strange Tk in photo album

[Craig Gottlieb]

While I do find it amusing that people make authorative statements such as "The skull is a postwar fake" with no commentary to support their position, I do find it encouraging that such statements, without evidence, do not go unchallenged here. Rearding the two pieces, the two skulls do look similar, but a close up analysis will show that while one skull appears to be modeled after the other, they are made from two completely separate dies. Look at the eye-sockets, the direction of the "tick" on the right eye socket, the shape of the jaw, details to the bone joints, etc. It seems to me that since the album was a family buy in Germany (bought by a German picker of mine), and the hat is of unknown origin, it's fair to say that the skull from the hat is the forgery, and that the album skull is "original" (meaning pre-45). Of course, they could both be period, or both be post-war - there is no way to tell for sure. Fortunately for my reputation (and fortunately for Michael's pocket book) the album was not sold at any huge premium because of some "unique looking" purpose-unknown skull.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Michael Fay]

Craig Gottlieb comparison photos

Here is examples of the two skulls in question that Craig Gottlieb has described.
--MF

[Chris_Werner]

I too am frustrated by "Sorry, it's fake" comments with nothing further. We should all know how to search, and educate ourselves, but when someone pans a piece outright, I think it is helpful to us all to explain the rationale.
On the other hand, I can understand the frustration of the Forum regulars when someone uses the Forum just to vette his pieces before he posts them on e stand, but makes no meaningful contributions himself. There needs to be a line between educating all of us, and using the Forum for a free appraisal service.
And if you don't like what you hear, then have a good, informational and meaningful debate, or send the piece off for a written appraisal from an SS Cloth expert/dealer. Don't just get po'd and pull the pics.
Please let me make myself clear that I am in no ways referring specifically to this thread or any other, as my observations are just in a general nature.
Now back to this ugly but interesting skull ....

[Robin Lumsden]

Here's a quick example of another 'odd skull'..........

[Robin Lumsden]

.......which is nevertheless original, as this photo shows........

[Michael Fay]

[Please let me make myself clear that I am in no ways referring specifically to this thread or any other, as my observations are just in a general nature.
Now back to this ugly but interesting skull ....[/QUOTE]

Hello, I agree with you Chris Werner, but just to be clear from my side, I am not planning on selling this album-ever. Nor, gods willing, will I ever sell any of my collection...(unless its my SA stuff to get more SS stuff!)
That being said... I do want my album to be authentic pre-1945.
Thank you to all who have contributed here. It does help .
Cheers, MF

[Anders S]

I have to admit that the term in my first answer in this thread was unfortunate.
Please notice that in other answers in this thread im carefully using the term
"in my own opinion" I also say at one point "can't prove anything"...

[derek]

Do not overlook the fact that many albums were put together after the war by SS members to contain all their period photographs. I have seen many SS albums with out of sequence images or postwar commentary added, and, occasionally, post war artifacts included with original photos (like replacement sleevebands or insignia). It wouldn't surprise me for this to be the case looking at the cover.
Photographic albums are best judged, in my opinion, by the content of the images contained in the book. After all, this album was bought, I presume, for the pictures and not the admittedly ugly skull (whatever its date of manufacture).
Mind you, I am intrigued by the name of the SS officer Gummann, an Oberfuehrer in 1934/35 to judge by the photo. I can find no reference to this man whatsoever. I would love to know more about the identification of the picture as the signature looks more like an "H" than a "G".
Derek

[Michael Fay]

[Photographic albums are best judged, in my opinion, by the content of the images contained in the book. After all, this album was bought, I presume, for the pictures and not the admittedly ugly skull (whatever its date of manufacture).
Mind you, I am intrigued by the name of the SS officer Gummann, an Oberfuehrer in 1934/35 to judge by the photo. I can find no reference to this man whatsoever. I would love to know more about the identification of the picture as the signature looks more like an "H" than a "G".
Derek[/QUOTE]

Hello Derek, I actually bought this album for one photo only : the autographed Fritz Weitzel photo( He wrote a rather infamous little book). , but of course everything else helped-and it was supposed to be "original." Now your information on after war compilations (by SS, and/or family) is an intriging point which leads to a vague grey area-, But this may very well be the case.
As to the ID of SS officer Gummann; I only know what the seller(Craig Gottlieb) told me. He (Quote)""... can't remember where I got the info on the other guy, but it may have been from either Erich Bendorff, or another researcher...(Unquote)"
Thanks for your input.
---MF

[Michael Fay]

skull

I have to admit that the term in my first answer in this thread was unfortunate.
Please notice that in other answers in this thread im carefully using the term
"in my own opinion" I also say at one point "can't prove anything"...

Hey Anders, I appreciate you just saying what you think is correct. It is all helpful for me to get some understanding on this item.
--MF

[derek]

Michael,
If I were you I would post your portrait over on the Axis History Forum in the SS section, those guys, Max Williams, Phil Nix, Michael Miller et al are absolutely amazing at identifying SS officers.
Derek

[Michael Fay]

strange skull album

heres more pix from the album.

[Michael Fay]

and another

[Michael Fay]

another

[Michael Fay]

last pix

last pix (for now anyway)
--MF