|
Author
|
Topic: 261265977942: Apollo 13 Crew Patch
|
David C
Member Posts: 1015
From: Lausanne
Registered: Apr 2012
|
posted 09-01-2013 05:18 AM
  
261265977942: "This is a vintage patch and is identical to those worn by the Apollo 13 crew on their post-flight jumpsuits during Recovery."Really? |
Besixdouze
Member Posts: 235
From: Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 09-01-2013 06:00 AM
Looks pretty good to me. Missing a crater maybe but otherwise I don't see a problem. |
David C
Member Posts: 1015
From: Lausanne
Registered: Apr 2012
|
posted 09-01-2013 10:00 AM
Yeah, the missing crater was the big problem for me. Can any owners attest to how much variation they've seen in these? |
garyd2831
Member Posts: 640
From: Syracuse, New York, USA
Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 09-01-2013 10:20 AM
I know you can pick them up for around $100US as that is how much I paid for mine. If there is any deficiencies, I personally would wait. |
Gonzo
Member Posts: 596
From: Lansing, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 09-03-2013 07:10 PM
I would steer clear. I've been looking at Apollo patches in general for a while now and I'd say that this is a good replica. Compare it to a known example on Chris Spain's crewpatches website. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but there's a couple of things wrong with this patch that even my untrained eyes can see.First is the missing crater. There's one missing center left. There should be 10, this only has 9. Next is the back. The tail is in the wrong place. It has a selvedged edge, but the tail is below the second hoof from the left (looking at the back). The example on Chris' website shows the tail further to the right, just right of the center of the moon. Now more objectively, the stitching isn't as precise and well done as the example. It is OK, but if you really look at it, the stitching is much more crudely done. The stitch directions all seem to be right, they just aren't as full and precise. Look at the letters. They aren't as full as the example. Neither are the horses. So while I'd say it is a good rendition, if pressed for a judgement, I'd say it's a replica from overseas. Possibly Malaysia looking at the quality. They may claim it's a vintage original, but I'm not convinced it is. I wouldn't put my $$ down on it. |
george9785
Member Posts: 196
From: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Registered: Nov 2010
|
posted 09-04-2013 01:04 AM
As the seller I can tell you the patch is authentic and not a replica. I've owned about six of these patches and currently have three of them. If you see enough of the same patch, you'll occasionally find variation and/or errors. That's the nature of embroidery particularly when there are several "runs" by the manufacturer of the same patch. If I had any doubt whatsoever it would have been communicated within my listing. |
Gonzo
Member Posts: 596
From: Lansing, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 09-04-2013 06:01 AM
I fully understand your point of view. I have been collecting patches for well over 20 years and have seen thousands of them. I agree, there are variations from different runs of a patch from the same manufacturer. The most common variation being a slight variation in the colors depending on when it was made. However, looking at this particular patch, you should admit there are problematic differences, not just slight variations.What I based my opinion on were those problems. As I said, a crater is completely missing and the stitch quality is not what it should be for a genuine example, at least from the pictures posted. You say you have several examples of this particular patch. Are they all the same? Are there NO differences between them? If there are differences (and I suspect there are), perhaps these differences are because they are from different manufacturers altogether? My particular interest is the Apollo patches, Apollo 11 being at the top of my interest. As such, I have 18-20 different versions of the A-11 patch itself from different manufacturers and variations from the same manufacturer. This does not include duplicates. So, yes, I agree there are differences between examples. You claim this to be a genuine example. From my experience and from the other examples I've seen, I question that. The OP asked for opinions on the authenticity of the patch and that is all I've given based on my experience. I, like others, question that. This particular patch has too many, what you call variations, to support that, and I personally would not bid on it for those reasons. |
Besixdouze
Member Posts: 235
From: Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 09-04-2013 06:26 AM
I personally still don't have a problem with this patch. OK, it's missing a crater but that's probably just a flaw (if you check the back of the patch there's a lot of loose black thread just about where the crater should be). More convincingly check out eBay item 181194049359 sold recently by Maarten. No one seemed to think there was anything wrong with that one and, apart from that patch having the requisite number of craters, they both look pretty much the same to me at least. I have three of these Apollo 13 Crew Patches and they all show slight dissimilarities mainly in the lettering. Maybe Chris or Kevin would be willing to share their opinions. |
george9785
Member Posts: 196
From: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Registered: Nov 2010
|
posted 09-04-2013 06:34 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Gonzo:
This particular patch has too many, what you call variations, to support that, and I personally would not bid on it for those reasons.
In many cases the back of a patch, in particular, is like a fingerprint and from that you can know with almost complete certainty whether it originates from a common manufacturer or from a common run of patch production. I'm assessing on that basis. You seem to have trouble with this in this instance but too some of your comments are naive like suggesting that differences between the location of the tails is problematic for you in your assessment. Unfortunately others with less experience and who don't know better can buy into your comments. |
Gonzo
Member Posts: 596
From: Lansing, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 09-04-2013 08:00 AM
George - I fully understand your points. It's not a naive opinion. I agree that the back is like a fingerprint. However, I've also seen the backs of different patches look ALMOST identical, yet be from different manufacturers altogether, particularly when the manufacturer intended to make a duplicate and pass it off as genuine. What I was trying to point out was that any one of the variations by themselves was not the reason for my opinion. If that had been the case, I would have overlooked any of them as a slight variation. However, as I said, there are several differences in this particular patch. And that is the crux of my post. So, yes, there are variations within different runs of a patch from the same manufacturer. However, as I pointed out, it is the other differences along with these that I have a problem with. The three biggest being that the crater is missing entirely. And again, if this was the only issue, it would be a variation as that can happen. The second is that the stitching does not nearly have the quality of the genuine article. The third, as has been pointed out, most commonly in the lettering. C'mon, look at the lettering. Look at the horses. Look closely at the manes. This particular patch does not have the stitch quality of other known examples. OK, so you claim it is genuine. Maybe it is. But you know what? The OP asked for opinions. This is mine. This is merely my opinion. If I'm wrong, great. I'll be the first to admit it and we will all learn something from it. But what you are not agreeing to is the flaws I've pointed out. They do exist, whether this is a genuine patch or not. You can call them variations if you'd like. But to have several obvious "variations" within a single patch makes it suspect. As I said, maybe they are just variations. Maybe it is genuine. Whether you want to admit they are there is up to you, I can't make you see something when your eyes are closed. All I did was answer the OP's question. Sorry if you think you lost a possible sale due to my comments. But I am not the only one to point out the issues with this patch and more importantly, to me it is better to point out the possibility of a flaw so that the buyer knows what he's getting when they see the flaws and are concerned enough to ask for other opinions here. Point being, if the suspicion wasn't in the OP's mind to start with, it wouldn't even have been asked and we would not be having this conversation. So, the variations/flaws are there and I'm not the only one to see them. |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 09-04-2013 10:41 AM
Except for the missing crater, which just sometimes happens with embroidered patches (even today), I see nothing wrong with this patch. I have my own original in hand and it is the same, stitch by stitch. Your statement about 'Malaysia' really puzzles me. The embroidery technique and type of thread is completely different from (and far superior to) what is being produced nowadays on Asian machines. By the way, do you know how the borders (the ones that leave the 'misplaced' tail) are being attached to these patches? |
Gonzo
Member Posts: 596
From: Lansing, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 09-04-2013 10:56 AM
All I was pointing out was that I would question it, just as the OP did by asking to start with. My point was that any one of the variations by themselves would not be an issue. But when there are a couple obvious ones, important ones, it will at least make it questionable. And that I believe is why the OP asked to start with. To him/her it was questionable and came here for advice. All I did was point out the "variations". |
Besixdouze
Member Posts: 235
From: Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 09-04-2013 10:57 AM
These are what I'd call 'modern' versions of this patch - eBay item 190896309052 and eBay item 290971702108 - from Malaysia or elsewhere. There's really no mistaking them for vintage patches. |
george9785
Member Posts: 196
From: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Registered: Nov 2010
|
posted 09-04-2013 11:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by hoorenz:
Except for the missing crater...
Just for the record, there is another deficiency in that there is some orange thread missing in the fill for the sun. |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 09-04-2013 11:12 AM
Where is the orange thread missing? |
george9785
Member Posts: 196
From: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Registered: Nov 2010
|
posted 09-04-2013 11:22 AM
Just above and to the left of the eye of the horse in the forefront.Actually, now that I look again, it appears that the positioning of the sun in relation to the horses is a little different which creates the appearance of that bit of orange thread being missing. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 09-04-2013 11:50 AM
I've edited a few of the posts in this thread to focus the discussion on the patch, not the seller or the collectors. Remember: discuss the product, not the person. As for the patch itself, I think its helpful sometimes to step back and look at it as a whole, rather than focus on the details. The missing crater was worthy a question, but overall, it appears to be a run-of-the-mill AB Emblem vintage patch. |
george9785
Member Posts: 196
From: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Registered: Nov 2010
|
posted 09-04-2013 12:13 PM
Just for clarity for those who read the post before it was deleted and so that no one is offended, my earlier reference to James Spence was intended to be a reference to PSA. Post was deleted before I had a chance to make a correction. |
David C
Member Posts: 1015
From: Lausanne
Registered: Apr 2012
|
posted 09-06-2013 05:48 PM
Thanks for the advice guys, didn't mean to start a ruckus. I think I wait for a cheaper more typical example. |
advertisement