Prop Collecting for future gains???

[Jedifyfe]

Hey everyone,
I was just contacted by a long time member here about a couple of specific props I have replicated. Now this wasn't that I stole their work or that recast anything. This was to let me know that original prop collectors don't appreciate people like us that replicating props that they own.

Now I can understand this to a point. The select few people that are either, wealthy enough to pay the hundreds or thousands of dollars for an origial prop, work in the business and aquire a prop through production or get it in any other legal way, must hate that people like us exist.

I have two questions for you all:

Do any of you that do own an original or screen used prop (myself included) hope that someday you will be able to resell them for future financial gain? Or are you just happy to have the props you have.

What would you guys do? If a prop collector of the original prop asked you not to sell a replica of that prop that you made from scratch, would you comply?

I am interested to know what the majority would say.

Brad

 

[Polsnulspace]

I have a coupla screen used chap and I bought them for my collection....not for profit or gain at a later date....Im a collector, not a seller!!:cool

As for producing a prop replica, its exactly as you said Brad.......replicas can sometimes be the only means to get your hands on one of these props for a majority of members in here Id guess. IMO, I dont care if its Sideshow, Cinema Replicas or one of the talented members in here...its all about collecting props/prop replicas for me. Anyone who moans about this, is in it for money and nothing else........just my 2 cents

Paul

 

[capetown19]

I have to aggree with Paul.If I had an original prop I would not mind replication. However as long as my prop maintains the status as an original.

I would take great offence to someone duplicating the prop and then selling it or claiming it as an original.In fact I would probably sue.

I do think that where possible ask the person first.

 

[SgtFang]

This was to let me know that original prop collectors don't appreciate people like us that replicating props that they own.

Brad

:confused

Well, I think I speak for a lot of people here when I say, "WAAHH!!!" :cry

Replicated props are NEVER going to devalue an original piece, because it's still the frikkin' original.

Replicated props thrive, purely because most people can't afford an original in the first place, and are willing to settle for a nice copy.

Here's a great, first person example- Worf's Kahless and Morath statue is my absolute, die happy, Holy Grail prop. After nearly 18 years of searching, I now know it's in IAW's inventory, waiting to be auctioned off. Odds are high that I won't be able to touch the final bid, so my biggest hope is that someone will win it that will alllow it to be copied, so I can finally have one.

And to give an example of my mindset on these matters, if I won the lottery tomorrow and could buy the original outright, you better believe I'd still copy it and make copies available, because I know a lot of other people want one, and may never have a shot at it otherwise.

I think most of these guys that whine about their originals being devalued by our efforts here, just want to be the kid with the flashiest toy on the block.

-Sarge

 

[Wake]

Here's a different side to the same argument.

As a prop collector, I would not like someone to perfectly replicate an original prop I was interested in, since that would make it difficult for me to know whether a prop I was offered was original or a replica.

For example, I don't think that replica costumes should replicate the original tags.

Look at Parks replica Graflex flashes. There was no need for them to have Graflex written on the base, but now they do anyone who doesn't know what tells to look for might end up buying a replica when they think they are buying an original. The consequence of this is that I would be reluctant to pay more for an original Graflex than a replica, just in case.

I collect Judge Dredd props (both originals and replicas). The lawgiver has been replicated many times, and while I feel reasonably confident in being able to tell the replicas from the originals I have seen replicas being sold as originals and even lawgivers I believe to be originals being sold as replicas.

I don't make props myself but please, if you do, make sure there is some way of easily distinguishing the replicas from the originals. There's a place for both in this hobby.

Wake

 

[LeMarchand]

In my experience props are usually not a very good investment. If you look at the market, in 90% of the cases you see that what you pay for a prop from say 'the propstore' only sells for way less when resold, somes even as little as 25% of the paid price.

As for replicas devaluating an orgininal. I don't really think it is the case. People who buy a replica usually don't have the means to aquire the original anyway and people who want the real deal will only go for that, basicly they are two completely seperate streams within the collecting scene.

Does the fact that there are nice reproductions of the 'Mona Lisa' devaluate the original?.....don't think so

I have a couple of screen used items, i bought them to have a momentum from the movies they are from. I i wanted to invest my money, i would put my money in Gold or Silver...not props

 

[Kadajiroth]

I have to agree with the majority in this thread. If I owned a screen-used (original) prop, which I hope I do some day, I wouldn't mind at all if someone was replicating it. It doesn't de-value the original at all, in my opinion. If you own the original, it's still going to be the original prop, no doubt about it.

 

[capetown19]

I have to agree with the majority in this thread. If I owned a screen-used (original) prop, which I hope I do some day, I wouldn't mind at all if someone was replicating it. It doesn't de-value the original at all, in my opinion. If you own the original, it's still going to be the original prop, no doubt about it.

For instance the original oddjobs hat from Goldfinger sold at Christies for £62000.00[I think] in 1998.Bond collectors would all love one of these.The replicas has not devalued it in any way.

I wonder if the replicas actualy increase its value by creating a larger market for these things?:confused

What do you think?

 

[deck5]

This was to let me know that original prop collectors don't appreciate people like us that replicating props that they own.

They probably don't like us enjoying the same movies they do, or eating in the same restaurants, either. Life must be hard for the elitist.

 

[Heatshock]

as already said - original props are always gonna be the original. nothing will change that. replicas wont even come close to touchin the 'want' value of it.

the problem arises between the 'collector' and 'in it for a quick buck guy'
at the end of the day - a prop will only command a price that a collector will be able to pay.

I got 3 TK lids now, inluding an AP and hopefully a TE2 in the future. If I could afford it, and if one were to come available - I would definately STILL pick up an original lid. Because - its the ORIGINAL!

I agree abt wot Wake said though. the problem is the unscrupolous maker out there, whose out to make a quick buck off the inexperienced newbie by selling replica as an original.


if this person who owns the original prop is sayin that it 'devalues' his original prop, I seriously wonder why hes got the prop in the 1st place. again to my analogy - if I got THE original TK lid in my collection, I wouldnt measures its worth in its dollar value, but by the very fact it was an original and it was in MY collection. And the satifaction that, although someone else can get a good replica - I have the original

to the 2 questions:

>>Do any of you that do own an original or screen used prop (myself included) hope that someday >>you will be able to resell them for future financial gain? Or are you just happy to have the props >>you have.

it would break my heart even to sell a valued prop replica eg I got me a MSH2 from FP that I really really would hate giving up

>>What would you guys do? If a prop collector of the original prop asked you not to sell a replica >>of that prop that you made from scratch, would you comply?

no. its a fan sculpt, an interpretation of something u've seen on the screen. in essence, its your work. I think things would become a lot muddier though if u are replicating a copy of a known original sculpt - eg the whole muddy and murky world of stormtrooper TE/TE2 armour

 

[Monster]

Im with the majority. The original artists of the prop - now they may have a slightly more valid argument when it comes to making money from 'art' they have created, but thats not the issue here.

Personally, i believe 'replica' props are just that. The only thing that could possibly affect the value of a real prop, is a 'fake' prop, and even that , i think, is highly unlikely.

I think replica props actually have a say in making original film props more valuable (whether in price or desirability). But the attitude does seem to be, as people have already pointed out, more a case of 'i dont want anyone else to have what i have'.

 

[Jedifyfe]

I think the ONLY time a prop should not be replicated and sold is when the original prop owner gives or sells you a copy of their prop and specifically asks not to replicate it. I have had this asked of me before. This is fair and I totally understand that. But if I came across a prop that I could either make from scratch or buy and replicate, I don't see an issue with that.


As most of you know I create mainly paper style props and that is where this discussion involves me.

BTW: This is in regards to my Terminator Police ID badges that I make



Brad

 

[DivineHeresy]

:confused

Well, I think I speak for a lot of people here when I say, "WAAHH!!!" :cry

My thoughts exactly, lol.

I would love to own a real screen used prop, one day, but i am more than happy to have a replica.

 

[Chief Bast]

Who really wouldn't want to say they own an piece of film history via an original prop?

Like everyone else has stated, cost (and availability) is obviously the biggest hurdle to jump, but I've found that in many cases, fan-made or commercial-made reproductions are usually cleaned-up and refined enough that often times, they look far better than the actual pieces used in film, which usually don't have to run the risk of close scrutiny.

And yes, my opinion opens up a whole 'nother can of worms with the "idealized vs warts and all" arguments. (a la trooper helmets)

 

[defstartrooper]

I have a poster print of the Mona Lisa i'm pretty sure it hasn't devalued the original at all.
How many replica stormtrooper helmets are out there ? i'm pretty sure anyone with enough money would stump up for an original given the chance rather than buy a replica.
Really nobody has any right to tell you not to produce a replica unless they are the copyright owner.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Errm... hasn't the replicas actually helped to garner attention to props that were previously just tossed in the bin for destruction? Without replicas... the real movie props would never have become so sought after items that they are today. Without replica props those elitist collectors would not have any hope of future gain from their props, so I say they can stuff their elitist crap up where the sun don't shine. An authentic prop won't devalue because of a replica... in fact... the replica helped create interest and awareness in the original prop, meaning the value of the original prop increased because of it.

What would you guys do? If a prop collector of the original prop asked you not to sell a replica of that prop that you made from scratch, would you comply?

I would say: no chance in hell are you the boss of me! I made it, I decide its fate: unless the studio says I should stop you have no power over me.


Besides, what is a guy like that doing in a place like this?

 

[Paracord Junky]

heck no. i've made a few replicas that i'm quite proud of and would certainly make and sell a copy if another fan wanted one. if the studio tells me to stop, i'll do so, but noone else has that authority. The analogy of the Mona Lisa is the best one.

 

[Die Hard Props]

There seems to be quite a few dissapointing attitudes in this thread.

I'm an original prop collector, and i don't take too kindly to been labelled as an 'Elitist', because i collect original props.

I think the main issue here is that Brad has replicated this prop, and is selling it to the marketplace for a profit, without it seems a thought for the owner of the original. Whats to say one of these, or a few of these don't turn up on ebay in a few months, or years, as original props? Who will be there to say 'Hold on a minute, that is a replica that Brad made' - We all know how easy people get duped on ebay, look at the dozens of fraud sellers there are, and how many gullable collectors buy this stuff that has no chain of real provenance.

It happened with the Superman costumes. How many of those have turned out to be fakes? how many collectors have paid thousands and thousands for what they thought was an original and it turned out to be an Armando Alverez knock off?

I have no problem with replica props. I'm a member of this forum because i want to be. But i think when it comes to making replicas and selling them on, replica makers should take a couple of things into consideration, and in this case, and many others i see on here, it isn't happening.

Would it not make sense to perhaps contact the owner of the original, and speak to them about making replicas? I would like to think that the majority of original prop collectors are not 'elitist' killjoys who don't want anyone else 'to have what they have' - At least then the original owner can voice an opinion, perhaps work round how to modify the replica so that it is easily distinguishable from an original.

Brad contacted me last year in regard to a prop i own. He asked for high resolution pictures of something i owned so that he could make himself a copy. After some thought, and getting to know him a little better, i agreed to compromise and give him a good enough quality image to create his own accurate enough looking replica. Would i want him selling this on for a profit to everybody else? No i wouldn't. Is that because i'm an elitist? Not at all. I have even talked with Brad about having some high end replicas made of this specific prop for others who can't afford the original to enjoy.

In my opinion, Replicating a prop or costume so that it looks exactly like the original does devalue the original. When it gets to the point that many people can't tell the difference from an original to a replica, we have problems. This issue has been risen a number of times in the past, there are certain props out there now that a lot of original prop collectors won't touch, or darn't touch. Such as Jurassic Park canes, Superman Costumes, props and costumes that have been replicated to a high degree and problems have arisen.

There is enough room in this field for original prop collectors and replica prop collectors. But i think some people, and many members of this forum need to look at things from our perspective for a change.

I don't mind people replicating props i own, i get a kick out of people wanting to replicate something that i own, and i want other people to be able to enjoy it. But i saved up a lot of money, and made a lot of sacrifices to own the props that i own, so why not be respectful and take that into consideration? Instead of labelling us all as 'elitists'.

Lastly, for the member who made the following remark...

They probably don't like us enjoying the same movies they do, or eating in the same restaurants, either. Life must be hard for the elitist

I strongly suggest you grow up.

Simon

 

[jdebord]

Anyone who moans about this, is in it for money and nothing else........just my 2 cents

:confused

Well, I think I speak for a lot of people here when I say, "WAAHH!!!" :cry

-

I think most of these guys that whine about their originals being devalued by our efforts here, just want to be the kid with the flashiest toy on the block.

They probably don't like us enjoying the same movies they do, or eating in the same restaurants, either. Life must be hard for the elitist.

Besides, what is a guy like that doing in a place like this?

Hello,

I didn’t realize my private conversation with Brad was playing out here publicly, as the topic title does not in any way relate to our actual conversation. I thought it would be appropriate to correct the record and to present my actual argument.

NOTE: I did not ask Brad to do or not to do anything anything other than to consider another perspective.

I collect original props.

I’ve never purchased an original prop as an “investment” or for “financial gain”.

Wake conveyed the main point that I was trying to communicate to Brad:

I don't make props myself but please, if you do, make sure there is some way of easily distinguishing the replicas from the originals. There's a place for both in this hobby.

My original point to Brad was that in merely copying the photos of the original prop credentials and flooding the market with cheap copies, it does have an impact on both the value and integrity of the original prop that is copied.

Introducing copies into the marketplace does have consequences on other collectors – the owner and subsequent owners of the original as well as collectors who might buy a copy believing it to be an original.

I don’t at all understand the hostile “class warfare” tone in some of the responses to this topic (as I quoted above) nor the resentment directed towards those who collect original props.

We are all fans of the same films and television shows, only we celebrate them in different ways (and many hobbyists collect both originals and replicas).

In many cases, original prop collectors are very hesitant to show any photos of or information about the pieces that they own out of fear that copies will be made that could be confused as originals.

This situation is a shame, as I don’t personally believe that anyone “owns” a prop – collectors are merely caretakers for these important pieces of popular culture, which will hopefully survive beyond the current owner. I have personally been very open about sharing information with original and replica prop hobbyists.

My hope is that there can be some mutual respect and give and take so that there is not this inherent conflict between original prop collectors and replica prop collectors.

And in defense of original prop collectors, I don't feel it is fair to collectively disparage, dismiss, or demean them as seen in this topic (and I realize, acknowledge, and appreciate that some who posted here in this topic have done nothing of the sort, but quite the contrary).

I’m open to the ideas and concepts and perspectives of this group – which is why I've been a member here for many years - I only ask for the same in return.

As an example, I suggested to Brad that distinguishing the prop replicas produced for resale by marking them as “REPLICA” somewhere on the piece would prevent some future owner from trying to pass it off as authentic and defrauding another collector. This could be done in a manner that is not noticeable (in the case of a badge, in tiny print on the back).

Whatever the intentions of the maker of a replica, there is always a risk of unscrupulous people obtaining such pieces who attempt to pass them off as authentic, so I don’t see any downside to replica makers marking their pieces in a way so that anyone (not just the maker of the replica or owner of the original) closely examining such a piece can know that it is a copy.

I personally have no issue with anyone making a prop replica for himself or herself.

When someone, as Brad put it to me privately, “exploits” the fact that he found an image of an original prop on the net, and makes exact duplicates of the photo to sell for no purpose other than for personal monetary gain, with no considerations beyond his own profiteering, I find it disappointing.

If someone takes it upon himself to do something which impacts other hobbyists, I have every right to contact them to make them aware of potential consequences that he or she might not have contemplated.

Of course, none of this touches upon ancillary side issues...

Thanks,

Jason De Bord

 

[Hez]

I'm a little unsure on something; when you were told that original prop collectors don't appreciate people like us replicating props they own, was any reasoning given? Is it because they believe it devalues the original ($200,000 on the Luke ESB saber that sold recently suggests otherwise) or do they simply want to be the only boy in school who owns a football? Or is it something else entirely?

I'm not sure that the owner of an original prop should expect to have any say in the matter about replicas (sorry Die Hard Props, but I'll explain why). Firstly as has been pointed out, replica/original collecting are hardly the same thing. The amounts of money involved are so vastly different that we may as well be discussing whether Ferrari should be annoyed that Ford is allowed to make cheaper cars than they do.

Secondly, would an owner of an original prop expect to be consulted if licensed replicas became available? It's exactly the same thing, a replica of that prop is increasing the availability to the masses.

As far as telling them apart, I can only say 'buyer beware'. Any original prop should have detailed lineage back to the set. If it doesn't, why risk dropping $30k on it?