K&Q electron miscroscopy preliminary results- facinating

[Michael Root]

Tom,

Nice work.

[Dave Kane]

Seba I answered your PM prior to looking at the post and as indicated therein I explained that the commentary was meant in fun albeit sardonic but still a wonderfully funny retort.......

Then I read this and am a bit taken back....

The "......." name calling and and childish reference to "......." were brought forth by persons (here) who were or are Moderators or otherwise are members who should be above that level of tripe!

If we can't poke fun at each other at this level........where in heck do we go?

Start a site just to fold in 3 days in a vain attempt to be an elite 'club'?

I'm really confused but more so frustrated by this compitition to be the foremost site but at the same time stifeling, omitting and deleting references to topics which appear or may appear on other venues.

It's not healthy!

Dietrich, can you please explain this message to all of us?

I look forward to it.

Thank you,

[Jim Baker]

Hey Guys,

If I'm reading all this correctly, this method will be great for identifying period pieces and possibly grouping pieces by specific manufacturers. But why do so many believe it will stop the fakers?? The fakers pray on the less knowledgeable, and those who normally fall victim to the fakers will probably not have access to the information you are compiling.

[Lorenzo Brown]

Gentlemen....PUHLEEEEEZE.......

Tom Hansen's research may not be conclusive, but it is beyond doubt a
step in the right direction!!!

Like it or not... scientific analysis will ultimately surpass the "know-it-all", "veteran acquired" and "clairvoyant" expertises that we have had to endure for so many years.

As has been stated, Tom's research is not now conclusive but is only the "tip of the iceberg" that will inevitably (and refreshingly) provide us with sound, reliable scientific data upon which we can make intelligent conclusions regarding the authenticity of those items which we treasure.

[George Stimson]

Ditto to what Lorenzo said. 1000%.

[Joseph D'Errico]

Joe


1. We will have to test other makers to see. If the paint used by the different makers was of a different brand, which may have differences in composition of Ca, P, adn trace Fe and S, there may be a way to "fingerprint" different makers by paint. I doubt we will find this. I think the main thing is that we can verify period "bone black" paint by the elemental composition. It is possible, however, that some makers may have unique trace metals- we will see


2. There may be changes from late to early war with regard to paint if they changed brands within a maker. This would probably be unlikely as the amount of paint required for these medals would be rather small and one would not think there would be the need for multiple orders over time. Likewise for the metal used for the frames. The % of the rhodium coating may, however, be key in identifying each maker, as their special mix of Ni, Rh, and Ag may be different for each maker. That may be a key to each maker.

Marc- Good luck ! Any information from the SEM guys in Brooklyn?

Hi Tom,

Thank you kindly for taking the time to follow up on my questions.

Nice work..................I think I get the picture now...............

Your Friend,
Joe

[Sal Williams]

Tom, this is fantastic! Bravo!!!

I have a question, you said that fakers would be unable to fake to the degree of accuracy that these tests determine. How close could one, at reasonable return on thier money, get trying to fake one? If that is an answerable question until it was tried.

Please guys S&L flawed, unflawed,begining flaw, and 57 "s next!!!!!

Best, Sal

[tom hansen]

Sal-


Art forgers have been unable to accurately fake paint alone in creating forgeries. Throw in the metal composition, rhodium coating, and all the die charactersitics including the subtle flaws and it would take a HUGE industrial effort to even make the attempt. In short, it would not be worth it at all for the expense. I am sure they will keep on trying, but given better analytical tools, their efforts will look more and more clumsy.

[David C]

And those Art forgers have $100,000,000 pay off's so if they can't "afford" to get it right no one can.

Bravo Tom!

This is very exciting. I can't wait until a broad body of data is built for digestion.

Cheers,
David.

PS. I endorse the Lifetime membership also, or at least an outstanding contribution award.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dietrich, can you please explain this message to all of us?

I look forward to it.

Thank you,

The comment - as mentioned unneccessary and worthy of deletion - was in no way, shape or form directed against this establishment or the lifetime membership. How could it - I'm one!

It was directed against the 3-day wonder forum were some of our lifetime members were titled as mentioned and banned because of this classification. Especially Tom was called an "Idiot" and I just wanted to make clear that an "Idiot" at one place can be very, very valuable at another one. It all seems to be in the eye of the beholder or the beholders motives.

Personally I endorse a lifetime membership for Tom and I'm proud to be called degrading names by some. It just confirms that I'm (and a lot of others) are doing something right here.

That's all. Maybe it was too enigmatic.

Dietrich

[tom hansen]

Hey-


I knew it was a joke! I think we need to lighten up a bit.


I am a little suprised we have not seen any input from the enlightened individuals who have labeled such evaluations as ridiculous and extreme. Perhaps they are content to remain in the dark and rely upon opinions and conjecture. A deafening silence is interesting to say the least.

[Erich B.]

Rk

Thanks for going the extra mile, Tom! As a fan of Juncker RKs I'm anxious to see a fingerprint of the paint and frame compostion of those, in order to compare to mine. Then, of course, I've got to find a unit in the area, but there must be a number of them in Southern CA.
Erich

[Sebastian Bianchi]

Thank you, Dietrich, I did take it the wrong way. I'm not privy to what happens in other forums in such detail, though of course I am generally aware of the situation you speak of. In way I'm glad I'm not privy, I have a hard time keeping up with this forum.

Well, now that that's settled, we can move on with this interesting topic.

[Brian S]

Tom, they'll come out of the darkness if we don't make sure our methodology here is consistent and produces consistent results based on absolutely like procedures.

We need to make sure that as people now get the bug to rush out and try this that the engineer who works the SEM uses the same techniques as your man did or at least a procedure is established.

On an EK/RK: At the very least what is going to be tested? Paint front and back? Frame? Frosted area?

Does surface patina, dust, dirt etc. play any part at all in the 'fingerprint'?

I hope we get the procedures published here before anyone spends time on this and we discover we do not have comparable results.

Two original Juncker RKs would be a great test at two different sites. Most of us agree Juncker was not copied as the dies did not survive. Therefore, if that theory is correct, the results of two rks from Juncker must be the same IF; paint used is the same, frame material is the same and frosting technique is the same. I can imagine different results over the life of the Juncker RK but that is something else we should see and understand.

Wouldn't it be something if for example for some specimens of Juncker RKs the paint is the same fingerprint as on other RKs? Or frame composition the same fingerprint?

Much to do, very early in the process...

[WalterB]

I am a little suprised we have not seen any input from the enlightened individuals who have labeled such evaluations as ridiculous and extreme. Perhaps they are content to remain in the dark and rely upon opinions and conjecture. A deafening silence is interesting to say the least.

Indeed, Tom!