NSDStB opinions?

[esko p.]

Hi there!

Any opinions about this one? Having a bad feeling

http://akateemikko.com/kuvat/at14020-02.jpg

[blackbird939]

Nice original, IMO

[Br. James]

What gives you that "bad feeling" about this piece?

Br. James

[esko p.]

What gives you that "bad feeling" about this piece?

Number of the red dots. It was written somewhere in the forum that there should be 2x5 of them, like allways. Or maybe I misunderstood something.

[Wim Vangossum]

IMO a good one.


Regards, Wim

[sjl]

Only one maker - different from yours - had the 2x5 dot pattern in the red field.

[Jo Rivett]

Hi Esko, a great original badge !

Only one maker

Stephen, not quite sure what you mean here by "only 1 maker?" if you are referring to the 3 pins that you pictured, then what maker they are in anyones guess as there are no reverse images

BUT, if you are suggesting that there was only one maker of these badges and stickpins, then you are very wrong ! Many makers are know, Hoffstätter made them (transitional markings from late 1933 to mid 1935 are known from them as well as post April 1935 markings with the M1/ prefix) Otto Schickle`s post April-1935 code is known on them as shown in post 1, as well as others including Austrian makers codes.

The "dot" pattern, number of dots - or whatever else is referred to here, is absolutely nonsense and irrelevant. Why certain individuals continually harp on about it, is beyond me. I would personally attribute this to a fundamental lack of knowledge of small badges in general.

Where do you go when there are no "dots" to look at, hearsay that Descher was the only maker and theories that all opaque enamel badges are fakes..... i guess you curl up into dreamland and shout fake at anything and everything that does not make sense to you......

[Gary Symonds]

Jo, thank you for nipping in the bud another collector myth. Mr. Stephen Laurens (sjl) a respected author of books on the RZM voices his opinion that there was only one maker of the Student Bund swastika badge, even though he did not treat us to the reverse of his pictures to prove who that one maker was.

Others in the Forum assume he must know what he is talking about, and when collector Joe Blow posts his picture of the same badge by maker RZM 1/xx, there is a great hue and cry that it must be a repro, because as everbody knows, there is only one maker.

Thanks for basing your conclusion not on opinion, but solid evidence, as shown in your Party Badge Book.

A ray of reality in the miasma of the great WAF misinformation collector myth swamp.

[Matthew]

put the pitchfork down

Unless I am missing something it has been said "there is only one maker with 2x5 dot pattern in the red field" rather than "there is only one maker".
If wrong I stand to be corrected.

cheers

Matt

[RonR]

It is well know that I do not have a fundamental knowledge of small badges, and depend on the expertise of our members to learn something new almost everyday.

Therefore post these without comment in order to learn, not knowing if they are even authentic.....


...................

[sdesember]

Jo,

I think someone, (wonder who!) wrote that the opaquecity of the enameling depending upon the enameling powder. This powder has a very short shelflife and when used near the end stage or past it, the enamel becomes more opaque.

Jay

[Jo Rivett]

Unless I am missing something it has been said "there is only one maker with 2x5 dot pattern in the red field" rather than "there is only one maker".

If that is the case, then this must be backed up by research instead of a one-liner post. Not because anyone deserves a bashing on a forum, or because anyone needs to be right and others need to be wrong - but simply because it is a complicated issue that can only be answered correctly with the necessary research.

Anyone who has read the "Sub-Contractors Chapter" in the PP book, will have seen the 20-odd Parteiabzeichen, all stamped with the identical obverse die (identical pattern=identical dots) all made - without a doubt - by a subcontractor in Pforzheim, with all reverses showing different makers numbers.
So if the comment is supposed to mean that - and not 1 maker per say, then where is the research to support it? What is that one-liner based on?

[Jo Rivett]

Jo,

I think someone, (wonder who!) wrote that the opaquecity of the enameling depending upon the enameling powder. This powder has a very short shelflife and when used near the end stage or past it, the enamel becomes more opaque.

Jay

It will become murky Jay, but it wont be that translucent enamel will turn completely opaque just because it has passed it`s best by date.

[sdesember]

I see. Sorry to hijack, but just would like to write something while we're on the topic: It's interesting that GPBs by Fuess usually have translucent enamels whereas the 30mms by Deschler do not always show as translucent.

It will become murky Jay, but it wont be that translucent enamel will turn completely opaque just because it has passed it`s best by date.

[sjl]

Unless I am missing something it has been said "there is only one maker with 2x5 dot pattern in the red field" rather than "there is only one maker".
If wrong I stand to be corrected.

cheers

Matt

Exactly. Thought it was pretty clear. Thanks. The enamel ones shown are maker M1/52.