Announcement

**Bob Hritz** · 03-28-2017, 10:02 AM

I have only seen one example, in hand, hat was brought back by a US veteran. I know younger collectors, and many my age, are tired of hearing vet stories. However, the example I have examined has the pin attached by two plates and has a chisel shaped top hook. It is die struck in copper finish. From the source and other items that came back with it, I believe it is an original example.

Bob Hritz

**Gary B** · 03-28-2017, 10:15 AM

Bob, what does the pin set up - attachment - have to do with authenticity?

Just to respond to this one comment.....pin, catch and hinge set up have been used for the past 15 years to assist in the authentication of badges. In many cases it is the "definitive factor" to determine originality. See any of the multiple threads in the KM/Luft/Heer badge sections.

As an aside, microscopic examination of a badge is ONLY one tool and is useful only to a certain extent. IMO, EVERYTHING should be taken into account, and that includes the story behind the piece (vet, how it was acquired etc) since that might put things into context. True a story can be good or bad but it should not be discounted.

There has been a lot of discussion about microscopy over many threads but the examination of a piece without comparing it to a known piece yields nothing. One can examine a "Floch" EK1 using a microscope and conclude it is a die struck piece, which it is, but that does not make it real - it is one of the best fakes in the 90s/early 2000s. These pieces fooled countless collectors and dealers. (the pin was the pieces down fall)

Gary B

**Jo Rivett** · 03-28-2017, 10:24 AM

Originally posted by Bob Hritz View Post

It is die struck in copper finish. From the source and other items that came back with it, I believe it is an original example.
Bob Hritz

Bob, your post begs questioning - and explaining.

"Die struck" you say... when the ten badges i posted above are all cast.. and this "die struck" badge you have is automatically real because it came from a vet together with other, real items?

The problem now, is why is "die struck" genuine to you with this item - presented supposedly on the 9th November 1933? When the "prototype" blutorden you have is cast - and they too, were supposedly presented on the exact same day?

You can`t have it both ways Bob, you need to clarify, you need to explain... by simply coming back to the same threads over and over and lacing them with "vet" and "i believe", is not helping anyone.

You need to show readers that you indeed have a solid understanding of what is genuine and what is not, and why! And why you find it perfectly OK to jump the fence on expensive, undocumented items that you happen to own, and why you can only defend them with the words "vet" and "i believe".

**Bob Hritz** · 03-28-2017, 10:26 AM

Gary,

The problem, as I see it, is that one must have sonething with which to make comparisons. Determining an original cannot be done without knowing what an original looks like or how it was made. If there is no baseline for comparison, I do not understand how we can determine authenticity. Originals should look like each other, fakes should look different.

Bob Hritz

**Bob Hritz** · 03-28-2017, 10:36 AM

Jo,

I understand manufacturing, from when I was younger and did cost accounting for large manufacturing firms. It was not uncommon for dies to be created for large production runs, but not economical for small runs. This is where casting was done. The size of the item was inconsequential. One firm made oil pipelines. A seamless elbow may have been 8 feet in diameter and a casting was made because it was a small run. If many were needed, die casting would be cost effective. When I worked for a firm that made parts for the space program, they did the same; small runs were cast and large runs used in house created dies. Many times, a small run of cast items became reordered, on a larger scale, and dies were made to offset production and finishing costs.

I certainly cannot speak for the German medals and badges manufacturers, but I would think that cost accounting would dictate how items were to be made at the lowest cost.

Bob Hritz

**Gary B** · 03-28-2017, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by Bob Hritz View Post

Gary,

The problem, as I see it, is that one must have sonething with which to make comparisons. Determining an original cannot be done without knowing what an original looks like or how it was made. If there is no baseline for comparison, I do not understand how we can determine authenticity. Originals should look like each other, fakes should look different.

Bob Hritz

Bob,

Agreed.

Microscopic examination verifies whether a piece has been cast or die struck. It can also be used to help authenticate a piece by looking for commonalities between pieces made from the same die (looking for common die flaws/flaw progressions) but it has to be compared to a known original to verify as original.

I would use as an additional example to my Floch reference before, the cast Aluminum Lappland shield. Depending on the design, original or fake, but an ORIGINAL cast piece.

I would also add to this discussion the J. Deutschbein Euskirchen Pilot badge (a die struck pilot badge of extreme rarity) viewed as fake since it did not conform to other known pilot badges/designs. It was only verified as an original in the last 10 years when a few were found in untouched Luftwaffe groupings. (Same for the OM pilot badge).

Gary B

**Kyle Harrington** · 03-28-2017, 10:40 AM

Assertion

Well I can make one all of a sudden these are popping up pretty frequently now all over the place in the last year and a half...er how odd ?? Would not touch one with a proverbial bargepole

**Bob Hritz** · 03-28-2017, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by Kyle Harrington View Post

Well I can make one all of a sudden these are popping up pretty frequently now all over the place in the last year and a half...er how odd ?? Would not touch one with a proverbial bargepole

Kyle,

Point well taken. There is good money in the reproduction business and there is no doubt everything is being faked.

Bob Hritz

**Jo Rivett** · 03-28-2017, 10:48 AM

Originally posted by Gary B View Post

There has been a lot of discussion about microscopy over many threads but the examination of a piece without comparing it to a known piece yields nothing.

Sorry but i squashed your attachment theory in-print in 2013, it is nonsense.
The last part is also complete nonsense, as over 150 micro videos will show anyone who takes the time and interest to explore. I will also support my assertion that your claims are nonsense by entering into a bet with you.

A micro analysis of just one item - will tell you everything, including if it is genuine or not. If you chose not to believe me, fine, but don`t just post nonsense that is simply not true. As far as a bet goes, i am open to any amount you wish to bet. You pick a clever fake, or you buy one, or you pick any badge/award/medal/coin you like, and send it to me. I will make a video like this of it, and tell you - show you - everything you need to know about it. Incl. if it is a genuine item or not.

If i fail, if the inspection video (for all to see) is not crytal clear, you win the bet, i send your item back plus the "whatever" you won.
If i am indeed correct, and the microscope is as good as i say it is, i win the bet, you send me the "whatever" and i send your item back.

The bet can be a friendly "i`ll pay postage both ways and a few beers for you" or it can be a thousand pounds if it needs to be. The point, is that i am going to call you to action on this claim of yours, and i am telling you that i am ready.. and i am prepared to back up any claims i have made about microscopy in our hobby with this "bet" in real time, live. Taking forum words and opinions.. and putting them into a video for all to see. Are you ready?

**Gary B** · 03-28-2017, 10:55 AM

Jo,

So you are saying all of the posts and books that have come out on Heer badges, KM and Luftwaffe badges in the past 10 years are bunk? The thousands and thousand of of badges examined by collectors which verifies which pin,hinge and catch attachment were used by which makers is all wrong?

You don't collect badges do you.

There is ABSOLUTELY no way logically one can examine something under a microscope to determine originality without HAVING something to compare it to. And I have seen your videos.

Gary B

**Jo Rivett** · 03-28-2017, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by Bob Hritz View Post

Jo,

I understand manufacturing, from when I was younger and did cost accounting for large manufacturing firms. It was not uncommon for dies to be created for large production runs, but not economical for small runs. This is where casting was done.

Bob, this is worse than nonsense. I can debunk your claim with many period announcements, as well of course with hands-on inspections. In fact i already did in 2013 when i showed and translated an article about "How are badges and medals made?" from 1934! -As the link i just hosted in my previous posts shows, with a die struck multipart item, only 4 known examples world wide right now, and each part was die struck. Working dies created for all parts, the way it was.

You see the problem Bob? Your claims are debunked in period print (up until 1943!) your claims are debunked with every genuine item i have ever looked at. So i know, that you certainly do not know how these items were really made, and you will fence sit when it fits your own items. Therfore there is no reason at all for us to discuss this matter further. Unless, of course, you too wished to take me up on my offer to Gary above? I would be open to this of course, with any medal/badge/award or coin.

**Jo Rivett** · 03-28-2017, 11:22 AM

Originally posted by Gary B View Post

Jo,
The thousands and thousand of of badges examined by collectors which verifies which pin,hinge and catch attachment were used by which makers is all wrong?

There is ABSOLUTELY no way logically one can examine something under a microscope to determine originality without HAVING something to compare it to. And I have seen your videos.

Gary B

Yes Gary, all nonsense, attachments were made and ordered from attachment makers (documented), and in many cases sent to a sub-contractor to have the attachment soldered on. For sure some makers did use the same attachments for many years (documented and followed in the 2013 Party Badge book with a few makers) The attachment is a seperate part, in many cases as i said not made by the maker who made the award/badge/medal, so they can, and will, change over time, orders, contracts.
If we are talking about one sole maker, making the same item for a short period, then quite possibly you are going to find that they used the same attachment throughout - for example the TeNo Ehrenzeichen by Fühner. Otherwise it is a mix match, and the attchment should not even be a part worth considering until the very end.

What about the bet? I can imagine that for some members here, you included, there would be nothing more they would like to see, than me, embarrased, floored, stumped.. see that the microscope can - as you claim - not be of help at all with only one item. See that you guys were right all along, and even have a laugh on me. (I would encourage that even)
I have made the offer, i am willing to support everything i have claimed about microscopy...with a living video, not with words and opinions. The next move is up to someone else.

**Gary B** · 03-28-2017, 11:24 AM

Jo,

The famous American author, Mark Twain had a saying that states "Where you stand depends where you sit". From my understanding you are a pin/small enameled badge collector/researcher.

What works for/goes for one community does not necessarily transfer to another. Your microscopic examination has merits across all fields including the medal/badge arena, as has been demonstrated by Dietrich Maerz in his examination of the Knights Crosses (especially the 935 4 where he develops a time line for progression of frame die flaws) but it is NOT the "be all end all" solution. For medals/badge, companies used the same type of pins/hinges for years and this is a factor to help in determining originality. The Budeswehr used a standard pin arrangement in 1957 for their redesigned awards that was not used in the TR era an easy way to help determine a fake award.

As I stated before EVERYTHING needs to be taken into account.

Gary B

**Jo Rivett** · 03-28-2017, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Gary B View Post

but it is NOT the "be all end all" solution.

And i am saying it is. And i am waiting for someone who wishes to challenge me. And i am surprised that nobody is jumping at the opportunity.

I will even pour some sauce on the bet, just to stoke and poke.

I claim, that i am able to inspect any Third Reich medal, award or badge produced between 1920-1945, and conclusively prove whether it is genuine or not.
And i can do it without the need to have many examples of the same..

Regardless if it is a Luft award, a Knights Cross, a German Cross, or a Party pin. That is a hefty claim that surely needs challenging with more than just opinion?

It is possible that the videos you have seen, have misled you into believing that i can only show you what is cast or not? This would be far from the truth, and is only my starting point, just to get viewers accustomed to detail. Struck traits, die sheared traits etc.... because our hobby is full of cast nonsense, so we need to start with the obvious. But, you may or may not know, i have worked in a few Medal factories, doing every job needed to go from metal roll strip to boxed award. So i have the background knowledge to accompany the surface research. Or did you think i was just a simple party pin collector who bought a cheap microscope and now thinks he has hit paydirt? I hope not, but i can see where that comes from if you did.

**Bob Hritz** · 03-28-2017, 11:56 AM

Congratulations, Jo, upon becomming the final arbiter of what is authentic in German medals and badges.

Bob Hritz

Announcement

Jungsturm Hitler 1921-1923 Badge

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread