Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Devon Laney on August 23, 2018 at 9:15pm

All are authentic, IMO. Look great. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on August 23, 2018 at 9:36pm

I find them all to be slightly odd, especially the first image. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by chris boudreau on August 23, 2018 at 9:45pm

Thanks guys.  What’s seems odd Eric? I appreciate the feed back. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on August 24, 2018 at 5:16am

I agree with Eric the first one is unusual.  Without seeing it in person I would say that it looks wonderful. This is one time I would like to know the full back story of when it was signed and if all seven were present for the signing.  This one must have been for a special occasion or for a special person.  For a random collector to get seven people to sign in the same pen and the same angle perfectly below their image is great feat. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by chris boudreau on August 24, 2018 at 8:31am

Thanks for chiming in Scott. I know the cast photos were produced back in the early 90’s for Star Trek’s 25th anniversary I believe.  The were produced by scoreboard and catch a star collectables with permission from paramount studios and were limited to 2500 and were sold on the QVC. They usually have a catch a star coa. I’ve added a couple more to compare to.  The individual Nimoy and Kelley I’ve never seen. They are a plaque and they seem to have been produced at the same time by the same company. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on August 24, 2018 at 1:52pm

So many appear slightly atypical to me in that first image - I had a friend who used to buy this Trek stuff like this from QVC, photos and comics - and so many were so atypical from signers fatigue...rushed and odd. That and the paint pen skipping so much here. I would pass on the OP. For whatever reason, for me, I don't like it. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by chris boudreau on August 24, 2018 at 2:37pm

Thanks Eric. That’s the one thing I don’t like about it.  The marker isn’t the greatest and the Shatner is partially faded, but the price is great. What you think of the other two I posted?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on August 24, 2018 at 2:46pm

Hi Cris,

perhaps I am too used to the vintage sigs, but I did start collecting the modern ones first - the OP 1st just look atypical to me - the last Nimoy also. I recall my friend could never sell most of his QVC Nimoy comics which were abbreviated scribbles in the case in Nimoy and most of his other stuff also - atypical. I also think some of the pictures had screws going through the corners into the plaques - things like that. If these are old school paint pen and they are not with mat - they could be stuck. I recall the older plaques were simple screw down affairs right to the sig. These appear matted thankfully.

I will also add I can not read much of anything from a photo of a photo in a photo of a screen.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on August 24, 2018 at 2:53pm

Is Shatner really faded or was it just the pen? Shatner sig is pretty key in such a context. Along with the other 2 or 3. Great price fades though... 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on August 24, 2018 at 3:02pm

Well, I just can't get behind the OP 1st image. I suggest a stronger set. Or a vintage set! :D This was all bought on eBay back when this sort of thing could be had for a few dollars each. Click for larger image:

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on August 24, 2018 at 3:14pm

Fading I am certain would affect the red pigments in the photograph and it does not seem to be the case here.  I would vote for pen problems or perhaps another photograph was placed on top and ink lifted.  Maybe this was a discarded QVC that someone "saved?"  Perhaps that is why there is no COA.  Not sure but a possible explanation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on August 24, 2018 at 3:20pm

Considering the difference in quality that is a reasonable suggestion. The other sets shown seem far more attractive and well-signed with contrast and placement. The Shatner here is just too deficient IMO.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page