Pic Sticky "Debate"

[Aaron]

This may come off the wrong way, but why isn't every matching rifle that is posted added to the picture reference?

I think the biggest argument against it will be that it will clutter the reference section, but frankly the way it is itemized is as efficient as you can get. Simply using ctrl+F will give you access to whatever information you desire.

Another argument against it is the time and labor needed to accomplish this, I cannot speak to what process is needed for an admin to sticky a thread, but matching examples are posted so few and far between these days that I think it would be very easy to keep up with the ones posted.

Another argument against it would be that there is no way to control consistency in photos. This could be remedied by creating a template post and simply pinning it to the top of the forum where everyone would be able to take pictures in the correct orientation, order, and quantity.

I think the greatest benefit to this would to remedy the biggest crutch this forum has: being unable to search 3 letter codes. As we all know there is a character limit to search, and it conveniently is the same number of characters needed to find German 3-digit/letter codes. By pinning every matching example in the future, it would be far easier to begin your search in the reference thread.

Another issue is when trying to do a "case study" of say, a certain year or serial range, one has to find every thread in the forum with the search function (many of which you will miss due to keywords) before they can begin their comparison, which often means trying to find posts that are now a decade old.

Finally, I think the reference thread over the years has not been maintained as well as it could be (no offense to our great staff here who work completely free, for their passion in the hobby). There are stickies that contain very few or very poor pictures from the beginning of the forum days, and excellent examples with better pictures have been posted since then that should have supplemented or outright replaced these old pins. There are also plenty of rifles that could fill letter block gaps and many unique examples that for some reason or another, have not been pinned.

Just some thoughts on my lunchbreak, look forward to a productive discussion.

Edit: I'm not asking for increased permissions, but I'd happily put my money where my mouth is and contribute man hours into searching for rifles and helping update the reference thread.

 

[grimlin13]

Edit: I'm not asking for increased permissions, but I'd happily put my money where my mouth is and contribute man hours into searching for rifles and helping update the reference thread.

I think (although what I think doesn`t count for much) that for a young, enthusiastic collector who is willing to devote the time and energy to tackle a task as this is a wonderful idea. You have my vote.

 

[ugafx4]

Disclaimer: The following is my own personal opinion.

I believe the usefulness of the picture sticky reference lies in having several preeminent rifles for each date/code that provide a guide to what an original rifle should possibly look like. There are so many factors of originality that go into a 98k that I believe the reference section would be overwhelmed quickly if every matching example was added. Beyond that, I personally believe originality is paramount to the reference section. Outside of extremely rare circumstances, the rifles added to the sticky are in their original condition. It takes a trained eye to properly discern that state and I feel like the powers to be do a great job with that. The majority of collectors use the reference by clicking on a rifle, comparing it to what they are looking at, and then moving on. Unfortunately, these collectors are not trending rifle changes block by block, barrel codes, etc which is a deeper level of collecting and research. That is where the serial number studies come in, where photos of the rifles are not as important as the data. Perhaps a new thread endeavor, combining photo references and serial studies is the proper direction to go.

Google site search is the best way to search this forum. Type the below into google (feel free to switch up BNZ for whatever) and you will get the results you need. You can sort by most recent etc too. I do not use the built in forum search unless I am looking for posts by a specific person.

 

[heavy_mech]

While I agree with a lot of what's been said, I'm against just adding 'every matching rifle'. 2 things there. I could see the server size becoming an issue, but maybe that's not the case? The other side is that I also believe they should be exceptional AND original.

I will either recommend or second nominees and like to see new items added, mainly because the photos are usually better and more extensive. If you look at some of the older items, some have a half dozen of less fairly lame photos by today's standards.

 

[Bigdibbs88]

I also find it to be a non-issue. The books and gooogle should be able to answer pretty much whatever you’re looking for.

 

[joryfreeburg]

I have got to agree with what’s been already said….. I think the pic sticky index is well run, are there examples that come up from time to time that don’t get added that I believe should…. Sure but they are few and far between. The pic stick index has been very valuable to me over the years and I have used it to vet many of my acquisitions. Plus with the similar treads section at the bottom of the page, when looking at a particular year/code many other rifles and examples come up right there…. YMMV

 

[Aaron]

I also find it to be a non-issue. The books and gooogle should be able to answer pretty much whatever you’re looking for.

My main problem has been restorations, for example I need to know what barrel band number location works for a bnz4 e block. There is a b block with the SN location on the middle, and then I can find an e block eith them on the top. I can find no rifles inbetween that here, which would be wicked easy to do if more were posted.

 

[Aaron]

Disclaimer: The following is my own personal opinion.

I believe the usefulness of the picture sticky reference lies in having several preeminent rifles for each date/code that provide a guide to what an original rifle should possibly look like. There are so many factors of originality that go into a 98k that I believe the reference section would be overwhelmed quickly if every matching example was added. Beyond that, I personally believe originality is paramount to the reference section. Outside of extremely rare circumstances, the rifles added to the sticky are in their original condition. It takes a trained eye to properly discern that state and I feel like the powers to be do a great job with that. The majority of collectors use the reference by clicking on a rifle, comparing it to what they are looking at, and then moving on. Unfortunately, these collectors are not trending rifle changes block by block, barrel codes, etc which is a deeper level of collecting and research. That is where the serial number studies come in, where photos of the rifles are not as important as the data. Perhaps a new thread endeavor, combining photo references and serial studies is the proper direction to go.

Google site search is the best way to search this forum. Type the below into google (feel free to switch up BNZ for whatever) and you will get the results you need. You can sort by most recent etc too. I do not use the built in forum search unless I am looking for posts by a specific person.


View attachment 393556

This is a great help, the vast majority of my problems stem the search limits, this will achieve the functionality I was shooting for with an "updated" reference.

 

[Aaron]

While I agree with a lot of what's been said, I'm against just adding 'every matching rifle'. 2 things there. I could see the server size becoming an issue, but maybe that's not the case? The other side is that I also believe they should be exceptional AND original.

I will either recommend or second nominees and like to see new items added, mainly because the photos are usually better and more extensive. If you look at some of the older items, some have a half dozen of less fairly lame photos by today's standards.

When I say matching I should have been more precise, but I was implying only original condition, matching rifles. Matching rifles with messed with stocks for example, would not make the cut.

 

[Aaron]

I also find it to be a non-issue. The books and gooogle should be able to answer pretty much whatever you’re looking for.

The issue is they do not, there are many gaps in letter blocks in the book that cannot account for small changes. for example several of the rifle study tables have missing or incorrectly listed information.

 

[Hambone]

There are a few mods who maintain it. I started this as a concept when the site started as a reference for allowing quick comparison to vetted originals. If everyone had access to post what they thought was original we’d have turds slipping in there. We’d then be comparing turds to turds. Honestly, for the purpose it serves, we could almost call the pic sticky reference section done. Anyone wanting to do deeper dives can search examples of codes and dates with our search feature. Just IMHO.

 

[Aaron]

There are a few mods who maintain it. I started this as a concept when the site started as a reference for allowing quick comparison to vetted originals. If everyone had access to post what they thought was original we’d have turds slipping in there. We’d then be comparing turds to turds. Honestly, for the purpose it serves, we could almost call the pic sticky reference section done. Anyone wanting to do deeper dives can search examples of codes and dates with our search feature. Just IMHO.

I'm not saying let anyone sticky rifles though, it would still be on a mod basis. With the search function shown by ugafx4 my biggest gripe is now irrelevant and I am content with things as they sit.

 

[CanadianAR]

most people just don’t do a good enough photo spread to be worthy of reference. Also they externally host images and can disappear.

 

[Aaron]

most people just don’t do a good enough photo spread to be worthy of reference. Also they externally host images and can disappear.

Agreed. The template concept is nice but I understand it would only work if people followed it, which I doubt most newbies or non tech-savvy people would do.

 

[Hambone]

Agreed. The template concept is nice but I understand it would only work if people followed it, which I doubt most newbies or non tech-savvy people would do.

A good premise, assuming all would do it like you. However, it would become a trainwreck IMHO. You’d get Gunbonker carnies and “high end” mongers posting stuff to legitimize it for sale, etc. As it stands now, limited, only vetted stuff is in there. Anyone here calling any of it out and being right gets it removed.

 

[heavy_mech]

A good premise, assuming all would do it like you. However, it would become a trainwreck IMHO. You’d get Gunbonker carnies and “high end” mongers posting stuff to legitimize it for sale, etc. As it stands now, limited, only vetted stuff is in there. Anyone here calling any of it out and being right gets it removed.

Sad but true. It's happened a few times in 'teaser' threads they started.

 

[RavenOps]

If I understand the original post, an addition of originally vetted examples would be of benefit.

When I go to the pic reference page for assistance, many examples provide nice rifles that are poorly photographed. This is often due to digital photography at the time.

Not to be difficult but a picture (pic) is a human creation like a painting or illustration, a photograph (photo) is an actual image.

I agree, the reference page needs to be updated with original vetted rifles. JM2c

 

[pzjgr]

If I understand the original post, an addition of originally vetted examples would be of benefit.

When I go to the pic reference page for assistance, many examples provide nice rifles that are poorly photographed. This is often due to digital photography at the time.

Not to be difficult but a picture (pic) is a human creation like a painting or illustration, a photograph (photo) is an actual image.

I agree, the reference page needs to be updated with original vetted rifles. JM2c

Sorry the guys who were around in 2010 (when this board got started) and before who started cataloging and photographing their rifles don't live up to your standards...we tried...

 

[Hambone]

If I understand the original post, an addition of originally vetted examples would be of benefit.

When I go to the pic reference page for assistance, many examples provide nice rifles that are poorly photographed. This is often due to digital photography at the time.

Not to be difficult but a picture (pic) is a human creation like a painting or illustration, a photograph (photo) is an actual image.

I agree, the reference page needs to be updated with original vetted rifles. JM2c

Round up the folks with original rifles and superb photos and I'll add them to the pic sticky

 

[Muncher 1953]

Round up the folks with original rifles and superb photos and I'll add them to the pic sticky

do we need to obtain the OP’s permission?
I stumbled across a post from G d’O containing links to a half dozen Sauers that came from original owner posts, several of those I’d nominate for the sticky, good quality images & well covered details. I was researching the differences between ‘37 & ‘38 S/147s & 147s, great stuff there.

& OOPS, having opened my mouth, I reviewed the post & found one is already stickied, (5068) several dead links & one nice looking rifle which some thought might have a boinked bolt. The rifle well photo’d by RavenOps, 8636n would be my vote to add to stickys. I’ll paste link when my fingers work better.