"Pink" smock or not?

[Fritz]

.

This shows how effectively this camo worked at the time. In fact, what some are laughing about as "Pink" or "Brick" colour is in fact a legitimate camo shade to have used for the purpose intended.

Chris:

They are referred to as "pink" or "brick colored", of course they aren't really "pink". Yet these shades are "unusual" as far as german ww2 dyes for oak patterns are concerned. Apparently unusual enough to call them "pink" or "brick colored" - and it seems most people are willing to accept these terms based on the item's features. Obviously no one calls them the "blue" smocks.


Cheers

[90th Light]

Chris:

They are referred to as "pink" or "brick colored", of course they aren't really "pink". Yet these shades are "unusual" as far as german ww2 dyes for oak patterns are concerned. Apparently unusual enough to call them "pink" or "brick colored" - and it seems most people are willing to accept these terms based on the item's features. Obviously no one calls them the "blue" smocks.

Cheers

Thanks Fritz,

yes I realise that, it is a coined name of convenience which seems to fit nicely. Some however, want to use it as comical or to cheapen the whole thing

The point I was making was, when one looks at post numbers 686 to 688. One sees how the red-brown of these smocks ( the basis of the pink/ brick name ) works very effectively in a natural setting/ light. The shade of this colour is not out of place with other SS camo of the time or the red browns used to camouflage German WW2 vechicles esp. 1943 to 1945.

It is an effective SS camo pattern for that time,

Chris

[Fritz]

The point I was making was, when one looks at post numbers 686 to 688. One sees how the red-brown of these smocks ( the basis of the pink/ brick name ) works very effectively in a natural setting/ light.

Yes, Chris, although that is so with almost any repro. Just because a repro is effective in terms of camouflage it doesn't mean it has to be original.

When you reproduce a camo pattern you will reproduce its effect - unless you screw it up big time of course and use real pink or neon shades.

No reproducer would do that - yet, almost all repro prints are more or less "off" as far as the original dyes are concerned. Still they would work as camo items - some perhaps even better than the original.

Cheers

[90th Light]

Yes, Chris, although that is so with almost any repro. Just because a repro is effective in terms of camouflage it doesn't mean it has to be original.

When you reproduce a camo pattern you will reproduce its effect - unless you screw it up big time of course and use real pink or neon shades.

No reproducer would do that - yet, almost all repro prints are more or less "off" as far as the original dyes are concerned. Still they would work as camo items - some perhaps even better than the original.

Cheers

Yes I understand what you are saying Fritz,

some repro SS camo however, that one sees reinactors wearing sticks out like sore toe. The divisions between colours are too strong and there is a satin type sheen to the fake cloth. This is especially true as one gets closer to such reproduction SS camo.

This "brick" camo and dyes do not. It has the correct subtle pattern and blending of colours to achieve a matting of definition in natural light as the light get brighter.

It works correctly as it is suppose to and in the correct manner that SS camo cloth was designed to do,

Chris

[Philipson]

If you got movie stamps, i'm thinking... show us the movie!

[RobertE]

Just to make sure everyone is on the same page, the material and the colors are NOT radically different between a pink smock and a standard German piece, and it's important to realize that. In terms of material weave (tightness, thread count, weight) they are so similar to the regular German camo as to be indistinguishable.

There are some side by sides here http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...robert&page=25 , but these smocks are NOT some really oddball shade.

regards, Robert

[phild]

Just to make sure everyone is on the same page, the material and the colors are NOT radically different between a pink smock and a standard German piece, and it's important to realize that. In terms of material weave (tightness, thread count, weight) they are so similar to the regular German camo as to be indistinguishable.

There are some side by sides here http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...robert&page=25 , but these smocks are NOT some really oddball shade.

regards, Robert

Very telling! I can not believe that it took us 10 years to decide to to do a post like this one. I realize that some side by side photos have been done before, but not in a while and not like this one. I know that in Beaver's book alone several Type 2 smocks are show that are much more pink in the "red" shades than these "pink" smocks.

I agree with Chris in that the term as been used to slam these smocks and is used in most every post by some in the most childish way.

I agree with Fritz that just because the camo is effective (and this version is as Chris has shown) does not make it original. Again, the reason this point was brought up is that so many have claimed the smocks are NOT original because the colors are not effective. When the term "original dyes" is used......that implies that these dyes are not wartime (rather than simply just like the dyes used in the German made smocks).....on what basis can anyone say that these dyes are not wartime?

Back around 2003-2004 and even in a thread on these that was started earlier......a very advanced SS camo collector posted a series of photos that showed the improvised pattern used in the pink smocks to extend the pattern due to the larger rollers used (the rest of the pattern is the same in both these and the German oakleaf B patterns), this comparison was his "proof" that these pink smocks could not be wartime. NOW we know that the Norwegian camo was done the same way for the same reason....we did not know that then....at least on this forum and no one mentioned it. That is one reason that the information from Tom is so important.

I hope that we are past the days of collectors sticking their heads in black trash bags at shows to blacklight items and licking flatwire insignia to see if it is period or not........these were the methods of "experts" back in the mid 80s and earlier......essentially the same school as the thinking used back then to condem these smocks....and still used today.

We all know that a faker could and would have made a type 1 smock (and a version without the loops) in 1/2 of the time that it would take them per smock to have made these. They would not have had to have found the 2000 or so buttons that these required, again no fooling with 14 loop sets per smock (42 loops per smock and 42 additional sewing operations just to attach them, machine sewn eyelets instead of hand sewn........and using only 2/3 of the fabric per smock as these required...... and selling them at least 30% higher price than these......not to mention that this oakleaf B is a very complex pattern to copy, more so than even QL A and both patterns were used in this model during the war.

Regardless, the stamps are a fact and they are a fact that was not known 33 years ago when these showed up. The stamps in these smocks back then (and removal of the same) hurt the selling value of these then and they also served as a basis to suspect them as being some kind of prop......because NO ONE understood the stamps back then......

Thanks to Leroy for posting the photos of the smock that just sold. I do not know what is up with the dyed or bleached greenish mottled pocket bags or if it is just a photo effect....but this I have never seen in the ones as they came in. I do agree with NZMark that this one is (otherwise) a real "pink' smock and the details are well shown in these photos.

Since none of us posting in favor of these smocks know anything about SS camo......as stated by some, perhaps those who do can tell us all about the Norwegian SS wartime camo that used the larger rollers, made up repeat extension, non-standard fabric and narrow width bolts? Actually I'm surprised that this variant did not come to our attention before Tom raised it as the experts must have known about this for decades.


Lastly I want to echo the posts of those who spoke out about the deplorable insults posted on this thread targeting RichardP. Richard was a gentleman and a collector was vast knowledge and a greater heart who helped every collector who asked. I would ask those who had any discourse with him during the last year or so of his life to consider the nature of his illness (he did not know this until the last months of his life) and the role that it may have played in some his reaction to others.....fully out of his control......we never know what is going on with everyone in every case.

[NZMark]

Thanks Phild,
A well thought out (and considerate) posting.
Regarding the pocket's staining on the estand example, is it possible that that is transfer from the dyes while sitting in a damp condition over an extended period? This would mean (perhaps) that this example was near the out edge of a bale??
Just a thought...
Mark
New Zealand

[NickG]

This thread shows another pink one with the pocket lining in unsoiled (unstained) conditions....
Image credit; see thread link

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ght=pink+smock

and a Dachau m43 liner ...image credit member airmechanic

[90th Light]

Another comparison with the course type of HBT.

There is a difference in lighting between the 2 photos. The smock pocket is in shadow where as the M43 cap is in natural daylight. Allow for this and the shades of grey are not too far off each other. Also the smock has been heavily washed and the M43 cap has not,

Chris

[90th Light]

The thread that they have used to weave the HBT pockets on the pink smocks is thicker than the thread used to make the HBT linings of the late war M43 caps.

This makes sense, because it gives the pocket a lot more strength and durability. It creates a courser feel and looks more like a sack material than a fine cloth.

The weave pattern between the two has been mapped exactly and they are woven in an identical HBT pattern. Both appear to be made from an identical base material having a similar feel and sheen.

I question now looming, is HBT like this found in the Dachua and other M43 caps German made ???

or is it made in one of the other countries in the Reich like Czechoslovakia, Austria or from countries outside the Reich such as Italy, Estonia and pressed into the service of the Reich ???

Chris

[RobertE]

Chris, thanks for posting the comparative photos. I don't think these are the same HBT material types, however.

As you pointed out, the thick HBT in the smock feels almost like a thin blanket, while the HBT in the cap is firmer. The thread count may be the same, but these are completely different other than the shade, which is similar.

I would suggest it is also foreign (non-German) made.

regards, Robert

[90th Light]

Chris, thanks for posting the comparative photos. I don't think these are the same HBT material types, however.

As you pointed out, the thick HBT in the smock feels almost like a thin blanket, while the HBT in the cap is firmer. The thread count may be the same, but these are completely different other than the shade, which is similar.

I would suggest it is also foreign (non-German) made.

regards, Robert

Hello Robert,

when you magnify the two clothes, they are made of the exact same material what ever it is.

The only difference between the two, is the size of the "yarn" used to weave the cloth. The pockets on the smock have been made from a yarn of a larger size for more strength, The yarn twists in the same direction in both cases.

The HBT fishbone weave pattern can be mapped exactly on to each.

The texture, sheen and feel of the cloth is the same.

Basically, what is in the pocket of the smock is the next size up in weaving thickness and as such is a larger, stronger, courser version of what is in many Dachau SS M43 caps.

The colours of the cloth when new is very close to one another.

I agree that such HBT may not be of German manufacture. In the case of the Dachau SS M43's they may have requisitioned the HBT from some where else to use in the making of those caps.

In fact this raises the question of the Dachau SS M43's being of German manufacture or from some where else in the reich ??? . I have never seen one with an RB number or maker name/ label. They are quite shoddy when compared with German maker marked M43 caps. Plus they have a strange pirate trap ( foreign made ?) that is not seen on any other SS M43 used by the Germans. Then there is the exposed cardboard bill, how many late war German maker marked WH, LW or KM M43 caps have that ?

How do we know that the so called "Dachau SS M43's" were not made some where else in the reich by a factory under SS control and transported by train into Dachau for distribution to the Waffen SS. Do we actually have proof that they were made there ???

Chris

p.s. if you heavily wash the HBT used in a Dachau SS M43, it will be come pliable and not feel so firm

[RobertE]

Chris, quite a bit of the Dachau material was made elsewhere and stored at / distributed from / Dachau. On the HBT, you could be right, but to me it looks and feels like a completely different material.

I understand what you're saying about yarn thickness, but that to me is enough. The pockets have some of the cap material characteristics, but the overall thickness and "stretch" would lead me to believe these were not related manufacturing. I could be wrong, though.

There is not reason to make them thicker, either, despite the lack of strength in alot of the re-spun yarns. Standard "thin" HBT, like what is seen in the Dachau caps, was used as pocket bag material in many other wartime uniform tunics and trousers, as you know.

s/f Robert

[90th Light]

Chris, quite a bit of the Dachau material was made elsewhere and stored at / distributed from / Dachau. On the HBT, you could be right, but to me it looks and feels like a completely different material.

I understand what you're saying about yarn thickness, but that to me is enough. The pockets have some of the cap material characteristics, but the overall thickness and "stretch" would lead me to believe these were not related manufacturing. I could be wrong, though.

There is not reason to make them thicker, either, despite the lack of strength in alot of the re-spun yarns. Standard "thin" HBT, like what is seen in the Dachau caps, was used as pocket bag material in many other wartime uniform tunics and trousers, as you know.

s/f Robert

Thanks Robert,

I understand what you are saying and I am not disagreeing. This is the type of objective discussion and observations that are needed on these smocks. Perhaps the real question for the pockets is about HBT itself;

Is it a material made in Germany or else where in the Reich/ Axis allied country before May 1945, thus also used by the German later in the war ???

What grades/ thickness/ strengths did it come in at the time ???

Of course, being made else where in the Reich or by one of the other Axis powers would fit in with the "Pink smocks" not being made in Germany and thus reflecting such differences from a German made type 2 smock in the later half of the war.

The SS M43 that I have shown the liner of in post number 715 was New Zealand veteran brought back from Trieste in May 1945 and appears to be made in Austria,

Chris