S&L RK Post War puzzle

[Leroy]

What a difference is made by paint and frosting techniques (and also, to a very great extent, photography lighting)! I believe the just posted piece (which I initially thought might be a "C" frame) is, in reality an earlier version of the frame just posted by George. Earlier stamped frame, early core, but assembled and finished after George's.Here is one that's very similar posted by Gordon Williamson.

P.S. Guys, it is really hard to tell on some of these pieces without actually having them in hand and available for comparison to another cross. I know that some people say that anything can be judged by photography, but (and this is coming from the world's worst photographer!) I think it is very difficult when discussing nuances of color, frame beading, etc., without having "uniform photography standards" (i.e. photos taken with the same camera under the exact same conditions).

[streptile]

What a difference is made by paint and frosting techniques (and also, to a very great extent, photography lighting)! I believe the just posted piece (which I initially thought might be a "C" frame) is, in reality an earlier version of the frame just posted by George. Earlier stamped frame, early core, but assembled and finished after George's.

Hi Leroy,

Thank you for your opinion. Given the other indicators, it makes more sense to me that this one would be a very early B-type frame, before the flaws set in. It's got the dent row, remnants of frosting, a wartime loop (probably), a stamp under the Öse (as opposed to the 6 o'clock arm of the reverse frame), decent finish, and (of course) a 1st pattern core. It also appears to have been worn, judging by the wear to the reverse.

Thanks again,

[Leroy]

It's VERY nice to see these crosses. George's has very close to the finest frosting I've ever seen on an early 57, and Trevor's is a wonderful example
of the non-flawed beading.

I don't collect 57 crosses per se, but I do try to study them closely every time I see one because I believe they provide great insight into "what came before" with S&L, which is a field full of misconceptions and guesswork. S&L has been the "boogeyman" of RK collecting because it, without any doubt, was a source for swastika crosses after the war. As time goes by, I am coming to the conclusion that the truth is not nearly as complicated as many believe.

[George L]

Thanks Leroy!

[streptile]

It's VERY nice to see these crosses... Trevor's is a wonderful example of the non-flawed beading.

Thank you, Leroy. I've suspected that this RK was one of the very earliest, but the lack of flaws did confuse me. I'm happy to have your opinion on it.