build a frankenstein question.

[Johnny R]

Actually the issue in this thread is about restored uniforms and restoration. Some people don't like restoration, they call restored uniforms "frankenstein", "christmas tree", "fantasy", "the irresponsible and unethical behavior", "ethically wrong", "destroying an original item", "destroying history", etc. And at the same time the very same people restore uniforms and call it "correct historical configuration"! Isn't something? But to be honest I am not surprised at all. Also, the most if not all collectors put awards on their uniforms for display but some of these very same collectors call others collectors'displays "christmas tree", "fantasy", etc.
As to me I personally have no problem with restored (or with added awards) uniforms as they are original items. I agree that a restored tunic is not in the exact same configuration as it was 70 years ago and that's OK. IMO if it is not attached to a personality/ a specific individual with a history the tunic is an original uniform that represents WW2 German forces in general not an individual whos history is not really important anyway.

You still do not appear to understand how the terms are used or what the main question of the thread was. A Frankenstein is a tunic that is embellished beyond what is likely to have been there or what is known tho have been on the tunic. Restoration means returning an item back to its best known or most likely "correct historical configuration" That term is used as it means exactly what it indicates, restoring what was there based on the best available historical information and evidence for insignia from photos etc. of what was typically worn. Restoration is not adding cuff titles and other things that where never there before- that is embellishment. When it is done to an excessive level or poorly the item is termed a "Frankenstein".

[A c h t u n g !]

You still do not appear to understand how the terms are used or what the main question of the thread was. A Frankenstein is a tunic that is embellished beyond what is likely to have been there or what is known tho have been on the tunic. Restoration means returning an item back to its best known or most likely "correct historical configuration" That term is used as it means exactly what it indicates, restoring what was there based on the best available historical information and evidence for insignia from photos etc. of what was typically worn. Restoration is not adding cuff titles and other things that where never there before- that is embellishment. When it is done to an excessive level or poorly the item is termed a "Frankenstein".

No, I understood it a long time ago. If you have a tunic with cheap common insignias and awards on it - it is "properly restored" but if you have a TK tunic with RK it is "Frankenstein". Right?
But if a tunic has no name tag, how would you know what insignia was there originally and who it belonged to? And do you really care who was an original owner? I do not collect because of that individual whoever he was, I like the ww2 history and the look of German uniforms and their beautiful military design.

[Johnny R]

No, I understood it a long time ago. If you have a tunic with cheap common insignias and awards on it - it is "properly restored" but if you have a TK tunic with RK it is "Frankenstein". Right?
But if a tunic has no name tag, how would you know what insignia was there originally and who it belonged to? And do you really care who was an original owner? I do not collect because of that individual whoever he was, I like the ww2 history and the look of German uniforms and their beautiful military design.

Sorry, I still do not think understand what I/we have been trying to say. There are better ways from a professional/ethical stand point to restore historical items. Adding things that were not there is in my perspective is wrong. As a side line, I would not call the 3200 dollars worth of original SS insignia I put on my tunic cheap either. I collect named groupings, the RKs diplayed are named or ided to RKTs and almost all of the tunics I have and restored are also named. These were restored back to wartime configurations so there is no guessing involved. In addition to those I have many more that are not restored.

[jacquesf]

The term "Frankenstein" is actually used by visor collector to describe a Schirmutse or visor built from scratch, using original parts, (Such as a sweatband , liner etc.) from other / different caps and selling / marketing it as an original piece. It has got nothing to do with embellishing a cap with different insignia and nametags. Jacques

[A c h t u n g !]

Here we go again.. but I will try to explain.

Sorry, I still do not think understand what I/we have been trying to say. There are better ways from a professional/ethical stand point to restore historical items. Adding things that were not there is in my perspective is wrong. As a side line, I would not call the 3200 dollars worth of original SS insignia I put on my tunic cheap either. I collect named groupings, the RKs diplayed are named or ided to RKTs and almost all of the tunics I have and restored are also named. These were restored back to wartime configurations so there is no guessing involved. In addition to those I have many more that are not restored.

I still do not understand it either, please tell me one thing, if in your perspective "adding things that were not there is wrong" then why did you add "things that were not there" (insignia and awards) to the tunic that you restored? I mean you knew nothing about this tunic history: no original owner' name, no rank it was originally, no branch, what awards were on it, absolutely nothing but after the restoration you call your tunic "my own "untouched" example" in "correct historical configuration" and start to criticize other collectors and splash mud on their restored tunics.
IMO there is no difference between the restoration of your tunic and for example the wrap posted on the first page. Interesting though that your tunic has got thumbs up from other collectors while the TK wrap on the first page has been criticized, called "chrismass tree" and was even initially posted by TonyS for laugh. The only explanation to this reaction, as I already mentioned earlier, IMO is a monetary value invested in a restored iniform: if it is only a few thousands dollars for insignia like on your tunic - collectors like the restoration and nobody argue that it is "correct historical configuration" but if it is tens of thousands of dollars involved in insignia and awards like on that TK wrap - it becomes "fantasy" or "chrismass tree" even though it is just a NCO with pretty common awards, just an average wrap, one of millions made in WW2. Only rare and expensive and that is why IMO you don't like uniforms like this.

[Johnny R]

I call my tunic "untouched" as a joke meaning that almost all "Untouched" SS tunic examples are also restored just like mine but sold for much more and as real, so what I am saying is that I saved thousands of dollars "making my own". The SS tunic does have a name tag but the name was cut out by the family at that is left is the date. The award loops on that tunic were also there. You just do not seem to understand what we are trying to talk about here so there is really no point in drawing this out.

[Kreager]

I'm sure most would agree that:
Restoring a stripped tunic, with original insignia, where there were signs of insignia on the tunic, to me is a restoration. As long as you say it has been restored to a future buyer or even on the forum for that matter, to me is a restored tunic. I have no problem with that. It's when these tunics are humped up by adding insignia, when there were actually no signs on the tunic, that causes an issue (Frankenstein).

The guys who have untouched originals may be able to afford them, and more power to them 90% of the colectors wish they could afford them.

The guys who have neither in their collections but frown upon restored tunics, as mentioned above, should spend some money in this hobby so you will know why we are forced to restore a tunic. It's great you're into the history of it, I think that's a bond we can both share and educate each other as we progress in this hobby.

Regards,
Matt