Taking pics of your Screen Used Prop

[franz bolo]

I wanted to start a thread here so the BR Gun thread doesn't get messed up.

<div class='quotetop'>(philippes @ Sep 5 2006, 08:58 AM) [snapback]1313271[/snapback]</div>

Unfortunately, until one has owned original screen-used props, it's very hard to understand the feelings of those who have extremely rare and valuable items in their collections.

Although I don't agree with the fundamental premise and inherent elitism that exists in regards to this dynamic, I nonetheless understand it. I also feel the protectiveness, and deal with these feelings on a regular basis when copies of original props I own are released by people who have no stake or investment in them except to further their own personal glory while profiting from something I pride myself in owning.

Here's the dilemma: It's hard enough these days to verify the authenticity of a piece, but once details about an original are released, and bootleggers start making evermore accurate replicas, it makes it even more difficult to prove the genuineness of a prop. What's worse, many fakes eventually find their way into private collections, pawned off as originals, costing unwary victims thousands—and in some cases tens of thousands—of dollars.

I've heard from several owners of original Blade Runner props over the past week, and they're livid that this information has been released. In at least one case, the owner has decided to part with something he's owned for over 20 years because the mystique of the piece has been lost. Another is very upset because "tells" only known to him have now been exposed and will be added to reproductions. The paper prop dilemma is even worse, and those who own original Blade Runner badges, IDs, etc. are thoroughly frustrated.

Until one's spent over $10k on a prop, and then watched it reproduced, will never understand the concern.

All of this said, it's about time owners of original props began to realize that one of the reasons prices of certain pieces has remained artificially high is due to this "code of silence." With the advent of the Internet, and the unprecedented mass and instant sharing of information on a global scale, the fundamentals of data exclusivity have changed. Just ask the RIAA and MPAA.

It's about time owners of original props came to understand that if something they own is not being replicated, it probably isn't worth much in the first place. And while seeing information about such pieces gratuitously shared with everyone in the world is frustrating, it should come as a major consolation that people care about such pieces as much as they do in the first place.

Similar to real estate, the secret to maintaining the value of original props is still: Provenance, provenance, provenance.

Phil
[/b]

I don't agree. The prop is still worth what people are willing to pay.

There is always someone out there who is willing to pay.. Even if there are a million replicas, there is only a few screen used props.

Most of us are satisfied with a replica and can never afford a real screen used one but there are a couple of collectors who can afford it.

You actually think that if this went on sale it wouldn't fetch a super high price because of replicas??

That's ridiculous.

FB

 

[cayman shen]

Surely there are all kinds of ways to determine an authentic prop from a repro? Wouldn't many of these props have a paper trail? Why sell something simply because good copies are being made. Heck, I'd be more proud. I have somthing YOU want.

Nobody sells an original ANH poster just because abundant reprints are available. That would be idiotic. And if they did, they'd make a lot of cash, BECAUSE people are interested. Nobody pays money for, say, a Last Action Hero poster. And nobody repros them.

 

[dualedge]

<div class='quotetop'>(franz bolo @ Sep 5 2006, 10:22 AM) [snapback]1313275[/snapback]</div>

I don't agree. The prop is still worth what people are willing to pay.

There is always someone out there who is willing to pay.. Even if there are a million replicas, there is only a few screen used props.

Most of us are satisfied with a replica and can never afford a real screen used one but there are a couple of collectors who can afford it.

You actually think that if this went on sale it wouldn't fetch a super high price because of replicas??

That's ridiculous.

FB
[/b]

Phillippes is right in that an original prop's value comes 100% from it's provenance. If you don't have provenance or a way to prove authenticity, it's not worth any more than a replica. That's the problem and that's where I vehemently disagree.

Replicas by their nature are replicas. They don't need provenance. Screen-used collecting is just as much about finding provenance and proving authenticity as it is about finding the items. In this sense, replica collecting and screen-used collecting have very, very little in common.

Sometimes the only thing you've got to prove a piece is authentic are details about how the piece was produced. When those details get out into the public and are then copied by replica makers, it makes authenticating originals that much harder so it's no surprise that someone that spent $20,000 on an original is going to be more than a little peeved.

I have a prop I was able to get authenticated primarily by exactly such tells as mentioned in this Blade Runner PKD issue so no one can say this isn't reasonable for screen-used collectors to be concerned about.

Rob

<div class='quotetop'>(cayman shen @ Sep 5 2006, 10:55 AM) [snapback]1313292[/snapback]</div>

Surely there are all kinds of ways to determine an authentic prop from a repro? Wouldn't many of these props have a paper trail? Why sell something simply because good copies are being made. Heck, I'd be more proud. I have somthing YOU want.

Nobody sells an original ANH poster just because abundant reprints are available. That would be idiotic. And if they did, they'd make a lot of cash, BECAUSE people are interested. Nobody pays money for, say, a Last Action Hero poster. And nobody repros them.
[/b]

There are lots of ways to prove props but not every method works in every case. In some cases only one way works and all the others are unreliable. Unless you saw the item being filmed, took the item from the actor's hand and left the set, you're relying on the word of others. No method is completely irrefutable. Studios have given out CoA's for stuff they don't know anything about, CoA's get forged, details of how items were produced get out and are replicated... some items are stolen, some given as gifts... proving what a prop is and how it was used is literally half the hobby and what makes it a completely different hobby from replica collecting.

I've seen people that make props for movies scam collectors just as I've seen replica makers scam screen-used collectors. Provenance is everything. That's how a Don Post Creature from the Black Lagoon mask sells for $70,000... it has great provenance from ignorant people.

Ultimately it's up to the owner whether they want pictures published of THEIR item. If somebody else has one and wants to post pics, that's their decision.

 

[Robot Monster]

Well if someone owns an the prop it's up to them to do with it as they please. If they want to show it off that is up to them. After all would you want someone telling you what to do with your prop after you spend 10 or 20k on it?

I myself would never get to see this stuff if people just kept it under wraps. So personally I am thrilled to see them.

Tek

 

[dualedge]

<div class='quotetop'>(tekmage3000 @ Sep 5 2006, 11:24 AM) [snapback]1313315[/snapback]</div>

Well if someone owns an the prop it's up to them to do with it as they please. If they want to show it off that is up to them. After all would you want someone telling you what to do with your prop after you spend 10 or 20k on it?

I myself would never get to see this stuff if people just kept it under wraps. So personally I am thrilled to see them.

Tek
[/b]

That's absolutely my opinion. If it's yours, it's yours to do with as you please. You can take it out and smash it with a hammer if you want, y'know? Might suck for the rest of us but that's life.

 

[franz bolo]

<div class='quotetop'>(philippes @ Sep 5 2006, 08:58 AM) [snapback]1313271[/snapback]</div>

I've heard from several owners of original Blade Runner props over the past week, and they're livid that this information has been released. In at least one case, the owner has decided to part with something he's owned for over 20 years because the mystique of the piece has been lost. Another is very upset because "tells" only known to him have now been exposed and will be added to reproductions. The paper prop dilemma is even worse, and those who own original Blade Runner badges, IDs, etc. are thoroughly frustrated.
[/b]

I guess the reason I wanted a new thread is because this attitude is so depressing.

"Losing the Mystique", "Hidden Tells", etc. This is elitism at it's finest. You should collect props because of the love for the prop. I can't afford any screen used item so I can't begin to understand this. I'm sure people buy these just so they can re-sell them and make a bunch of money but I think that's a shame.

The replica prop makers are the ones profitting on these things and trying to keep certain things secret so they can make a lot of money. There are few people that make super accurate parts for cost. Because they want the most accurate part and don't do it for profit. I wish this attitude was shared among more people.

To each his own, but to me that attitude is very snobish and selfish.

Where is the owner, that has decided to part with something he's owned for over 20 years because the mystique of the piece has been lost, going to sell his prop???

I'd like to know how much money he's lost because of the new pictures that were posted.

I doubt he lost any money and can only think that the recent finds will make his piece even worth more.

For instance, I was looking at the wallet project and saw that the ID alone was selling for $300. To me that's crazy. I could offset print 5000 of them and then laminate a photo and amberlith on top for less than $300.

So the real cost per ID (4 color offset printed) would be about $35 to make. That's one hell of a markup..

I'll hope to hear more peoples point of view so I can try to understand this myself.

FB


<div class='quotetop'>(dualedge @ Sep 5 2006, 10:22 AM) [snapback]1313310[/snapback]</div>

When those details get out into the public and are then copied by replica makers, it makes authenticating originals that much harder so it's no surprise that someone that spent $20,000 on an original is going to be more than a little peeved.

I have a prop I was able to get authenticated primarily by exactly such tells as mentioned in this Blade Runner PKD issue so neither you nor Phillippes can say this isn't reasonable for screen-used collectors to be concerned about.
[/b]

You have a good point.

FB

 

[Art Andrews]

While I can certainly understand the frustration an owner of an "original" piece can have, the whole elitism and secret cloak and dagger BS as well as the "I know things you don't know" mentality makes me not feel too sorry for them. In general, their attitudes, especially towards replicas is staggering. Again, I understand they invested a lot, but that is really their problem. You might have invested $3k in a computer 5 years ago that is now worth less than $200. That is life. It happens. Get over it. Should technology stop so your PC can retain its value? Should the whole replica prop world cease and desist so these few elistists can have their prized toys retain their "original value." As was posted above, a piece is what someone will pay for it, nothing more. If nice replicas have come out that have not made the original as valuable in some people's eyes, well, too bad. That is life. It happens. Get over it. Being pissed about it or trying to squirrel away the info is like trying to stop the sun from coming up. It is going to happen sooner or later so if a collector is going to be all pissed about it, perhaps they shouldn't spend so much on the originals.... OR... they should only spend what they feel something is worth to them personally instead of trying to make an idiotic "investment" in a market that is so volatile. Might as well get pissed about the daily fluctuations of the stock market...

 

[eltee]

In some instances, I can see that the revealing of an original prop may actually discourage counterfeiting. Posting pictures of the real blaster, for instance, will make it hard for someone to pass off a homemade job or even a modified, commercially made replica as the real prop. If someone duplicates the ID card (they have) it would be easy for me to compare tiny little details revealed by the photos but difficult to replicate exactly.


With the Wondercon photos, initially I was skeptical. One of the patches looked like the one sold at conventions for years and the ID card was significantly different than the 10 or so versions I have in my collection. As more information emerged I realized that the stuff shown is considered real and that:
1. My $8.00 Tyrell Corp. patch I thought was a fantasy job is actually pretty close to the real item
2. My RAC blaster is very, very close
3. None of my ID cards was close to what was on display
4. The badge is what I thought it was


I don't quite understand the angst as described here among some reported owners of real props. Clearly one of the owners provided the props photographed. I guess this exemplifies the privilege of ownership...do with your property as you see fit, hide it or share it. Perhaps an artificial veil of secrecy adds to the mystique of an item, but likewise it may also inspire some suspicion.

 

[Mechinyun]

Sharing is caring.

 

[amish]

I guess if you charge a lot for a replica it doesnÂ’t devalue the original...lol

What a crock, you speak of not sharing original screen used props and say that replicas will devalue them and then go ahead and make replicas....

Interesting.

 

[philippes]

I never said the feelings of original prop collectors were justified--just that they exist. And they exist because it's human nature to do two paradoxical things: 1) share with people one's great fortune 2) keep things secret.

How many times has someone shared something that they didn't want anyone to know? Well, if they didn't want anyone to know, why did they share in the first place.?

Someone once said that to successfully rob a bank one would have to do it alone, not tell anyone, and never spend the spoils. So...what would be the point?

No one ever said humans were sane or rational animals. We're emotional and act irrationally. We're also highly motivated by greed, jealousy, and competitiveness. These feelings help us survive and reproduce. They also provide us with the desire to improve and advance while at the same time remaining adaptive. Otherwise, we'd die out.

Can everyone see how these things relate to the topic at hand? No one's right and no one's wrong.

And in the end, all of this boils down to petty materialism. In the greater scheme of things, does any of this REALLY matter? When you die (and everyone does), can you take it with you?

Phil

 

[eltee]

Well...one might refer to the age old axiom (that I think applies particularly well to prop collectors):

He who dies with the most toys...Wins.

It's largely about property rights. In the fine art world, multi gazillionaires are often criticized for acquiring, hoarding and hiding famous works of art that many feel should be displayed. The same may be what's going on here. Prop lovers want to see, some prop owners want exclusivity.

 

[hydin]

i think another reason that not many photos show up of official screen used stuff on a "hot" movie is simply that its a rather shady deal involved to GET that prop.

i remember years ago WB went after some dude in the cali? and japan because the cali guy used the original batman and batman returns molds to make a few batsuits, and the guy in japan plunked down 250k for em.

the guy in cali got arrested and the suits were confiscated in japan by wb.

the guy in japan lost 250k because , well, he bought stolen merchandise. i seriously doubt that if you pick up a super iconic item nowadays without going through the studio and getting a crapload of paperwork done, that you can really feel safe posting pics up of your super elite awesomeriffic prop without worrying about a lawsuit or loss of said prop.

not defending the super elitest prop snobbery idea cause, well, it happens. just saying there might be less prop snobbery and more "i want to keep this thing, not lose the cash i put out to own it".

imagine if someone here got a green goblin hero mask "under the table" from the spidey movies. with as much studio attention as this board (and a few others) get, how long do you think it would take before they got a call or letter from sony? or if someone showed off a superman returns hero costume symbol? i would imagine a pretty fast turnaround on it if they started showing it off.

screen used stuff is fun to have, and great as an ego boost, but its also somewhat akin to buying a stereo from a back alley. if someone goes looking for it, and they find out you have it, you could be in some serious trouble.

chris

 

[dualedge]

<div class='quotetop'>(franz bolo @ Sep 5 2006, 11:34 AM) [snapback]1313322[/snapback]</div>

I guess the reason I wanted a new thread is because this attitude is so depressing.

"Losing the Mystique", "Hidden Tells", etc. This is elitism at it's finest. You should collect props because of the love for the prop. I can't afford any screen used item so I can't begin to understand this. I'm sure people buy these just so they can re-sell them and make a bunch of money but I think that's a shame.

The replica prop makers are the ones profitting on these things and trying to keep certain things secret so they can make a lot of money. There are few people that make super accurate parts for cost. Because they want the most accurate part and don't do it for profit. I wish this attitude was shared among more people.

To each his own, but to me that attitude is very snobish and selfish.

Where is the owner, that has decided to part with something he's owned for over 20 years because the mystique of the piece has been lost, going to sell his prop???

I'd like to know how much money he's lost because of the new pictures that were posted.

I doubt he lost any money and can only think that the recent finds will make his piece even worth more.

For instance, I was looking at the wallet project and saw that the ID alone was selling for $300. To me that's crazy. I could offset print 5000 of them and then laminate a photo and amberlith on top for less than $300.

So the real cost per ID (4 color offset printed) would be about $35 to make. That's one hell of a markup..

I'll hope to hear more peoples point of view so I can try to understand this myself.

FB
[/b]

You know, I completely agree on the elitism aspect and I've said as much on various screen-used collecting forums when the issue has come up. I don't understand why somebody having a replica of a prop you own 'ruins' the prop for you (generically speaking of course). You either love the prop for what it is or you just love the idea of having something nobody else has - which is definitely elitist.

Understandably there are a variety of different types in these two hobbies. Some folks would never want to collect originals because of the price and the ease of getting scammed. Some hate even the thought of replicas because for them the collecting of original props has... for lack of a better way to describe it... a nostalgic connection to the actual production of the movie a replica just doesn't hold for them. And some, like myself, exist somewhat in both worlds to differing degrees.

I know I can never have an original ANH Luke saber or an original Raiders fertility idol but I do want what original items I can find and afford (usually Rocketeer stuff). It's an issue of priorities for me. I love iconic props but I can't afford iconic props from every movie I love.

Some just do it for the money that comes from flipping stuff. Myself - I do it because I love the props as art so if I can't have an original, a suitably accurate replica is okay and I wouldn't fault anyone for wanting a suitably accurate replica of an original I have. I won't share some details about my original because it's partially what I look for when asked to authenticate items for others.

Replicas, in my opinion, do not hurt the screen-used hobby except in those instances where they are used to scam others (intentionally or not) or in the cases where people replicate originals to the point where even those that worked on the movies can't tell the difference. My opinion is - let replicas be replicas and originals be originals. 100% accuracy is a myth in most cases anyway so find a happy medium and don't worry about getting every molecule in it's proper place.

 

[dualedge]

<div class='quotetop'>(hydin @ Sep 5 2006, 12:24 PM) [snapback]1313356[/snapback]</div>

screen used stuff is fun to have, and great as an ego boost, but its also somewhat akin to buying a stereo from a back alley. if someone goes looking for it, and they find out you have it, you could be in some serious trouble.

chris
[/b]

You've got one point sorta right there but you're also making an awful a lot of generalizations. There are lots of ways to acquire original items legitimately through unofficial channels.

Most big screen-used collectors are naturally private for one thing. Plus, you've got to understand the differences in the hobby to understand why this is. There *is* concern over studios wanting stuff back but that doesn't happen all that often really. It's mostly about protecting your network, protecting the integrity of the pieces and just generally not wanting to share your private collection with folks that seem only interested in profiting from the info you give out.

Not saying it's good or bad, that's just the way it is.

<div class='quotetop'>(philippes @ Sep 5 2006, 12:04 PM) [snapback]1313343[/snapback]</div>

I never said the feelings of original prop collectors were justified--just that they exist. And they exist because it's human nature to do two paradoxical things: 1) share with people one's great fortune 2) keep things secret.
...
And in the end, all of this boils down to petty materialism. In the greater scheme of things, does any of this REALLY matter? When you die (and everyone does), can you take it with you?

Phil
[/b]

Sorry I misunderstood your post Phil. I think it does matter in that like it or not, I want to make sure my family can sell the friggin' stuff for what it's worth to take care of themselves when I'm pushin' up the daisies

I guess I'm "pro-choice" on this... if you own it and want to share the info, great. If not, great. I'm okay with a less than perfect replica for the sake of preserving something that helps authenticate an original because I know just how friggin' hard authenticating an original can be.

 

[philippes]

Unfortunately, just because one owns a hero doesn't mean one lives in a vacuum.

In the case of the Blade Runner blaster, at least two other heroes exist. So, the owner of any screen-used prop must take into consideration the potential feelings of others who also own that prop.

Even worse, the owner of a stunt may seriously piss off the owner of a hero by sharing information.

So, to keep everyone happy in the screen-used world, one becomes forced and accustomed to not sharing anything. Otherwise, they risk feeling the wrath of other stakeholders if they do [share].

Phil

 

[dualedge]

<div class='quotetop'>(philippes @ Sep 5 2006, 12:51 PM) [snapback]1313371[/snapback]</div>

Unfortunately, just because one owns a hero doesn't mean one lives in a vacuum.

In the case of the Blade Runner blaster, at least two other heroes exist. So, the owner of any screen-used prop must take into consideration the potential feelings of others who also own that prop.

Even worse, the owner of a stunt may seriously piss off the owner of a hero by sharing information.

So, to keep everyone happy in the screen-used world, one becomes forced and accustomed to not sharing anything. Otherwise, they risk feeling the wrath of other stakeholders if they do [share].

Phil
[/b]

Exactly - and well put, Phil. Of course, in screen-used collecting, oftentimes your network is your lifeline to the hobby. Making other collectors in your network mad - particularly those that have those duplicates - can be detrimental to your own collecting for better or worse in some cases.

 

[PHArchivist]

Cue the haunting musicÂ…

Ooooh… THIS is the scariest thread of all. Really – it is. I’ll get to that shortly.

But also, never has a thread generated such mixed feelings on my part.

PhilÂ’s commentaryÂ… Whooo boy. I both totally agree and totally disagree. And keep in mind, my agreement/disagreement is not with PHIL himself, but with the issues and sentiments he has relayed (which may or may not be his own).

First the disagreementÂ…

Comments regarding a “loss of mystique” and dissent with the choice to publicly display the item strike me as elitist and of “sour grapes”. Many folks involved (in any way, shape, or form) with the history, research, and general knowledge management of this prop occasionally seem to pride themselves on being the limited few caretakers of such knowledge, and seem to be somewhat miffed that it is now public knowledge, and no ONE person is any longer an expert or “special” with regards to this prop.

Sour grapesÂ…

Now the agreementÂ…

On the other hand (and the scary part), I DO fully understand their concerns of a much more valid and significant nature… One that revolves around a nasty little word mentioned above that begins with the letter “C”.

Let me begin by posing a rhetorical questionÂ…

When does a prop replica become a counterfeit?

All but the most foolish in this hobby know that a studio can bring down the wrath of its legal department upon anyone who chooses to create an unlicensed replica of any item covered by the studio's copyrights.

But if such an item is passed off as an original (a counterfeit), wouldn't that be where the FBI steps in? Last time I toured the FBI building in Washington DC, they had a full lobby display of counterfeit sports memorabilia, replete with kiosks chronicling the ensuing FBI investigations. Why wouldn't film memorabilia be any different?

In the Junkyard thread about the pending "Ultimate Blade Runner Blaster" the question was raised if the rust should be replicated. This verges -- though unwittingly -- (IN MY OPINION) on counterfeiting, rather than replicating.

And therein lays the angst of the collector's referenced by Phil.

With the advent of Hi-Res digital photography and instant sharing, counterfeiting (as opposed to replicating) has been made significantly easier. The prospect of the value of the original being diluted by the release of significantly more (and more accurate) copies is valid. Not to us. Because we all now the words to the song – “provenance, provenance, provenance”. But we’re not everybody, are we?

A little side note:
Shortly after I obtained my most valuable item in my collection (about a grand; USD) I was contacted, courted, romanced by THE shadiest character this Board has ever seen about replicating the prop. Bless the powers that be (and Dr. Strangelove.) for "outing" the GUY before I turned over more information to this prop whore. But even now, I wonder if copies of my item will somehow show up on ebay, diminishing my ability to recoup or expand upon any of its original value...?

So I suppose in the end I am right in there with Phil... Though I'm not sure I fully agree with these sentiments, I certainly understand them...

 

[juno]

If you want an investment, buy stocks or real estate.

"So, the owner of any screen-used prop must take into consideration the potential feelings of others who also own that prop."

It'll sound bitchy to say, "whatever," but it's exactly what I thought when I read that. If I own it, I own it and will do whatever I want with it. Now, I have bought things in the past with the promise to not duplicate (as in cast) them, and I have no problem with that. But not sharing photos? That's crazy talk. The reverse would be saying I HAD to share photos. It's completely my choice.

One thing I am curious about: do the original artisians share in the bloated sales costs? I know there are a few guys on here that do props for movies -- do they end up getting a percentage of the item?

 

[PHArchivist]

<div class='quotetop'>(PHArchivist @ Sep 5 2006, 05:00 PM) [snapback]1313376[/snapback]</div>

In the Junkyard thread about the pending "Ultimate Blade Runner Blaster" the question was raised if the rust should be replicated. This verges -- though unwittingly -- (IN MY OPINION) on counterfeiting, rather than replicating.

[/b]

Though I did include "unwittingly", I should emphasize:
I am in no way suggesting, implying, or insinuating that the project leads of the Ultimate Blade Runner Blaster replica have any nefarious intent. Nor am I against taking a replica, sold as a replica, to that degree of detail.

The point (clear as it may be) is that if a bad guy were to try to copy the gun for bad reasons, duplicating all current real-world damage and copying the item precisely as it appears today is what would be most likely necessary.