Oh come on!

[Minnesinger]

I'm interested that the sword and wheat do not slant in the same direction as the swastika does (to the left) as per the Blood and Soil symbol its clear supposed to represent. This may have been mentioned earlier, but there are so many threads going on this I've lost count.

There are period examples of that so it is not an issue.

[patrice]

It ain't the first time that this gentleman is involved in some "unethical" issues, not exactly the best of reference IMO.

One more reason why this plate is even more suspicious knowing who's selling it.

[Steve T]

Careful all you thorsten detractors, if you dont say nice things about thorsten his defacto defense attorney Steve T will get mad at you.

Don't be ridiculous. People are entitled to their opinions and I'm not getting mad at anyone.

You are supposed to discussing the item, not hypothesising about other people getting mad and making jokes about me being a defacto defense attorney.

[Thorsten B.]

Patrice,

Thank you for your input and honouring me as a gentleman.

Now would you also gentleman-like actually be willing to discuss the item itself?

Thank you.

[CWP]

In my opinion, the detractors who are deriding this item as "too new" are totally off base. No award collector would say that a badge could not be original because it looks new, no uniform collector would condemn a cap or tunic on the basis of a like-new appearance. Any collector of Third Reich material experienced in his field, be it documents or belt buckles, will have seen any number of absolutely factory mint items. For items in most categories, aging is not simply a factor of time but is a combination of many factors like exposure to dust, heat, humidity, sunlight, handling or storage wear, other environmental factors, etc. There is absolutely no reason why a wooden object carved during the war must have any appreciable patination. We can assume that this plate would have been waxed after manufacture, this finish might only be perceptible in hand but what might account for what one has called a lack of oxidation. I have had and held many wartime German firearms in mint condition with wood stocks that appeared as brand new.

I have and have seen any number of hand-made objects from that time that are not masterworks of quality. I believe that the person who made this plate did have an appreciable level of skill and that the quality of this piece is within the realm of what I find acceptable for Third Reich artwork. Looking for instance at oil paintings from that time (portraits of soldiers, etc.) we can see a huge range of quality, from photorealistic masterpieces to paintings of crude character wheich nevertheless were framed and hung in homes. This plate that we are calling a "presentation piece" may have been intended to be given as a souvenir or token of appreciation rather than a momentous gift.

This piece was originally stated to be fake due to a percieved difference in some photos. Thorsten has stated he has or is getting a photo of this from the auction house where it was purchased, I believe this. Now we have switched to new straw man arguments like "too new" or "new growth wood." Would only old growth trees have been available for lumber, in WWII?

Here are three WHW items from 1943. They were made at the same time and I assume looked the same when new. The "Ostpreussen" piece shows real age, it has darkened from oxidation, the paint has faded with time. The "Friesland" piece shows less oxidation and fading, but still shows some age. The "Egerland" piece looks absolutely new, zero oxidation or toning on a fresh bright clean wood surface, the paint remains bright and vibrant. It should be abundantly obvious that storage conditions determine how a wood item will age.

[Thorsten B.]

Here comes my evidence:

Dear Gentlemen collectors,

Yesterday I received via E-mail a pic of my Reichsnährstand plate from the office and pic archive of the german auction house where I bought the piece.

It´s size was 4 MB which I could not post here so I had to re-size it - I hope that Steve is still able to find out when this pic was taken by the staff of the auction house.

I also have no problem to send him via E-mail the original pic sent to me by the auction house (4 MB) as well if that helps to reveal any necessary evidence and data to reveal the truth in this case.

Please notice: also in their taken pic the carved details of this piece are not absolutely clearly visable due to lighting conditions - just the same effect as it was when I took my pics of the piece.

[Thorsten B.]

More truth:

Furthermore for protecting my reputation and credibility against these ruthless and baseless attacks of certain members I also ordered the auction catalogue of their 64th auction - and it already arrived today.

They obviously did not value this fine period plate very high so this plate is not listed with a picture.

Here is a pic out of that mentioned catalogue showing their detailed description of this AUTHENTIC SS CULTURAL BEAUTY.

And I am looking forward to answer any possible questions anyone seriously interested in discussing the piece might still have in mind.

Happy collecting.

[Tobysauer]

In my opinion, the detractors who are deriding this item as "too new" are totally off base. No award collector would say that a badge could not be original because it looks new, no uniform collector would condemn a cap or tunic on the basis of a like-new appearance. Any collector of Third Reich material experienced in his field, be it documents or belt buckles, will have seen any number of absolutely factory mint items. For items in most categories, aging is not simply a factor of time but is a combination of many factors like exposure to dust, heat, humidity, sunlight, handling or storage wear, other environmental factors, etc. There is absolutely no reason why a wooden object carved during the war must have any appreciable patination. We can assume that this plate would have been waxed after manufacture, this finish might only be perceptible in hand but what might account for what one has called a lack of oxidation. I have had and held many wartime German firearms in mint condition with wood stocks that appeared as brand new.

I have and have seen any number of hand-made objects from that time that are not masterworks of quality. I believe that the person who made this plate did have an appreciable level of skill and that the quality of this piece is within the realm of what I find acceptable for Third Reich artwork. Looking for instance at oil paintings from that time (portraits of soldiers, etc.) we can see a huge range of quality, from photorealistic masterpieces to paintings of crude character wheich nevertheless were framed and hung in homes. This plate that we are calling a "presentation piece" may have been intended to be given as a souvenir or token of appreciation rather than a momentous gift.

This piece was originally stated to be fake due to a percieved difference in some photos. Thorsten has stated he has or is getting a photo of this from the auction house where it was purchased, I believe this. Now we have switched to new straw man arguments like "too new" or "new growth wood." Would only old growth trees have been available for lumber, in WWII?

Here are three WHW items from 1943. They were made at the same time and I assume looked the same when new. The "Ostpreussen" piece shows real age, it has darkened from oxidation, the paint has faded with time. The "Friesland" piece shows less oxidation and fading, but still shows some age. The "Egerland" piece looks absolutely new, zero oxidation or toning on a fresh bright clean wood surface, the paint remains bright and vibrant. It should be abundantly obvious that storage conditions determine how a wood item will age.

To be fair you are not comparing like with like, the items you are showing look to me like they are made from beech plywood, A process of thin slices or veneers of wood glued and pressed together to form a very strong and long lasting product. The same technique was used for the production of gunstocks, of later K98s albeit thicker. The plate on the other hand is a different matter, It is a natural organic piece of wood (oak in this case) which over time will show natural signs of slow decay, it would naturally expand and contract with the different seasons, resulting in slight warping, shrinking even maybe slight cracking in places, It would be more evident in this case because the plate appears to have never had a protective finish applied and shows the open grain . In my opinion of working in the Antique trade this item was not made that long ago and was produced from the modern process of kiln dried timber ( oak ) which would explain its perfect state. I have no doubt thorstens plate was around during the Third Reich, However, I believe at that time it was still a tree.

[Steve T]

Dear Gentlemen collectors,

Yesterday I received via E-mail a pic of my Reichsnährstand plate from the office and pic archive of the german auction house where I bought the piece.

It´s size was 4 MB which I could not post here so I had to re-size it - I hope that Steve is still able to find out when this pic was taken by the staff of the auction house.

I also have no problem to send him via E-mail the original pic sent to me by the auction house (4 MB) as well if that helps to reveal any necessary evidence and data to reveal the truth in this case.

Please notice: also in their taken pic the carved details of this piece are not absolutely clearly visable due to lighting conditions - just the same effect as it was when I took my pics of the piece.

I can tell you the time in the file:

Model = Canon EOS 50D
Date Time Original = 2011-11-17 19:29:11
Date Time Digitized = 2011-11-17 19:29:11

As for the picture, really difficult to see any of the details. By all means email it.

The lighting is soft, almost perpendicular to the plate, not the way to show detail but let us have a look at the bigger one.

[Thorsten B.]

Toby,

Thank you for sharing your opinion and beliefs.

Can you also provide facts to support them?

[Tobysauer]

Toby,

Thank you for sharing your opinion and beliefs.

Can you also provide facts to support them?

I do not need to answer or provide any facts to support my opinions !
I am just explaining the knowledge of which I learnt working in the Antique trade (including Antique restoration)
At the end of the day (as other people say on this fine discussion forum) as long as you are happy and comfortable with an item in your collection, then that is ok, however if you are trying to sell a questionable item, then that is another matter!

[Hoss]

In my opinion, the detractors who are deriding this item as "too new" are totally off base. No award collector would say that a badge could not be original because it looks new, no uniform collector would condemn a cap or tunic on the basis of a like-new appearance. Any collector of Third Reich material experienced in his field, be it documents or belt buckles, will have seen any number of absolutely factory mint items. For items in most categories, aging is not simply a factor of time but is a combination of many factors like exposure to dust, heat, humidity, sunlight, handling or storage wear, other environmental factors, etc. There is absolutely no reason why a wooden object carved during the war must have any appreciable patination. We can assume that this plate would have been waxed after manufacture, this finish might only be perceptible in hand but what might account for what one has called a lack of oxidation. I have had and held many wartime German firearms in mint condition with wood stocks that appeared as brand new.

I have and have seen any number of hand-made objects from that time that are not masterworks of quality. I believe that the person who made this plate did have an appreciable level of skill and that the quality of this piece is within the realm of what I find acceptable for Third Reich artwork. Looking for instance at oil paintings from that time (portraits of soldiers, etc.) we can see a huge range of quality, from photorealistic masterpieces to paintings of crude character wheich nevertheless were framed and hung in homes. This plate that we are calling a "presentation piece" may have been intended to be given as a souvenir or token of appreciation rather than a momentous gift.

This piece was originally stated to be fake due to a percieved difference in some photos. Thorsten has stated he has or is getting a photo of this from the auction house where it was purchased, I believe this. Now we have switched to new straw man arguments like "too new" or "new growth wood." Would only old growth trees have been available for lumber, in WWII?

Here are three WHW items from 1943. They were made at the same time and I assume looked the same when new. The "Ostpreussen" piece shows real age, it has darkened from oxidation, the paint has faded with time. The "Friesland" piece shows less oxidation and fading, but still shows some age. The "Egerland" piece looks absolutely new, zero oxidation or toning on a fresh bright clean wood surface, the paint remains bright and vibrant. It should be abundantly obvious that storage conditions determine how a wood item will age.

Absolute magic post Chris

Regards
Eric

[PMan]

SS Plate

Here is a real SS plate. Made by E. Sund Berlin W8. Nothing fancy.
Peter

[Steve T]

Here is a real SS plate. Made by E. Sund Berlin W8. Nothing fancy.
Peter

Peter,

That company made some wonderful pieces, thanks for showing.

I posted mine a while back on WAF and also asked if anyone had a Sund plate to share and now we have another one

[PMan]

Sund

Peter,

That company made some wonderful pieces, thanks for showing.

I posted mine a while back on WAF and also if anyone had a Sund plate to share and now we have another one

WOW! I thought I had the only piece. I did not know Sund was known at all. I did not show the mark for obvious reasons.
Peter