Questionable Camos

[mcorioles]

Still bad?


http://www.ghw2.com/topic/54027-m42-netted-nd/

 

[mcorioles]

Also M45 some of your points are valid and correct.Just not about a lot of lids posted here.

 

[M45]

And? So again soely your opinion should be taken as gospel.

I can post pics of different camos too that are real and not all are drab.

Do me a favor and look at some period pics from Market Garden of German Camos.

Tiger stripe camos at shown.Hell, there's period pics of a lid with leaf patterns.

If there wasn't photographic evidence Iwouldnt believe it either.....but they exist.

Period photos of exotic camos are a big stumbling block to modern day camo collectors, IMO. Most of those photos were taken by German war correspondents, a profession known for its desire for dramatic photography. Exotic camos no doubt grabbed their attention and thus the varied photos of exotic camos that we have. The problem is that it gives the false impression that there were loads of these around, and thus loads should have survived to be collected today. Just like the period photos of row upon row of pre-war SS troopers wearing SS blackies, or ranks of marching paratroops wearing M36/M37 para helmets. Where are all of those helmets now ? There were so many at one time, why are only a very few found in collections today ?

It's the same issue with exotic camos. Yes they existed as per period photos, but like the SS blackies and M36/37 para helmets, very few survived. And those that did have long ago found permanent homes in high-end collections.

The chances that YOU or your friends are going to find such rare treasures are quite slim. Understanding that is the key to not being ripped off.

 

[nirvana]

Still bad?


http://www.ghw2.com/topic/54027-m42-netted-nd/

How is one supposed to authenticate burlap string wrapped around a helmet? This is a serious question. I see a worn out net made out of some variety of natural fiber, and it's draped over a helmet with a bent wire at the front. What separates this helmet with a net from any other helmet with a worn out net?

 

[Player11]

Here's a rule of thumb I would recommend to camo collectors:

- Does the camo jump out at you, trying to get your attention, trying to impress you ? There's a good chance that it's a postwar creation.

- Does the camo sit there unassuming, trying to blend in, trying to hide, is unimpressive and quite bland, something you might well pass over at a show or shop not realizing it even is a camo ?

That is what you really want to see (assuming you are in the market for originals).

OH My God. This is pure rubbish. Hope non a single collector will follow this piece of shite.

the rules i would recommend to collectors ( not only camos)
-if you want to become a collector, first begin for decaled helmets, after studyng them, analizing them, materials , etc... begin to study camos, pattern model, etc... allways ask before buying ( but please to somebody serious, not to M45 that doesnt have f... g idea of what a camo is), never trust in anybody, even a dealer or a friendly collector, allways search opinions the more you have the better it will be

another of your phrases that go straight to my signature
Does the camo jump out at you, trying to get your attention, trying to impress you ? There's a good chance that it's a postwar creation What a stupid assessment

 

[GunKraut]

Ham, I think we've reached the point where some need a time out in Infernus solitary confinement. This thread has become unbearable.
StuGIII needs company.

 

[Player11]

How is one supposed to authenticate burlap string wrapped around a helmet? This is a serious question. I see a worn out net made out of some variety of natural fiber, and it's draped over a helmet with a bent wire at the front. What separates this helmet with a net from any other helmet with a worn out net?

You must move a little the burlap to see the interaction between the helmet and the straps, probably it will have left some marks under the strap. Many times a good point to judge a camo is just moving the strap that uses to be laying in the visor, as the helmets uses to be placed in this position the strap protects the paint under it and it gives a kind of dark to the paint.

Look this example

 

[mcorioles]

Wise advice
The same guys saying this isnt so probably fell for the sham wow debacle too

Wrong again as usual.

LOLsays the guy who passes judgement on several camos from 1 picture!

Ha!

I would have said I need more pics and close ups.

But that's just me........... and hundreds of collectors that know what they are doing.

 

[mcorioles]

How is one supposed to authenticate burlap string wrapped around a helmet? This is a serious question. I see a worn out net made out of some variety of natural fiber, and it's draped over a helmet with a bent wire at the front. What separates this helmet with a net from any other helmet with a worn out net?

Not a burlap string first of all.
Not a "bent wire at the front" either.

Not trying to be a dick but your lack of knowledge and comments are confusing.

You go on to make statements that I listed above that aren't accurate to say the least and want to know what makes this one different.

If you know what to look for it isn't that difficult.
Since "I don't post my reasons here you go".

1.Is the overall look consistent?Components undisturbed,net showing interaction with shell?
2. The net hooks oxidize on the shell similar to wires.
3 Not recent fraying and compression where the net goes over the net edge.
4. Knowing what a real net looks like.

Also these ABSOLUTELY need hands on.But according to Nibs and M45 they knew it was bad from 1 picture.

For the reasons I listed above there is NO WAY they could make the observations I listed from that 1 picture.

CASE CLOSED

 

[Eurofighter]

Guys,

I really wish that we could end this 'Soap-Opera' of conflict, child like behaviour and personal attacks and get this thread back on track to its purpose of evaluating Camo helmets. Wether that be a critical, objective or conclusive evaluation or just individual opinion.

The 'squabble' is becoming tiresome.

There are two members both on opposite sides of this argument that add absolutely nothing to the debate, both IMHO need to grow up and get on with their lives.

Opinions and counter arguments on various camouflage helmets have been written. It is for fellow collectors to make up their own minds on what makes them comfortable with a camo purchase as that 'comfort zone' will vary between each and every one of us.

I have had my thoughts on camo helmets changed a great deal by the points mentioned during this thread - some points taken on-board and others not. I have found it both interesting and educational...and unfortunately of late, as mentioned, tiresome.

Please enough is enough.

EF

 

[deadeye18]

Guys,

I really wish that we could end this 'Soap-Opera' of conflict, child like behaviour and personal attacks and get this thread back on track to its purpose of evaluating Camo helmets. Wether that be a critical, objective or conclusive evaluation or just individual opinion.

The 'squabble' is becoming tiresome.

There are two members both on opposite sides of this argument that add absolutely nothing to the debate, both IMHO need to grow up and get on with their lives.

Opinions and counter arguments on various camouflage helmets have been written. It is for fellow collectors to make up their own minds on what makes them comfortable with a camo purchase as that 'comfort zone' will vary between each and every one of us.

I have had my thoughts on camo helmets changed a great deal by the points mentioned during this thread - some points taken on-board and others not. I have found it both interesting and educational...and unfortunately of late, as mentioned, tiresome.

Please enough is enough.

EF

Well said

 

[Eurofighter]

For discussion,


As regards camouflage patterns - 'Disguising the presence of a person, animal or object by painting or covering them to make them blend in with their surroundings'

My thoughts are:

Camo patterns on combat soldiers helmets would generally be used for an offensive or at most during one campaign. Then they would need to be changed so that the camo pattern was not conflicting to the new operational environment. Due to supplies or time constraints this could become difficult.
Hence the use of helmet covers or natural camouflage (Mud or foliage). I assume these would be the preferred options, as they could be easily changed or removed.

For Armed Units in non-combat zones/environments or units stationed at fixed defensive positions a 'camo' job could be facilitated and the chances increased of finding an original.

The 'SS' were often in combat - They also used, when possible helmet covers, but how many SS camo helmets are found? Practically none compared to the volumes of Heer and LW camo helmets that we see today. Read into that what you will, I have my own opinions.

To me when evaluating a camouflage helmet many factors need to be taken into account. What was the helmet under consideration used for? Where was it used, for what was it used - combat, strategic defence, desert etc.
Not one factor or 'Rule' applies to ALL camouflage helmets.

Just my self-formed opinions to-date, still much to learn and to appreciate. Please let us get this thread back to its original purpose.

EF

 

[Niblet]

Guys,

I really wish that we could end this 'Soap-Opera' of conflict, child like behaviour and personal attacks and get this thread back on track to its purpose of evaluating Camo helmets. Wether that be a critical, objective or conclusive evaluation or just individual opinion.

The 'squabble' is becoming tiresome.

There are two members both on opposite sides of this argument that add absolutely nothing to the debate, both IMHO need to grow up and get on with their lives.

Opinions and counter arguments on various camouflage helmets have been written. It is for fellow collectors to make up their own minds on what makes them comfortable with a camo purchase as that 'comfort zone' will vary between each and every one of us.

I have had my thoughts on camo helmets changed a great deal by the points mentioned during this thread - some points taken on-board and others not. I have found it both interesting and educational...and unfortunately of late, as mentioned, tiresome.

Please enough is enough.

EF

If you have forund something useful in these posts then pls share,,because M45 needs all the support he can get,,and its appreciated knowing others are learning

 

[capt14k]

And like you were told earlier.A poster here said he talked to a vet and it was common for non combat troops to Camo their helmets because they thought it was cool.

Another theory of yours evaporates.

And once again your last paragraph is pure conjecture, like most of your observations sorry.

At GHW we talk about the actual helmet, not stories or what we think troops have done.

Why would a non combat troop helmet be any more valuable than one made by Walt Disney or any other USGI? If the camo wasn't used by and camouflaged by combat troops is it really a war used camo? Just a thought.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[Warrior1354]

That's what really makes this type of helment collecting so dangerously to get screwed. If you know nothing about collecting helmets expecially camo helmets then you risk losing a lot of money. M45 did bring up a good point there are a lot of original ones out there but in the past it was hard to find them. Why is it all the sudden tons of them are coming out of the woodwork and thats not just because the veterans and collecters are passing away.

I always believe what a wise collector told me when I first started collecting anything. If it sounds too good to be true or if it looks too good to be true most likely it's a fake.

 

[capt14k]

You must move a little the burlap to see the interaction between the helmet and the straps, probably it will have left some marks under the strap. Many times a good point to judge a camo is just moving the strap that uses to be laying in the visor, as the helmets uses to be placed in this position the strap protects the paint under it and it gives a kind of dark to the paint.

Look this example

About time player11. Why was that so hard for you to share your knowledge. Posts like that are much more productive than personal attacks on M45.

Why was his previous post about a camo jumping out at you likely being post war vs a camo that blends in likely original. Wouldn't a camo that jumps out at you as soon as you see it really not be a very good camo. Isn't the point of a camo to blend in? I think that was the point M45 was making. That a bright shiny camo helmet would not make very good camouflage during a war. I am asking for an honest answer from yourself. As I read this thread it is becoming obvious to me that you also possess knowledge of camos. If you and M45 could have civil debates on camos presented this thread would be much more valuable.

McOrioles I'm afraid just relies on the opinions of others and is only here because he is upset his collection is being dissected. He is purely trying to discredit M45 without offering any defense of his items. For instance if someone said my Finnish Bayonets are fake I would certainly be able to defend them and likely prove the person wrong. During the back and forth both parties and other observers would likely learn a thing or two. Why can't the same thing be done here?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[nirvana]

Not a burlap string first of all.
Not a "bent wire at the front" either.

Not trying to be a dick but your lack of knowledge and comments are confusing.

You go on to make statements that I listed above that aren't accurate to say the least and want to know what makes this one different.

If you know what to look for it isn't that difficult.
Since "I don't post my reasons here you go".

1.Is the overall look consistent?Components undisturbed,net showing interaction with shell?
2. The net hooks oxidize on the shell similar to wires.
3 Not recent fraying and compression where the net goes over the net edge.
4. Knowing what a real net looks like.

Also these ABSOLUTELY need hands on.But according to Nibs and M45 they knew it was bad from 1 picture.

For the reasons I listed above there is NO WAY they could make the observations I listed from that 1 picture.

CASE CLOSED

The net isn't burlap string and that bent wire isn't bent wire?

And that helmet deemed to be original does not have oxidation (that I can see) where the wire meets the shell, I don't see wear on the helmet from the net, and the net doesn't look to have any unique fraying from being on the helmet. It's just a beat up net. And what is an "original" net? I've seen random net identified as "period Norwegian fishing type nets" and that's been accepted. What sort of net is bad? Is this helmet original in your opinion?

 

[Player11]

About time player11. Why was that so hard for you to share your knowledge. Posts like that are much more productive than personal attacks on M45.

Why was his previous post about a camo jumping out at you likely being post war vs a camo that blends in likely original. Wouldn't a camo that jumps out at you as soon as you see it really not be a very good camo. Isn't the point of a camo to blend in? I think that was the point M45 was making. That a bright shiny camo helmet would not make very good camouflage during a war. I am asking for an honest answer from yourself. As I read this thread it is becoming obvious to me that you also possess knowledge of camos. If you and M45 could have civil debates on camos presented this thread would be much more valuable.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

My friend, my little knowledge, is due to a hard field work of travelling and travelling across Europe when Internet was a dream, old times friend collectors, had to write letters instead of E-mails. I have seen collections much bigger than the ones actually in forums.

After many, many years of handling them, studying,discussing with other friends about fakes or odiginal ones, handling that helmet again,and discussing again after reaching to a neutral point.

As you can understand, im not going to share this study of many years with a stupid nerd and his dog that think they have the last word in VIRTUAL HELMETS .

Said in another way, you have study medicine and after years of being prepared comes somebody that says that can see your illness just wacthing your pics.

Lets be more serious than a " questionable camos " thread without even smelling them.

 

[capt14k]

Player11 I understand the work you put in but this is a forum. The point is to share knowledge. I think many would appreciate you sharing yours.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[M45]

GHW2 Normandy M42. Two extreme views on this one:

1. It is a rare original Normandy camo that is a bit salty but still authentic. Maybe a $2k piece ?

2. A rusted relic was postwar upgraded with a Normandy scheme before being chemically treated to simulate wear. Value, less than $500.

The fact that such a helmet would be given serious consideration in the first place should be troubling to a hobby that has been flooded with fake gear.