NYC Gallery Sold an AI-Generated Ansel Adams Photo Without Permission

[Coventina]

The New York Danziger Gallery displayed for sale an AI-generated version of Ansel Adams’ photo “Moonrise Over Hernandez” without consulting the photographer’s trust, effectively stealing the legendary artist’s work and dramatically altering it with AI for the sake of profit.

The work, which can be seen above, is described as “A.I. Generated” from the prompt “Make a realistic color version of Ansel Adams’ iconic ‘Moonrise Over Hernandez’.” It is further described as “Proofed, regenerated, & photoshopped from 11/25 – 4/26. Printed by master printer Esteban Mauchi Editions of 10 in 3 sizes – 20 x 24” , 24 x 30”, 30 x 40.'”

The image was part of The Photography Show at the Park Avenue Armory in New York City, which ran from April 22 through April 26, 2026. Images sold at this show in the past typically cost in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Ansel Adam’s trust published a public statement on Instagram over the weekend, confirming that despite its best efforts at communication, the Danziger Gallery used Adams’ name and his photo for commercial purposes without its permission.

https://petapixel.com/2026/05/25/nyc-gallery-sold-an-ai-generated-ansel-adams-photo-without-permission/

***********************************************************************************************************

[hlthe2b]

1. This needs to send a message to others and thus a BIG LAWSUIT is indicated.

[marble falls]

2. They took all the magic out of Adam's work. The stole intellectual property. ...

... I wonder if that means that if an individual can identify elements in an AI generated work one could sue for stealing just an element?

[GJGCA]

3. Legal defense is, "public domain"

The gallery claims the photo is in the public domain under copyright law, and thus fair game.

https://petapixel.com/2026/05/26/nyc-gallery-says-it-has-every-right-to-create-ai-version-of-iconic-ansel-adams-photo/

[Coventina]

4. For works published between 1931 and 1977, copyright is automatic for 95 years.

So, 1942 + 95 = 2037

Not a very good copyright lawyer!

[GJGCA]

5. It's complicated?

FTA:
Adams’ famous photo, Moonrise, taken in Hernandez, New Mexico, in 1941, is available from Wikipedia in high-resolution.
A note states that the photograph was “first published in 1942, when Adams gave a print to the Museum of Modern Art and it was published in U.S. Camera, 1943.” Therefore, the note explains, the copyright would “have to have been renewed in 1968, 1969, or 1970.” No such renewal exists in the Stanford Copyright Renewals Database.

[Coventina]

6. Agree, copyright law can be complicated, and there are exceptions.

I know this because I'm an art historian and I deal with images and their copyright status all the time.

That being said, I am NOT a law expert, and there might be some exceptions at work that I'm not aware of.

HOWEVER, what I have been told is that copyright is AUTOMATIC, and does NOT require a renewal until the automatic one is up. So I have no idea why Wikipedia thinks it would have to have been renewed in the late 60s-70. Without an explanation as to why that should be so, I would be very skeptical.

Besides "public domain" there is such a thing as "fair use" for educational and other limited uses. However, selling a work for profit would NOT be covered by "fair use."

Without more details that justify this use, I would say the art gallery and their lawyer is in the wrong.