armband original?

[codytrcollector]

Erich, in the summer of 2011, I wrote an article in The International Medal Collector, Dietrich Maerz's publication, entitled The Black Light Test Revisited.

The "Black Light Test" is based on the premise that if a textile made before 1945 "glows" under an ultra violet light, that proves that piece of cloth is a reproduction because the chemicals that react to the black light and glow, did not exist before 1945.

In that article I showed patents going back to the 1930s, proving that the flourescent brighteners used to intensify the color white have been in commercial use well before 1945. I show evidence that these chemical flourescent whiteners actually go back to 1929!

It is these chemical flourescent whiteners that react to 365nm of an ultra violet light, by flourescing back the bright blueish white light that is obvserved in the so-called "Black Light Test."

I am posting the link to that article. Scroll down to the bottom of the page, and the article is in a pdf file.

Maybe these facts may change somebody's mind about the validity of the so-called "Black Light Test."

Based on the huge number of collector myths in this hobby, Probably Not.

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=675024

Gary

Hello Gary,

though I willingly concede to your article being definitely conclusive, in this situation, among a few others, I must respectfully deviate with my opinion. Here's why; you're correct that there had been "[whitening] patents going back to the 1930's." But just as that's fact, we also know the variants in question weren't produced using a chemical fluorescent whitener--or, at minimum, there's no examples nor documentation in existence substantiating there were. This gives credence to the blacklight test, abiet the test isn't reliable. Furthermore, the item submitted for review is arguably a "later" produced armband which by the time of its production fell under a quality control system, i.e: the Reichszeugmeisterei, and was made by the millions.....in laymen's terms, it was a very common item during the period which was standardized for the most part around Hitlers rise of power. Due to such, I highly doubt a experimental and rarely used practice would even be found on this kind of armband.
Concerning the moderator, my interpretation of his recitation was it's to explain to the inquiring party that since the armband is correct in material/manufacture, yet still with it anomalies, as a tool, he could use the "blacklight" test, if only for further verification and reinsurance. Yes, the test has its many faults and should never be relied upon or used to authenticate something, but if one can understand that, it's still able to assist us collectors with minimal results....granted only when used in conjunction with other more definitive means.
In closing let me say you've done a commendable service for our community with your article and that should be applauded. However, as I'm sure there are limitation with your own knowledge in this hobby (possibly even a time when you believe(d) false-lore?), others will be wrong at times as well....even the moderators who're held to a higher standard. You have a talent, that's undeniable....why not use it educate rather than going onto the defensive and practically attacking someone for a difference in opinion or simple mistake?
Good luck sir and again, well done with your article, it was pleasant read.

[codytrcollector]

I'd just like to add that in all the unequivocally authentic material I've encountered or owned(that I tested), not one example glowed in a systematic way as modern cloth does under UV light. Besides that, not unlike these regulated armbands, there's no evidence I'm aware of which definitely proves Germans used flourescent whiteners during the Third Riech régime. And though admittedly one can argue it's possible, stating it as the absolute truth only on the basics it was patented by the Americans and British is nothing short of presumptuous.
*Question: do we even know of concrete evidence which confirms supplies from any country used these chemicals in the 30's to mid 40's on their products?*
It's also worth stating that it's a known fact many countries would turn a blind eye to foreign scientific innovations as a result of their ego and/or patriotism, especially back then, even if it was developed by someone originally from their native land. However, that too only leads to speculation, so as I said earlier, let me reintegrate that it's best if the blacklight test is only used as a tool--key word being too--in a long checklist of anatomizing the item in question. This way we don't open Pandora's box to the criminals and deceivers who we all fight against together....that's all.

[sgstandard]

Glow Worm

The simple fact is that almost everything from the Third Reich era does NOT glow whatsoever (not counting the "spotty" type of glowing on a cotton political armband from washing it in Tide). There may be items from the 3rd Reich era that glow, but I wouldn't invest in items that I'd forever question.

[Erich B.]

Moderator, Erich B:

Hopefully you have read my article about the Black Light Test.

Maybe, you even consulted fellow Moderator Detrich Maerz as to his scientific opinion of the Black Light Test. After all, the article was published in his magazine.

I would respectfully request that you as a Moderator and certainly part of your duty as a Moderator of a major forum, post an advisement in the Poltical Organizations Forum, when the subject comes up in the normal course of business, whether you will advise the members that the Black Light Test is or is not a valid tool for reproduction recognition.

While I've not seen your article, I am very familiar with the chemical whiteners primarily used in many white fabrics as well as in many types of white paper. I have advised many collectors, who try to use UV as a test for medals, badges, non-white fabrics, etc., that UV is useless in these cases. I have period and pre-33 articles in German as well as in English publications detailing the UV reactions of certain dyes and paints, for example, so I'm familiar with the fact that glow does not necessarily equal fake. However, it is an effective tool when dealing with white fabrics. While chemical whiteners were developed even earlier than the 1920s, they did not see widespread commercial use until the early 1960s. The UV reaction of many recently produced white fabrics and papers is an electric blue color. If UV-dead white fabric is laundered in a brightening detergent, it will exhibit a reaction under UV but to a much lesser degree than more recent industrial treated white material.
I've never seen original (pre-1945) white fabric, thread, or paper that reacted under UV unless it was subsequently exposed to a brightening detergent. That said, there are modern white fabrics, thread, and papers that do not react under UV. Therefore, the absence of UV reaction to white fabric, thread, or paper is not a guarantee of originality.
While it is not the ultimate tool, UV testing is certainly a useful adjunct when used along with other investigative methods.
Erich

[Gary Symonds]

While I've not seen your article, I am very familiar with the chemical whiteners primarily used in many white fabrics as well as in many types of white paper. I have advised many collectors, who try to use UV as a test for medals, badges, non-white fabrics, etc., that UV is useless in these cases. I have period and pre-33 articles in German as well as in English publications detailing the UV reactions of certain dyes and paints, for example, so I'm familiar with the fact that glow does not necessarily equal fake. However, it is an effective tool when dealing with white fabrics. While chemical whiteners were developed even earlier than the 1920s, they did not see widespread commercial use until the early 1960s. The UV reaction of many recently produced white fabrics and papers is an electric blue color. If UV-dead white fabric is laundered in a brightening detergent, it will exhibit a reaction under UV but to a much lesser degree than more recent industrial treated white material.
I've never seen original (pre-1945) white fabric, thread, or paper that reacted under UV unless it was subsequently exposed to a brightening detergent. That said, there are modern white fabrics, thread, and papers that do not react under UV. Therefore, the absence of UV reaction to white fabric, thread, or paper is not a guarantee of originality.
While it is not the ultimate tool, UV testing is certainly a useful adjunct when used along with other investigative methods.
Erich

Erich, you mentioned textiles pre-1933 that glow under UV light. These are the reactions of UV light on aniline dyes of colors other than white, that could go back to the mid 19th century when these coal tar dyes were discovered.

However, the whitening agents used prior to the introduction of these chemical whiteners, did not react to UV light, and as said in the trade it is "dead" to UV light. As said in my article, the only color that is relevant is the color white. None other.

The discovery of the chemical fluorescent brighteners to make white "whiter" was a major step forward in the production of textiles.

The patent evidence is clear these chemcals were in the commercial stream before 1945, it is that simple.

You said, and I have heard it many, many times, that no original TR textile has ever been observed to react to UV light.

That of course is a self fulfilling prophecy. Because the moment a white textile reacts to UV light, it is immeadiately disregarded. What is left? Obviously, white textiles that are dead to UV light have to be originals.

Erich, I suggest that when you get the time, to read what I wrote about the Black Light Test.