I am not comfortable with this one.
-
-
Sec phot -
Hi Brian,
you're right, a very poor carpenter's copy!
The needle system at L / 52 is very fine. It is the most beautiful thing I know of L / 52nd
But that is scrap.
Greeting LCComment
-
It is not a typical L/52 cross but from the estand photos it is still an original Spanish cross IMO, mm possibly later addedComment
-
-
hello,
I received today from the piece better pictures.
After careful contemplation I have come to the conclusion that it is a cast copy.
On my pictures I can see very well cast errors and the typical dark brown color for copies.
The images I can not adjust, sorry.
Greeting LC
Hans GünterComment
-
I was not seeing the Schickle catch either.Comment
-
Sorry but i have to stronlgy disagree. This is a perfectly fine Schickle Cross. Perhaps the pictures are not the best, but here are the scans i made when it was in my collection. Everything ist ok with this piece, the maker marked beneath the pin is unusual but genuine. It has all aspects of a Schickle cross with a later added L/52 stamp as Schickle was closed. Maybe the center disk was a bit mis-stamped because of the unregular rim but that´s really not a red flag. Regarding the source (yes yes buy the piece not the story but nevertheless) it came from a private source together with a minesweeper and auxiliary cruiser badge. I was very sad when i had to let it go from my collection but it makes me far more sad to see this good piece badmouthed. I would really like to the see were the cast errors are ... (i have 1600 dpi scans so i can provide perfect details). Regarding the color ... "patina" is the key word.Comment
-
hello,
Show times the other!
he second picture shows the cross peak Below luncker right.
At the left arm crossing it also looks like a cast error.
Sorry it looks for me.
Even the locket and the entire edge to see a cast of kopy.
Very difficult to judge the piece.
I would like it in hand.
Gruß LC
Greeting LC
Last edited by Legion Condor; 10-27-2014, 04:35 PM.Comment
-
I don't think "badmouthed" describes a conversation about the cross... Photos on eStand were terrible and my first reaction was it was not a Zimmerman which it is not. If the clasp had been more clear I would have made that leap. So, a little tolerance for discussion I think...Originally posted by Alex K. View PostComment
-
You are right, sorry for my "rage-post" but i can´t see a good piece called a fake and you know it´s notOriginally posted by Brian S View Post
I just emailed you the high-res scans and you will see it´s a fine Schickle made Spanish Cross with a later added L/52 stamp as sometimes appeared. I admit the sellers pictures are really not the best and you are also right, it´s not a Zimmermann.
Comment
-
You're right! I'd be a little outraged too, yeah me... When I know an item is good. Thanks for the nice reply Alex!!!Comment
-
Hallo,Originally posted by Alex K. View Post
After these pictures I would say it is ok.
But according to the pictures which were sent to me I would say kopy.
Greeting LC
Hans GünterComment
-
If you would have it in hand you would say in a second "It´s a good one", trust meOriginally posted by Legion Condor View Post
Let this thread be an example how certain pictures make a good piece look falsly suspicious.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex K. View PostIf you would have it in hand you would say in a second "It´s a good one", trust me Let this thread be an example how certain pictures make a good piece look falsly suspicious.
Trust is good but control is better.
I know many examples of pieces which years were kept as original and many collectors thought a nice piece.
But then everything was different.
And really trust does not still have the piece with the locket.
But you know the piece and can judge it better.
Greeting LC
Hans GünterComment
Comment