Alleged Screen Used Hero TOS Phaser up for auction (now the aftermath)

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.


ALLEY

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
The main arguments against authenticity, beyond feel and style, is that the Velcro does not seem to match 1960s Velcro and the extra crispy is aluminum, not Mylar, which is generally associated with modern replicas.
I think they there may also be a “Robertson Screw” on this newly discovered piece, somewhere?

I’ll have to look again….

:) sorry, I’m mixing franchises
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Highliners

Well-Known Member
That’s not the same phaser….

The top rim of the side dial in the phaser screen shot, above, runs partially into the side ribs (the very bottom row of the side ribs is partially cut into by the top rim of the side dial).

The side dial in this newly discovered hero phaser does not exhibit this detail and does not interrupt the bottom row of the side ribs.

View attachment 1465781
AT THAT POINT IN TME!

And, since the other screenused phasers all seem to have the knob cut partially into the ribs, it indicates that the depression for the knob was a part of the P2 body mold. Unlike this one.
They are two separate components. Otherwise, how would you make such an aluminum piece?

The experts have spoken. The fact that this is clearly fake and made as a fake makes me mad. :mad:
Why don't YOU name these "experts" who say this is a fake.

The main arguments against authenticity, beyond feel and style, is that the Velcro does not seem to match 1960s Velcro and the extra crispy is aluminum, not Mylar, which is generally associated with modern replicas.
And what proof can you provide that in the intervening HALF CENTURY since production, that the Velcro itself wasn't replaced?

---Those internal components PROVE these are the only two surviving "Hero Phaser" pistols.

Been there.. digested everything. That's how I was able to tell this was a fake!
LOL.
 

Highliners

Well-Known Member
No "takers" in response to what I have said, huh! You're all simply ignoring me.... I love it!

It's clear, not a single one of you grasps that time intervals during filming, repairs, or the end of production and the effect that has on surviving objects (A.K.A. film properties!)

This "Newly Discovered" one could well be the very same one depicted in the close-up with the machined (tuned)-in strep in the acrylic tip. That comment can neither be proven nor denied.

This step wasn't "drilled into and stuck in". Apparently none of you have any idea as to the use of a lathe, or anything else I have broached. Turning a "step" into acrylic rod takes only seconds to do.

So once again, the EXPERTS H.A. resourced for the appraisal are indeed CORRECT: It IS an original Hero Phaser Pistol. Period.

AND since not one of you can $mell anywhere near this thing's fair market value, what all of you in sublime Group Think are agreeing to do in order to COPE with your angst, is to deny the thing's obvious and expertly proven PROVENANCE!
 
Last edited:

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

JW Foust

Well-Known Member
No "takers" in response to what I have said, huh! You're all simply ignoring me.... I love it!

It's clear, not a single one of you grasps that time intervals during filming, repairs or the end of production and the effect that has on surviving objects (AKA properties!)

This "Newly Discovered" one could well be the very one in the close-up with the machined (tuned)-in strep in the acrylic tip.

Apparently none of you have any idea as to the use of a lathe, or anything else I have broached.
DO enlighten us with your expertise?
 

Jintosh

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
So, somebody has been here since 2010 and only posted 28 messages and wants expert status granted to them ?
That's not how it works. Thanks for playing.
 

Highliners

Well-Known Member
Sounds like you have a very large axe to grind?
Nah... Just the facts Ma'am!

So, somebody has been here since 2010 and only posted 28 messages and wants expert status granted to them ?
That's not how it works. Thanks for playing.
Actually being on "HERE" has zero impetus re: "Expertise" ...okay? I am quite happy to stand by my record, both in Hollywood and elsewhere.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

JoeG

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Actually being on "HERE" has zero impetus re: "Expertise" ...okay? I am quite happy to stand by my record, both in Hollywood and elsewhere.

If you want to be taken seriously and have actual facts to present regarding the provenance of this piece, maybe you should actually post that. As it is, you're coming off like a raving lunatic. And an incredibly hostile one at that. Which seems both concerning and amusing, given that no one has directed hostility towards you.
 

Gregatron

Sr Member
Personally, I find what's going on here quite interesting. Mind you, I am not out to deliberately embarrass anyone on here but I find some of these comments patently absurd.

You are all behaving as if these things weren't "work-a-day film props" that were written-off (as accounts see things) or "consumed" during filming. At the time these things were never religious Icons of any sort. One MUST keep in mind, these were used and greatly abused during the shooting of the original show. Have any of you ever worked on so much as one actual "Hollywood" production?

That said, by your own comments, it appears you are all experts, (and that's despite one claim to the contrary) why is it then that Heritage Auctions did not ask any of you to in come and give your opinions as to the authenticity?

----Are any of you aware of just who it was that they did ask to do this verification, and provide truly genuine expert authentication?

To further explain what I am postulating:

All of you have ignored/overlooked Wah Chang's reportedly having possession in order to repair the thing, ostensibly for damage accrued during filming. Even perhaps for a broken off acrylic "emitter tip" which would then have to be replaced and therefore no longer identical with the initial "original" piece. It was not simply "stuck in" either. So, pomder this: how is it that those cracks get "put" into these things? ---I do "wonder" about that! (Not!)

Have any of you considered how often such repairs/repaints occur during principal filming and to what extent such repairs change or even outright modify a polyester/fiberglass film prop? THREE Seasons guys, 79 episodes, that's a lot of repair work.

But what occurs to me is you are all going on and on about insignificant external minutiae, those unimportant and most easily corrupted details as if those thing didn't change with their being thrown across a sound-stage, or Bill S. (as usual) dropping such a thing onto the studio's concrete floor, or with each repaint, or script required re-fit, etc.

---And not one of you commented on how the internal operating mechanisms are virtually identical, even down to the use of "Dykem layout fluid" (comes in blue, purple and red) on the clearly "batch-made" operating, internal metal components. Please, tell me; HOW could that possibly be the case, if the Phaser in the upcoming auction was exclusively made from photographs?

Nor did one of you comment or even notice that under the early-on 1st season shooting schedule repaint from B&W into two tone grey, the original "Mantrap" black paint appears on the "Hand Phase" body, is easily seen wherever there are chips in that hastily brush-applied grey paint.

"GREGATRON" claims the Velcro on the wrong side compared to Greg Jein's, Um, how do you know that? The jewels were held on with what specific adhesive ---so they will be there no matter how hard Shatner handled the things?

"ROBN1" states: "The handle looks "quite different from Greg's (Jein)" Are you absolutely certain you know what you are saying here Robn1?

Also: "The other three had jewels" Precisely WHEN did these things have jewels, Robn1? Neither of the two depicted have any jewels. Is that irrefutible "proof" neither of these is an original??? Robn1 also says, the "...contours are different" and you know this Robn1 from personally handling these things? Have you any proof that you are capable of the task of matching said contours?

"Crispy" as an adjective here? Robin1, THAT does sounds like you do enjoy those fries. And too, brush applied, enamel paint occludes a "crisp finish" you know.

"TREBOR" Sez: "And the appearance in general just seems "off" to me." But, but, ... I though you said you weren't an "expert" Trebor?

"ALLEY" Claims: "The use of a stamped aluminum extra crispy that appears to have been possibly subjected to a “black wash” vs. a Mylar extra crispy." Again with the "cripsy", it's probably time to lay off all the fries and potato chips guys.

Alley, This material is embossed (rolled actually) thin (as in less than .010" thick) sheet aluminum, precisely the same stock as used on the Klingon Disrupter barrel tip "Coffins". But here, one of these Hand Phasers has the material applied inverted, 180 degrees out from the other. You are looking at the underside of the very same material! Do you see that now that I have pointed it out?

But this comment is simply too much for me to bear Alley: "—The inability to tie this piece directly to any previously identified prop or screen shots." HOW do YOU know?

---Enough.

1) None of you noticed both grips are made entirely from brass, with the correct plugs on both ends for conversion to Phaser III configuration. Were any of you aware of that tid-bit prior to the announcement of this auction?

2) Not one of you noticed under that early-on shooting schedule repaint into grey, the initial black paint appears where there are chips.

3) It feels as though you guys have a tough time accepting the reality of/with the final appearance and genuine crudity of that period's filmed props.

Perhaps most important:

I get a distinct feeling that you guys have some deep seated fear, that according multiple known and true expert opinion(s) of those retained by the (not in-expert) people themselves at Heritage Auctions, and after lengthy physical examination that this actually is a genuine, filmed Star Trek Phaser prop.

Are any of you considering the source of your own skepticism? Could this be due to the fact that the reality of this situation is the hammer price of this "item" in all probability will be greater than each of your total self-worth? And therefore, not one of you will be the one to ultimately own this Phaser?

As all of you would say: I'm just saying....


Keep sharpening that axe.


I believe Mr. Starkiller asked for opinions on this piece, and that's exactly what he's gotten. You're free to take them, leave them, or offer polite rebuttals.


The Jein phaser has been well-documented, and it would not be difficult to fake a hero prop with that handy information.

That said, this piece does not match any of the other screenused hero props, which have been documented as well as can be via screencaps and photos. There's documentation that four heroes were built. The Jein is one. The three other known hero P1s had the velcro on the other side, compared to the Jein. The three other known P1s had jewels, whereas the Jein did not.

These are the facts as best as the actual experts have been able to pin them down. Is there room for corrections? Sure. Always. But this piece does not match anything we know of that was used onscreen.



So, before you go shooting you mouth off and playing mind-reader, perhaps you should take a step back and understand the concept of Occam's Razor, and that the burden of proof in this matter does not lie with us. Taking potshots at, yes, EXPERTS (which I do not count myself as, by the way, compared to people like the esteemed ALLEY and robn1) is bad form, to say the least.

For decades, now, scammers have passed fakes off as legitimate, screenused items. Nowadays, with all of the information that's come out on the real props, crafting a forgery is that much easier, and so the burden of proof is that much greater.


Take a chill pill.
 

Highliners

Well-Known Member
Hostile? Raving lunatic? Nah, come on. Those are terms of deeply emotional and irrational "Freudian Projection".

What I have stated are indeed factually accurate observations. And not one of YOU'SE EXPERT GUYS have by any of those points, even half heartedly refuted.

It's all just the usual, (and sad) deflective type, Ad Hominem attack techniques by those who (apparently) know less than they profess.

As for who I am? You want "badges"? I don't need to show you no stinking badges!

As I said, those credentials are indeed out there. You are coming off as uh, well, "lazy" for making no effort there. ---THAT is the problem I see on here in the recent period. --- It was quite different on here over a decade ago.

Why hasn't even one of you asked who it was exactly that HA retained as experts? As they are both very good and close personal friends, and I patently refuse to say who.

But were you to know, each and everyone of you be compeletly "Shut Down" regarding this matter. As in permanently.

Simple Logic, Captain.

Keep sharpening that axe.


I believe Mr. Starkiller asked for opinions on this piece, and that's exactly what he's gotten. You're free to take them, leave them, or offer polite rebuttals.


The Jein phaser has been well-documented, and it would not be difficult to fake a hero prop with that handy information.

That said, this piece does not match any of the other screenused hero props, which have been documented as well as can be via screencaps and photos. There's documentation that four heroes were built. The Jein is one. The three other known hero P1s had the velcro on the other side, compared to the Jein. The three other known P1s had jewels, whereas the Jein did not.

These are the facts as best as the actual experts have been able to pin them down. Is there room for corrections? Sure. Always. But this piece does not match anything we know of that was used onscreen.



So, before you go shooting you mouth off and playing mind-reader, perhaps you should take a step back and understand the concept of Occam's Razor, and that the burden of proof in this matter does not lie with us. Taking potshots at, yes, EXPERTS (which I do not count myself as, by the way, compared to people like the esteemed ALLEY and robn1) is bad form, to say the least.

For decades, now, scammers have passed fakes off as legitimate, screenused items. Nowadays, with all of the information that's come out on the real props, crafting a forgery is that much easier, and so the burden of proof is that much greater.


Take a chill pill.
Wrong Greg. A simple matter when you have never handled the thing? Show us how you'd do that please!
 
Last edited:

phez

Sr Member
Am I seeing things or are the P2 shells made out of off white resin instead of fiberglass on that one? It sort of looks like they grinded through the paint and exposed the resin? Does it say that it is fiberglass anywhere? [I am posing this as a question and not assuming it is resin]
 

Attachments

  • 14.jpeg
    14.jpeg
    671.5 KB · Views: 66

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top