In a technology-driven world, we’re conditioned to perceive newer as better, more mechanical as more advanced. Every once in awhile, though, something comes along to make us rethink that view. The West Licht Photo Gallery in Vienna, Austria announced Monday that it has acquired a collection of over 4,500 Polaroid photos taken by photographers including Ansel Adams and Robert Frank. The photos were originally part of a collection of more than 16,000 Polaroid photographs belonging to Polaroid’s founder, Edwin Land. Land gave cameras to a number of famous photographers to show consumers the artistic capabilities of the Polaroid camera. To provide some perspective, a small portion of photographs from the collection fetched $12.4 million at auction in 2010. With this emphasis on Polaroid photographs, which many people have taken for a forgotten technology, is it possible that newer isn’t always better? If the art in question had been a more modern medium (digital camera, etc.) would their worth change? Or vice versa, does the fact that the photographs are in a somewhat “antique” medium make them more valuable, or the attachment of a recognizable name like Ansel Adams? If technology’s aim is to make things cheaper and faster, does that cheapen the product of that technology?