|
Author
|
Topic: Discerning vintage from replica space patches
|
spaced out
Member Posts: 3110
From: Paris, France
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 09-06-2011 12:45 PM
   
A set of patches just ended on eBay brought up the difficult issue of how to differentiate between original vintage patches and previously unknown replicas.I'd be interested to hear other collectors' opinions on this as it can be quite a tricky subject. Obviously if the patch has a plastic coating on the back it's not Apollo era but a bare cloth back doesn't mean a patch is vintage. Replicas can be produced with or without coated backs and Randy Hunt (4gator) for example, regularly produced his replicas without coatings. In the absence of other clear indicators it can come down to the style of stitching used in the execution of the patch but this is somewhat subjective. The North American Rockwell Apollo Launch Team patch just sold on eBay differs from the known vintage patch not just in the fully embroidered background but in the fill stitch style employed in the white areas of the patch. The 'cross-hatch' (for want of a better term) stitching visible there strikes me as a modern style. The known vintage original uses dense parallel lines of thread in the filled areas (satin stitch), usually following the angles of the filled areas. The LLTV patch likewise has a similar style of fill stitching over the whole background of the patch. This patch also has the overall appearance of a modern copy, in my opinion. Finally, there's the Grumman LM Ground Support patch which is a tricky one. This has a major design difference from the known original design (the LM shape) which would be somewhat surprising in a replica. However the bad thread color choices that are obvious in this patch would be unsurprising in a replica attempt. Otherwise I could only explain these things as a possible prototype design. What makes me uncomfortable with this patch is the cross-hatch fill thread in the palm of the hand and in the fill areas of the LEM. Again this strikes me as a distinctly modern touch. I would expect a vintage patch to have dense parallel satin stitch fill in these areas. Maybe I'm wrong about this fill stitch style? Have a look through your vintage patches and see if you can find an example of this fill style in any of them. I did a quick check of my own collection through to 1969 or so and couldn't find a single example but maybe I missed one, or don't have a particular patch in my collection. I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on all this. |
mama04
Member Posts: 151
From: Haarlem, N-H, Netherlands
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted 09-06-2011 01:32 PM
As the buyer of the three patches you mentioned I too struggled with the mentioned vintage versus modern dilemma.After a number of email exchanges with both you, other cS forum members and the seller himself I decided to bid on them. I truly believe the seller to be honest in his assumption that the patches were vintage after a number of emails. I too checked my collection to see if I could find matching stitch patterns and, as with your patches, I couldn't find any. Does that mean that they are not vintage? Possibly. Does it mean they are modern replicas? No, it does not. In my humble opinion it means that I don't know for sure what they are and there is only one way to find out. It is a gamble, but it surely is interesting. I'll send high definition scans so you can have a good look yourself and of course you are always more than welcome to come and visit me in Haarlem and have a look or yourself.  |
Kevin T. Randall
Member Posts: 1082
From: Chesham, Bucks UK
Registered: Dec 2008
|
posted 09-06-2011 01:57 PM
I also e-mailed the seller and come to the same conclusion as Maarten. These Grumman and Rockwell patches were acquired by the seller in 1988 from a retired Grumman employee. Also I have images of the Grumman patches the seller did not list. A 6 3/4" high fully embroidered LM-8 patch, (matching the replica one Chris produced), and an unknown 4 1/4" diameter Apollo 14 patch with the names of the CM and LM on. (These images I have sent to Chris, would you like to see these images too Maarten?) |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 09-06-2011 02:22 PM
Here are images I have of vintage versions (Donnis Willis). I think it is pretty clear that these are direct copies from images of embroidered patches. The maker of the eBay patches did not have any idea where the thumb on that hand started or ended. Even the glare in the wrist was mistaken for white thread. |
spaceman
Member Posts: 1104
From: Walsall, West Midlands, UK
Registered: Dec 2002
|
posted 09-06-2011 02:59 PM
The thumb is an obvious error, buyer beware! Collecting space patches (vintage ones anyway) just got a whole lot harder. |
benguttery
Member Posts: 547
From: Fort Worth, TX, USA
Registered: Feb 2005
|
posted 09-07-2011 10:31 AM
Upon seeing these patches, I looked through all my images of Hunt and Wagner patches. My lists are not complete, but it again reminds me of the need to have a catalog of these old reproductions. In 10 or 20 years people may not differentiate them from the originals. |
Besixdouze
Member Posts: 235
From: Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 06-06-2012 04:44 AM
I thought it would be interesting to resurrect this thread in light of the seller (Hospoi (960)s new listings. Another LM Ground Support patch, an unusual Grumman contractor patch, a large embroidered NASA meatball and a Grumman Lunar Module patch. That uncomfortable feeling Chris mentions in his initial post has returned. To my eyes at least, these are beginning to look like modern replicas. Any other thoughts? |
Gonzo
Member Posts: 596
From: Lansing, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 06-06-2012 08:05 AM
Agreed. The LM Ground Support patch the seller (Hospoi) currently has listed is identical, to my eyes anyway, to the one Chris questioned as authentic initially. What I find interesting in all the listings by this seller at the moment is that all the descriptions include, "This is a very rare patch. ... I recently went to a storage facility where I have stuff..." To me, that just sounds fishy. |
spaced out
Member Posts: 3110
From: Paris, France
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 06-06-2012 08:42 AM
Seeing these new listings I have to say I still have some doubts about the age of the Grumman Lunar Module patch too.The crude conversion of the artwork into fill areas makes me think of modern patches rather than vintage ones, although it could be from the same artist as the equally crude LM-1/APOLLO-5 patch. Seeing a few examples with clean provenance to former Grumman employees would help me feel more confident about this one. |
spaced out
Member Posts: 3110
From: Paris, France
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 06-07-2012 05:57 AM
The seller has now listed a bunch of Snoopy patches - LRL, "Zero In On Safety", "I'm On The Moon", "Eyes on the Stars" etc.Although these may all have bare cloth backs the stitching style is 100% modern. In my opinion these are modern patches based on decal designs. I'd be very surprised if the seller doesn't remember where these were all bought. They certainly didn't come from the vintage collection of a NASA worker. More likely they were made in the 80s or 90s, either by Randy Hunt or by the seller. It's striking how similar the wording is on these listings to the way 4gator used to sell his replicas on eBay. Everything was carefully worded so as to imply the patches were rare originals without explicitly stating this, since Randy knew full-well his patches were replicas he'd had produced himself. |
Besixdouze
Member Posts: 235
From: Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 06-07-2012 07:26 AM
These new offerings certainly help muddy the waters. Cross reference to another thread started by Chris on Snoopy patches and the images posted by Silver Snoopy to see what I mean. Some are the same, some are different. However, including the 'PS' from the decal on to the patch looks like a mistake and gives credence to the notion of that particular patch being copied. Personally, I'm finding it hard to decide if the seller is genuinely mistaken or deliberately trying to mislead. Guess we'll have to draw our own conclusions. These patches will still sell regardless. |
Apollo 8
Member Posts: 176
From: Vienna, Austria
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 06-07-2012 07:33 AM
I am bidding on some of this Snoopy patches at the moment, but I won´t spend much money on them, not more than for a nice replica... |
spaced out
Member Posts: 3110
From: Paris, France
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 06-07-2012 08:37 AM
Indeed all these patches have some value as replicas. As with Randy Hunt in the old days and the sellers of the replica ASTP initialed patches on eBay today I just wish they'd advertise the items as what they are and let them sell accordingly. |
Apollo 8
Member Posts: 176
From: Vienna, Austria
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 06-07-2012 09:30 AM
Yes, I agree, they should do that! - But I am afraid, buying stuff on eBay always is some kind of a risk. For example, I never bought an autograph on eBay, only once an autopen, and this one was offered correct as an autopen.With "original" patches, I am afraid we have to be very careful on eBay too. This interesting thread here shows how difficult it sometimes can be, even for experts like you, to find out if a patch is a replica or not. I mean, I would buy any patch offered from you on eBay (because I know who you are), of from others from our board here, I can trust, but I am very, very careful with any other offers... |
englau
Member Posts: 110
From: tampa, florida, usa
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 06-07-2012 11:41 PM
I am very new to collecting and I think a hit my first pitfall. I bought a few patches from Malaysia. I was just on another thread on this message board and saw someone mention knock offs from Malaysia. Rookie mistake!My question is, what is the best way to properly spot and avoid the knockoffs in the future? Also, can someone explain why the knockoffs come from there in particular? Thanks! Editor's note: Threads merged. |
KSCartist
Member Posts: 2896
From: Titusville, FL USA
Registered: Feb 2005
|
posted 06-08-2012 04:42 AM
The pirates in Malaysia hunt for patch images on websites like cS to steal them and make patches fast and dirty.The good thing for the collector is that the quality of their reproductions are always inferior to the real thing. As for why they do it - simple $$$. |
Gonzo
Member Posts: 596
From: Lansing, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 06-08-2012 05:38 AM
Good explanation Eric! Labor is cheap and they know how collectable patches have become. Since ANYBODY can sell crap on eBay, they even have the market to sell to. So it boils down to simple economics.I was recently scouring eBay for some particular patches and found a whole slew of patches that looked interesting, until I noticed two things - they were all listed individually for just $0.99 each and they were all from the same seller. I then checked and the seller was from Malaysia. So, I promptly just ignored them. But yeah, they are ALWAYS of inferior quality and almost always sell at dirt cheap prices. That's why sites like crewpatches.com, spacepatchs.nl and this site are so vauable. Avoid them (the cheap Malaysian knock-offs) and maybe they will just go away! (I know, wishful thinking...) |
johntosullivan
Member Posts: 162
From: Cork, Cork, Ireland
Registered: Oct 2005
|
posted 06-08-2012 08:08 AM
I understand that the Malaysian rubbish can be called knock offs and replicas. But what constitutes an original and what constitutes a replica?Is it the first batch by the original supplier paid for by the space agency? Or is it flown patches, or is it patches worn/owned by the original crew? The reason I ask, I try to buy the latest patch as soon as it is available, shuttle, soyuz, ISS expedition, spacex, ATV, HTV etc. If the orginal manufacturer (e.g. AB emblem) produces a second or subsequent batch using the same factory, is that a replica? Strictly speaking aren't they all replicas except the flown patches? |
Harald Kraenzel
Member Posts: 304
From: Dinslaken,Germany
Registered: Nov 2005
|
posted 06-08-2012 09:05 AM
quote:
Originally posted by johntosullivan:
If the original manufacturer (e.g. AB Emblem) produces a second or subsequent batch using the same factory, is that a replica?
That's a good point. Over the years I bought some patches of the same mission (f.e STS-1) from AB Emblems and of course they did several runs looking different. AB Emblem call them "original" patches as they produced them and that's of course true. But passing years do force them to change the embroidery machines or techniques which of course is causing different looks and feels. If someone is starting to become a collector and is buying those patches directly from AB Emblem he is having an "original" patch but the question is which run it is from. So it ends up to what a collector is looking for to collect. Just to have a patch that represents the mission patch or to collect those "crew patches" or whatever reason a collector might have... |
butch wilks
Member Posts: 333
From: Lowestoft, Suffolk, UK
Registered: Mar 2007
|
posted 06-08-2012 10:12 AM
As with the last post I too get most of the mission patches for AB Emblem but through Stewart Emblems in the UK who are agents for AB in the UK. But it can take a few more weeks to get them over here in the UK.Having a look back at the patches I have to see if I have a patch that a post on cS sometimes come up with, I see that I have some of not a good few of the more different to come by patches that AB made. On saying that, I want to say that I got the patches before two to a maximum of six months have gone by to get the first ones off the machines that do not go to NASA/ESA and so on. But as of this last year or so with AB adding the label to the backs of there patches: - Do we say that only the AB patches made in the USA are the first ones, or
- Does AB send out the design to Taiwan/China and they make the first one from time to time?
I cannot at this time say (maybe someone can on here).So I go back to saying you have to get most patches before the end of two to six months to get may be a good one, but keep an eye on cS and the space patches web pages to keep up with it all. Plus you can ask on here for help to get them, as we all do from time to time, and you'd be surprised at the help you get from the members (thanks to you all). And it is fun. One last thing, please not all patches come from AB Emblem. in time You'll get who to buy from and who not to, and one day you will be able to see the good the bad and the ugly. So keep at it, you'll get there and put the bad patches back on eBay to sell them off to get the good ones. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42984
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-08-2012 10:32 AM
quote:
Originally posted by butch wilks:
...put the bad patches back on eBay to sell them off to get the good ones.
Unless it's a financial hardship, it might be a better idea for collectors to destroy the knockoff patches, rather than continue to have them circulate. And by knockoff, I don't mean fine-crafted replicas like Chris Spain's Grumman LM series, but rather the cheaply made and completely unnecessary mission patch duplicates that are today made by companies in Malaysia, but also those earlier made by Randy Hunt, Tom Foley and others. Think of them as forgeries of the original AB Emblem approved design. You don't re-sell an autograph forgery, you destroy it. The same should be true for patches (or any counterfeits). |
butch wilks
Member Posts: 333
From: Lowestoft, Suffolk, UK
Registered: Mar 2007
|
posted 06-08-2012 11:02 AM
Sorry Robert but I have to add that you must NOT destroy them.I have a number of Randy Hunt's patches and the STS-134 wives and crew patches and I would NOT destroy them as they to have a history to them too. I have told you all from time to time that the patches made by Randy will one day be collected. They may have been made to make $$$$$ but in the end they are part of the history of patches collecting and without them we would not have a base line to look back at for as some put it the knockoff. Okay, let's see how many on here would give me their Randy Hunt patches to put in to a collection for free to keep his work alive and to be put on a web page for all to see as a guide for his patches. Instead of destroying them as Robert would have you do. Not many I bet, sell them to me yes, but to give NO. But way as they have NO financial worth we are all going to destroy them yes. Is it just the planet we live on. |
Gonzo
Member Posts: 596
From: Lansing, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 06-08-2012 11:58 AM
I agree with Butch and disagree with Robert on this one. I understand both viewpoints. And I would not intentionally buy one of the knockoffs either.The same goes for what some call "errors" - patches with obvious errors/ommisions in them. Take for example the thread I've been updating on the STS-103 patch. The colors are all off and in some places just plain wrong from the official patch. I have another copy of this patch, from AB, that what appears to have had the thread break while doing the names. The N in Brown only has about half of the ascender (it's very narrow) and there is no Kelly on it at all. So it has obvious "errors". Will I destroy it? No. For the ones with the wrong colors, we've contacted AB (I'm working with reseller that has contacts within AB) and are awaiting to see what their stance will be on their patch. For the one with the missing name, I'll keep that one as well. While these aren't "official" patches, they are very interesting when you look at it from the view of the patch making process and hence, deserve a spot in a collection if for no other reason, documentation of what can go wrong.
|
fredtrav
Member Posts: 1673
From: Birmingham AL
Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted 06-08-2012 12:16 PM
I agree with most of what Butch ans Gonzo have to say. However the patches from Malaysia need to be destroyed or at least shoved in a drawer somewhere not to be seen again. while a Hunt patch might have some interest to collectors, the Malaysian do not and I believe will not. I wish eBay would require a banner across all the Malaysian sites stating that the patches they sell are unauthorized knockoffs. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42984
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-08-2012 01:47 PM
Hunt (and others, not to just single out him) produced many patches based on stolen artwork. He did so knowingly and blatantly and then misrepresented those patches as his original idea or acquisition. He (and again, others) advertised his patches as being "official" and went so far to misrepresent them as the first patches that NASA bought before ordering from AB Emblem. In that sense, Hunt's patches are no different than those produced in Malaysia. (I say this with firsthand knowledge, as he not only lifted copyrighted designs from collectSPACE but when challenged, swore it was a mistake but then kept on selling them.) I don't want to derail this conversation from its original purpose, so that's all I'll say on this topic, but were it up to me I would destroy every last one of Hunt's (and others) unauthorized and/or misrepresented patches with absolutely no remorse. |
butch wilks
Member Posts: 333
From: Lowestoft, Suffolk, UK
Registered: Mar 2007
|
posted 06-08-2012 02:14 PM
I agree with fredtrav that a banner on the copies would help on eBay but it would have to go on all (I will not say knockoffs) copies of patches, from the Malaysian to AB and more (way is AB added to the list; 3" souvenir Mercury patches/end of the space shuttle program patch is all I'll say).I'd like to see eBay add to the copies this: This is an unauthorized copy of the authorized and may be in breach of copyright ...and not put in as a big banner but as a warning at the top of the listing.And the authorized seller having a banner to; that this item comes from the maker of the authorized patch and is authorized to sell it. Or that it comes from a private party or a collector. eBay can hold a list of authorized sellers. This then may get over the copyright issues. |
johntosullivan
Member Posts: 162
From: Cork, Cork, Ireland
Registered: Oct 2005
|
posted 06-08-2012 05:02 PM
The issue of copyright gets closer to answering my question above. So who has copyright on ISS Expedition patches? AB Emblem, NASA, Roskosmos?Who has copyright on Soyuz patches? Roskosmos? Remember before the children's art competitions, a lot of cosmonauts produced them privately and the manufacturer was very successful at preventing copies. |
Apollo 8
Member Posts: 176
From: Vienna, Austria
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 06-09-2012 03:53 AM
The prieces for the Snoopy patches on eBay, we talked about at the beginning of this thread, are climbing higher... I stopped bidding. They are beautiful, but a copy is a copy! |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 06-09-2012 05:46 AM
Even AB Emblem is making and selling copies. For instance, the Mir EO-21 (Lucid) and Mir EO-26, which were originally made by Spaceview/Aviation Patch Supplies, or Mir EO-28, which is originally Planeta Zemlja. Just recently, they even made a run of Soyuz TMA-03M patches for a space agency related to the flight, while we have designed and produced the original ones for Roscosmos. Did they break copyright with this? I have no idea. On the other hand, we made a run of Expedition 31 patches from our original design for another customer (which happened to be the crew...). Both our patch and the AB Emblem version are now flying aboard ISS. Which one is the original? Which one is the copy? Who has copyright? Sometimes, it is just very hard to tell. |
Spaceguy5
Member Posts: 427
From: Pampa, TX, US
Registered: May 2011
|
posted 06-09-2012 07:13 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Unless it's a financial hardship, it might be a better idea for collectors to destroy the knockoff patches, rather than continue to have them circulate.
If you look up the section of the Code of Federal Regulations (Title 14, Chapter V, Part 1221) regarding NASA emblems and NASA program identifiers, reproductions must be exact and "the manufacture, sale, or use of any colorable imitation of the design of an official NASA Program Identifier will not be approved."If NASA doesn't approve of cheap knockoffs being used for official use, then I'd say that collectors shouldn't keep them either. |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 06-09-2012 07:31 AM
I am not so sure if NASA's rules concerning what is official and what not, should be the standard. |
Spaceguy5
Member Posts: 427
From: Pampa, TX, US
Registered: May 2011
|
posted 06-09-2012 08:10 AM
The code isn't against reproductions. In fact, regarding NASA program identifiers, it states: Specific approval is given for the following uses: (1) Use of exact reproductions of a badge in the form of a patch made of cloth or other material, or a decal, or a gummed sticker on articles of wearing apparel and personal property items; and (2) Use of exact renderings of a badge on a coin, medal, plaque, or other commemorative souvenirs. It's just against colorable imitations, such as emblems that have items added/removed, or color changes, or incorrect artwork.No one can enforce what every collector does, but I think it's a good guideline to follow as it makes sense to avoid colorable imitations and poor reproductions. |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 06-09-2012 08:43 AM
Which makes Expedition 31 an interesting case. Artwork with yellow ISS gets approved by NASA and is sent to AB Emlem, AB Emblem makes a mistake with the colors (orange ISS instead of yellow), NASA alters the artwork after the fact to hide the color mistake, crew is not happy and orders new patches from a third party with the original colors, which are now not 'official'... Sometimes, as a collector, I would not always strictly adhere to what NASA is considering official... |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42984
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-09-2012 09:49 AM
There is a clear difference between a patch that is created at the request of the crew and a patch produced by a third party company with no connection or communication with anyone associated with the spaceflight for which the patch is associated.The latter, when contemporary to the mission, is a knockoff. |
hoorenz
Member Posts: 1031
From: The Netherlands
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 06-09-2012 10:14 AM
A good point! |
spaced out
Member Posts: 3110
From: Paris, France
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 06-11-2012 06:23 AM
I'm disappointed to see that the bidding for two of the Snoopy patches has now reached $147 and $214. That's an awful lot for modern embroidered reproductions of vintage decals. |
Besixdouze
Member Posts: 235
From: Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 06-11-2012 07:16 AM
Have to agree with Chris on this one. Judging by the bid activity, we may have a Peanuts memorabilia collector after one in which case probably not a reader of this forum but the other bidder seems to be well experienced in the field of space collecting and, you would assume, aware of what he/she is purchasing. Unfortunately though, with potential returns like these, the prospect of sellers ever doing 'the right thing' becomes more and more unlikely. On a brighter note, I look forward to my offspring passing off Chris' excellent replicas for originals and making megabucks in about 25 years from now.  |
Apollo 8
Member Posts: 176
From: Vienna, Austria
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 06-11-2012 07:32 AM
quote:
Originally posted by spaced out:
I'm disappointed to see that the bidding for two of the Snoopy patches has now reached $147 and $214.
That's too crazy to believe! I never could imagine that! |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42984
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-11-2012 07:38 AM
A well placed letter to Peanuts Worldwide LLC or United Features Syndicate, showing the high prices bid/paid, should put a quick end to these sales based on copyright violation. Snoopy is not in the public domain and even NASA has to get permission before using the character. |
spaced out
Member Posts: 3110
From: Paris, France
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 06-11-2012 08:21 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Besixdouze:
I look forward to my offspring passing off Chris' excellent replicas for originals and making megabucks in about 25 years from now.
That's one of the reasons why I deliberately opted for plastic coated backs on my replicas — explicitly to ensure that they could never be mistaken for vintage originals in the future. Sorry.  |
advertisement