Alter Kampfer - new found

[Matthew]

still not sure what MSC stands for

You see Matt, this is what i mean, we are not on the same page here, not even the same book

And I thank God for that.
Being a nice day I will get some fresh air and check in later. You should do the same- maybe take your microscope for a walk or something.

Since this badge is so hard to get a hold of, maybe start smaller and give those of us not fit to discuss forensics ourselves a download on something else- Balloon Observer Badges still seem to be bit of an unknown to most collectors. Maybe original, probably not, you know how those unproven discussions go.
I would be forever in your debt.

Thanks!

Matt

[jabnus]

Guys, the two of you may have some differences, but i know both of you are in your own way after the same: finding out and proving the truth about these rare badges (whatever that truth may be in the end).

Don't give the trolls a mess they like to see which would maybe destroy a vey interesting topic, and lets try and stay above your differences.

Maybe one of the owners of said badges reads this and would like to have their badge examined? Im sure that anyone who owns one of these Danzig badges can buy and operate a microscope? Or with some help maybe even be sent one? Im also sure that there's a few people who are willing to help out with any questions?

[Matthew]

No worries Gaston. If one knows how to dish it out, they should also know how to take it. Thick skin and no grudges on my part. It helps stimulating creativity and we will need that to get to the happy end on this one. Or luck.

Here is the problem with applying forensic science as proposed by some:

We still lack what's called the index case for this particular decoration.
Ok, so lets suppose you pair up the owner of the badge with a lucky owner of a microscope. Then you run what's commonly referred to as PBP Analysis.
Here you run into first problem: what do you compare it to?
There are NO known and documented originals. Which means that the best you can come up with is- is the badge die struck or cast. What does that prove? Nothing. Stumpf was not exactly a Juncker in that respect. They were a jewelry firm. I don't think I am giving away any trade secrets by saying they mostly cast their jewelry. But they also stamped some things (SS-Heimwehr Honor Pin comes to mind).

Next: compare two purported originals. Here is your second problem. Best you'd be able to prove is are both badges the same or are they different?
What's the difference if we do not know if neither one is original?

What we have is a slug but some here would have you believe that having just that will tell us which gun it was fired from without being able to examine that gun. Hell, as it stands we don't even know if the gun existed when some claim it did.

And that is why as much as some here get excited looking at blown-up imagery (MSC images, lol) the way adolescent boys get excited looking at Playboy, it really proves nothing in this particular case.



Now if I could only find out what that MSC really stands for, that would complete this discussion for me!

cheers

Matt

[Stan]

Matt,

As you know, Weitze did sell a 925 Gau Danzig badge which formed part of a larger group to an SA-Fuehrer, some three years ago and you stated earlier in the thread that "the provenance is not very iron-clad" but do not give your reasons for saying this.

Do you have evidence or is it merely speculation on your part?

You continue to base your argument that the 925 version is post-1945 because "there are no known and documented originals". Well here you are contradicting yourself because on post#166 of the thread:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=242861

You inform us "I have stumbled across a Gau badge undocumented in any books.-Most-even seasoned collectors- are unaware of its existence.-But it did".

So that means that whilst you will not accept the existence of the 925 badge because it was not documented until 1985, this does not matter if you happen to discover another undocumented Gau badge!

Also, whilst we are on the same subject, do you give "The Other 1st-Pattern Blood Order" your seal of approval when it was first discovered in the 21st Century! What happened to your argument throughout this thread of " If they are real, where were they all since 1945"?

Definitely mixed messages here.

Stan

[jabnus]

Hi Matthew,


You are right that we have no "original" or makers die or actually whatever to compare it to, but the patina and micro-images do reveal if it is a copy or an original and that would be a huge step forward in the dicussion about originality. Now we have as so often on the forum before two camps: original vs not original, and i think that discussion can be ended by micro forensics.

Also if it would turn out to have the "right" micro-characteristics it would be a huge step forward in identifying the badge as indeed by maker M.ST.&S. If i would turn out to not have the right characteristics we would know if the M.ST.&S were not good. It doesn't matter actually what "gun" was used to fire, if the slug is real we know the gun existed, if the slug is bad there is probaby no gun to start with? Ok, so far for the guns and slugs comparisson...

As often as i agree with you i disagree on the micro forensics part, as i think that CAN tell us more as can be seen by the naked eye. It's not a matter of believing versus non believing in the science, and it doens't matter who tells anything, the images should speak for themselves. It's about the facts and from what i have learned the past year these can be very usefull.

If this topic proves one thing then it is that we need some sort of science to distinguish originals from fakes, even if it would tell nothing more it would be a huge step forward to end discussions like "he said - she said".

This hobby has been polluted by fakers too much to not try and look for more valid methods.

best regards,
Gaston


ps: Stan, im sorry to have to say, but just because Weitze sold anything does not tell anything about originallity. I can point out many fakes on his site. Several items like the Dutch SS sportsbadge many here on the forum refuse to believe are fake. I don't own such a badge and refuse to pay over 3k just to be able to make micro images, but i do own all the original wartime paperwork that proves my point. Just as much as some people say that original badges must be proven to be original, the same goes the other way around that fake badges must be proven to be fake. This topic proves that that is not always easy without having a certain badge in your own possession. But the micro forensics method CAN be very usefull!

pps: for sake of clearity: can we please keep the name micro-forensics? I like it and we need some sort of uniformity when we speak about this method? It will be used a lot in the future i think.

[Matthew]

good one

Why bring up 'guilty until proven innocent' or 'the law of the land'? And why not apply it to different pieces like say Spanish Crosses?
Your second point about 925 silver and me changing my argument about sterling silver being used in Gdansk. I would appreciate you pointing it out to me? Perhaps mixed up different people Stan? If we agree you did, perhaps you can correct it?
Speaking about disagreements Stan- what are your thoughts about the gold Essen pin you showed me? Last time we spoke you deemed my proof inconclusive?

you will not accept the existence of the 925 badge because it was not documented until 1985, this does not matter if you happen to discover another undocumented Gau badge!

Also, whilst we are on the same subject, do you give "The Other 1st-Pattern Blood Order" your seal of approval when it was first discovered in the 21st Century! What happened to your argument throughout this thread of " If they are real, where were they all since 1945"?

Definitely mixed messages here.

Stan

Quid Pro Quo Stan.

I am still waiting on some answers few pages back that slipped your attention.
Yes, mixed messages I agree.
I'd be more than happy to address your questions right after.

cheers

Matt

[Matthew]

You are right that we have no "original" or makers die or actually whatever to compare it to, but the patina and micro-images do reveal if it is a copy or an original and that would be a huge step forward
pps: for sake of clearity: can we please keep the name micro-forensics? I like it and we need some sort of uniformity when we speak about this method? It will be used a lot in the future i think.

Hello Gaston,

Like the thread I referred to few posts back, you also have to know what you're looking at. I think we can agree that if a piece is cast it will inevitably shrink, no matter the metal. Well, in that thread our resident CSI here claimed he as well as one of the guys here have a 'modern cast fake' that was 'easily indentified under a microscope'. That is of course false as the measurements showed.
That is just one example of a wrong conclusion when using forensics.

You also have to have something to look at and compare against. Here we have nothing. Come to think of it- if there is a perfect fake out there, this certainly fits the scenario for me. Think about it- once we overlook the fact that the design of the badge do not match with original design and get over the fact that it was nowhere to be found for decades after the war, the fakers have their work cut out for them: there will be no matching (or not) originals to compare against. No paint or enamel to test. It is a hunk of silver which means it is in danger of being patinated artificially within minutes or naturally within months. Uniquely applied hardware could go either way, same with the actual content. Throw in a picture of a Gauleiter or scratch a name in the back of it and call it a grouping.
Then try and prove it is not the other way around.

Micro-forensics? Sure.
Do you know perchance what MSC image means?

cheers

Matt

[Stan]

Quid Pro Quo Stan.

I am still waiting on some answers few pages back that slipped your attention.
Yes, mixed messages I agree.
I'd be more than happy to address your questions right after.

cheers

Matt

Sorry Matt but I didn't think you were serious about wanting a reply.

Yes, Matt did visit me earlier this year and told me that my Gau Essen in Gold was a fake. I didn't really believe him but he was adamant and I returned the badge for a full refund which was around $750.

If there is anything else which remains unanswered please let me know.

Stan

[Matthew]

If there is anything else which remains unanswered please let me know.

Stan

Hi Stan,

Yes, there are the other two questions that remain unanswered above.

About the Essen pin- you believe it to be original but returned it as someone else thinks it's a fake? You do realize there will always be 'someone else' who will find fault with everything we have in our collections, right?

cheers

Matt

[ErichS]

Hi Stan,

Yes, there are the other two questions that remain unanswered above.

About the Essen pin- you believe it to be original but returned it as someone else thinks it's a fake? You do realize there will always be 'someone else' who will find fault with everything we have in our collections, right?

cheers

Matt

The items that we collect weren't made by the Franklin Mint so opinions will always very on the items we collect.

[Matthew]

if you're good at something, never do it for free.

You inform us "I have stumbled across a Gau badge undocumented in any books.-Most-even seasoned collectors- are unaware of its existence.-But it did".

So that means that whilst you will not accept the existence of the 925 badge because it was not documented until 1985, this does not matter if you happen to discover another undocumented Gau badge!

Stan

Let me tackle this one meantime. The undocumented and unknown to most Gau Badge. I called it undocumented and unknown to most as that's what it was and still is to some degree- at least the unknown part.

Let me take the ever familiar approach some use here- you want to find out more, get my book when it becomes available.
As you probably know by now, my research took me to many countries, archives and meetings with fellow collectors/researchers. Nothing wrong with trying to get something exclusive for it, right? (I was hoping to feature first peek at the cut-out Gau Danzig in it too, you know how that ended up).

Another question would be- when was the last time you saw that badge offered anywhere? To the best of my knowledge it happened only twice in 70 odd years. The idea of fakes is to make them and sell them. Granted, there are always a few of those who would like to get a rare piece for their collection so they commission a 'museum quality replica'. Well, that is bit tricky if you're not aware of the badge's existence to begin with, isn't it?
You're one of the most advanced collectors I met and I have met quite a few. Were you aware of this badge's existence until I showed it to you?

I think we agree that I shared few things with you not commonly known to most and you were gracious enough to do the same for me. I think we have a 'good working relationship' in that respect.


cheers

Matt

[Matthew]

The items that we collect weren't made by the Franklin Mint so opinions will always very on the items we collect.

Presumably you're talking about the Essen pin as you quoted me above.
The same pins have been found marked L/58.
What is you opinion on them now?

cheers

Matt

[Matthew]

don't want to rob you of the thrill of the chase but

Also, whilst we are on the same subject, do you give "The Other 1st-Pattern Blood Order" your seal of approval when it was first discovered in the 21st Century! What happened to your argument throughout this thread of " If they are real, where were they all since 1945"?

Definitely mixed messages here.

Stan

The above mentioned decoration does not need mine or anyone else' seal of approval as documented examples exist. At least two of those come straight from recipients families with other material far surpassing the value of those badges alone. That in itself would defeat the purpose of 'salting' the groups.
When you do, you usually fake something expensive and throw in a cheapo to make it a grouping- not the other way around.
But don't take my word for it, check it out for yourself.

cheers

Matt

[jabnus]

Hi,

I don't want to go offtopic, but there are now several topics being discussed here at once, so i will keep it short:

You also have to have something to look at and compare against. Here we have nothing.

Matthew i think this part is not true. We don't need anything to compare it to (as in an "original badge" similar to the one we want to research). The patination and weardamage speaks for itself and can not be faked. We may not learn from micro-forensics who made a certain item, but it will reveal very helpfull information about the originality of any examinded item and that is very important.

Although we don't agree here on this method i do want to say that im looking forward a lot to Matthews book. From what i've heard so far it will have much more (and much more better researched!!!) information than any book that deals with Gau badges so far. I also understand very well that everyone researches in his own ways and also that not every discovery can be shared on forehand. Hopefully this topic will contribute to understand the badges better after all.

best regards,
Gaston

[Thorsten B.]

And I thank God for that.
Being a nice day I will get some fresh air and check in later. You should do the same- maybe take your microscope for a walk or something.

Since this badge is so hard to get a hold of, maybe start smaller and give those of us not fit to discuss forensics ourselves a download on something else- Balloon Observer Badges still seem to be bit of an unknown to most collectors. Maybe original, probably not, you know how those unproven discussions go.
I would be forever in your debt.

Muahh..that Ballonbeobachter-Abzeichen did never exist which is a well-known fact since a loooong time...pretty odd to even still mention it.

The horse on which you wanna put yourself is simply too high for you.