Fakes

[jack1]

Fakes on Estand.
Can not believe this.
No point in collecting really as these will be authenticated on forums as original.
The hobby is a mess.

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=930459

[Antonio Scapini]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what's wrong is selling fakes as fakes?

[101combatvet]

Exactly!

Maybe I'm missing something, but what's wrong is selling fakes as fakes?

[jack1]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what's wrong is selling fakes as fakes?

Nothing at all in selling fakes as fakes they have there collectability in there own right.
I have seen the medals posted authenticated as originals on fora.
I was just using the sellers pictures as this type have been called originals.

[Tom Yanacek]

No point in collecting really as these will be authenticated on forums as original.
The hobby is a mess.

Hi Jack,

I have to disagree with you. I think these pieces would all be called out for what they are. The hobby has always been flawed, but don't give up on it. The hobby is what you make of it.

Best regards,
Tom

[jack1]

Thank you Tom.
The fake on estand(sold as) would be good for a side by side comparison to an original.
Shall i post my example which i have always thought original until i saw the fake.
Please do not miss understand me fakes sold as fakes are ok.When i saw it i thought it could have been period.

[Jean-Claude]

Thank you Tom.
The fake on estand(sold as) would be good for a side by side comparison to an original.
Shall i post my example which i have always thought original until i saw the fake.
Please do not miss understand me fakes sold as fakes are ok.When i saw it i thought it could have been period.

I dont have a problem with fakes being sold as fakes either and I dont know enough to question the authenticity of the other pieces posted by Lloyds but I agree wiht Jack on at least 1 item...

Hard to say for sure from the small picture posted but the "fake" 18 year Wehrmacht cross sure looks like a (magnetic) single 18 year cross that I bought because I had seen this design many times in posts & on dealer sites described as "original"

Regards

JC

[jack1]

i dont have a problem with fakes being sold as fakes either and i dont know enough to question the authenticity of the other pieces posted by lloyds but i agree wiht jack on at least 1 item...

Hard to say for sure from the small picture posted but the "fake" 18 year wehrmacht cross sure looks like a (magnetic) single 18 year cross that i bought because i had seen this design many times in posts & on dealer sites described as "original"

regards

jc

+1

[jack1]

Here is mine.
It looks like the fake which is for sale.
My one does have a ring stamp.

[Tom Yanacek]

Hard to say for sure from the small picture posted but the "fake" 18 year Wehrmacht cross sure looks like a (magnetic) single 18 year cross that I bought because I had seen this design many times in posts & on dealer sites described as "original"

Hi JC,

Your Luftwaffe 18-Year Long Service Cross is completely original IMO.

Best regards,
Tom

[Tom Yanacek]

Here is mine.
It looks like the fake which is for sale.
My one does have a ring stamp.

Hi Jack,

Your Gold Second Class Ostvolk Decoration is a textbook original by Rudolf Wächtler & Lange. Don't sweat that one. It is original beyond any doubt IMO.

Best regards,
Tom

[Ian Hulley]

Your Gold Second Class Ostvolk Decoration is a textbook original by Rudolf Wächtler & Lange.

100% textbook W&L ... I would post a shot of mine but ....

Ian

[jack1]

Thank you.
Can some tell me what is wrong with the fake being sold as a fake.
It looks very accurate to me even with a dished reverse.

[Tom Yanacek]

Thank you.
Can some tell me what is wrong with the fake being sold as a fake.
It looks very accurate to me even with a dished reverse.

Hi Jack,

As I'm sure you know, many originals have the dished back. But there are also originals that have a plain reverse. And there are fakes both with and without a dished back so the presence or absence of a dished back alone is not a good indicator of originality.

The first thing I notice about the fake on estand is the modern, reproduction ribbon. The ribbon lacks the proper looped wefts along the selvage edges. There is no way that is original ribbon and that casts doubt on the whole thing. Of course, there is always the possibility that someone mated a fake ribbon with an original medal. But lets look at the medal in question compared with your fine example. The comparison pictures alone are worth a thousand words. The original has very crisp detail, excellent symmetry, typical faded finish where the medal appears grayed out and the gold remains intact on the suspension ring (which is made of a better base material than the medal itself and thus holds a finish). Your original also has a wartime ribbon with the proper brooch mount.

The fake has softer detail, lacks symmetry (most noticeable when viewing the reverse outlines), and a modern ribbon. From the pictures I also question the base material and finish. The base material doesn't look to me like zinc and, if it is zinc, I would expect to see some bubbling with a silver finish that intact.

Best regards,
Tom

front comparison (original on left and fake on right):

[Tom Yanacek]

reverse comparison (original on left and fake on right):

Notice the straight edges of the modern ribbon on the fake at right. Also notice the lack of symmetry on the outlines of the medal itself. And notice too how some of the starburst points are very pointed and sharp. This is supposed to be a medal for wear not some kind of ninja throwing star.