Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ryan on March 2, 2014 at 8:58am

I completely agree. Just take a trip over to eBay getting a Neil Armstrong that's authentic is hard enough. Getting one with no condition issues on the signature is nearly impossible. I find that the only ones in acceptable condition are in pen or not on a photo.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on March 2, 2014 at 9:36am

He never was a particularly autograph-friendly signer, and in later years even stopped signing altogether.

This is not really accurate. He signed freely for almost 35 years until the mid-90s. According to his secretaries, in the early 70s he would often get 100+ requests a day and sign them all. The only restriction he had was "one per customer."

One common scam was people would write to him claiming to be a teacher and asking for 25 signed photos for their students. And he fulfilled this request many times. When he caught onto it, he was not happy and many believe this is a key reason he stopped signing altogether.

I saw an interesting letter from Armstrong to a friend from the mid-90s. In the letter, Armstrong told his friend he stopped signing for everyone and was disappointed to learn that even friends and former NASA colleagues were taking advantage of him and selling items.

Regarding the fading...  

I'm sure it was not intentional. It doesn't fit with his personality in everything I have read. I am relatively confident he used a water-based Flair marker. There is a slight sheen to the NASA portrait lithographs and I think the water based ink simply did not penetrate the surface and easily faded. Essentially, the autographs evaporated. Additionally, many, many of these were displayed and the ambient light really did a job on the already weak water-based ink.

But you are correct... a very high percentage of these are faded and examples that somehow remained bold sell for a premium.

I am very pleased to have this White Space Suit portrait in my collection. Bold signature with the Apollo 11 inscription, which is uncommon. I purchased this from the original recipient, Scottie Hensley many years ago. I also have the transmittal letter that accompanied the signed photo.

Steve Zarelli
Zarelli Space Authentication
www.SpaceLOA.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by hitmanten on March 2, 2014 at 9:48am

Thanks, Mr. Zipper for the reply, and added insight. Great signed photo, too.

As for the faded signed photos, we can both agree Armstrong seems to be the only astronaut who has this problem, or at least such a disproportionate number.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on March 2, 2014 at 10:09am

Yes... the fading only seems to be an issue with Armstrong. Probably because he got the most mail and probably signing during that time frame a lot more than other astronauts like Dave Scott, Alan Bean, etc.

One other factor in my opinion is he was signing so much, he was killing pens very quickly. I see a lot of signed photos where the beginning of the strokes are dark and they quickly get weak... as if the pen was running out of ink and he would smash it into the paper hard to squeeze a few more signatures out of it. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by hitmanten on March 2, 2014 at 10:25am

Great feedback, I've learned a lot in short order. Interesting info on the water based Flair which makes sense, too.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by hitmanten on March 2, 2014 at 10:28am

Thoughts on best method for preservation of an Armstrong to avoid fading? Possible to slab it, or simply best to lock it away? In other words, why by a Flair signed Armstrong if ultimately it would meet a similar fate?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on March 2, 2014 at 11:17am

I suspect that at this point, whatever ink is left (faded or bold) is stabilized and it won't change much as long as it is stored properly. I've had mine over 10 years and I do not believe it has changed since I acquired it. I store it in a mylar sleeve in a archival photo storage box. 

I do not know what type of material the slabs and the inner sleeves are made of, but they can't be any better from a preservation standpoint than a mylar sleeve.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryan Maxwell on March 5, 2014 at 10:25pm

I would attribute a lot of the faded signatures to the fact that the vast majority of these signatures were displayed prominently in homes and offices. If you had a signed Alan Bean photo, you would save it but maybe not spend the time and money to frame it. But if you received Neil Armstrong's signature, the first man on the moon, you definitely put it up on the wall and showed it off! People didn't use UV museum glass like what is used today.

The other astronaut photos have been tucked away in a dry dark box all these years while Neil has been exposed to sunlight in a cheap frame for 40 years!

This along with his choice in markers and the frequent use of said markers may be why we see such poor examples.

I am trying to work my way up to a beautiful bold signature like yours Steve! Currently selling my WSS at RR and hope to buy a better example with the proceeds from my sale.

• ▶ Reply