Originally posted by HouweTrouwe
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Question theme: Authentic or not?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Mouseyi think this is a simple case of a double exsposure of the film and not somthing going wrong in the faking process.
the dirty look, high contrast, grainy photos you have been posting i agree with.
this is a thread for people to take what they will, and for discussion on how to spot some of the easier fakes ("russsian archive" etc...)
101combatvet is testing you now!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mouseyi think this is a simple case of a double exsposure of the film and not somthing going wrong in the faking process.
the dirty look, high contrast, grainy photos you have been posting i agree with.
this is a thread for people to take what they will, and for discussion on how to spot some of the easier fakes ("russsian archive" etc...)
101combatvet is testing you now!
101, then I would buy a new scanner. The scanner I use delivers such photos at 300 DPI. Can you scan them at higher quality and in full, please?
<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/hdsZN2-JeHB7rsUDvtWNcQ?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_kHrkAIeGckg/TSt-DrAOzyI/AAAAAAAABlA/dPqi2W8W9Xk/s800/00938.jpg" height="545" width="800" /></a>
.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Marcel Banziger View PostThanks!!! It's nice to know all are original and that such blurry spots and also black edges are seen more because these were for me my main concern.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Thälmannpionier View Postseems this thread goes in a bad direction with Herr "101combatvet" who seems to have some issues with either this thread or some people who want to share their expierence in photo collecting and try to help each other or do I get something wrong here???
Andreas
Comment
-
Originally posted by HouweTrouwe View PostNo No Mousey, those are all originals I posted with the blurry photos etcetera. It is just because Marcel B. said that he worried about the lines and blurry spots, that I posted such photos to show him that he has not to be worried about it.
101, then I would buy a new scanner. The scanner I use delivers such photos at 300 DPI. Can you scan them at higher quality and in full, please?
<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/hdsZN2-JeHB7rsUDvtWNcQ?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_kHrkAIeGckg/TSt-DrAOzyI/AAAAAAAABlA/dPqi2W8W9Xk/s800/00938.jpg" height="545" width="800" /></a>
.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 101combatvet View PostActually, it was scanned at 300 DPI or greater.
It may have been scanned at 300 dpi but what you posted is very low res. A 300 dpi photo does not come out as a 21.5kb jpg fileCollecting German award documents, other paperwork and photos relating to Norway and Finland.
Comment
-
I think you guys should really try and get some sort of proper idea of what is 'real' and what is 'fake' or 'authentic' or 'original' as far as photos go.
to quote from the first post in the thread
Here you can post your question about (a) photograph(s) to know whether they are authentic to the Third Reich or not
consider the following.
A print, printed during the war from the negative
A print, printed post-war from the negative
A print, printed during the war from another print
A print, printed post-war from a print
Take this scenario
A soldier returns from the war, perhaps from captivity in Russia. We're into the 1950s. After a while he decides to get some of his old films developed from his army days which he didn't do at the time.
Clearly such prints are every bit as 'authentic'
In fact, if someone found a roll of film that had never been developed today and if it could be developed, i would argue those images would hold just as much value as anything developed in 1940 or 1950
the other thing of course is that a print can be reproduced infinately, every print is a repro in any case.
the nature of photos puts them into a completely different class than anything else collected here and yet collectors try to apply the same rules and ideas about them as to say an EK or soldbuch.Collecting German award documents, other paperwork and photos relating to Norway and Finland.
Comment
-
Simon, I totally agree with you. Everyone should read following: http://www.kriegsberichter.de/Data/fake01e.htm. The purpose of this thread is to avoid reprints from original photographs or photographs trying to be sold as original while they are not. Photographs sold with wrong description or purpose to make money. I also have photographs or portraits produced after the war or in Kgf. and for me they are original. This thread is ment to beginners or so can learn to avoid them and save their money.
Likewise following portraits on ebay. Sold as original! Only the middle one is original. A person who didn't know he can buy these bad fakes for less then $5 now bought them for $85,32 !
Comment
-
That photo on the left crops up very often. I once saw an album on ebay full of those extremely poor quality SS repros sold as original. I agree with the points made re http://www.kriegsberichter.de/Data/fake01e.htm & on the last few posts - but just because a negative can produce multiple prints does not mean that it has done. I think it's a reasonable conclusion that most original ww2 era photos are unique.
Comment
-
Originally posted by HouweTrouwe View PostSimon, I totally agree with you. Everyone should read following: http://www.kriegsberichter.de/Data/fake01e.htm. The purpose of this thread is to avoid reprints from original photographs or photographs trying to be sold as original while they are not. Photographs sold with wrong description or purpose to make money. I also have photographs or portraits produced after the war or in Kgf. and for me they are original. This thread is ment to beginners or so can learn to avoid them and save their money.
Likewise following portraits on ebay. Sold as original! Only the middle one is original. A person who didn't know he can buy these bad fakes for less then $5 now bought them for $85,32 !
As he says, even a print made today could be considered original and a copy or reproduction is not necessarily a fake.
Helden
I agree, because most photos are really pretty boring. I would think studio photos usually had multiple prints made of them, then you have the official, unit\ship or PK type photos which printed, sometimes in large numbers and then you have copies of some of the more interesting private photos passed around between friends or comrades after the war at veteran meetings.
Clearly there's no way to garantee a photo any of us has hasn't had multiple copies made of it only a level of probability.
I would venture that quite often a buyer will buy a photo or photos because he hasn't seen the image before, thus to him it may seem unique. That's particularly the case with newer collectors who simple haven't had the time to see vast numbers of images. We've seen a few threads here of people suddenly seeing a photo they have, which they thought was unique also turning up in someone elses collection. It's certainly happened to me!Collecting German award documents, other paperwork and photos relating to Norway and Finland.
Comment
-
Here are original photographs that were printed more than once .. For all reasons possible ..Attached FilesLast edited by HouweTrouwe; 01-11-2011, 10:37 AM.
Comment
Users Viewing this Thread
Collapse
There are currently 5 users online. 0 members and 5 guests.
Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.
Comment