Mine Rescue

[münster]

Hi Guys

Now a 2 man operation.

[münster]

again

[John T]

4000 views what a great audience...

...the so-called ghost letters can be formed when the mold for the casting is formed...when the piece used to make the mold is pressed into the material if the hand is not steady and the original is moved a half mm or a mm etc the weight of holding it down before pressing it down fully to the desired depth into the mold material will leave a ghost image at the area where movement occured or it would be at process of pulling up the original from the mold material if the artisan is not steady with his hand...then this can be caused as in double striking a planchet such as on a 1955 double die penny, two different processes at work, then when the engraver was making the initial die and he sees a line of lettering was off where he did his guide line cuts he moves them over leaving the initial cuts showing as a shadow ghost effect giving yet a third possiblity, and then as with maker marks the re-cutting of a worn die where salvageable the most effective way can cause havoc with lettering, designs, egads....

[John T]

Here is another. Weight is 17.5 grams, 35.09mm diameter, 2.23mm thick. This one was removed from a ST&L sample board.
I have also done a transparant overlay, Dions medal over Toms.
This is a very attractive medal, great to see it discussed, and it would be nice to see some conclusions.
Wolfgang

This example was die struck using a highly polished die and highly polished planchet resulting in the superior quality similar to a proof coin. You will see this with the 1936 Olympic Medals also. To bring the detail out it may have been struck more than once, but I can not say for sure.

[John T]

Picture I was referring to above from Wolfeknives posted earlier in the thread by him....J

[John T]

reverse of Wolfeknives' example:

[Stan]

Mine Service medal

I was asked before to provide the dimensions of this medal:

Weight =21,9g

Diam = 35,36mm

[Dietrich Maerz]

Thanks Dion for posting the rim pictures. Nothing there to see that would indicate a casting. But also nothing that would indicate it is not.
So we are where we are: unknown maker.

Dietrich

PS: maybe Tom can send the medal to me after he's done. I'd like to put it under my microscope and maybe even do a SEM test and some really close up pictures of the pitting in the area of several 100 times magnification.

[Thomas Bendixen]

Dietrich: Call me stubborn but I still think that Dions medal is a cast fake and that its a cast from a medal thats the same as my maker.

Pascal: I whish I could accomodate you but my camera is 8 years old and the pics produced is the best it can do. I'm on my second scanner that is unable to produce a decent scan - can someone PM me with a scannername still availble on the market that is good at scanning medals - then please PM me)

Everyone: I have for +25 years collected civilian medals and have handled Dions medal and must say that it differs from what has untill now been generally accepted. I don't think these medal were ever cast. What stands out is:

1) Rounded rims
2) Blurry details
3) Pitting
4) Finnish lacks mirrorpolish/frosting
5) Thicker than usual

So if anyone thinks its original and is ready to put his mony where his mouth is I will respect that - I just don't!

I think this thread, that has also lived its life on GCA, has been a good learning and cooperation between the two foras

Cheers Thomas

[Dietrich Maerz]

Thomas,

you say that this medal is cast: that is not proven! It is your opinion.

you say this medal is a copy of your S&L: that has clearly been proven to be not so!

We don't know what it is and that is not a problem. Sometimes it is not possible to have a definite conclusion.

Sure, however, is one thing: nobody can or should say that Dion sold a fake medal since it is not proven at all. That he took it back was a very good move and advisable, even after such a long time.

Dietrich

[tgn]

I was asked before to provide the dimensions of this medal:

Weight =21,9g

Diam = 35,36mm

Just for comparison, mine is:

Weight = 22.0g

Diam - 35+ mm (I don't have a precise measuring device for this)

Tom

[Thomas Bendixen]

Hi Dietrich, and thats where we disagree.

Cheers Thomas

[Dietrich Maerz]

I surely understand that you disagree with the casting part since that is not proven either way. If you disagree with the "not a copy from your medal" ... well, then I think your optical sensors work different than the rest of us....

[Thomas Durante]

I admire your patience in time after time showing us the differences between Dion's and Thomas's medal. With all the evidence brought forward (mostly by you) I think it is now proven without any doubt that Dion's medal is NOT a copy of Thomas's. I am sure that if you had better scans of both medals many more differences would evolve.

Hi guys,

Pascal, thanks for the kind words, much appreciated. I agree that the evidence is pretty clear that Dion's medal is just a poorly struck original by an unknown maker (not S&L). I don't think there is anything else to say that hasn't been said already. This is a great thread with some good insight on both sides of the fence IMO.

That is also a good point about Stan's L/16 mark, that should be considered the true S&L medal and not Thomas', although notice that both medals have the dent in the rim right under the ribbon ring. That would be quite a coincidence that two different makers had this dent, no?

Tom

[münster]

4000 plus views. Ill bring the piece with me when I fly out and send to Tom once stateside. Thanks for all the interest in this and what a thread!

Best
Dion