Author
|
Topic: FS: Apollo 8 Earthrise red number photo
|
Pad39A Member Posts: 41 From: Little Rock, AR, USA Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-22-2017 03:16 PM
The May 19, 2017 Heritage Space Auction just sold an Apollo 8 "Earthrise" original NASA "red number" color photo, AS8-14-2383 for $10,625, which included a 25% buyer's premium. I have an identical photo, same red number on the correct vintage chromogenic 10x8" Kodak fiber-based paper bearing the "A Kodak Paper" watermark on the verso. I am offering it to anyone for the no-buyer's premium-price of $7900. The auction catalog reads: This is one of the most iconic images of the entire twentieth century, taken from lunar orbit in December 1968 of the Earth as it rises over the horizon. These originals are rarely offered and this one is beautiful with a couple of minor dents seen only under raking light, pristine otherwise. A rare opportunity. I would not call my copy "pristine," but excellent condition. Please contact me if if you have an interest. |
Chuckster01 Member Posts: 873 From: Orlando, FL Registered: Jan 2014
|
posted 05-22-2017 05:02 PM
Just insane... |
jtheoret Member Posts: 344 From: Albuquerque, NM USA Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 05-23-2017 01:05 AM
Couldn't agree more — but I never got the prices paid for red numbered photos anyway. To each his own I suppose, but that such photos often sell for more than flown items is truly insane to me. Could have bought four or five flown flags for the price of that photo. |
rgarner Member Posts: 1193 From: Shepperton, United Kingdom Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 05-23-2017 02:07 AM
I know a few collectors of red numbers and they're all incredibly enthusiastic. I can see why, especially with this piece. Photography allows the capture of a moment in history that will never come again, and the moment in this picture is one of the most beautiful and important in human history, so it is no wonder there are those who will pay big money for an original. Why buy a print when you can buy an original? But at this price? I don't know anyone who would pay event a tenth of that. |
neo1022 Member Posts: 281 From: Santa Monica, CA Registered: Jun 2013
|
posted 05-23-2017 02:56 AM
Time to sell all those red numbered photos dad brought him from work, I guess... Too bad I used a three-hole-punch on all of them when I was a kid! |
spaced out Member Posts: 3110 From: Paris, France Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 05-23-2017 03:39 AM
quote: Originally posted by rgarner: But at this price? I don't know anyone who would pay event a tenth of that.
Actually a pristine copy could approach $790 on eBay. $500+ is certainly possible. And neo1022 - punched holes, particularly if they go into the printed image, are a real problem. That said, if you have an original Apollo 8 earthrise or Apollo 11 'visor' shot in there they're probably still worth three figures. |
Panther494 Member Posts: 402 From: London UK Registered: Jan 2013
|
posted 05-23-2017 07:35 AM
quote: Originally posted by rgarner: Why buy a print when you can buy an original?
An original one of many hundreds printed at the time. A fantastic image, a crazy price. |
Mike Dixon Member Posts: 1397 From: Kew, Victoria, Australia Registered: May 2003
|
posted 05-23-2017 07:56 AM
To each their own I guess, but those dollars in an investment easily obtained elsewhere? No. |
rgarner Member Posts: 1193 From: Shepperton, United Kingdom Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted 05-23-2017 08:20 AM
I suppose some people just see it as a hobby or fascination as opposed to an investment. Personally my collection is a combination of both. I have bought pieces which I will not make money on (I doubt I would lose money though), while others I know will appreciate in value.Each to their own indeed. |
Joel Katzowitz Member Posts: 808 From: Marietta GA USA Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 05-23-2017 09:15 AM
quote: Originally posted by rgarner: Why buy a print when you can buy an original?
I certainly agree that the image is amazing but the image isn't any more "original" than any other printed image made from the negative. The negative (or positive) used to capture the image is an original but any print made from that negative is, well, just a print. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42988 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-23-2017 09:26 AM
And it is good to keep in mind that no prints were ever made from the flown film. All prints are at best second generation, having been made from a duplicate of the original negatives/positives (and I believe, but I am not positive, that the red number glossies are actually third generation prints). |
spaced out Member Posts: 3110 From: Paris, France Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 05-23-2017 09:44 AM
When you get this kind of anomalous auction result my assumption is always that the buyer has completely misunderstood the nature of the item. In this case they probably thought that this was 'the' Earthrise photo (a unique original in some way). Maybe they even imagined that the crew came back from the mission with a stack of prints, one of each image.The same thing can happen with large flown flags, where the bidder has a vague idea of having seen a flag flying on the moon and thinks that the flag in the auction must be the one that was flying on the moon. |
Chuckster01 Member Posts: 873 From: Orlando, FL Registered: Jan 2014
|
posted 05-23-2017 03:18 PM
When you speak of "the buyer," please remember that for a price to reach such a level there were "bidders." |
Mike_The_First Member Posts: 436 From: USA Registered: Jun 2014
|
posted 05-23-2017 08:16 PM
quote: Originally posted by spaced out: When you get this kind of anomalous auction result my assumption is always that the buyer has completely misunderstood the nature of the item.
Honestly, I wish auction houses (and sellers in general) would scrap words like "rare," "original" and "beautiful" and put the items in context. In the description above, they managed to shoehorn some variation of "rare" in twice... in only three sentences. At a certain point, not quantifying wording like that reads less like hype and more like an attempt to take advantage of less educated bidders with deep pockets.Sellers on eBay are even worse with that kind of thing. |
Philip Member Posts: 5952 From: Brussels, Belgium Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 05-24-2017 03:35 AM
LOL for a $ 5.00 KODAK photo |