Thanks for your assistance!
-
-
Yes
Hi,
It looks good to me. It certainly has several of the attributes that I would look for in an original ACU. The stippling behind the writing does not look sharp and defined in the picture,what is like in hand? Grubby,but do not clean it.
Regards,Ivan -
Hi Andrew
try this website its a great site and also reference. i always look at the Letters E.
http://www.northeastmedals.co.uk/bri...arcopyfake.htm
TedComment
-
Thanks! Looks like a good one. Thought it was (from the source, not from my knowledge!).Comment
-
the jump ring looks a little big but it could be just the photo.
i would recommend getting some close ups & some images of the ray'sComment
-
Andrew,
All of what I am about to say now is in MY OPINION.
I'm afraid it is impossible to tell from your photograph. We need better photographs with the camera lense pointing at 90 degrees to the reverse and obverse. You also need to remove the ribbon and show a photograph of the edge of the medal. The weight and dimensions would also be useful. In other words........you must now treat these like you would a German WW2 award.
Gentlemen, I am sorry to say but all the guides that you will find on the Internet are now out of date. In the last two years a reproducer has ticked all the boxes for those guides. There are still ways to tell.
I have noted Pacific and Aircrew reproductions thus far. Please use common sense when buying these stars, no one ever sells originals at 20 percent of the Medal Yearbook price.Last edited by yellow; 04-02-2011, 05:59 AM.Comment
-
One more shot...Comment
-
looks bad imoComment
-
mmmmmm?
I have to say, that as I originally said,there are a lot to like about this medal,then you see the last pic and it looks very badly finished indeed. As has been said the faker is getting better.
You say that the piece has come......from a source that makes you believe it is good.......can you let us into the facts,it might just help.
My worries as I said from the off was the stippling behind the writing,then now the side view. All of the obvious worries with the faked ones of these are not apparent.
Interesting thread.
Regards,IvanComment
-
-
i own quite afew stars.. just in my opinion, the jump ring looks a little big and the suspension area / hole look a bit off.. but this could all be down to photos
what dealer is selling this medal?Comment
-
All of what I am about to say now is in MY OPINION.
Third generation copies are die struck. No longer do you look at the edge to identify a second gen cast copy that has been polished to disguise the cast line. Shear marks are a tip from guides that are almost 15 years old!
The original medals, if were found to have flash on them were often ground by hand. So you may find an imperfect edge on a genuine medal.
In regards the example that started this thread I am still of the opinion that there is no way to tell with the photographs we have to work with. British stars are no longer the cast iron field they once used to be YOU MUST pay as much attention to spotting the fakes as you would any German award. To quote what has been said on the German forums time after time.............better pics please!Last edited by yellow; 04-03-2011, 04:35 AM.Comment
-
I bought a nice little Brit. medal collection for the Victorian era material it contained. The Aircrew came in the collection. The collectors notes indicated he purchased it from Liverpool Medals about 8 years ago.Originally posted by redline09 View Post
I apologize for my lack of knowledge on 20th Century UK, everything I can find in print (photo's, measurements, etc.) are favorable to this star. But I don't want to sell off something that has any issues.
Here are some of the singles from the collection. Not too many issues here! And I'm looking forward to the research as the gent was a type collector and didn't care who the medal was named too.Comment
-
about as good as my photography gets!Comment
-
couple more...Comment
Comment