Questionable Camos

[Bigdibbs88]

And yet another who refuses to understand what is being taught here,
"I'm sure wayne is referring to RAL colors" really? are you sure? or are you just guessing? did you consult with him prior to this statement?
if he was referring to "RAL colors" why didnt he just say so? He was very vague actually, and I believe that he was basically saying that
you need to handle and view original camo helmets, then and only then would you know what this mysterious color pallet is,,
and its already been stated that the colors cant be posted because digital images cannot be relied upon,,therefore an in hand inspection is always necessary,
something I disagree with

another who refuses to blindly follow m45? Yes I fit in that category. And no I didnt consult Wayne, I just know he knows his stuff and anybody who knows anything about camo's knows RAL. You obviously dont. As for hands on: yes you can rule out some poor quality fakes based on pictures alone. But as your master preaches, there are excellent fakes out there. Arguing that you can I.D. every excellent fake based on pics alone seems bold (and contradictory). This is probably why player11 keeps laughing at you. If you notice most knowledgeable guys (and guys who actually own camos) swear by a hands on. But hey, I guess its safer just to label every camo a fake.

Guys,you're wasting your time.

The only thing you need to know about those two are...
1. They think hands on is not necessary.
2. Neither own camos

Yes I think you've summed this entire thread up nicely.

 

[Hambone]

This has degenerated into more personal attack than debate. I can see the merit in both positions actually. Here's what I see:

1) I believe you can ID a fake from good digital pics better than you authenticate an original.
2) Hands on is crucial for those camos in the grey area.
3) Original camos are more consistent than they are different (e.g., RALs, and period orders and directives).
4) A worn camo helmet is easier to authenticate than one with little wear.
5) Camo fakery is extensive and the quality of the work of some lid humpers is very good.
6) In some instances, authentication becomes subjective, and in the eye of the buyer; but buyer X's purchase doesn't make it original.
7) All dealers will sell bad camos, just as collectors who traffic in them; a dealer with integrity backs his wares with a money back guarantee.
8) The term "exotic freshie" is an absurdity coined by the waftarded in a censored plastic bubble environment to legitimize high dollar klown kamos.

Taking all of that into account, which is for me an amalgamation of the positions of all sides of the feud, I think there is much more common ground than not.

 

[Player11]

This has degenerated into more personal attack than debate. I can see the merit in both positions actually. Here's what I see:

1) I believe you can ID a fake from good digital pics better than you authenticate an original.
2) Hands on is crucial for those camos in the grey area.
3) Original camos are more consistent than they are different (e.g., RALs, and period orders and directives).
4) A worn camo helmet is easier to authenticate than one with little wear.
5) Camo fakery is extensive and the quality of the work of some lid humpers is very good.
6) In some instances, authentication becomes subjective, and in the eye of the buyer; but buyer X's purchase doesn't make it original.
7) All dealers will sell bad camos, just as collectors who traffic in them; a dealer with integrity backs his wares with a money back guarantee.
8) The term "exotic freshie" is an absurdity coined by the waftarded in a censored plastic bubble environment to legitimize high dollar klown kamos.

Taking all of that into account, which is for me an amalgamation of the positions of all sides of the feud, I think there is much more common ground than not.

I agree with you. I dont think all dealers are bad people just trying to get the money from noob collectors ( of cource, they will exist), but the dealers who are out there, some when you have a helmet that ofefrs you some doubts, they will give you back the money without anydoubt.
I think is more dangerous to deal with not known collectors where is hardest to get the money back

 

[Player11]

,I feel sorry for folks like you, I really do

For me its a pleasure to feel your sadness for me, from the first time and each time i have seen you, Your wonderful and successful entry at FB, i have had the same feeling with you. And believe me that im almost feeling embarrased judging you ( only by pics, not face to face like it should be done), lol !!!! what a great lesson you may lean form this. YOU MUST SEE BEFORE JUDGING LOllLLLLLL

I LOVE YOU NIBLET

 

[mauser99]

It's like a underwater oil spill... If you cant clean up the polluting the water attack the source. The spill point.

That's what's happened here. We cant Make M45 listen to reason so they have resorted to attacking him and the sock puppet.

I appreciate the apology from M45 and I didn't mean he was pushing me personally and I don't take any of this personally.

I meant he was pushing in the wrong direction as far as his wear patterns and what constitutes originally based on wear.


Here is a fake camo that shows plenty of honest wear not the typical tool marks and rim wear.. Its fake just the same.

 

[M45]

Mauser, how many times do we have to go over this - the idea that wear is only ONE factor to be considered during camo critique ?

Bravo, you have posted a fake camo with plenty of wear !

This looks like chemical aging, bright colors, with that Latvian Connection look about it.

Can't listen to reason ??? Why is it that you and others evade discussing the camos I post ? Why can't you explain in detail why my logic is faulty when I out these questionable camos ? Rather, you go on the attack.

Is it that you don't want to admit that fakes could be that good ?

 

[Player11]

Can't listen to reason ??? Why is it that you and others evade discussing the camos I post ? Why can't you explain in detail why my logic is faulty when I out these questionable camos ? Rather, you go on the attack.

Is it that you don't want to admit that fakes could be that good ?

Very easy to reply your questions, for more that you insist that you can recognise fake helmets only by the pics, the only thing you do is post and post and post mixed helmets, good and bad. You dont know the good ones you post here as fakes, but you recognise just the " obvious" camo fakes.

So, You dont have the last word on camos, you must handle them to speak about them, when you have handled some, you will have more credibility, the other way is just judging for judging

 

[mauser99]

Mauser, how many times do we have to go over this - the idea that wear is only ONE factor to be considered during camo critique ?

Bravo, you have posted a fake camo with plenty of wear !

This looks like chemical aging, bright colors, with that Latvian Connection look about it.

Can't listen to reason ??? Why is it that you and others evade discussing the camos I post ? Why can't you explain in detail why my logic is faulty when I out these questionable camos ? Rather, you go on the attack.

Is it that you don't want to admit that fakes could be that good ?

Better to do this than post and authentic item with little wear and call it a fake..Cause it shows little wear or its too new looking..
My biggest beef with you.

 

[nirvana]

Very easy to reply your questions, for more that you insist that you can recognise fake helmets only by the pics, the only thing you do is post and post and post mixed helmets, good and bad. You dont know the good ones you post here as fakes, but you recognise just the " obvious" camo fakes.

So, You dont have the last word on camos, you must handle them to speak about them, when you have handled some, you will have more credibility, the other way is just judging for judging

At this time of writing this, you have 99 posts, almost all of which are on this thread, almost all of which are critical of M45. Is this the only reason that you are here on this forum, to attack one person and his views?


I'm just not sure where this thread is going anymore. Its pretty much a tiring string of personal attacks that long ago left behind its purpose, critically reviewing helmets. Now its "you're dumb, you're wrong" over and over.

Christ guys, seriously?

 

[Player11]

At this time of writing this, you have 99 posts, almost all of which are on this thread, almost all of which are critical of M45. Is this the only reason that you are here on this forum, to attack one person and his views?

Now i have 100 !

Yes, more or less, you are right. I was just following the thread because i was spoken in my community about M45 and i wanted to see how was it. after following and following his arguements, it reached a time where i couldnt stay quiet before so many no sense.
But, basically, you are right.


Wellll.... i have to admit, that i also came because was following to Niblet in FB, his replies have very high value there!

 

[Niblet]

This has degenerated into more personal attack than debate. I can see the merit in both positions actually. Here's what I see:

1) I believe you can ID a fake from good digital pics better than you authenticate an original.
2) Hands on is crucial for those camos in the grey area.
3) Original camos are more consistent than they are different (e.g., RALs, and period orders and directives).
4) A worn camo helmet is easier to authenticate than one with little wear.
5) Camo fakery is extensive and the quality of the work of some lid humpers is very good.
6) In some instances, authentication becomes subjective, and in the eye of the buyer; but buyer X's purchase doesn't make it original.
7) All dealers will sell bad camos, just as collectors who traffic in them; a dealer with integrity backs his wares with a money back guarantee.
8) The term "exotic freshie" is an absurdity coined by the waftarded in a censored plastic bubble environment to legitimize high dollar klown kamos.

Taking all of that into account, which is for me an amalgamation of the positions of all sides of the feud, I think there is much more common ground than not.

I believe I have been saying this (in one form or another) for about the last 20 pages,,no one wants to listen when I say it, but when you say it,,somehow its cool....
but yes,,you are correct

 

[Niblet]

Mauser, how many times do we have to go over this - the idea that wear is only ONE factor to be considered during camo critique ?

Bravo, you have posted a fake camo with plenty of wear !

This looks like chemical aging, bright colors, with that Latvian Connection look about it.

Can't listen to reason ??? Why is it that you and others evade discussing the camos I post ? Why can't you explain in detail why my logic is faulty when I out these questionable camos ? Rather, you go on the attack.

Is it that you don't want to admit that fakes could be that good ?

Again,,more voices of reason falling on seemingly deaf ears,,I too am interested in these answers

 

[Niblet]

At this time of writing this, you have 99 posts, almost all of which are on this thread, almost all of which are critical of M45. Is this the only reason that you are here on this forum, to attack one person and his views?


I'm just not sure where this thread is going anymore. Its pretty much a tiring string of personal attacks that long ago left behind its purpose, critically reviewing helmets. Now its "you're dumb, you're wrong" over and over.

Christ guys, seriously?

I agree,,player needs to go,,he's is only here to cause problems,,like I said I wish player would man up and contact me,,,but I suspect he wont,,but I'm done with the preaching,,only will discuss helmets now

 

[Player11]

I agree,,player needs to go,,he's is only here to cause problems,,like I said I wish player would man up and contact me,,,but I suspect he wont,,but I'm done with the preaching,,only will discuss helmets now

Im here to educate you, to show you the light, but there is not one more blind than the one who doesnt want to see.
So, im just here to follow this thread and to discuss to M45 nosenses discussing original camos. You arent ready ( prepared) to discuss

Glad you will keep discussing helmets now, the fun is sure!

 

[Player11]

Guys,you're wasting your time.

The only thing you need to know about those two are...
1. They think hands on is not necessary.
2. Neither own camos

Therefore everything they say should be held to the same scrutiny they use for "questioning " camos.

Textbook knowledge is great.

Doesnt mean I can read a bunch of books on astronauts and be one with no real world experience.

Educated beyond their intelligence.

Thats a very good point!!!! Is like knowing driving, just making tutorials in youtube, i can drive so i can decide withouth having taken a car in my life lol!!!!

 

[mcorioles]

Another ignorant post, more rubbish,,,from a guy who owns a bunch of bogus camos

LOL!!! which ones are fake nibbles?

 

[Niblet]

I'm not rising to the bait,,sorry, besides not possible to tell with the pics you provided
you should post them on WAF and ask Willi Zahn,,,he just suspended me for 6 months last week for simply agreeing with an individual about some
cheezy enamel badges that were fake,,but since he owned one and had a period pic of one in wear it could not be

the background looks like Eisen Hunde's,,(Bill M's) house,,you and he get together and hump a few batches?

 

[M45]

LOL!!! which ones are fake nibbles?

I'll take the bait, Nibblers.

1. DD Heer - absolutely authentic. Don't need a hands-on to see that. I would stick with pure factory production if I were you. As you will see, I don't think camos are your strong point.

2. M42 wire - considering that probably 99% of wires are fake, I would be highly suspicious of that one. Even Ken N. agrees that wires are highly faked (but of course the ones HE's selling are A-OK).

3. 3 color Normandy/woodchip/strap - danger, my friend. Don't think that such helmets cannot be replicated. Don't think that such helmets are not being replicated. Too much $$$ involved for their not to be.

4. Tiger stripe Normandy - absolutely bad, no doubt in my mind. Bright colors, no age to the paint, strong contrasts, very a-typical of originals but quite typical of questionable Normandies.

5. Net camo - anyone can put a net on a helmet. I fail to see why such helmets should sell for more than their component parts.

6. Woodchip/wire - absolutely bad, no doubt in my mind. Pristine condition material despite heavy wear to rim/vents. Overdone with wire as are many postwar creations.

7. SD Heer wire, actually looks good, but once again wires are heavily faked. Are you a wire expert ? Then I would steer clear of wires.

8. Tan - Shows promise, needs a hands-on.


In summary: only #1 is hands-down authentic IMO. #8 could use a hands-on to confirm as well as the wires if that's your thing.

 

[mcorioles]

I'm not rising to the bait,,sorry, besides not possible to tell with the pics you provided
you should post them on WAF and ask Willi Zahn,,,he just suspended me for 6 months last week for simply agreeing with an individual about some
cheezy enamel badges that were fake,,but since he owned one and had a period pic of one in wear it could not be

the background looks like Eisen Hunde's,,(Bill M's) house,,you and he get together and hump a few batches?

Have no idea who Bill M is.I live in MD.Where does he live?

BTW everyone of those helmets has been posted there and GHW,only one had some detractors,it was a 50/50 split.

So once again you are wrong.

 

[Niblet]

I'll take the bait, Nibblers.

1. DD Heer - absolutely authentic. Don't need a hands-on to see that. I would stick with pure factory production if I were you. As you will see, I don't think camos are your strong point.

2. M42 wire - considering that probably 99% or wires are fake, I would be highly suspicious of that one. Even Ken N. agrees that wires are highly faked (but of course the ones HE's selling are A-OK).

3. 3 color Normandy/woodchip/strap - danger, my friend. Don't think that such helmets cannot be replicated. Don't think that such helmets are not being replicated. Too much $$$ involved for their not to be.

4. Tiger stripe Normandy - absolutely bad, no doubt in my mind. Bright colors, no age to the paint, strong contrasts, very a-typical of originals but quite typical of questionable Normandies.

5. Net camo - anyone can put a net on a helmet. I fail to see why such helmets should sell for more that their component parts.

6. Woodchip/wire - absolutely bad, no doubt in my mind. Pristine condition material despite heavy wear to rim/vents. Overdone with wire as are many postwar creations.

7. SD Heer wire, actually looks good, but once again wires are heavily faked. Are you a wire expert ? Then I would steer clear of wires.

8. Tan - Shows promise, needs a hands-on.


In summary: only #1 is hands-down authentic IMO. #8 could use a hands-on to confirm as well as the wires if that's your thing.

Another brilliant observation by my colleague M45,,,
Funny,,I clicked on number 6 myself and laughed,,,and then thought,,why bother,,,but M45,,good job!
now lets wait for player11 and the rest of the gang to hear how this "simply cannot be"