Announcement

**John Pic** · 06-04-2013, 11:29 PM

Articles like this are at best misleading and confusing. Any serious collector of SS cloth has tested numerous proven examples against KNOWN fake examples only to have the same results....the white threads glow on fakes and do not on originals. This has been the case with EVERY single known original example and I purposely chose newly made guaranteed fakes to compare and test against. The fakes always glowed....the originals never did.
So my conclusion to this is that if every single original sleeve eagle and collar tab mounted on veteran aquired tunics or obtained from veteran sources do not glow under UV...the idea that the UV light test is useless is just an attempt to open the market up to more fake insignias...or to find an excuse for fakes already in collections that have been found to be worthless reproductions due to this fact. Someone attempts this every few years with some article or thread on a forum and I have kept one magazine with an older article about the same subject. Useless article when considering SS cloth.

Now, i am not saying that some German color dyes do not glow under UV, but that any white thread or material that does is highly suspect. Even when cleaners are used the glow produced is not as strong as that made by modern made white materials.

I should add also that many Heer tunic have also been subjected to this test and none that were undoubtedly real had glowing white thread under UV light.
In one case I detected the replacement post war of shoulder boards in an SS tunic which was a clever hoax having been a rebadged heer tunic the sleeve linings were resewn closed with modern synthetic thread that glowed as opposed to the original thread that did not.

**revi** · 06-05-2013, 03:10 AM

quote : Articles like this are at best misleading and confusing.

I agree with John Pic. I also check with black light for synthetic thread but .... as a primary guide to distinguish synthetic glow from natural material but for me it doesn't stop there. Once you do that there could still be many questions and only experience ( as always ) could provide answers. Plain cotton dyed greyish thread for instance has a certain color under black light depending on the components used in the dyes, for instance copper.
Clean white natural material thread can look dull ( not glowing ) but can yet be as "new" as can be. Usually used or old white thread has a dull yellowish beige appearence but old linnen as a basematerial will have a slight glowish appearance. Dyes used with a natural dyingagent as for example on pink Panzer visorbranchecolor glow like an orange nightfly in the dark. Material that has been soiled with for instance sweat has a glow to it, even sometimes a bright coloured white / yellowish stain. That is due to the double layer effect natural human "fluids" have. The same effect that shows with for instance ... milk. So yes I use black light and it helpes to distinguish modern synthetic thread from natural thread but there is more to it than just that. The old fakes repairs with synthetic thread are easily spotted but fakers have adapted, so on modern fakes with natural thread it won't or will partially work, so besides that ( visual ) experience with what is what is essential. Uniforms that have been in contact with sunlight and air have a darker tone in spots where insignia have been applied that where later removed .... so there it is also usefull. I surely also use blacklight, as a primary guide.

**John Pic** · 06-05-2013, 03:19 AM

It is clear though that the stains and dyes you talk about do not glow bright like white thread that is modern I have done all kinds of checking with UV lights and the bright glow of modern white thread is unmistakeable.

**revi** · 06-05-2013, 03:25 AM

Absolutely

.

**Ian Hulley** · 06-05-2013, 03:30 AM

Blacklight isn't the be all and end all BUT it's still a valuable tool in our arsenal against 'modified' and 'manipulated' items .... it rather begs the question why would someone wish to dismiss it completely ?

Ian

**brooksbz** · 06-05-2013, 10:54 AM

I concur with Mr. Hulley. It is but ONE of MANY tools that can be used to evaluate an item. It is is not the only tool. Many times I have read in this forum that an item failed a black light test so that makes it automatically fake. This would be an important consideration, but not a black or white conclusion. Many naturally ocuring materials and body fluids naturally glow under UV. There is no rule that nothing before 1945 glows. All of what John Pic says is true. The sewing thread discussion is especially pertinent. Paper and sewing thread are easier calls.

One question is that if an entire item glows to some degree (not just parts) it is a fake? Not necessarily. It may have been washed any time after 1935. Laundry detergents used whiteners that glowed in the 1930s. The first black light was invented in the 1700's. That is is where further investigation and experience is required and the item needs to be evaluated in context. There are no easy quick answers.

If you serch this forum you will find many older posts on this topic.

**John Pic** · 06-05-2013, 02:22 PM

Here is what I did to test the different theories....I took a piece(s) of original period white thread that had no glow at all and I dipped it in modern laundry detergent. I then allowed it to dry off and then I held it and a modern strand of white thread under UV light. The Modern thread lit up like Manhattan at night...the period thread glowed slightly but not enough to cause concern. One has to learn to see the differences. White Summer tunics often have a slight glow from cleanings but they never glow like a white cotton Fruit of the loom T-Shirt.... Once you see and learn this difference you can be confident in the use of a UV light.

On the fake Carl Sieder eagles the threads do not glow but if the cardboard unterlagen is damaged or cracked beneath them you can see the glow of the paper...unlike on any original piece.

I also use the UV to detect previous removed insignias, the dark ghost of a heer eagle over the breast will become apparent under UV on altered tunics. Even if the tunic was faded in the sun for a while the slight image will still appear.

**C. Betz** · 06-05-2013, 03:22 PM

Black Light Use

John Pic, revi, Ian and brooksbz have all made very valid points. Black lights are a useful tool but as has been said, they are not the be all and end all. Experience with known original insignia is the best teacher.

Charles Betz

**amiklic1** · 06-05-2013, 03:36 PM

I am testing all my cloth items under UV light. I also have some white jackets that were dry-cleaned, and they all glow under UV light.

Being able to tell from in-hand experience is a key for me. I got two great white tunics for bargain because the collector who was looking at them before me thought they are repros just based on UV test :-)

Even if cleaned in modern detergents, they still tend to glow a bit different than new bafrics.

I am attaching a photo of one of my tunics with new white shirt on the mannequin beneath it. The difference is not huge, but it's clearly visible.

Attached Files

DSCN2467.JPG (121.9 KB, 686 views)

**brooksbz** · 06-05-2013, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by John Pic View Post

.

On the fake Carl Sieder eagles the threads do not glow but if the cardboard unterlagen is damaged or cracked beneath them you can see the glow of the paper...unlike on any original piece.

.

Another trick. On officer's shoulder boards I gently expose the inner cardboard and check to see if it glows. Usually if it is laquered its ok anyway.

**Felix** · 06-05-2013, 04:43 PM

Black light can be used to find obvious fake insignias, and resewn insignias to a tunic, or a cut off. Or a fake put together tunic. However the reaction to black light is well known since at least 10 years and probably more than 20 years. Fakers knows this fact and have adopted for sure. At least the better ones. Real amatuers might not know this even of today, but I bet they are few.

I do not own a black light and have only used it once. I think this test is over rated to spot the good fakes of today. Burn test is better IMHO. (provided you can find a loose thread - but again all this is known to advanced fakers) Real knowledge and careful studies of original insignias is what matters. There are yet no perfect fakes for SS insignias, even if at first glance it might seem so, and that is why it is vital to know original patterns. Only then you can be safe.

But still it can be a useful tool, but it does not beat real knowledge about insignias. So, I do not advice against using it, as it can be helpful, but to the bottom line, knowledge is the real power.

Cheers
//Felix

**toadboy65** · 06-05-2013, 08:20 PM

black light

Once again we discuss black light as a failsafe test for dating textiles. The problem I see is that every one of us with decades of experience studying these artifacts have our own little things we look for to determine that an item is a repro or fake, and It has been my experience that if you take an absolutely authentic piece to any ten experts, at least one of them will call it a fake. The end result is that many valuable and authentic artifacts get thrown into the pile of fakes and repros. UV light testing is a tool, but should not be over-relied on. many natural materials and dyes fluoresce. There are many forum members here who have ten times the experience I have in authenticating Third Reich artifacts, but I am a materials guy with maybe more science background than most. One thing I can do in my shop is make any object pass or fail the UV test. I think a 'fail" of the test might only be a preliminary tool to decide only whether an item is "textbook". So much innovation in materials and dyes occurred during the first half of the 20th century that I really believe no single test should be relied on without suspicion. UV is just one tool. It is an undisputed fact that the ancient Egyptians used fluorescent pigments. What we need is someone to do a dissertation on fluorescent materials used in the Third Reich. On the other hand, if you have two objects supposedly made at the same time, in the same place, and of the same materials, They should probably react similarly to UV light. Even then, the differences could be due to cleaning or even fungal exposure, and more testing will be needed.

**John Pic** · 06-06-2013, 02:13 AM

If this is the case then explain why the insignias one every single tunic known to be a period original do not glow under UV...if white threads that glowed were used during the period then the insignias on at least some known original tunics would glow under UV. but the fact is they do not. What I have found is that people who say that the test os unreliable usually do not know what they are looking for in general when using a UV light. The photo attached by amiklic1 demonstrates exactly what I was refering to and one can see that the new white T-shirt is lit up like a fireball with an internal glow ,while the other coat only demonstrates a flat glow or reflected light...insignias made using new white threads will have this bright internal glow of the threads show through like the glow of the T-shirt. Felix is right though the fakers have started using non glowing thread which is still made today.

When I first learned of the UV test I brought a fake movie propr non- textbook tropical tunic to a guy when he held it uder UV all the threads used to sew the tunic together glowed bright under UV all original tunics in his collection and mine did not. I thr UV test was unreliable then the Germans only decided to make certain things glow that would make collectors squirm like non textbook items.

**cbuehler** · 09-13-2016, 10:47 AM

To revisit this topic, I do know of an absolutely original bullion Heer breast eagle that had glowing inner threads to the metal outer wrap. How can this be explained?
And to add, also an SS rank tab that the litzen stripe had glowing inner threads as well. Granted, these were the only examples I have ever seen in my long years, but I have not tested everything of course.
CB

Announcement

Black Light Test

Black Light Test

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread