New Sevastopol Medal, just need confimation

[Robert P.]

Hi, all.

I just received a couple of Soviet medals today, one of which is this type 1 Sevastopol Medal. I'm quite sure that after looking at the examples in McDaniel's Book it is indeed an original. Although I just wanted to post it to see if it looks good to all other collectors. I've heard rumors of very good copies/fakes being made recently. So if you can, shoot holes through it. I'm open to the opinions.

Thanks

Robert

[Robert P.]

some additional photos...

[Rick Research]

Looks great to me! Perfect detail!

Mine is exactly like the one in McDaniel (a search on "Sevastapol" here should turn it up, mounted, not as closeup or focussed as your scan), and like his well polished.

The ONLY difference I see with yours is the touch-hole end of the cannon barrels, at bottom below the anchor: mine and McDaniel's show a cannon barrel the same width all the way back to that "ball" end, except for the reinforcing strips on the barrels. Yours has a distinctly wider end below the anchor.

But there were obviously more than one die for any of these, like all the tiny Caucasus Defense detail variants, so I'd be happy, quite happy, with yours! Mine had some sort of schmutz in the brass that caused part of the rim to flake off, dirt in the mix or maybe the wrong die pressure or something. Yours is perrrrfect.

I've highlighted the bits of ordnance width I mean are the sole difference that I see between yours and the McDaniel one:

[Robert P.]

Thanks, Rick.

I was pleased when it arrived in such nice condition. The dealer I buy through has always done me good for a very fair price too.

Thanks again, Rick.

Robert

Thanks, and I looked in his book to see the difference too. Good eyes.

[HuliganRS]

Is it possible to get a large scan of the Sailors head? I'd like to see the back of the neck close-up.

Otherwise looks pretty good.

Rusty.

[Robert P.]

Here you are, Rusty. I lost my daylight so I had to rely on lamplight (not nearly as good). Anyway, hope this helps you.


Robert

[Robert P.]

Rusty, here is a better shot. There was some 'grunge' I needed to wipe off of the area in question behind the neck (this guy had a dirty neck...sailors). I can see what looks like a very small oval between his neck and the tails hanging down behind his cover. I didn't see it before until I really got up close to it with a 10X loop. What's up with this? Die flaw or something????

Robert

[New World]

Robert,

Several points that I don't like about your medal. Here are the most notable ones:

1) Faces look very different from the ones on the original medals:
- sailor's face is too elongated - it supposed to have more rounder shape;
- sailor's chin should be squared;
- soldier has no collar - no way it could have been worn off.

2) Overall - I see lack of details which is not a good sign, I've seen better details on the worn medals...

3) And as Rick pointed earlier - cannons look wrong.

Beat regards,
William

[HuliganRS]

Robert,

I would have to agree with William, It has some minor details that are wrong.

Sorry,

Rusty.

[Robert P.]

Well,

I thank you guys for your help with this. Your points were all well taken. I've got one last person to run this by on a different forum. I'll see what he has to add to this. Thank you for your time. I certainly appreciate it. If indeed this piece in a fake, BACK IT GOES as soon as possible.

Robert

[Robert P.]

here's a closing shot of the same medal with a different angle of lighting. It really brings out the collar on the soldier to the left.

Regards.
Robert

[New World]

Hi Robert,

I wish your medal turns out to be fine.

One point to stress - we can never be 100% sure by looking at the pics, the best way is to examine the medal in person.

In any case - my policy is that if I have doubts - it's better to take the medal back to the source.

Best,
William

[Robert P.]

Thanks for the encouragement, William.

And another thing, all too many medals have gone back to the dealer because of people condemning them when they should have stayed in the dugout learning before they came out swinging. You can now see for yourself with this last photo that the details you condemned are actually there:

1.The squared-off chin of the sailor,
2.The collar on the soldier,
3.The fine detail, and the true facial expressions.

I have no doubts as yet. I believe this piece is indeed an original. I'll wait for other opinions before I rest with yours, thanks. Not discarding your opinions, that's not it, I'm just sticking to what I believe to be authentic.

With all respects.
Robert

[Rick Research]

I find it is VERY hard to scan any of these medals:

There is always some sort of "real color" distortion and or either reflection from whatever may be left of the original gilt finish, or "distortions" through the sort of splotchy discoloration and tarnish most of these seem to end up with.

I personally NEVER clean any of these medals, ever:

the brass they are made out of is already soft, and easily scratched as decades of original owner wear so often reveals. Anything used to clean will inevitably strip off whatever remnant of original finish might still be lingering in crevices. And having been buffed down often enough with whatever the Soviet version of "Brasso" was, they are already QUITE worn enough.

I'll be starting some new threads, one on EACH of the Defense/Liberation/Capture Medals, just to point out some of the microscopic NORMAL variations that may not even actually "be" there... but that we "see" and close up scans can distort. My scanner has "issues," and I do not have ALL of the WW2 campaign medals (no Odessa, as Robert has just posted, no Belgrade), so if any of you would like to start up threads along the same line as what I am about to start off with (Leningrad and Moscow), please do.