Originally posted by tony james
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Sedlatzek RKs?
Collapse
X
-
Agree! No L/26 marked K&Q KC have ever been found. That one is from a spectacular homepage presenting a lot of crap.
And if you think of it, the ring would throw a shadow (if the light comes from the "right" direction) that gives the impression of a "dipping ring". But not on a Schickle made cross, as the ring and frame are on the same level.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ludwig View PostThat one is from a spectacular homepage presenting a lot of crap.
And if you think of it, the ring would throw a shadow (if the light comes from the "right" direction) that gives the impression of a "dipping ring".
Hi Ludwig,
Wie geht es ihnen?
ok ok, thanks for your response.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rich G View PostThe second cross is a K&Q. You can tell by the shape of the arms (lack of curvature) and the angle and lighting is just making the ring appear to dip into the frame.Attached Files
Comment
-
Line-up: Early postwar Souval - with filed ring, low swastika and "dipping 3" in '1939' date, has the "Sedaltzek" beading defect; K&Q; "Sedlatzek".Attached FilesLast edited by Leroy; 04-16-2016, 07:39 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leroy View PostGood idea. The K&Q is certainly a possible "culprit" for such photos, as is also a Zimmermann, IMO, because the Zimmermann ring can give the optical illusion sometimes of dipping into the frame. Another possibility is any cross which was not properly finished in the factory to eliminate intrusion of the ring into the frame.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tony james View PostMaybe if you could replicate the distance and angel of the KC in the foto in post # 41 using. both a K&Q and a sedlatzek and photograph it it might be interesting to see the results. .
exact "finish" on the cross in the photo, as neither of the crosses I am using are, of course, in the exact same condition as the one in the photo - and that matters in terms of reflection, shadow, etc.).
Surely someone else here will have examples of both types and is a more talented photographer than me.
I will say, without prejudice to either type (and this was surprising to me): I could not get a single shot of the K&Q which made the ring appear to "dip" into the frame to the degree as appears in the photo.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leroy View PostI have tried for almost 2 hours to do just that and have taken dozens of digital photos, but simply cannot replicate the exact angles or lighting (and certainly not the
exact "finish" on the cross in the photo, as neither of the crosses I am using are, of course, in the exact same condition as the one in the photo - and that matters in terms of reflection, shadow, etc.).
Surely someone else here will have examples of both types and is a more talented photographer than me.
I will say, without prejudice to either type (and this was surprising to me): I could not get a single shot of the K&Q which made the ring appear to "dip" into the frame to the degree as appears in the photo.
Sent from my SM-T330 using Tapatalk
Comment
Users Viewing this Thread
Collapse
There are currently 4 users online. 0 members and 4 guests.
Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.
Comment