*HTML is ON *UBB Code is ON Smilies Legend
Smilies Legend
If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.
T O P I C R E V I E WMichaelI am having a hard time deciding which is more in demand... a NASA lithograph or high quality photo. They both seem to get the about the same price. Am I correct on saying this? eurospaceThat depends. Real vintage photo glossies from the period they were made are definitely more expensive than lithos. Vintage lithos are also more expensive than contemporary lithos. Glossies made by NASA are also more expensive than glossies printed by John Doe at the local Walmart. mjanovecI think it also depends on the type of collector. Some people who want to prominently display their photos to others might actually prefer modern re-prints for the sharpest and most vivid colors. Some of the original NASA glossies can be a little faded if they haven't been properly stored.For many serious collectors, however, having the autographs on original (and vintage) NASA-made materials is the most preferred option...so that typically affects price. Rick MulheirnLithos and modern quality prints both have their merits. With that in mind prefer to have an astronaut sign one of each (WSS litho and inflight glossy); very straight forward at signing events etc.Much has been said about the archival qualities on lithos, vintage glossies and modern prints. I have all three media in my collection and would suggest vintage glossies offer the poorest prospects for longevity.Paul23Although I've been to a few Autographicas now and met some great astronauts there, I'm still relatively new to the hobby. One thing I am noticing a lot more from reading the threads on here though is that a lot of people choose to have vintage lithos signed over standard photographs. Is there a particular reason for this, i.e. is it the age of the litho that makes the item more appealing or is it more that they hold signatures better?I feel a bit silly asking this now but it would be useful to know before the show.Editor's note: Threads merged.Rick MulheirnThe consesus would suggest each have their advantages and disadvantages.Personally lithos bring back nostalgic memories of mustard coloured NASA envelopes dropping through my door in the 70s and provide iconic and contemporary images of astronauts at the height of the program.If I do end up having a portrait signed at Autographica by Tom Stafford, given the choice of a litho or a glossy, the litho for me wins hands down.lm5eagleI notice that one seller is advertising a Stafford Apollo X litho at $29 and a Dave Scott Apollo XV at $24. Are these the kind of standard prices you would pay for mint condition vintage lithos, or have the prices been inflated in the light of impending autograph shows?Rick MulheirnAndy, I would suggest the prices you quoted for Scott and Stafford lithos are perhaps slighly higher than "the norm"... but not by much. WSS lithos for Paul Weitz and John Young to name but two typically fetch in excess of $100 on popular auction sites while others as little as $5 to $10 a pop.I have often wondered (yes, I know it is sad...) just how many lithos have been produced by NASA for each astronaut over the years. I base my opinion on no statistics or facts but some astronaut WSS lithos are surely more prevalent than others and this is reflected in the current market values. SpacefestNASA glossies are on rather crappy Kodak paper, and will crack, fade, yellow and curl even if stored in the dark.Lithos have a limited selection.marc515The older style NASA lithos appear to be of good quality. The newer style glossy photos used at the astronaut signings also look really sharp.The older lithos don't usually fade or discolor. How do the newer glossy photos hold up? Is the paper and ink of sufficient quality that they will hold up over the years without discoloring?Editor's note: Threads merged.mjanovec quote:Originally posted by marc515:The older lithos don't usually fade or discolor. How do the newer glossy photos hold up? Is the paper and ink of sufficient quality that they will hold up over the years without discoloring?It has been claimed that modern Fuji Crystal Archive photo paper can last 100+ years without significantly fading...though that doesn't guarantee that any inks autographed onto the photo will last nearly as long. As with any autographed photo, where and how you display it (or store it) will greatly affect it's longevity.
For many serious collectors, however, having the autographs on original (and vintage) NASA-made materials is the most preferred option...so that typically affects price.
Much has been said about the archival qualities on lithos, vintage glossies and modern prints. I have all three media in my collection and would suggest vintage glossies offer the poorest prospects for longevity.
Is there a particular reason for this, i.e. is it the age of the litho that makes the item more appealing or is it more that they hold signatures better?
I feel a bit silly asking this now but it would be useful to know before the show.
Editor's note: Threads merged.
Personally lithos bring back nostalgic memories of mustard coloured NASA envelopes dropping through my door in the 70s and provide iconic and contemporary images of astronauts at the height of the program.
If I do end up having a portrait signed at Autographica by Tom Stafford, given the choice of a litho or a glossy, the litho for me wins hands down.
I have often wondered (yes, I know it is sad...) just how many lithos have been produced by NASA for each astronaut over the years. I base my opinion on no statistics or facts but some astronaut WSS lithos are surely more prevalent than others and this is reflected in the current market values.
Lithos have a limited selection.
The older lithos don't usually fade or discolor. How do the newer glossy photos hold up? Is the paper and ink of sufficient quality that they will hold up over the years without discoloring?
quote:Originally posted by marc515:The older lithos don't usually fade or discolor. How do the newer glossy photos hold up? Is the paper and ink of sufficient quality that they will hold up over the years without discoloring?
It has been claimed that modern Fuji Crystal Archive photo paper can last 100+ years without significantly fading...though that doesn't guarantee that any inks autographed onto the photo will last nearly as long. As with any autographed photo, where and how you display it (or store it) will greatly affect it's longevity.
Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts
Copyright 1999-2024 collectSPACE. All rights reserved.