DougB exposes "Champagne Rune" SS Decal Fraud and Adds a Coffin Nail to XRFacts

M45 said:
http://www.oakleafmilitaria.com/144hel2.html

144HEL2 - Waffen SS M42 single decal combat helmet by NS. This helmet features a near mint runic shield on a semi-rough field gray textured finish. The exterior displays light age and storage wear. The interior displays a mint leather liner size stamped 58 ( medium). The rear apron is lightly stamped with the batch number that is not clearly legible . An excellent example of an SS M42. $6500

That SS decal is interesting. Of course it does not belong on an NS shell, but it looks as if the border was painted separately and is coming off, revealing the bright silver background.
Click to expand...

If that $6.5k C SS lid is typical, then the "C" hue could likely be an unintended consequence of ageing and if that is a "spray job," then there could be a clear top coat that's causing the "C" hue with age that doesn't affect the silver paint that was under the black border. I would think that a clear top coat would be useful to soften the edge between the silver shield and black border.

I don't think that lid is worth $6.5k.
 
Let me tell you, the materials needed to do this type of work are readily available and relatively inexpensive considering the upside $ potential. The following is all you need to get going:

http://www.uscutter.com/Airbrush-Painters-Stencil-Creation-Kit

The actual detail that these can achieve would really surprise you. The way it would work is as you suggest - apply the outline stencil and spray the shield silver. Then, lay the insert back in and remove the areas to be painted black. Spray them black, then remove the spray mask. Last step would be to apply a clear lacquer probably, which could be tinted to "antique" the sliver to a champagne color.

That last helmet you posted looks very much like it was done this way.
 
Thanks Farb. So, would the stencil be reusable so that the "decal" would look the same? How many "decals" before you needed a new stencil? If this was such a secret and this explanation for the "Champagne rune" never came up, then one would think one or only a few people are responsible for creating these. Maybe he/they made a bunch and then stopped and we are seeing the same ones resold.
 
It's my impression that the "C" hue wasn't intended. It's just a function of age and the materials.
 
mrfarb said:
Let me tell you, the materials needed to do this type of work are readily available and relatively inexpensive considering the upside $ potential. The following is all you need to get going:

http://www.uscutter.com/Airbrush-Painters-Stencil-Creation-Kit

The actual detail that these can achieve would really surprise you. The way it would work is as you suggest - apply the outline stencil and spray the shield silver. Then, lay the insert back in and remove the areas to be painted black. Spray them black, then remove the spray mask. Last step would be to apply a clear lacquer probably, which could be tinted to "antique" the sliver to a champagne color.

That last helmet you posted looks very much like it was done this way.
Click to expand...

Air brushing in general surprises me. I've got no artistic talent. I'm always amazed by air brush work that looks like a photograph or sidewalk artists that can recreate the Mona Lisa on concrete pavement with chalk.
 
tjg79 said:
Air brushing in general surprises me. I've got no artistic talent. I'm always amazed by air brush work that looks like a photograph or sidewalk artists that can recreate the Mona Lisa on concrete pavement with chalk.
Click to expand...

That's obviously the inspiration for these fakes. Back in the day the fake SS decals, the transfers, were wonky and "one dimensional" without the metallic backing and content. To make a fake you either must have decal transfers created, an expensive proposition unless you are making and selling thousands, which pretty much exposes the fraud, or you can have multiple layers of paint airbrushed on a template and lacquered over, as apparently done here. That no one in the SS lid world investigated this, used magnification (available since the late 16th century), etc., IMHO shows complicity or gross negligence by the "experts".

It will be fascinating to see the Hicks "counterpoint" to what DougB produces. Thankfully, we no longer have to rely on WAF as the sole source of our information on this issue.
 
Last edited:
http://wehrmacht-awards.com/FORUMS/showthread.php?t=578059

This thread was closed down by the mod (surprised?). I would like to see the photo of the NS DD Champagne SS helmet.

RGD51: "Zams premise is well founded but only scrapes the surface because of what can be rendered by a competent airbrush guy with accurate frisket stencils, pigments, and aging techniques...Ka-Ching!"

DougB: "To airbrush the perfect fake you need to have a stencil accurate enough to show the fingerprints of correct SS decals at 200x. What are the fingerprints you ask? Well, not sure if the fakers have looked at a couple hundred SS decals at that level of magnification to know. You cannot fake the natural aging of decades of oxidation to copper in the metallic pulver either or the correct construction of the varieties of makers that shows up at 200x magnification either."

The date is 02-28-12, about 3-3/4 years ago, still early.

Doug is a pretty sharp guy. So sharp in fact, that he brings up the topic of fingerprints on correct (original) SS decals that show up with high magnification (200x). He then posits the question, "What are the fingerprints you ask?" as though he is about to tell us this very important piece of information. But then, he never answers his own question. Nobody on that thread ever confronted Doug about this and I doubt that anyone on WAF would catch it today.

Fingerprints (or the fine details that distinguish original SS decals from fakes) is apparently privileged information. For the "unwashed masses" it is sufficient for them to know only that such things exist, but to know exactly what the fingerprints are is information reserved for the privileged few. And since knowledge is power in this hobby (and everywhere else, it seems) those in the know can dictate to the rest of us only what we need to know (not the fine differences between original and fake SS decals). Remember, if Kelly says its real, then it must be.
 

Attachments

  • STENCIL INSIGNIA II SAMIR.jpg
    STENCIL INSIGNIA II SAMIR.jpg
    146.4 KB · Views: 19
  • STENCIL INSIGNIA.jpg
    STENCIL INSIGNIA.jpg
    234.9 KB · Views: 29
  • STENCIL INSIGNIA III.jpg
    STENCIL INSIGNIA III.jpg
    163.4 KB · Views: 17
Last edited:
Interesting read on WAF. A good way of discouraging inquisitive minds from asking questions essential to the survival of the hobby of collecting. SSamir, foamspoon and Stahlhelm1976 have demonstrated stunning levels of resistance to education. I hope one day DougB will/can deliver -but I'm not holding my breath.
 
M45 said:
He than posits the question, "What are the fingerprints you ask?" as though he is about to tell us this very important piece of information. But then, he never answers his own question. Nobody on that thread ever confronted Doug about this and I doubt that anyone on WAF would catch it today.

Fingerprints (or the fine details that distinguish original SS decals from fakes) is apparently privileged information. For the "unwashed masses" it is sufficient for them to know only that such things exist, but to know exactly what the fingerprints are is information reserved for the privileged few. And since knowledge is power in this hobby (and everywhere else, it seems) those in the know can dictate to the rest of us only what we need to know (not the fine differences between original and fake SS decals). Remember, if Kelly says its real, then it must be.
Click to expand...

I interpreted that question as a rhetorical question. The answer would required the study of many pictures at 200x magnification. The message is that USB microscopes are affordable and collectors should be using them to study their lids and learn to detect fakes. I don't get the impression that this is an example of the "privileged information" issue.
 
tjg79 said:
I interpreted that question as a rhetorical question. The answer would required the study of many pictures at 200x magnification. The message is that USB microscopes are affordable and collectors should be using them to study their lids and learn to detect fakes. I don't get the impression that this is an example of the "privileged information" issue.
Click to expand...


I suppose it's another way to see the matter. I had assumed that since Doug brought up the 'fingerprint' issue with original SS decals, he must obviously be aware that such a thing exists. And since we know he has been looking at these under magnification for some time (200x, 400x) as per his claims on other WAF, GHW and WRF posts, I assumed that he knew what those 'fingerprints' were.

"Regarding high (200x-400x) magnification comparisons to other SS decals; The NS decals I have studied under magnification appear generally sharper in print, but do not posses any signs of modern print as far as I can tell. The pulver has a bronze effect and is slightly thinner than on other SS decals. But I have only magnified a small handful compared to 30 or so of Pocher, ET and Q SS decals and a good couple dozen EF. So I am very cautious to draw any conclusions other than there is a fingerprint I have noticed on these at 200 and 400x magnification which is unique. Each SS decal has this unique fingerprint under high magnification as does any Heer, LW or KM decal. In fact, any mass produced printed item made has a unique "fingerprint" at high magnification no matter what it is. Fakes cannot copy to the 200 and 400x magnification level, it is that simple." (post#134) July 2, 2013.


DougB: "To airbrush the perfect fake you need to have a stencil accurate enough to show the fingerprints of correct SS decals at 200x. What are the fingerprints you ask? Well, not sure if the fakers have looked at a couple hundred SS decals at that level of magnification to know." 02-28-12.

A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked in order to make a point rather than to elicit an answer. (Wikipedia)

It appears that Doug knew about fingerprints on SS decals on 02-28-12, but did he know what they were at that time?

He clearly knew what the fingerprints were by the July 2, 2013 post. But notice that we are never told what those fingerprints are. That is really the key to being able to correctly authenticate SS helmets, IMO. The fingerprints are the key that unlocks knowledge. And knowledge is power in this hobby. Those with the knowledge have the power, and those without are dependent on those with. "It is that simple".
 
Last edited:
The guy that needs the scrutiny is Kelly Hicks. He's the biggest promoter of these C SS lids and he sells them too. I would put him on the persons of interest list because of all his involvement with these apparent fakes. How many C SS lids has he sold over the past thirty years? Now, he's supposedly preparing a "lengthy essay" defending these turds.

Hicks needs some exposure. What does he say about XRF lid testing in his book? How does he claim the XRFacts test method outs fakes? Does his XRF chapter give any indication that he understands the science and the elements of scientific testing?
 
Last edited:
Hicks: SS=Steel Updated Edition 2010 pp.274-275
 

Attachments

  • HICKS XRF.jpg
    HICKS XRF.jpg
    243.1 KB · Views: 25
M45 said:
Hicks: SS=Steel Updated Edition 2010 pp.274-275
Click to expand...

"I'm using 'science' to find out what's in a decal. I won't tell you what's in a decal because of forgers. Only the blessed circle gets to know what's real. Now go get your shine box, boy."
 
nirvana said:
"I'm using 'science' to find out what's in a decal. I won't tell you what's in a decal because of forgers. Only the blessed circle gets to know what's real. Now go get your shine box, boy."
Click to expand...

I'm glad that you mentioned it. The idea that we don't want to let this information get out because fakers will use it is a cop-out, a hording of information. I could have done the same thing with the lot# book but chose instead to share it with collectors.
 
The problem with the lid collecting community is that it's populated with guys like Hicks who are the anointed lid gurus. He's definitely one that practices the "privileged information" game. The bigger fools are the ones that pay for his SS lid authentication services. I can't wait to read the Hicks "lengthy essay" on C SS lid legitimacy. If it reads like his SS Steel XRF chapter, then this SS lid guru head-to-head between Kelly Hicks and Doug B should be a slam-dunk for Doug B.
 
M45 said:
Hicks: SS=Steel Updated Edition 2010 pp.274-275
Click to expand...

What's on the next page?

Is this the extent of his XRF lid testing knowledge and expertise?

Based on the C SS lid and XRF lid testing information you've posted from that Hicks' lid "reference" book, I'd send it back to Amazon for a full refund and write a one-star review.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top