Authentic or fake – EK 1

[wildkatz22]

After I found this forum, I read threads and went through my collection to see which seemed obvious fakes and which I thought were good. I am posting what is left in my collection ( after I removed the items that I thought were fakes ) and I would very much appreciate your comments and thoughts as to the authenticity. I took as good pictures as I possibly could.

This is my proud KVK 1 with swords.

Thanks to all in advance for your thoughts and comments.

[Nick Hessens]

Looks like a good Meybauer cross to me.

Can you turn the pics please?

Regards

[Adrian]

Yes, a nice Meybauer cross. It would be very helpful if you could turn the pics the right way up and also take some more of the case please?

[wildkatz22]

Adrian, Ingrid,

I appologize. here are the pictures in correct orientation.

[tempelhof]

i agree with the previously expressed opinions.

[tempelhof]

is there something going on with your lens here? i don't think i jeopardizes the call on the EK itself, but some of the dimensions seem odd and this is especially apparent with very symmetrical shapes such as the case. again, don't think what i'm seeing is real and is instead an artifact of the lens you are using.

[wildkatz22]

is there something going on with your lens here? i don't think i jeopardizes the call on the EK itself, but some of the dimensions seem odd and this is especially apparent with very symmetrical shapes such as the case. again, don't think what i'm seeing is real and is instead an artifact of the lens you are using.

Tempelhof,

Thanks for questioning this. I never noticed any dimention descripancies. I thought it was 44 x 44mm like my other cross. I'll check it and confirm.

Thanks again

[rbminis]

Tempelhof,

Thanks for questioning this. I never noticed any dimention descripancies. I thought it was 44 x 44mm like my other cross. I'll check it and confirm.

Thanks again

TJ,
The item in question is the case, not the cross.
Ralph.

[tempelhof]

yes, please don't misunderstand. the cross is authentic.

i am stating that there seems to be a distortion as to the "apparent" dimensions and symmetry of these items due to some camera setting or lens being used.

see the following relationships:



in the photograph:

- length "a" is greater than length "b"

- inside of white card border of lower box rim is visible at a rather extreme angle while the inside white card border of the upper box rim is at the same time.

- the upper flange of the cross itself appears smaller than the lower flange.

these conditions do not exist as you hold the set and look at in hand. they are being created by the camera. they can not exist in real life... especially the apparent existence of two angles of perspective relative to the inside box margin at the top and bottom as noted in red. it's something like an M. C. Escher creation.

so i was just pointing this issue out with the camera settings or lens so you could address this for future postings as in the right circumstances and context it could create confusion when analyzing a piece. it is not your set. i believe them to be perfectly fine.

[Adrian]

On my screen the cross looks distorted as well, longer top to bottom. I think it's the photo.