Author
|
Topic: Authenticity of Challenger crew autographs
|
Hart Sastrowardoyo Member Posts: 3445 From: Toms River, NJ Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 07-05-2013 12:28 PM
Edit: I've since deleted these scans.Had these for a while, was wondering if anyone could give their opinions on them. They're album pages from five of the Challenger 51L crew (less Smith and Resnick), plus Dick Covey (fittingly enough, CAPCOM that day.) Here's a scan of Jarvis, Onizuka, and Scobee. Here's the scans of Covey and McAuliffe on what must have been a fading marker, and below that of McNair. Just some thoughts: If they're not real, it's interesting that whoever did so used three different pens, with the McAuliffe, perhaps the most valuable of them all, done in a faded marker. It's also interesting that if they are fakes, that added verbage was added (the titles of four of the astronauts.) And lastly, that if they are fakes, that Smith and Resnick were not included (but Covey was), unless Smith and Resnick were somehow separated from this lot. Anyway, opinions freely sought. |
garyd2831 Member Posts: 640 From: Syracuse, New York, USA Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 07-05-2013 02:19 PM
As a collector of STS-51L material, to my eyes, the signatures look good. I would say that the Jarvis signature is a little more rarer and possibly more valuable than the McAuliffe signature. Of course the medium in which they are signed on is all that great so the value would be just in a plain signature that could be cut and mounted. |
garyd2831 Member Posts: 640 From: Syracuse, New York, USA Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 07-05-2013 02:28 PM
I meant to say in my previous post: "Of course the medium in which they are signed on isn't all that great and plain so the value would be just in a plain signature that could be cut and mounted. |
Bob M Member Posts: 1745 From: Atlanta-area, GA USA Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 07-05-2013 04:16 PM
Sorry, but you need to return these and get your money back. |
Greggy_D Member Posts: 977 From: Michigan Registered: Jul 2006
|
posted 07-05-2013 04:32 PM
Agreed. The Covey and McNair are really bad. The last two e's in Scobee are shaped wrong. The z in Onizuka usually ends and does not continue into the u (like in your example). |
garyd2831 Member Posts: 640 From: Syracuse, New York, USA Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 07-05-2013 09:02 PM
After reviewing in greater detail and comparing the signatures to the ones I have, I would have to agree that the signatures don't look right. I make a quick observation earlier without doing a comparison analysis and jumped to an opinion quickly, my apologizes. |
Steve Zarelli Member Posts: 731 From: Upstate New York, USA Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 07-06-2013 10:23 AM
Not sure I can add much that hasn't already been said other than to note the forger here (in my opinion, of course) was ambitious and did a relatively decent job at capturing the "essence" of these signatures. The whispy light touch of McNair and Onizuka, the elegant flow of McAuliffe, the sturdy Scobee, etc.But, yes, on closer examine they fall apart for a number of reasons. Note the similarity of "shuttle" in the Onizuka and Scobee inscriptions. This is the danger of the obvious, crude fakes we often see... it makes it easier to fall prey to more skilled fakes. |
Hart Sastrowardoyo Member Posts: 3445 From: Toms River, NJ Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 07-06-2013 02:57 PM
Thanks all! It's been a while since I've had these, and I don't remember where I got them. I'll file them in the recycling bin... at least there it'll get some good use. |