Oh yes, I apologize! I apologize, that my English is so bad, that everybody can read in my comments, what he want to read!
Unfront, can you please show me, where I wrote that, because I cannot find it:
"... elevate their status to that of Third Reich originals..."
and
"Uwe is trying to say that 57 collectors are trying to inflate the status of 57 related items to that of Third Reich items ..."
And yes,"... oak leaves of the 57er period are *just* copies", compared with the TR originals and compared with other real 1957 "originals".
Nigel,
it seems, that you cannot explain me the asked comment, and instead of that you try to insinuate me some allegations?
My worry counts for the collectors who, in the good belief that these are 'original' 57th versions, had to spend perhaps to much money on these not original pieces.
It is not meant personally to anyone here.
And I'm not writing here about good and bad copies, that is secondary. That must everybody decide for himself.
I'm writing here about originality or not originality, and that could be an expensive difference.
Dietrich,
I'm dissapointed. May I remember you, a few days ago:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...0&postcount=20
"... it is a copy. Post war Oaks and Oaks with Swords, even if made on the same (S&L) die, should be considered such. All of them, no matter whether pre- or post 1957."
Uwe
PS: Nils, thank you!
Unfront, can you please show me, where I wrote that, because I cannot find it:
"... elevate their status to that of Third Reich originals..."
and
"Uwe is trying to say that 57 collectors are trying to inflate the status of 57 related items to that of Third Reich items ..."
And yes,"... oak leaves of the 57er period are *just* copies", compared with the TR originals and compared with other real 1957 "originals".
Nigel,
it seems, that you cannot explain me the asked comment, and instead of that you try to insinuate me some allegations?
My worry counts for the collectors who, in the good belief that these are 'original' 57th versions, had to spend perhaps to much money on these not original pieces.
It is not meant personally to anyone here.
And I'm not writing here about good and bad copies, that is secondary. That must everybody decide for himself.
I'm writing here about originality or not originality, and that could be an expensive difference.
Dietrich,
I'm dissapointed. May I remember you, a few days ago:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...0&postcount=20
"... it is a copy. Post war Oaks and Oaks with Swords, even if made on the same (S&L) die, should be considered such. All of them, no matter whether pre- or post 1957."
Uwe
PS: Nils, thank you!
Comment