|
Author
|
Topic: Reproducing uncommon space patches
|
MichaelD
Member Posts: 90
From: Troy Michigan USA
Registered: May 2009
|
posted 09-01-2009 09:17 AM
   
My wife is thinking of starting a small home business remaking in exacting detail patches that are not so common. In my own collection I have a Apollo 18, 19, and 20 patch, SMEAT and such and she is thinking of making these first. Selling for about 6.00 or thereabouts on eBay or online store. Would there be enough community interest for something like this? Is so, what others would you like to see remade? Should she stay at original size or larger to ensure no one could ever confuse it for an original? The reason I ask is that it takes many hours to set up the computer programing to do these. So, looking for input/suggestions. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42984
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 09-01-2009 09:24 AM
I will leave it to others to suggest other patches, but the four you have identified in your own collection present a problem. The Apollo 18, 19 and 20 patches are fakes -- and by that, I do not mean non-AB Emblem or unauthorized replicas, but a combination of someone's imagination and, much worse, plagiarized artwork from Robert McCall. Various astronauts who were listed on those patches have all said that they were not far enough along (if assigned at all) to design a patch. The SMEAT patch presents a related issue: copyright. While NASA received permission to use Snoopy on the patch, to reproduce it for commercial uses, a license is needed from United Feature Syndicate. There may be public domain, authentic patches that collectors desire being reproduced (e.g. the Gemini patches, as discussed under a different thread) but I would advise against the examples you identified. |
Jacques van Oene
Member Posts: 861
From: Houten, The Netherlands
Registered: Oct 2001
|
posted 09-01-2009 09:32 AM
As a collector I only want the real thing, not a copy (of a copy of a copy of a copy...) and most patches are out there (the originals). So I will keep looking until I found them... |
MARKW
New Member Posts:
From:
Registered:
|
posted 09-01-2009 12:05 PM
Great idea. I would like to see the Leonardo patch reproduced. The patch has the Teeenage Mutant Ninja Turtles on it. I also looked into the idea of reproducing some patches. I was told that you should have some type of mark on it that identifies it as a reproduction. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42984
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 09-01-2009 12:11 PM
The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Multi-Purpose Logistics Module project logo has the same issue as with the SMEAT patch; the character art is not in the public domain. Commercial use (such as producing patches) would require a license from Mirage Studios. |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 09-01-2009 12:26 PM
Very good idea. I'd rather see people who like fake patches spend money on projects like this, than spending it on eBay, outbidding me on REALLY hard to find patches. And then e-mail me with the question: "What exactly did I buy?" |
KSCartist
Member Posts: 2896
From: Titusville, FL USA
Registered: Feb 2005
|
posted 09-01-2009 01:57 PM
Michael, there will always be an audience for the type of patches you are referring to. I know of two gentlemen in my area who made careers making such things.But listen to Robert - when reproducing a logo for a patch make sure you have the written permission from the people who control the logo. The last thing you would want is for a large corporation to file suit against you for copyright infringement. |
tombohnstedt
Member Posts: 19
From: Pasadena, California, USA
Registered: Jan 2010
|
posted 01-14-2010 12:19 AM
This is kind of late to get in on this particular discussion, but for myself, just an average guy, not a hardcore collector like some of you; here's my take on what kinds of things I would spend my hobby money on: I would spend money on an unflown emblem, but only if it was originally designed as such, not some purely made up thing that somebody pulled out of their backside (like the so-called Apollo 18, 19, 20 patches). I would (and do) buy commemorative patches, as long as they are marketed as such. I would (and do) spend money on Tim Gagnon's commemorative patches because not only are they attractive, but they are marketed as 'commemorative'. I would (and have) bought 'souvenir' patches, such as the Mercury patches, just for the heck of it, but I would much prefer that whoever is selling them was just honest about it and say that it's a 'souvenir' or 'commemorative' patch. I would, and do, buy replicas of actual flown patches as long as it was fairly close to the original. Doesn't have to be an exact photocopy, but fairly close without any glaring deficiencies. My biggest complaint about the Gemini patches that are sold to the public is that they are so different from the originals in some cases that they are more of a 'souvenir' item than a replica.
Suggestion: if someone out there wants to make money making and selling patches, like something someone hasn't done yet; do some serious research, and recreate stuff that actually flew but no one is making or selling, something like Vostok, Voshkod, Soyuz flights. Or maybe the three Chinese flights that have gone up during the last seven years. Shouldn't be too hard to keep up with that. If any of those had official mission emblems at the time of the mission, and if someone can do a decent replication, I would certainly spend my money on something like that. |
KAPTEC
Member Posts: 578
From: Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2005
|
posted 01-14-2010 05:00 AM
I'm agree with tombohnstedt and his suggestion. Why do not RECREATE soviet / russian patches? I know many of them have a copyright (you need to ask Luc van den Abeelen, Jacques or horenz) but not all. And some never have been realized. This may be a good idea... I believe so. |
tombohnstedt
Member Posts: 19
From: Pasadena, California, USA
Registered: Jan 2010
|
posted 01-14-2010 09:13 AM
As a follow-up to my own post I would also add this to anyone wanting to do some business making and selling patches: Besides Soviet, Russian or Chinese patches, think again about Gemini. Forget about Mercury, there is already a set of ‘souvenir’ patches out there, and I see no point in revisiting that. But think about Gemini. Because so many of the Gemini patches sold to the public are so different from the versions actually used by the astronauts, I suggest someone do some serious research on that topic. A great place to start is Eugene Dorr's website. Mr. Dorr already has done serious research on American spaceflight patches, and this is an excellent resource for separating 'souvenir' Gemini patches from the real thing. Make a set of Gemini patches that are close to the originals and I would certainly spend money on that. |
GoesTo11
Member Posts: 1309
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted 01-14-2010 09:56 AM
quote:
Originally posted by tombohnstedt:
Make a set of Gemini patches that are close to the originals and I would certainly spend money on that.
There was a loooong thread devoted to this same idea. Seemed to be plenty of interest, but nothing ever came of it. |
tombohnstedt
Member Posts: 19
From: Pasadena, California, USA
Registered: Jan 2010
|
posted 01-14-2010 04:08 PM
Thanks. I dident catch the other thread, just responding to the start of this one. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42984
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-14-2010 04:30 PM
With regards to Gemini reproductions, I had been an early champion of having collectSPACE create them but the question was then raised as to what "original" we were reproducing: the original art or the copies of the "as-flown" patches. I had been supportive of the "original art" version, as those would clearly be souvenir tributes to the program. When it appeared that most desired replicas of the "as-flown" patches, I stepped out. I personally think that part of the charm of collecting is that we cannot own everything we desire, and that somethings should remain hard to obtain. |
tombohnstedt
Member Posts: 19
From: Pasadena, California, USA
Registered: Jan 2010
|
posted 01-14-2010 05:31 PM
Robert, good point. Well, I guess that is what defines different groups of patches. Mercury; nice looking but purely souvenirs. Apollo through Skylab; fairly close to originals, but mostly accurate. Shuttle; not much in the "rare" department, pretty well defined. Gemini is where the real gems would be if one could find "as flown" or original patches. |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 01-15-2010 12:37 AM
A pity you don't collect stamps. All you needed, would be a photocopier and a pair of scissors! Seriously, it is what I would do if I did not have the money or patience to get a real collection, or would only be happy with a complete set. Just design some nice looking posters on your computer, incorporating real-size images of real patches, some info for each patch and a couple of pictures of astronauts and cosmonauts wearing the patches, and frame those. What you would have on your wall, would have more to to with the astronauts, cosmonauts or taikonauts than fake patches. At least you are looking at the real thing, your memory of the patches does not get distorted by fake creations and you will appreciate the beauty of it. Also, you would be able to really display it, because you do not have to be afraid for discoloration. You simply order a new poster every year. You could then spend the rest of the money on 1 or 2 REAL "gems" and find out there is NOTHING like owning an original, not even a complete range of patches consisting of 100 fakes. |
Philip
Member Posts: 5952
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 01-15-2010 05:25 AM
Well, why not write a book with all patches of manned missions (or unmanned for that matter): "Space Patches: From Mercury to the Space Shuttle" (1986) by Judith Kaplan and Robert Muniz needs a 21st century update! |
KSCartist
Member Posts: 2896
From: Titusville, FL USA
Registered: Feb 2005
|
posted 01-15-2010 07:54 AM
Erik and Robert make excellent points. As I see it collectors are divided into three groups. Group 1: Those with the time, money and knowledge (about the subject) to search for the real thing. In this case a vintage or flown patch. (How I wish I were in this group.)Then there is Group 2: those who strive to be like the first group. They have the same passion for this hobby but are lacking in one of those areas, (usually money). I am among the second group. The third group consists of those people who will purchase any patch from any source just to fill holes in their collection. They lack the patience to search for the real thing and/or they don't want to spend the money. I think the point "tombohnstedt" is making is that if the "official" suppliers would offer accurate replicas of the mission patch artwork then he would be satisfied. I think everyone can agree that the AB Gemini patches are abysmal. There really is no excuse for sloppy work. Robert's point referring to the previous thread on Gemini reproductions: "When it appeared that most desired replicas of the "as-flown" patches, I stepped out." is the right thing to do. The honest goal as I see it is to re-create an accurate rendition of the artwork but not duplicate the exact characteristics of a vintage/flown patch. With the online resources at our disposal it is easy to educate yourself about the characteristics of the vintage/flown patch and in making the replica change some of them to ensure that the replica can not be mistaken for the real thing. No one seems to be upset with companies like AB Emblem for continuing to make patches for every mission because it is obvious that they aren't the real thing, they are souvenirs. It all comes down to "buyer beware" and the ethics of those who sell them. You have to educate yourself because you the collector have no control over the sellers motive. Just like the German eBay dealer Erik alerted me about. All that being said, I would like to take on the project of making a set of Gemini patches and offering them to our friends in Group 2. The first obvious characteristic change is that they would all have plastic iron-on backing. My goal is to make a beautiful set of souvenir patches not exact flown replicas. I have had private discussions with many of you about this and believe it can be done. EDIT - I have contacted John who produced a beautiful Gemini 3 patch to see if they are still available and Luc about his plans. When I have an answer I will post my update. Also Novaspace has the McDivitt endorsed GT-4 patch on their site - so no need to include that. |
JohnBerry
Member Posts: 35
From: Helotes, TX
Registered: Jul 2007
|
posted 02-07-2010 05:12 PM
I've posted a new link over on Buy, Sell, Trade for the GT-3 replica patches I put together w/ Bill Hunt, et al's, help. Thanks for the interest and support. |
Bill Hunt
Member Posts: 399
From: Irvine, CA
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 02-08-2010 02:20 AM
quote:
Originally posted by KSCartist:
The honest goal as I see it is to re-create an accurate rendition of the artwork but not duplicate the exact characteristics of a vintage/flown patch.
I think that's BY FAR the best approach here. Totally agree with this. And as I have no doubt the quality would be excellent, I'd certainly be interested in a nice set of these myself. Frankly, AB really should be doing this themselves, but if they're not interested, all the more reason the community should do it. And I can think of one one better to tackle such a project than Tim, who has a long track record of quality work and a great reputation. |
astroborg
Member Posts: 200
From: Woodbridge, VA, USA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 02-09-2010 11:42 AM
I agree. I'd buy a set. Plus - but on a tangent - wasn't AB planning to do a more accurate Gemini set based on the original artwork? I purchased Gemini XI patch like this that I thought I bought from AB, but I've misplaced my correspondence. Does anyone know anything about this? |
advertisement