Let me make this clear.......I have no issue at all with your assessment nor this board nor critical assessment of any Camo.
My point is there are plenty of wreckless statements here,that's all.
Questionable Camos
- Thread starter M45
- Start date
Let me make this clear.......I have no issue at all with your assessment nor this board nor critical assessment of any Camo.
My point is there are plenty of wreckless statements here,that's all.
M45
Well-known member
Mr. Corioles, if you plan on sticking around in the camo collecting hobby, I would try to broaden your horizons a bit. One way to do that is right here on k98k. You've got that part right.
No way in hell you can tell if that Camo is fake by those pics.
The next thing is try to avoid telling people what they cannot do. You would be surprised by the experience on this forum. Also realize that there is a growing industry of fake kamo producers hell-bent on creating better and better kamo replicas for the express purpose of deceiving collectors and relieving them of their $$$$ (the average questionable kamo sells for between 2-4K).
IMO a very dangerous mindset has seeped into the camo hobby, subjectivity to the EXTREME; the idea that
"The Germans used all sorts of methods and materials to camo their helmets - so who are we to say that anything is not possible ?"
Subjective definition:
1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective).
2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual:
3. placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/subjective
This extreme subjectivity appears in statements like the reference to that obvious Latvian fake camo that, "well maybe it is a good one despite the bad liner". Or the Champagne SS diehards that said, "well maybe there ARE real Champagnes. Maybe the Germans DID airbrush on some insignia ? Who are we to say otherwise ?"
My OPINIONS on the subject camo: a very crude, amateurish fake intended to deceive only the most novice of camo collectors. Not much time was spent on selection of colors, scheme, or aging. This camo does not event fit a WWII German military theme, IMO. (Lollipop-green ?? Indeed) Other than some paint popped off, no real believable wear associated with originals. Bright, shiny finish, no age or depth to the paint that would indicate a 70 year old authentic relic from the past.
Attachments
Last edited:
Niblet
Left Nad
Additionally I might add that the "new guard" is also extremely lazy and generally accepts what the computer (forums) tell them and they take this as gospel and run with it
They are too lazy to do their own research,,, they are content to collect by letting the forum consensus call the items they have "good" or "not so good" (remember we dont want to hurt anyones feelings here,,lest the forum jagoff's call you names and get off the subject) If you doubt me just go to any militaria group on facebook
Myself,,I took a job in Germany for a year to travel around the country in my BMW and look at these battlefields and historic sites...
have spend hundreds if not thousands on reference material,,networked with other collectors and generally feel I am capable of a few things
can i spot every fake? certainly not but it has given me a feel for some items and the personalities in the hobby,,,,,
M45
Well-known member
Normandy 3-color
If that sorry excuse for a camo that looks like some toddler used as a barf-bag has so many possibilities, what will you do when confronted by the high-end fakes ?
Subjectivity focuses on the collector; how does this camo make you FEEL ? What are your gut FEELINGS about this one ? Does it push the right buttons ? How do other collectors FEEL about it ?
Remember that the Germans used ALL SORTS of materials and methods to camo helmets, so really ANYTHING is possible.
Objectivity, on the other hand, focuses on the object, the camo itself. It examines color, scheme, wear, rust, hard breaks, shine, matching wear of components, comparisons with known originals, patina etc... It is not concerned much with feelings.
If that sorry excuse for a camo that looks like some toddler used as a barf-bag has so many possibilities, what will you do when confronted by the high-end fakes ?
Subjectivity focuses on the collector; how does this camo make you FEEL ? What are your gut FEELINGS about this one ? Does it push the right buttons ? How do other collectors FEEL about it ?
Remember that the Germans used ALL SORTS of materials and methods to camo helmets, so really ANYTHING is possible.
Objectivity, on the other hand, focuses on the object, the camo itself. It examines color, scheme, wear, rust, hard breaks, shine, matching wear of components, comparisons with known originals, patina etc... It is not concerned much with feelings.
Attachments
Last edited:
mauser99
Senior Member
All Im asking for is the proof. Where's the proof its fake ??? What can you see that all us lower life forms cant ?
I agree the Watermelon helmet is a real stinker. I never liked it from the moment I saw it. It was bought @ SOS two years ago and has been passed around ever since. Fake ? Maybe. Ugly, Yes !
I prefer to have most camo's "in hand" before a purchase is made. I sometimes am forced to make decisions for others over piss poor photos and have to use gut instinct.
Based off M45's criteria not all camo's make it over here to be bashed.. I see them meeting his criteria of what makes them bad yet he has yet to point them out ????? I find it odd......
M45
Well-known member
All Im asking for is the proof. Where's the proof its fake ??? What can you see that all us lower life forms cant ?
What do you really want, a scientific chemical analysis of the binders and compounds to PROVE absolutely that you are looking at a modern reproduction ??
I think short of that, my assessment has validity.
My OPINIONS on the subject camo: a very crude, amateurish fake intended to deceive only the most novice of camo collectors. Not much time was spent on selection of colors, scheme, or aging. This camo does not event fit a WWII German military theme, IMO. (Lollipop-green ?? Indeed) Other than some paint popped off, no real believable wear associated with originals. Bright, shiny finish, no age or depth to the paint that would indicate a 70 year old authentic relic from the past.
What do you really want, a scientific chemical analysis of the binders and compounds to PROVE absolutely that you are looking at a modern reproduction ??
I think short of that, my assessment has validity.
My OPINIONS on the subject camo: a very crude, amateurish fake intended to deceive only the most novice of camo collectors. Not much time was spent on selection of colors, scheme, or aging. This camo does not event fit a WWII German military theme, IMO. (Lollipop-green ?? Indeed) Other than some paint popped off, no real believable wear associated with originals. Bright, shiny finish, no age or depth to the paint that would indicate a 70 year old authentic relic from the past.
Niblet
Left Nad
I personally think Brian is doing everything a human being can do short of being with the helmet everyday of its life since WWII with a notebook in his hand watching it
Putting it in a lab? sure I suppose,,,but I dont know any scientists,,,and no one who has ponied up the cash to destroy a helmet,,
I think scientific analysis has already been discussed as a non viable option
Putting it in a lab? sure I suppose,,,but I dont know any scientists,,,and no one who has ponied up the cash to destroy a helmet,,
I think scientific analysis has already been discussed as a non viable option
To answer the early question by McOrioles of how I would feel if Rifles I collect were called out as fake. I would feel much better and probably continue to collect Finnish Rifles. Instead over on gunboards everyone refuses to admit there is Fakery going on.
Hambone has brought up Fake SA stamps and I have as well only to be dismissed by the likes of USMCSean and Vic. They specifically say fake SA stamps have not and are not an issue. It's gone as far as the deleting of posts on the subject.
Now today most Finns are faked in some way and the so call experts validate the fakes. For example I put together a 1940 M/28-30 from parts. The guy I traded it to posted the rifle on gunboards. I told him what I did. He didn't mention one way or the other if it was original, but everyone there said it looked original and what a great original example it was.
The lack of vetting has made me move out of Finnish Rifle Collecting. If the same lack of vetting continues with Camo Helmet collecting people will move away from it, less collectors will move into it, and ultimately real or fake all Camo Helmets will drop in price due to lack of demand. M45 is trying to provide collectors with a service. My advice is use it.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Hambone has brought up Fake SA stamps and I have as well only to be dismissed by the likes of USMCSean and Vic. They specifically say fake SA stamps have not and are not an issue. It's gone as far as the deleting of posts on the subject.
Now today most Finns are faked in some way and the so call experts validate the fakes. For example I put together a 1940 M/28-30 from parts. The guy I traded it to posted the rifle on gunboards. I told him what I did. He didn't mention one way or the other if it was original, but everyone there said it looked original and what a great original example it was.
The lack of vetting has made me move out of Finnish Rifle Collecting. If the same lack of vetting continues with Camo Helmet collecting people will move away from it, less collectors will move into it, and ultimately real or fake all Camo Helmets will drop in price due to lack of demand. M45 is trying to provide collectors with a service. My advice is use it.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
mauser99
Senior Member
Well doug b. was fairly well off we all know that. He took a razor blade to a 6k helmet to slam dunk his case !!!
A fake camo a real ugly one you might be able to get for 1500 ? But , he's after jaws not the little fish... So maybe 3k 3.500k
A go fund me page with willing people could come up with that in one day. Who's in ????
Then the testing ???? What to do about that ? We haven't even started a base line yet...
I'm not trying to take away what he's done or what he's doing just trying to make sense of all that he says on the camo subject.
He cant have it both ways..
I enjoy a good debate just like anyone else but there has to be two sides to a debate. I loathe these forgers and would like nothing else for them to be all exposed. As with the sham-wow rune we still don't know 100% who the artist was ???
We all think we do but, there has been NO smoking gun. All I can say is Michigan E.D. is more than likely the culprit and I find it more than interesting Ken N. and Karl K. seemed to have known before the rest that the sham-wow rune was bad.
I also linked them as long time associates via Dolin's facebook page. He also is an auto body tech ! Hmmmm. it's pretty much a slam dunk case but no one really seemed to care.
All good stuff in the end and if it keeps one less fake from showing up or being bought Im all for that.
Last edited:
Niblet
Left Nad
In the case of the Sham-wow Rune debacle,,,you have to keep in mind the Militaria Dealer Code (not code of ethics,,,just code)
the code is unwritten and says that if you are a dealer,,you NEVER speak out against another NO MATTER WHAT
doing so will be your demise,,somhow,,,Ken, Kelley and all those who most likely KNOW who the 'artist" is,,,will probably take the secret to their graves
opening thier mouth to admit anything about knowledge of the fakery will or could bring about severe legal action (maybe)
at minimum it destroy the credibility and pretty much ruin the helmet business they have
the best way for a dealer is just say nothing,,,the hobbyists will eventually forget and the Rune saga will fade away
and another scam will take its place,,silence is golden if your a dealer
the code is unwritten and says that if you are a dealer,,you NEVER speak out against another NO MATTER WHAT
doing so will be your demise,,somhow,,,Ken, Kelley and all those who most likely KNOW who the 'artist" is,,,will probably take the secret to their graves
opening thier mouth to admit anything about knowledge of the fakery will or could bring about severe legal action (maybe)
at minimum it destroy the credibility and pretty much ruin the helmet business they have
the best way for a dealer is just say nothing,,,the hobbyists will eventually forget and the Rune saga will fade away
and another scam will take its place,,silence is golden if your a dealer
mauser99
Senior Member
I just find it interesting that those closest to E.D. never ended up with a Sham wowzer in their stable or on their site for sale. Plus also knew years before hand they weren't worth mentioning in a book they authored. Where Hick's gobbled them up and sold tons of them. Was he fooled ? Was the sham done so well than even the SS guru king had the wool pulled over his eyes ???? I feel that was the case.. And in the end he just wanted to believe they were real.. Like the Furher in bunker still thinking the war could be won.. Both were a pipe dream.
M45
Well-known member
I see. Questionable camos are suspect simply because I say they are, yet I have no 'real proof' to support my claims? But DougB put C-SS to bed with 'real proof'?
Let's not forget that the C-SS fraud was never authentic, never had any proof of such (no period photos/documentation, no authentic vet provenance, no eye witnesses, etc..) yet for years DougB claimed it was a 'textbook decal' on his forum and elsewhere with no 'real proof' whatsoever. He was always pointing to Kelly H.'s books, but those books were only based on Kelly's personal opinions, no 'real proof' at all. As Kelly puts it, one day he encountered C-SS, liked it, and decided it was part of the 'SS decal pantheon', meaning that he declared C-SS to be period produced by virtue of his declarations alone, no 'real proof' at all. I guess being an author gave him the "authority" to do that.
Yes DougB finally outed C-SS, but only after lot# research backed him into a corner. I think that pointing to DougB as an example of the way things should be done in this hobby is a terrible mistake.
Last edited:
mauser99
Senior Member
So I guess based off your last statement all I have to do produce proof that exotic pattern camo's do exist with no wear in period photos ...
Done deal.. and another you don't like sand/woodchip possible FJR6 camos.
But, Im a realist and know one photo doesn't prove squat.
Done deal.. and another you don't like sand/woodchip possible FJR6 camos.
But, Im a realist and know one photo doesn't prove squat.
Attachments
Player11
Right Nad
In a sense, all this thread is very questionable by itself. The proofs that are aported are nothing because i dont see a real expert who can proof anything about camos, i just see somebody questioning something that for him are "bad" but some of them are real and good ones.
M45
Well-known member
Nice photos and nice try, Mauser. Remember that those photos were not taken yesterday but 70+ years ago. They recorded an instant in time long ago, that's all. It does not mean those same helmets survived to this day, or if they did it does not mean they survived in the identical condition as the photos show. The photos do not show the further years of combat wear, capture pile wear, vet handling/transport home, the decades of handling and oxidation postwar, etc...
You see period photos of bang-on exotic camos and then, voila! similar camos appear 'out of the wood-work' on forums or dealer's sites for sale and you buy into it, not realizing that original exotic camos were rare back then and most were collected up long ago and reside in high-end collections.
Last edited:
mauser99
Senior Member
The issue and the never ending debate dragged out by him say they are bad and you saying they are good with no proof.
Just like try to say weather some one is guilty or innocent with no proof either way it cant be done. Hence the 142 page thread.
Player11
Right Nad
Yes, you are right! But in both directions, my opinion is not valid, but neither his one. As i told you i dont see a real expert on identifiying camos, not even me.The issue and the never ending debate dragged out by him say they are bad and you saying they are good with no proof.
Just like try to say weather some one is guilty or innocent with no proof either way it cant be done. Hence the 142 page thread.
As i said, all this threat by itself is very questionable.
M45
Well-known member
The issue and the never ending debate dragged out by him say they are bad and you saying they are good with no proof.
Just like try to say weather some one is guilty or innocent with no proof either way it cant be done. Hence the 142 page thread.
Well done, gentlemen. By virtue of your declarations you have effectively nullified the art of camo critique. The Questionable Camos discussion amounts to a 'never ending debate' with 'no proof' either way, therefore it is all just a useless and time-wasting endeavor, 142 pages of mindless chatter.
There are no 'real experts' here and thus no one's opinion has any validity. It is the thread itself that is 'questionable', and certainly on any sensible forum it would have been locked down long long ago with the 'trouble-makers' chastised.
So apparently the only thing left to do now is to continue praising every exotic freshie posted on forums or for sale on dealer sites with comments such as "WOW!, One-looker!, Dream Helmet!, "fantastic wood-work find!" from now to eternity with nary a collector daring to speak a word against the main stream illogic.
Because we all know that the Germans used a wide variety of methods and materials to camo their helmets, so who are we to question even the most outrageous exotic freshie ?
Bravo.....
I thought the expert opinion of an artist who does similar work was the proof. What if more artists were to come on this thread and take credit for the work of certain helmets would that still not be enough proof?
IMO those whose Helmets have been questioned have a way to prove M45 wrong. Have them tested by an accredited lab. If you are willing to spend $4k on a Camo Helmet surely another $1k would be worth it. It would validate your helmet and only add to it's value. The little bit of removed paint would be well worth it. Then you could post the lab report and prove M45 wrong.
As for dealer code that is BS. Any dealer who knows for a fact that another dealer is selling faked items and doesn't out them is just as much of a scumbag as the dealer selling the fakes.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
IMO those whose Helmets have been questioned have a way to prove M45 wrong. Have them tested by an accredited lab. If you are willing to spend $4k on a Camo Helmet surely another $1k would be worth it. It would validate your helmet and only add to it's value. The little bit of removed paint would be well worth it. Then you could post the lab report and prove M45 wrong.
As for dealer code that is BS. Any dealer who knows for a fact that another dealer is selling faked items and doesn't out them is just as much of a scumbag as the dealer selling the fakes.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
