Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

Websites
related space history websites

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Auctions - Reviews & Results
  [WestLicht Gallery] Jim Irwin's Hasselblad camera (Page 1)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   [WestLicht Gallery] Jim Irwin's Hasselblad camera
ozspace
Member

Posts: 154
From: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Registered: May 2009

posted 01-31-2014 10:28 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for ozspace   Click Here to Email ozspace     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If only I had a few more Euros!

WestLicht Photographica auction on March 22, 2014:

Hasselblad 500 'EL DATA CAMERA' NASA

A big step for us and one of the most exciting cameras we ever offered in auction!

After presenting and auctioning the most rare and most valuable cameras of mother earth for many years, we proudly present the only camera ever used on the moon AND which also came back home.

Jim Irwin took exactly 299 pictures with this Hasselblad 500 'EL DATA CAMERA HEDC' during his 3 days stay on the lunar surface and 96 more on the way to the moon and back again.

The mission was the first not to land in a lunar mare, instead landing near Hadley rille, documenting an area of the Mare Imbrium called Palus Putredinus. The crew explored the area using the first lunar rover, which allowed them to travel much further from the Lunar Module. Often quoted, NASA called Apollo 15 the most successful manned flight ever achieved.

The offered camera no.1038 was one of 14 cameras used on the moon during the APOLLO missions 11-17.(nos.1002, 1003, 1016, 1020, 1023, 1026, 1027, 1028, 1031,1032, 1033, 1036, 1038, 1039)

But only this Hasselblad used on the 4th NASA mission between July 26th to August 7th, 1971 made it`s way back to earth finally landing at the Westlicht auction house.

The other 13 cameras were left on the moon, as the astronauts only took the film magazines back home in order to take lunar rocks in the equivalent of the weight of the cameras.

The authenticity of this camera can be proven easily, as the reseau plate is marked with number 38. This number appears on all photographs taken by Irwin.

This historical camera comes with an extensive documentation and photographs taken by Jim Irwin, assembled by its former owner Alain Lazzarini, author of the book 'Hasselblad and the Moon'

Technical details:

Hasselblad 500 'EL DATA CAMERA HEDC' from the first generation NASA motor-driven cameras for the Lunar missions, silver painted, with reseau plate with matching body number '38' to imprint on taken images, a special NASA Biogon 3.5/60mm no.5198329 with black/chrome anodized finish with control tabs designed for use with space gloves, silver 70mm. 200-exposure magazine no.UI310739, the body engraved: NASA no.P/N SEB 33100040- S/N 1038, magazine engraved 'P/N SEB 33101018-301 S/N 1003 HASSELBLAD REFLEX CAMERA FILM MAGAZINE'.

Startprice: 80,000 EUR
Estimates: 150,000-200,000 EUR

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-31-2014 10:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
collectSPACE
NASA moon landing camera claimed to be used by Apollo astronaut up for auction

A camera purported to have been used by the eighth man to walk on the moon while he was exploring the lunar surface in 1971 is now heading for the auction block in Austria, the sale's organizers announced on Thursday (Jan. 30)

A 70-millimeter Hasselblad Electric Data Camera (EDC), described by the WestLicht Gallery in Vienna as having flown to the moon and back on NASA's Apollo 15 mission, is included in the gallery's March 22 auction of vintage and collectible cameras. The lunar-flown Hasseblad is said to have been used by astronaut James Irwin, as identified by the registration number "38" on a small plate found inside the camera.

"[The plate number] is 100-percent proof that this camera is the real thing and really was on the moon," Peter Coeln, owner of the Westlicht Gallery, told the AFP wire service. Coeln said the camera is estimated to sell for $200,000 to $270,000 (150,000 to 200,000 euros).

alanh_7
Member

Posts: 1006
From: Ajax, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 01-31-2014 11:07 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for alanh_7   Click Here to Email alanh_7     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Is there any word over legal action to try and block the sale? After the dispute Ed Mitchell had over his camera I would have thought NASA would have taken further legal action to get the camera back.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-31-2014 11:17 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The question, as always, is how this camera entered private hands.

Had Mitchell's attempted sale of the DAC camera come after the 2012 legislation was passed, then he would have been able to keep (or sell) the camera without issue. Unfortunately, the bill does not reverse the legal settlement he reached in that case.

The Hasselblad EDC does not appear to have originated from Irwin's collection, and if that's true, then the astronaut artifacts bill does not apply.

NASA did not halt the sale of the same HEDC when it was offered by RR Auction in 2012 (assuming they are the same unit, and based on the serial numbers, at least the body is). But RR Auction did not advertise it as a lunar-surface-used camera; it was offered as a command module-flown camera.

I would say its a safe bet that NASA (Office of Inspector General) will be asking to see the "extensive documentation" that WestLicht says will be included with the camera's sale.

alanh_7
Member

Posts: 1006
From: Ajax, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 01-31-2014 11:43 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for alanh_7   Click Here to Email alanh_7     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have always been amazed that NASA did not have control over such items.

I can understand astronauts keeping checklists, or documents, maps, etc., they used on missions and items in their PPKs.

Without judging too harshly since I do not know the facts on how the camera came into private hands, I would have thought such an item would have been under strict control.

In Ed Mitchell's LM camera, my understanding is the camera in question was to be left on the LM anyway so he kept it, likely with Al Shepard's permission (speculation). Do we know how Irwin's camera came into private hands?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-31-2014 11:52 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Based on the information released publicly to date, no, we do not know how Irwin's camera entered private hands.

Rick Mulheirn
Member

Posts: 2652
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 01-31-2014 01:32 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Rick Mulheirn   Click Here to Email Rick Mulheirn     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Gene Cernan told me at Autographica last Fall, that he left his Hasselblad, lens upward on the lunar rover so that others in the future might study the effects of solar exposure on its optics.

He regretted not overriding that instruction instead using the camera to photograph his daughter's initials in the lunar regolith, or from an historical and personal standpoint... his last footstep on the lunar surface.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-31-2014 03:55 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Cernan shared the same recollection with Eric Jones for the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, but the space-to-ground transcript does not correspond with that memory.
169:29:44 Parker: ...and, Jack, we're making plans here... we'll bring both (cameras) back, and carry them to the ETB when we get done.

170:39:59 Parker: Okay, and we gather an ETB coming up with two cameras in it.

170:40:04 Schmitt: ETB's next. (Pause) (To Gene) Got an ETB? Yeah. (Pause) ETB has two cameras.

Cernan notes the discrepancy in his commentary for the ALSJ:
I can sit here and, just as sure as I'm alive at this moment, I can remember placing that camera (on the Rover seat). And I thought it was such a crime to leave a Hasselblad. But we were going to point it with the lens up so that, someday when someone goes back there, they can see the degradation of the lens from the cosmic radiation. And I guess I didn't do it. What can I tell you.

[Gene wonders if the memory of putting the camera between the seats is actually derived from training. However, the possibility remains that he put the 500 mm camera on the seat.]

To add to this, Ulli Lotzmann notes that on the way back from the moon (before jettisoning the lunar module), the crew asked the ground if they could use a lunar surface film magazine with the Hasselblad EC in the command module. Instead, the astronauts retrieved Cernan's HEDC from the LM and moved it into the CM for use with the magazine.

Schmitt's HEDC was later jettisoned with the LM's ascent stage.

On edit: Ulli offers "clear proof" that Cernan's HEDC SN 1023 was brought back:

Check the last pictures on Mag 139. These pictures taken on lunar orbit revolution 73 and 74 and thus after jettison the LM show the Reseau crosses and the marking 23 for HEDC SN 23, the CDR's HEDC.

Spacehardware
Member

Posts: 81
From: Bolney, West Sussex, England
Registered: Jan 2008

posted 02-01-2014 06:14 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Spacehardware   Click Here to Email Spacehardware     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm no expert on these things, but wasn't this the time when the cameras had stickers on both sides with CDR and LMP to distinguish the cameras? (AS15-88-11861 shows the commander's camera on the seat of the rover with CDR). I don't see evidence of that on this camera on either side (based on previous auction catalogue photos) and not sure why someone would want to peel that sticker off.

Magazine doesn't have the stickers on the top or the velcro tabs that tend to go with the lunar surface used versions, and the lens, whilst looking correct, has obviously been added at a later date as it wasn't on the camera for the last time it was sold.

So, buyer would presumably be buying purely the camera body as (possibly) the only lunar-surface exposed part? Think I would want more for the money.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02-01-2014 08:30 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
With again credit to Ulli Lotzman, the WestLicht website gives the serial number for the magazine as:
silver 70mm. 200-exposure magazine no. UI310739, magazine engraved 'P/N SEB 33101018-301 S/N 1003 HASSELBLAD REFLEX CAMERA FILM MAGAZINE'.
Ulli writes: "The code UI stands for 'manufactured in 1974.' Thus the PN should read SEF instead of SEB. A clear proof that the magazine is not flown on an Apollo mission."

Larry McGlynn
Member

Posts: 818
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 02-01-2014 12:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Larry McGlynn   Click Here to Email Larry McGlynn     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
This is the same camera that was offered at RR Auction is Nov. 2012. There is a difference though, if the Westlicht catalog photo is of the actual camera that is up for auction.

The lens offered at RR was an 80mm lens. The lens on the Westlicht camera is a Zeiss 60mm Biogon lens. Two very different lens. Also, it appears that a square of velcro has been added to the camera that was not on the camera during the RR sale.

So the camera has been altered from the last two sales.

Jurvetson
Member

Posts: 45
From: Menlo Park, CA, United States
Registered: Sep 2011

posted 02-02-2014 12:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jurvetson     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
How very strange. Does the reseau plate with number 38 establish that the plate was the same as used by Irwin on the lunar surface? (And if so, I assume this one item could have been added to an otherwise obviously reconstituted camera assemblage.)

Here is the photo from the RR Auction.

Comparing to the current listing, the central body is the same (same part numbers and every little scratch is the same), but the film canister and lens have been swapped out for something new. I am more disturbed by the addition of the velcro square to the main body. The seller could have tried to make the argument that they reunited parts that had originally flown together (however unlikely), but the addition of velcro seems like a fairly inexcusable step (unless they disclose and explain that in the forthcoming listing).

Is there any chance that a SEB component would have been lunar flown? It's interesting that the original RR-auctioned camera had a SEB body and SEF magazine. Does anyone know how that would happen ...other than collector who had a flown subcomponent (e.g., just the magazine) and wanted to display it with the unflown body for context in a display? In that case, it appears that the current consigner removed the 70-exposure SEF magazine and replaced it with a 200-exposure SEB.

Presumably, more than one magazine was used on the camera if WestLict's claim is true:

Jim Irwin took exactly 299 pictures with this Hasselblad 500 'EL DATA CAMERA HEDC' during his 3 days stay on the lunar surface and 96 more on the way to the moon and back again.
For reference, WestLicht's current listing reads:

200-exposure magazine no.UI310739, the body engraved: NASA no.P/N SEB 33100040- S/N 1038, magazine engraved P/N SEB 33101018-301 S/N 1003.

And RR auctioned:

P/N SEB 33100040-301, S/N 1038, with film magazine, P/N 33101018-301, S/N 1039.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02-02-2014 12:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Jurvetson:
In that case, it appears that the current consigner removed the 70-exposure SEF magazine and replaced it with a 200-exposure SEB.
The WestLicht consignor did (apparently) change out the magazine from what was previously sold at RR Auction, but per Ulli Lotzmann (see above), WestLicht's description that it is an SEB magazine is incorrect. It is an SEF mislabeled (typo?) as an an SEB.

I've sent off a list of questions to WestLicht, including:

Based on the serial numbers shared on the WestLicht website, the camera (or at least its body) was previously sold at auction by RR Auction of New Hampshire (USA) in 2012. The camera's appearance, based on the WestLicht images, appears to have changed since that previous auction and it has been paired with a different lens and magazine. Has the consignor altered the camera in the intervening years and are those changes documented?

One Big Monkey
Member

Posts: 37
From: West Yorkshire, UK
Registered: Jul 2012

posted 02-03-2014 09:26 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for One Big Monkey     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
A quick search of the available imagery shows that Magazine 90 from Apollo 15 has images on the surface and then in orbit with the number '38' at the bottom.

One Big Monkey
Member

Posts: 37
From: West Yorkshire, UK
Registered: Jul 2012

posted 02-03-2014 11:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for One Big Monkey     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Was Irwin's camera the only one to make it back on Apollo 15?

Magazine 88 started off in Irwin's camera, but after it jammed it swapped to Scott's, which has the number 31.

The final image in magazine 88 is 12014, which is of the whole of the moon, clearly well after TEI, and with a clear '31' marked on it.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02-05-2014 09:35 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Very good catch. Per Ulli:
Yes, images on mag 88 were taken with Scott's HEDC after TEI.

Also the image descriptions in the Apollo 70mm Image Atlas mention that these pics were shot with a 60mm lens (the 60mm Biogon fits only the HEDC not the HEC).

Conclusion: Yes, also the Apollo 15 CDR's HEDC was brought back.

Larry McGlynn
Member

Posts: 818
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 02-07-2014 07:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Larry McGlynn   Click Here to Email Larry McGlynn     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I decided to check the part number that was shown on the camera when it was sold at RR Auction against the part number of the two Hasselblad cameras that were brought back by the crew of Apollo 15.

It is very interesting that the last three digits of the camera part number were left off the lot description on the Westlicht auction.

The part number of the camera that the consigner bought at RR Auction in November 2012 is SEB 33100040-301.

I went into the stowage list for Apollo 15. The Hasselblad camerss are listed on page 46 and page 78 of the NASA stowage lists.

The part numbers of the lunar surface cameras that Scott and Irwin returned to Earth are SEB33100040-307.

While the serial number might be the same, the part number is different. A change in a part number means that new cameras with modifications were used during the Apollo 15 mission.

This camera might have been used on an Apollo mission. Unfortunately, the log books for the Hasselblad cameras were lost to time according to the Kansas Cosmosphere, who has an Apollo 14 camera and many of the flown magazines on display. We may never know which mission the Westlicht camera flew.

Spacehardware
Member

Posts: 81
From: Bolney, West Sussex, England
Registered: Jan 2008

posted 02-25-2014 04:04 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Spacehardware   Click Here to Email Spacehardware     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have just seen the close up photos for this camera in the catalogue. As I suspected, the reseau plate number, upon which all this provenance relies, has been engraved into the plate at a later date, probably obscuring the original number in the process. From the DATA cameras in my collection it is evident that these numbers were not added, and certainly never engraved, post-production, but included during the manufacturing process (and therefore virtually impossible to fake). The numbers appear as a fine, clearly defined number on the same plane as the reference crosses. Any photo taken with this camera would have a very coarse, fuzzy outlined number.

To sum this camera up, in my opinion the reseau plate number has been added, the LMP stickers are missing, the serial numbers are wrong, the magazine is wrong, the velcro and the lens have been added later. Considering the amount of money someone is going to pay for this item as it is currently being promoted I am annoyed and amazed that no one is even slightly concerned about these discrepancies over its authenticity. Auction houses are well covered under their terms and conditions for the sale of what may later be determined as less-than-authentic, so Caveat emptor, as always.

z0sense
Member

Posts: 11
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: Jul 2012

posted 02-25-2014 04:14 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for z0sense     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Seems I will get involved with another Hasselblad debate.

Quite simply the Hasselblad site is here.

Only 12 Hasselblad EDC were taken to the moon, all were left. Only magazines were returned.

Even if Hasselblad were wrong, the camera in the picture has the incorrect lens for any Apollo mission! Let alone Apollo 15.

Specifically, for Apollo 15, the lens used was switched to a 250MM according to the NASA link.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02-25-2014 04:27 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by z0sense:
Only 12 Hasselblad EDC were taken to the moon, all were left. Only magazines were returned. Even if Hasselblad were wrong...
Hasselblad is wrong. At least four of the HEDC were returned to Earth, as referenced in the mission transcripts, the post-flight technical reports and based on the photos themselves.
quote:
...the camera in the picture has the incorrect lens for any Apollo mission!
Only the body is claimed to have flown. The lens and magazine were added by the consignor (one assumes for display purposes).

z0sense
Member

Posts: 11
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: Jul 2012

posted 02-25-2014 04:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for z0sense     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Per Ulli: ...the 60mm Biogon fits only the HEDC not the HEC.
Under normal circumstances this would be correct, but the HEC cameras on Apollo had no reflex viewfinders, thus they could in fact use the Biogon series lenses.

z0sense
Member

Posts: 11
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: Jul 2012

posted 02-25-2014 04:41 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for z0sense     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Robert, are you certain they are the actual HEDC cameras that were returned and not the HEC or other Hasselblad model cameras?

I am not disputing the fact, only looking for references.

In the NASA article for instance, they mention that on Apollo 11, one camera stayed in CM, two went to the lunar surface, but only one actually was exposed to the lunar atmosphere, and it was left behind.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02-25-2014 04:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yes. Irwin's camera (for example) locked up several times on the surface so the ground had it returned for inspection. The results of that study are detailed in the post-flight technical report.

The space-to-ground transcripts document Shepard's and Cernan's cameras returning to Earth. Scott's is documented as having been brought back by the fact that there are photos, post-trans-Earth injection, that have his reseau plate number (as noted upthread).

Larry McGlynn
Member

Posts: 818
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 02-25-2014 05:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Larry McGlynn   Click Here to Email Larry McGlynn     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have talked with Scott and Cernan.

Dave said that both lunar surface cameras were brought back. He does not know what happened to either camera body after he returned from the mission.

Gene said that he left his camera sitting straight up with the lens pointing skyward on the LRV seat per instructions from Mission Control. Gene remembers, because he traced his daughter's initials in the surface after he placed the camera on the seat. He wished that he kept the camera and photographed Tracy's initials.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02-25-2014 05:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Larry McGlynn:
Gene said that he left his camera sitting straight up with the lens pointing skyward on the LRV seat per instructions from Mission Control.
Cernan told the same to Eric Jones for the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (as noted earlier), but the transcripts seem to contradict his recollection, and like Scott, there are photos taken after LM jettison with Cernan's Reseau plate number.

Larry McGlynn
Member

Posts: 818
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 02-25-2014 09:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Larry McGlynn   Click Here to Email Larry McGlynn     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Give me the location of the information and I will ask him.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02-25-2014 09:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Larry, scroll up to my post from Jan. 31 at 3:55 p.m., it is all outlined there.

Larry McGlynn
Member

Posts: 818
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 02-26-2014 04:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Larry McGlynn   Click Here to Email Larry McGlynn     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I just talked with Gene about this subject a couple of weeks ago.

There is a good reason to go back to the Moon now. What was left on the LRV seat at the end of the Apollo 17 mission? Earth needs to know!

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 03-21-2014 09:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
According to WestLicht's website, the HEDC will come up for auction tomorrow, March 22. The high bid is currently at €80,000 (approximately $110,000 US).

Unfortunately, some of the authenticity concerns were never fully addressed. The consignor did contact collectSPACE, but took offense to my questions and refused comment.

WestLicht did back away from the claim that it was the only HEDC returned to Earth, instead acknowledging in the final lot description that it was "one of 14-15 cameras used on the moon surface" and that "about 12 cameras were left on the moon."

WestLicht also confirmed that the camera was the same sold by RR Auction, and that the lens and magazine have been replaced:

The camera was purchased by the vendor at RR Auction in November 2012 with attached film magazine no. P/N 33101018-301, S/N 1039, as well as a Carl Zeiss 80 mm lens.
No explanation was provided for the Velcro square that is attached to the camera now but wasn't (apparently) present when sold at RR Auction.

There were additional, unanswered concerns expressed about the nature and placement of the '38' on the Resseau plate, and the etched '301' serial number on the camera's body.

To my knowledge, there have been no statements by NASA regarding the auction.

Spacehardware
Member

Posts: 81
From: Bolney, West Sussex, England
Registered: Jan 2008

posted 03-22-2014 01:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Spacehardware   Click Here to Email Spacehardware     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well, I guess two people wanted it quite badly - went for 550,000 euros, or 670,000 euros including premium, which I make to be over $920,000. Think I would have wanted at least the correct mag for that amount of money. Wonder how much he'll give me for Scott's Apollo 15 camera handle that goes with it. At least I can guarantee THAT has been on the moon's surface — it's covered with moon dust!

Time to get out the silver paint...

Greggy_D
Member

Posts: 732
From: Michigan
Registered: Jul 2006

posted 03-22-2014 04:14 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Greggy_D   Click Here to Email Greggy_D     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I predict the new owner is going to be a bit perturbed when he/she eventually stumbles across this cS thread.

chet
Member

Posts: 1347
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 03-22-2014 05:40 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for chet   Click Here to Email chet     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If it stands, is it not the highest price ever realized for a flown Apollo artifact?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 03-22-2014 05:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Perhaps at public auction, but it's under the reported price paid by private treatise (which was in the low seven figures).

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 03-23-2014 12:08 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
collectSPACE
Moon camera sale soars sky high despite questions about history

A camera claimed to have been used on the moon's surface sold for almost $1 million in Austria Saturday (March 22), despite concerns about its history.

The WestLicht Photographica Auction in Vienna registered a hammer price of 550,000 euros (660,000 euros with the buyer's premium, or about $910,400 US) for a Hasselblad Electronic Data Camera (EDC) that the gallery described as having been used by astronaut James Irwin during the Apollo 15 mission.

"This Hasselblad used on the fourth NASA [moon landing] mission between July 26th to August 7th, 1971 made its way back to Earth, finally landing at the WestLicht auction house," the sale's organizers wrote.

The final sale price far surpassed the 150,000 to 200,000 euros (about $200,000 to $275,000) that WestLicht had estimated the lunar Hasselblad to be worth. The camera's lot opened for sale at 80,000 euros (about $110,000).

chet
Member

Posts: 1347
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 03-23-2014 01:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for chet   Click Here to Email chet     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Spacehardware:
Auction houses are well covered under their terms and conditions for the sale of what may later be determined as less-than-authentic, so Caveat emptor, as always.
Auction houses may be covered in the conduct of normal business, i.e. if they have no knowledge that any of their claims or descriptions are inaccurate or inoperative. But I believe it's quite another matter to deliberately mislead or leave out important information if such actions end up having the effect of actively deceiving bidders or the final "winner".

In the instance of the sale of this camera I'd not want to be the buyer, or the auction house.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 03-24-2014 09:35 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
WestLicht has identified the winning bidder:
After an extremely close bidding war, Mr [Terukazu] Fujisawa, founder of Japanese retail chain Yodobashi Camera, managed to secure for himself the Hasselblad Lunar Module Pilot camera Jim Irwin – Apollo 15 for 660,000 Euros.

Greggy_D
Member

Posts: 732
From: Michigan
Registered: Jul 2006

posted 03-24-2014 11:07 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Greggy_D   Click Here to Email Greggy_D     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I see the AP has picked up on the sale of the camera. They do not make any mention of the discrepancies though.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 03-24-2014 11:09 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
And they misstate that it was the only camera flown and returned from the moon.

I've e-mailed an AP reporter (not the author of the article, which originated out of Vienna) with the correction and noting the authenticity concerns.

The collectSPACE article was picked up by PetaPixel and is in the process of going up on Space.com as I type. Yahoo! News will soon follow, as may other sites.

Update: The Associated Press updated their article:

The gallery initially described the Hasselblad as the only camera ever brought back from the moon but later said it was one of several, after some experts questioned that claim.
Additional coverage on the sale and skepticism: Popular Photography, Imaging Resource and Geekosystem.

chet
Member

Posts: 1347
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 03-25-2014 12:33 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for chet   Click Here to Email chet     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The geekosystem.com article isn't helping things by writing, "There’s also the whole question of how exactly the camera got to auction in the first place, as it’s illegal for astronauts to sell their souvenirs or “moonrebelia.”

And a writer over at SLRLounge.com, Kishore Sawh, also won't be winning any prizes for journalistic accuracy when he writes (explaining just how rare is an opportunity to own a moon flown item) - "Consider, too, that almost anything that’s been in space is in a museum."
(http://www.slrlounge.com/hasselblad-70mm-edc-moon-now-auction-est-200k)

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 29424
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 03-25-2014 12:41 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I think that's based on a misreading of our article, where it's stated:
A 2012 law made it legal for the Apollo-era astronauts to own, and if so desired, sell the spent equipment that they brought home as mementos.
I've e-mailed the author to clarify.


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 1999-2014 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement