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

[Gregatron]

I would very much like to see what the HeroComm gang has to say on this.


Anyway...

* No screencap match to any screenused prop, thus far.

* P1 rail glued into slots, rather than glued to outer shell.

* Velcro on left side, which matches no known P1, aside from the Jein, which does have screen-matched, vintage Velcro.

* Power meter numbers are the same numbers as on the Jein, and appear to be a different font than both the Jein and TMOST/Finney.

* P1 shape is off, especially near the rear, as robn1 notes.

* P2 cradle ribs look shorter and thinner than on the Jein.

* P2 trigger box shapes/curves look off compared to the Jein.

* P2 side dial does not intersect with the side ribs, unlike the Jein and the authentic midgrades.

* P2 emitter nozzle and side dial look different from the Jein, which, if both of them were found parts, doesn't make sense.

* Non-tapered P2 emitter.

* Crispy looks more like aluminum than Mylar, and does not appear to match the Jein or the midgrades.

* Paintjob and weathering (yellowed epoxy, etc.) look considerably worse and sloppier than on the Jein, yet details like the handle paint look in far better condition. Sure, different storage conditions could yield different results, but you'd think props made from the same materials, paints, and glues would age in a similar fashion if kept in storage for decades.


Again, it is nowhere outside the realm of possibility for a talented propmaker to put together a convincing fake. Just look at the work of (for example) Jon Paul Lussier, who has produced very authentic-looking midgrades with very convincing aging and paintjobs. A talented artisan with the right references and the proper motivation could easily whip up a convincing hero prop which looked very aged.

 

[BrundelFly]

Honestly....in the 30 plus years I have been collecting....I have learned:

Unless YOU are the one who walked off the set with it, you never know 100% that it is ""real" (from said show).

Just saying.

 

[Gregatron]

Honestly....in the 30 plus years I have been collecting....I have learned:

Unless YOU are the one who walked off the set with it, you never know 100% that it is ""real" (from said show).

Just saying.

Yep.


This really shouldn't be rocket science. We have documentation stating that four heroes were made for the show. One of them is the Jein, which has been definitively screencap-matched.

The details of the other three heroes have been narrowed down pretty darn well via screencaps so as to provide a very reasonable guide, should any of them ever resurface.

This piece does not particularly match any of those three props seen in numerous screencaps.

So, then, is it a mysterious, fifth hero? One of the three remaining heroes, conveniently repaired/modified in ways which altered its appearance, but then was never filmed again, because the show was cancelled?


Or, as seems far more likely, is it a clever forgery?

 

[Jintosh]

Honestly....in the 30 plus years I have been collecting....I have learned:

Unless YOU are the one who walked off the set with it, you never know 100% that it is ""real" (from said show).

Just saying.

Yep. Pawn Stars again. The guy brought in an Indy whip with total provenance that it had been used on set.

And it turned out that that was likely. Used by the STUNTMAN that was using a whip not even the same style or type used by Indy and he was using it as a practice whip ON SET. Just never ON SCREEN. The man shelled out a fortune for a whip that really had little value. Pawn Stars did not buy the whip from him.

 

[MARK M3]

For what it's worth...Read the bold type...And make your own conclusions. It seems this little tidbit eluded folks.​

Or most didn't bother to read it at all.

​

Description​

​

Star Trek: The Original Series Extremely Rare Hero Type-2 Phaser Pistol (Paramount, 1966-1969). The Type-2 Phaser Pistol is the most iconic and sought-after hand prop from the original Star Trek series. Designed by Star Trek art director Walter "Matt" Jefferies (designer of the Starship Enterprise), this was the first pragmatic/utilitarian energy weapon in science fiction, marking a stark design departure from the fantasy "ray guns" of Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, and Forbidden Planet.

This hero Type-2 Phaser was built for close up camera shots and breaks down into three detachable components: 1) The palm-sized Type-1 Hand Phaser – used for diplomatic missions and undercover work due to its discreet size, 2) The Type-2 Pistol Phaser body into which the Type-1 would install to make a more powerful weapon, and 3) The elongated brass handle/power pack (attached by twist-lock) capable of being quickly swapped out and "reloaded" during prolonged engagements. This is one of only two hero Type-2 Phasers known to exist.

Crafted of fiberglass, resin, turned aluminum, brass, steel and acrylic components, the weapon measures 8 in. long x 6 in. tall and features moving parts. The Type-1 has a moving dial on top that raises the "targeting sight" when rotated, as well as extending the acrylic emitter at front. A panel below the Type-1 (attached with flathead screw) removes to reveal the internal metal mechanism and holder for a single AA battery to illuminate a grain of wheat light bulb when activated (bulb and battery are no longer present).

The Type-2 pistol body features a spring-loaded acrylic emitter that moves backward as the Type-1 separates from the Type-2 by depressing the brass side-mounted release button. The front turned aluminum nozzle rotates to "focus the beam" of the weapon, and a turning inset aluminum side dial is installed on the left. A rear-mounted, rotating aluminum "power level" dial is mounted at the top of the weapon with engraved numbers from "1" to "9" with 10 hash marks between each number (9.9 being the maximum setting).

The provenance of this piece is as incredible as the Phaser, itself. The Type-2 pistol body was acquired directly from Star Trek prop designer and builder Wah Ming Chang in the late 1960s (Chang designed and built the Starfleet Communicators and Tricorders for the original series).

The accompanying LOA states the studio had sent the Phaser pistol body to Chang for repair and the show was
cancelled before he was able to return it. The Type-1 Hand Phaser was acquired by a member of the production crew after filming completed on a second season episode in 1967 (a second LOA accompanies the Type-1).

Eventually, the respective owners of the Type-1 and Type-2 Phasers learned about their counterpart, and in a detailed study the two hero components were reassembled and scrutinized in a side-by-side comparison with the only other known Hero Type-2 Phaser Pistol belonging to the highest-profile collector and top authority of original series props and costumes. The collector extensively examined the internal and external components and determined, based upon the comparison, that this Type-2 Phaser Pistol is authentic. In fact, the build tolerances
between both pistols are such that the Type-1 Phasers are interchangeable and fit perfectly in both pistol bodies!

To many science fiction fans around the world, the original series Type-2 Phaser Pistol transcends its association with a groundbreaking science fiction television series – it represents one of the defining indelible images of American pop culture. Exhibits expected paint loss and scuffing, with missing partial strip of Velcro for attachment to costume.

In December 2018, Profiles in History sold a midgrade Type-2 Phaser Pistol (for medium distance shots), one of several known, for $192,000. This Hero Type-2 Phaser Pistol is the first to ever reach public auction. COA from Heritage Auctions.

 

[Anakin Starkiller]

It seems that traditionally authentication of movie props was done by consulting people who worked on or were attached to the film production and asking them if the item offered matched what they remember from the time of filming.

But, with the growth of the replica prop community and the expansion of the hobby, it really would be worthwhile for auction houses who are interested in maintaining faith with their bidders, to enlist more help from the replica prop community. This is because, while a prop maker may have some recollection of the work he did or saw 20, 30, 40 years ago, he may be quite unaware of--or really not give a damn---about the community of fans who have spent years studying his craft and perfecting techniques to copy it. Case and point, when a fake OWK saber was put up for auction by Profiles last year, I knew instantly that it was a replica because I new the fan maker and remembered the ideosyncracies of his work from a decade back. But, Profiles, Lucasfilm, Estreee, would have no way of connecting the dots or remembering "Oh yeah, Darth Hez, he made his pommels like that."

I'm not saying that we're in a better position to knowing all the ins and outs of the originals. But we are in a better position for spotting the fakes, because we're in the business of building the fakes ourselves.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

It seems that traditionally authentication of movie props was done by consulting people who worked on or were attached to the film production and asking them if the item offered matched what they remember from the time of filming.

But, with the growth of the replica prop community and the expansion of the hobby, it really would be worthwhile for auction houses who are interested in maintaining faith with their bidders, to enlist more help from the replica prop community. This is because, while a prop maker may have some recollection of the work he did or saw 20, 30, 40 years ago, he may be quite unaware of--or really not give a damn---about the community of fans who have spent years studying his craft and perfecting techniques to copy it. Case and point, when a fake OWK saber was put up for auction by Profiles last year, I knew instantly that it was a replica because I new the fan maker and remembered the ideosyncracies of his work from a decade back. But, Profiles, Lucasfilm, Estreee, would have no way of connecting the dots or remembering "Oh yeah, Darth Hez, he made his pommels like that."

I'm not saying that we're in a better position to knowing all the ins and outs of the originals. But we are in a better position for spotting the fakes, because we're in the business of building the fakes ourselves.

Good points, sir!

However, I feel compelled to remind you that our analysis of these items is for not…

For you see, we who are hobbyists are but blind.

Yes, BLIND I tell you!

Blinded by our own jealous eyes. Blinded by our jealous conviction that these things not exist beyond their replica forms.

Alas, but for our eyes, our judgement would have substance.

(Outstretched hand…palm up…single tear…and, scene.)

 

[Gregatron]

For what it's worth...Read the bold type...And make your own conclusions. It seems this little tidbit eluded folks.​

Or most didn't bother to read it at all.

​

Description​

​

Star Trek: The Original Series Extremely Rare Hero Type-2 Phaser Pistol (Paramount, 1966-1969). The Type-2 Phaser Pistol is the most iconic and sought-after hand prop from the original Star Trek series. Designed by Star Trek art director Walter "Matt" Jefferies (designer of the Starship Enterprise), this was the first pragmatic/utilitarian energy weapon in science fiction, marking a stark design departure from the fantasy "ray guns" of Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, and Forbidden Planet.

This hero Type-2 Phaser was built for close up camera shots and breaks down into three detachable components: 1) The palm-sized Type-1 Hand Phaser – used for diplomatic missions and undercover work due to its discreet size, 2) The Type-2 Pistol Phaser body into which the Type-1 would install to make a more powerful weapon, and 3) The elongated brass handle/power pack (attached by twist-lock) capable of being quickly swapped out and "reloaded" during prolonged engagements. This is one of only two hero Type-2 Phasers known to exist.

Crafted of fiberglass, resin, turned aluminum, brass, steel and acrylic components, the weapon measures 8 in. long x 6 in. tall and features moving parts. The Type-1 has a moving dial on top that raises the "targeting sight" when rotated, as well as extending the acrylic emitter at front. A panel below the Type-1 (attached with flathead screw) removes to reveal the internal metal mechanism and holder for a single AA battery to illuminate a grain of wheat light bulb when activated (bulb and battery are no longer present).

The Type-2 pistol body features a spring-loaded acrylic emitter that moves backward as the Type-1 separates from the Type-2 by depressing the brass side-mounted release button. The front turned aluminum nozzle rotates to "focus the beam" of the weapon, and a turning inset aluminum side dial is installed on the left. A rear-mounted, rotating aluminum "power level" dial is mounted at the top of the weapon with engraved numbers from "1" to "9" with 10 hash marks between each number (9.9 being the maximum setting).

The provenance of this piece is as incredible as the Phaser, itself. The Type-2 pistol body was acquired directly from Star Trek prop designer and builder Wah Ming Chang in the late 1960s (Chang designed and built the Starfleet Communicators and Tricorders for the original series).

The accompanying LOA states the studio had sent the Phaser pistol body to Chang for repair and the show was
cancelled before he was able to return it. The Type-1 Hand Phaser was acquired by a member of the production crew after filming completed on a second season episode in 1967 (a second LOA accompanies the Type-1).

Eventually, the respective owners of the Type-1 and Type-2 Phasers learned about their counterpart, and in a detailed study the two hero components were reassembled and scrutinized in a side-by-side comparison with the only other known Hero Type-2 Phaser Pistol belonging to the highest-profile collector and top authority of original series props and costumes. The collector extensively examined the internal and external components and determined, based upon the comparison, that this Type-2 Phaser Pistol is authentic. In fact, the build tolerances
between both pistols are such that the Type-1 Phasers are interchangeable and fit perfectly in both pistol bodies!

To many science fiction fans around the world, the original series Type-2 Phaser Pistol transcends its association with a groundbreaking science fiction television series – it represents one of the defining indelible images of American pop culture. Exhibits expected paint loss and scuffing, with missing partial strip of Velcro for attachment to costume.

In December 2018, Profiles in History sold a midgrade Type-2 Phaser Pistol (for medium distance shots), one of several known, for $192,000. This Hero Type-2 Phaser Pistol is the first to ever reach public auction. COA from Heritage Auctions.

I say this in no way to denigrate Mr. Jein or his expertise, but isn’t is possible that, given the availability of extensive photos/measurements/hands-on study of his hero (as well as the Wand Company replica, which was laser-scanned from his prop, and could easily be used as reference or a molding/casting source in creating a fiberglass replica) that someone could create a replica which did indeed have tolerances that would be dead-on to the Jein hero?

Again, not trying to be stubborn or contrarian, here, but these are questions which need to be asked. If this piece is indeed authentic, then it is a BIG DEAL. Another Holy Grail piece thought to be lost. And so we can’t just go ahead and take anything as a given or as cold, hard fact unless it actually is.

 

[Anakin Starkiller]

Dimensions of the Jein hero are known to the 0.001" by TPZ members and published on the board

 

[Gregatron]

Dimensions of the Jein hero are known to the 0.001" by TPZ members and published on the board

Exactly.

And all I’m seeing here are lots of questions, with no forthcoming answers. Conflicting details, shaky provenance. Wah Chang didn’t even build the phaser props to begin with (he just dressed them up to improve the detailing and match the communicator and tricorder, which he DID build), and was not even particularly involved with the show during the later seasons. Why would he, an outside contractor, be given an ostensibly damaged phaser prop to repair, only to then give it away after the show was cancelled?

 

[asalaw]

Experts are human, and therefore fallible. They can be fooled, they can be bought, they can misinterpret facts. To say that something is true or false because an expert says so is a logical fallacy called the Argument from Authority. If Joe Blow, Ph.D in applied phaserology from Harvard, says something is authentic, all that proves is that Dr. Blow has formed an opinion. How and why he formed that opinion is a valid subject of inquiry, and contrary observations and opinions are vitally important in any attempt to discover the facts.

To put it more bluntly, simply standing on someone's expertise to pronounce something absolutely true proves precisely squat.

 

[MARK M3]

Experts are human, and therefore fallible. They can be fooled, they can be bought, they can misinterpret facts. To say that something is true or false because an expert says so is a logical fallacy called the Argument from Authority. If Joe Blow, Ph.D in applied phaserology from Harvard, says something is authentic, all that proves is that Dr. Blow has formed an opinion. How and why he formed that opinion is a valid subject of inquiry, and contrary observations and opinions are vitally important in any attempt to discover the facts.

To put it more bluntly, simply standing on someone's expertise to pronounce something absolutely true proves precisely squat.

So what your saying is that Joe Blow, or rather in this case Greg Jein's Expertise in Trek Props, costumes and pretty much everything else Trek related, In your words means squat?
Sorry, just wanted to be clear on that. Thanks.

 

[asalaw]

So what your saying is that Joe Blow, or rather in this case Greg Jein Expertise in Trek Props, costumes and pretty much everything else Trek related, In your words means squat?
Sorry, just wanted to be clear on that. Thanks.

Don't put words in my mouth. I'm saying that any expert's opinion, without further inquiry as to the facts, is open to reasonable challenge.

 

[MARK M3]

Don't put words in my mouth. I'm saying that any expert's opinion, without further inquiry as to the facts, is open to reasonable challenge.

I didn't put words in your mouth. I used your words. Just replaced Joe Blow with the expert who said it was legit.

 

[asalaw]

I didn't put words in your mouth. I used your words. Just replaced Joe Blow with the expert who said it was legit.

You're committing the very fallacy I wrote about. Merely saying "Expert X says so" is insufficient to prove something true.

 

[MARK M3]

You're committing the very fallacy I wrote about. Merely saying "Expert X says so" is insufficient to prove something true.

LOL! I just repeated what you said...That's all.

 

[asalaw]

LOL! I just repeated what you said...That's all.

You and I operate under very different definitions of the word "repeat."

 

[Jintosh]

Differences in the potentially different TYPE of material used have been noted by our people. But the auction talks about tolerances. If the expert did not take into account that it might look identical but be made of a different material, then that analysis might hold less weight. An expert can be challenged by another expert and it happens in courts on a daily basis. The judge (or jury) has to decide which of the experts in a legal case is the more correct when they disagree with each other. And disagree they do, on a regular basis.

 

[robn1]

* Power meter numbers are the same numbers as on the Jein, and appear to be a different font than both the Jein and TMOST/Finney.

EDIT: photo mix up, here's the right one.

 

[Trebor]

I think I'm approaching this from a different perspective that many people here.

As said, I never claimed to be in expert in the minutiae of the phaser props from TOS. That's not how I'm looking at this primarily.

What I am though is someone who has had a long-standing fascination with confidence men and cons and forgers and forgeries. I've read a lot on the subject over the years and see certain patterns emerge that I think I identify here.

I'm also active in the firearms collecting community and fakes are common there. (Typically common firearms embellished to appear to be rare firearms or owned by famous people, etc).

People have been making forgeries and fakes of works of art for hundreds of years. There are numerous examples of forgers who have fooled experts, and museums and auction houses in the 20th Century. There are people who could copy an artists style, use appropriate materials (although not always 100% correct), and use techniques to properly "age" or damage an item to make it look more authentic. Why? the motive is almost always money.

When you combine the forger's art with the con man's skill at deception you can fool experts, museums and auction houses. A simple search will turn up plenty of examples.

The same is true now with props. In a way these are modern art works. There is a huge financial incentive to create a highly desirable prop. We've seen experts, museums and auction houses deceived in the past.

In addition to making the actual item the forger has to take on the role of con man and create a story that goes with the fake. It has to be convincing, work within known facts, and, hopefully, (for them) explain away any inconsistencies or "missing links" in the provenance.

History has shown us that this is often easier than you might believe. The problem is "the mark wants to believe." The auction house wants to believe something is a previously unknown piece for the money it will bring in. The potential buyers want to believe they have the ability to buy something that is typically unavailable on the market for any price. That desire to believe can, and does, blind people to problems with the item itself and/or with the story behind the item. And even the experts might "want to believe" because finding a previously unknown surviving prop is exciting and is a neat connection to the history of the show.

The existence of a previously unknown surviving "Hero" Phaser is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary proof. The amount of money that will be asked for it at auction alone demands that.

The first step is the provenance. The story and the documentation to back up that story. I see the story that this was in Wah Chang's hands when the show ended and was transferred to someone else sometime after that. The next thing I'd want to see is the documentation behind that story. Who was it given to? What was their relation to Wah Chang? Do they have any documentation of their ownership of this item in all the time since then? Can anyone collaborate this with even a, "Yeah, he showed me that in 1990" or some such? Or does the owner have any old photos showing them with the item that were obviously taken years or decades ago?

I don't see the Letter of Authenticity posted on the auction site. I'd really want to see what it says and how it explains the chain of custody over time.

Personally, the story as told, seems suspicious to me without more documentation. I find it incredibly convenient that it says, "This was given to Wah Chang to be reworked or repaired" precisely because that is the type of thing that can be used to explain away any questionable elements of the item itself. "Oh, that's different because Wah Chang changed it." That's typical of the type of story used to back a con.

Then there's the item itself. This is where the experts come in. And this is where I say I'm not in expert in the details of this prop. Although you'd think you could leave authentication to the experts, you have to remember that whoever creates a forgery is specifically TRYING TO FOOL THE EXPERTS.

Let me repeat that. A forger is deliberately TRYING TO FOOL THE EXPERTS. He'll use all available info to create as close a match as possible including material, dimensions, paint color, etc. The less information there is publicly available on any item the harder it is for him to have the knowledge to duplicate it well enough. The more info available, the easier it would be.

Is there enough info about the Hero Phaser to create a convincing forgery? I tend to believe there is based on the photos and measurements and discussions of the details and techniques I've seen discussed in the past.

Now, I don't know Jein personally. I've interacted with him online briefly a few times. He's always struck me as polite and knowledgeable. I would consider him an expert on Star Trek Phaser props (unlike myself).

However, that doesn't mean he can't be fooled. It doesn't take anything away from him if he is fooled. As said, the goal of the forger is to deliberately FOOL THE EXPERTS so they can cash in on the completed con.

In the history of forgeries in the art world, in the gun collecting community and in the prop community, there are plenty of examples of experts, museums and auction houses being fooled. So, a mere "This has been authenticated by an expert" doesn't really hold as much weight as you think it would.

(As an aside, someone has mentioned, "Jein has been fooled before." I don't know if that is true or not, or the details if it is, but if it is true it speaks to the point "That even the experts get fooled." )

In the art community the techniques for ferreting out fakes have improved with technology. They are past, "It looks right" and into analyzing the chemical composition of paints used (modern paint used on a 500 year old painting is a tell) and similar techniques.

It seems to me we're still in the "It looks right" level of authentication in the prop community. Combine that with the fact that "The mark wants it to be real" and you'll understand my skepticism.

Personally, I also, "Want it be real," because I think it would be cool to have another previously "lost" prop turn up from my favorite show. And if it is real, and this different from the other known Hero, that adds information to our understanding of the original props.

But, approaching it from the point of view of someone who enjoys reading about forgeries and scams and con jobs, I'm seeing a lot of the same red flags that have been raised historically in other cases of forgeries (usually art forgeries) and ignored until the item was later proven to be a fake. The provenance being the big red flag, the convenient story of "Why things are different" being another, and then the discrepancies (as pointed out by others) in the item itself being the third red flag.

Believe what you want. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I don't see that here, yet.