All are authentic, IMO. Look great.
I find them all to be slightly odd, especially the first image.
Thanks guys. What’s seems odd Eric? I appreciate the feed back.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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...
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.
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.