to feel the mood and be able to catch it. find the right angle, etc. a good pic tells a story, lets your imagination grow. good photographers are artists just as painters, musicians, writers.
and the exile pics are fantastic (and i agree that they could release, not a cheap, but an affordable edition.

can't wait to see this book...i have only heard, but not seen

There are no other detailed photos on the making of ‘Exile’. That’s what makes these photos so unique (and expensive).

From a pure photography standpoint, there are really pretty mediocre photographs –there’s nothing outstanding about the composition, printing, etc…. They are more 'photojournalism' than pure photography.

What makes them so interesting is that it’s the Stones!

Quote
mcparty

From a pure photography standpoint, there are really pretty mediocre photographs –there’s nothing outstanding about the composition, printing, etc…. They are more 'photojournalism' than pure photography.

What makes them so interesting is that it’s the Stones!

dont agree! i think those pictures are very good because he really caught that special mood. one can feel and even "smell" it.

Well, I agree with you that he does capture some of the moods. I guess the point I was trying to make (unsuccessfully) was that if it weren't for his subject matter (Keith, et al...) we wouldn't be talking about these photos.

Quote
mcparty
Well, I agree with you that he does capture some of the moods. I guess the point I was trying to make (unsuccessfully) was that if it weren't for his subject matter (Keith, et al...) we wouldn't be talking about these photos.

of course a picture with a well-known person or someone you admire/love is always special on its own.
and of course those pictures benefit alot just because the "objects" are sooo cool!
but still i think he did a fantastic job.
captureing a mood on a photography isnt easy at all. its as hard as writing a song that touches you or a poem....many people think that photography is just pushing the button...but if it were like this, all those horrible familyparty-pics wouldnt look that shitty. and they dont look shitty just because there is no mick jagger on it....

Quote
RichardHurrah

Quote
with sssoul
let's not be so greedy, or imagine it's "our right" or "our collective memory". it's someone's work.

Sure, taking pictures of people actually creating something and then selling it for big bucks (remind me of people selling downloads on eBay)... it's the subject that makes the photographer not the opposite, in this precise case without the Stones Tarlé had only the see to photograph. Photographers don't create anything, they report, show, archive. That's the whole point of the profession.
Anyway, my point is we could have had a very expensive limited edition for the riches and a cheap edition on toilet paper for all the non rich, just allowing them to see the pictures.
That's what I think as an (ex)photographer.

You might change your viewpoint after seeing Annie Liebowitz's exhibit at the Legion of Honor in San Francisco. Not everyone can take pictures like that. Woof!