To continue the discussion about Fair Market Value, and  the example
that I used of a commercial photographer appraising a collection with the
eye as to it's potential stock resale value -- (First, let me say that I
stood at arms length from the whole process - the value eventually set
was between the appraiser, the donor and the IRS) -- the appraiser/
photographer set what he thought would be a reasonable purchase price as
if another photographer would have purchased the collection to add to his
stock photos.  We all know that photographers sold their negatives to
other shops, particularly when they were leaving the country or changing
professions.  Why wouldn't that be a reasonable "fair market value?"
Seems to me if someone offered you a D8 cat for a mining exhibit and it
could be sold to another miner for $xx, that's the value.  Why should
value to a COLLECTOR make any difference?
     Diane Brenner, Anchorage Museum