Honor badges test

Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
3,305
Thanks Received
1,750
Location
-
Below are eight images, all represent the same area - about 2mm x 1mm - taken from 8 different Hitler Youth Ehrenzeichen.
There is a mix of: Very old fakes (40 years old at least), modern fakes, very modern fakes and genuine badges.

The question is: Can you look at these 8 images, search ONLY for the natural, honest patina.. and list which badge - or badges you believe are genuine?

:001_smile::001_smile::001_smile:

You don't have permission to view attachments.
:)

You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
 

Attachments

    You don't have permission to view attachments.
The dings look too "rounded". They don't look like they were caused through use but rather when the badge was made. Am I getting closer or further away? :)
 
Here are badges 2,3,6 & 7... One of them is genuine, 3 are fake. But which one did you get wrong? By the way, there are more than three fakes out of the eight.

You don't have permission to view attachments.
 

Attachments

    You don't have permission to view attachments.
Last edited:
Okay, the good badge of those 4 is at top right.
That would be image 6.

What about images 1-4-5-8 ? Good, bad?

here they are. badges 1-4-5-8 :)

You don't have permission to view attachments.
 

Attachments

    You don't have permission to view attachments.
Last edited:
:) Of those four I would say that top right and bottom right are bad.
 
Gary, this is just what i though. You wont be able to do it, and neither will i or anyone - correctly that is, just by looking at the obverse. BUT........ the patina is the clue!!!
Of course it is not as simple as ABC... remember there are at least 2 badges above that are 40-50 years old! Fake of course but old, and they will have some patina. Just not an honest one. (And certainly not an honest one across or on, all parts that would show it were the item worn as intended.)

This test is a bit mean as there is more to it with very old fakes.. And this is most likely the stumbling block right now.

Reverse images are not shown as a few of the fakes here are in print since the last 1960s as genuine. Others are also accepted as genuine by most.There is also a 1960s Souval fake amongst them.

Have another go, but just list the genuine badges. There are not that many of them actually.
 
:) Of those four I would say that top right and bottom right are bad.
The top right image, is a genuine Deschler. BUT.... it has been slightly double struck (see the RZM code) this is also evident on the obverse pattern, so maybe thats what threw you off. Poor quality usually does, but there could always be a reason for it, as there is here. I had to acquire and examine many "defect" badges, factory errors, double struck etc etc....to cover this angle as well. In any case, this image might help you work out the other genuine badges :w00t:, albeit that this badge is quite heavily worn.

You don't have permission to view attachments.
 

Attachments

    You don't have permission to view attachments.
It was enjoyable attempting this but without your first book and the information on micro-patina (see, I remembered!) I very probably wouldn't have got anywhere near the correct answer. Probably more interesting for you if Wim V took the test, or Ailsby :)
 
LOL, no he cant read this thread being a non-member. It needs a lot of explaining as well as other things considered and shown, but after that, you will be able to pick out the THREE genuine badges from these 8 :first: with ease!
 
I would like to have one of these, but... It is very difficult to see what is originala nd what is not!
 
Hi Jo,
let me also take a guess:
I think 5 and 6 are genuine. (I think so, because the traces of use are more individual and more "accidental" as in any othe photos)
I also think 1 and 8 are fake. (I think so, because of the long similar lines.)
4 seems also to be a fake although the lines are not as long and as similar.
3 and 7 show no signs of anything to mee at all. (So I guess: fake.)
Number 2 seems smooth and well "rounded" (and as you said -there are three originals- this might be the third.)
Are my conclusions any good? Please tell (or pm) me, so I can learn from your knowledge.
Thank you.
 
Are you publishing a new book Jo? I very much enjoyed your first. I see many posts on WAF from people who should buy your Parteiabzeichen book to save them time.
 
Back
Top