Portrait Bandenkampf in estand

[Hohenlohe]

Hello,

i.m.o. this portrait is a fake:
http://wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/s...d.php?t=637642

What do you think?

[Michael73]

Reprint on possibly original photo paper

[max history]

Reprint on possibly original photo paper

Michael,
You and I often disagree on the term "fake" with regard to photos. I have often stated that the word "fake" is used too often to describe reprints. In this case, I think you are wrong to describe it as you have.....this one is a fake in my opinion. I think the anti-partisan badge has been subsequently added to increase the value of a reprint and it is therefore a fake photo.
Look closely at the angle of the award and compare it to his other decorations. In my opinion, the badge has been digitally added.
Regards,
Max.

[PBR]

I think the anti-partisan badge has been subsequently added to increase the value of a reprint and it is therefore a fake photo.
Look closely at the angle of the award and compare it to his other decorations. In my opinion, the badge has been digitally added.
Regards,
Max.

I totally agree with Max, the BKA is photoshopped (or, if original to the picture, added to it as happened many times during the war, but in this case close ups would be needed; in this case the value of the photo fall dramatically), so, if really printed on Mimosa, then carefull guys because fakers are printing on original photopaper stocks left unused after the war and during the 50's

[Michael73]

Well if so - then it much worse then I thought.....and look at the price of it

[Giel VW]

I agree, clearly photoshopped.

[PantherPanzer]

Looks fake. Also would a panzar crew "normaly" have this award? Have not heard of many panzers fighting partisans for 20 combat days..

[angriff]

Well, guys, it's easy way to say that this photo is fake. I understand your position. But I have two photos of this man in two foreshortenings, and can tell that the photo 100% original.

[angriff]

I put details. Please see.


By the way, glue on the backside doesnt shine under UV lights too

[kuratorium]

Well, guys, it's easy way to say that this photo is fake. I understand your position. But I have two photos of this man in two foreshortenings, and can tell that the photo 100% original.

can you post the other images please?

[Hohenlohe]

This photo was made AFTER 1945 for sure. And I fear your other photo is also a postwar modern made fake, maybe you can share it here.

Well, guys, it's easy way to say that this photo is fake. I understand your position. But I have two photos of this man in two foreshortenings, and can tell that the photo 100% original.

[PBR]

One thing I can say, IMO proportions between PAB and BKA seems to be not correct in your picture.

[angriff]

One thing I can say, IMO proportions between PAB and BKA seems to be not correct in your picture.

Maybe you're right, maybe not.
I called now to my friend photographer. And he told me that impossible to print digital picture on old photopaper. It's need special paper for it.

[PBR]

Angriff,

I know it hurts but prints of digital scans on old photo-paper are on the market since at least 10 years, and fooled many people (I've been in the past too).
Many pictures were stolen from this very same forum and sold on Ebay in the past.
If you have other pictures please post them, so we can solve this.
At this point, your picture worth 5 EUR to my eyes.

BTW, the badge pictured is clearly a fake IMO.

[Huntzman]

I have to say that I would be extremely hesitant on this photo. Certainly something this rare should be examined very closely.

The issues for me:

1. Position of badge in contrast to the others.
2. Lack of wool nap detailing around the badge in contrast to rest of photo.
3. Edge of tunic near this badge actually seems brighter and blurred.

The fact for me that all these issues revolve around the badge itself and not other parts of the photo are a red flag for me. Of course this is just my opinion.

If the seller has other pics to support this photo, I would be very interested to see them as well.