Holger Danske Helmet surprise!!!

[DougB]

Hi Dan, I believe what your doing is honorable and interesting and I don't mean to discourage it. But mere science alone cannot tell us what's real and what's not. I also do not believe the hypothesis you've brought forward to be valid. "If this happens with the paint then by rationale the decal must be real" is incorrect and a flawed approach, identifying the exact year paint or ink was made is impossible. XRF scanning has also been used to identify the elemental composition of both and even this has been proven to be inaccurate.

For some background, I began my ADM journey several years ago and assembled well over 100 real examples and I lost count of the fakes that I was sent for examination. This provided with many test samples to look for commonalities in print including ink distribution and print type, layered construction, pulver construction, aging and oxidization samples among many other things. What was found was each specific real SS decal has certain traits as do the fakes. One of the most telling with the fakes is modern mechanical printing along with incorrect construction. This included pulver composition. This also took 3 years to accomplish and many hundreds of hours.

An SS decal is actually a complex little beast that fakers simply try to replicate graphically, using modern ink or laser jet printing and an aluminum base for the pulver. What you've shown here is both but you dont know this because youve not examined any others therefor you have no comparables nor a control subject. And because you don't have these and please I say this respectfully you have no experience with SS decals it is very easy to come to whatever desired conclusion you wish.

Again, I will post many examples of the round bottom fake, and comparisons of both a real ET and the fake under magnification later today.

To graphically break down the round bottom fake ET decal, which I believe is the single most distributed fake today, simply look at this vs a real ET - first, the round bottom of course, the left and right breaks are non symmetrical, and the runes are positioned to high in the shield. Yours is exactly this decal and no science will prove otherwise, in fact your ADM pics show it to be exactly again, the round bottom fake!

Cheers
Doug

[DougB]

I had a quick chance to snag this one off the GHW forum, it is the decal I linked to earlier in the thread. It is the classic round bottom fake decal, identical to what is on your HD helmet. (and on many more out there!) Again, note the round bottom, non symmetrical break and high position of the runes. Under magnification it has no cellulose base, incorrect pulver construction, and modern print application. Here you can compare them to each other and see they are one and the same. No science will change that I am afraid.
Cheers
Doug

Attachment 339217
Attachment 339218

[Danmark]

Thankyou for your candour Doug - and I agree, your example IS identical.
Case closed.

Regards, Dan

[DougB]

Thanks Dan, I am sorry it is not original, but it just means onto the next one right! I do love your approach Dan, as things like magnification can be an asset and a tool for collectors to use, this includes a simple 10 power lit loupe to 400x magnification, provided one knows what to look for. I doubt I will have the time tonight to post my examples of magnification but if its case closed anyway then what I will do is a separate thread on magnification and its results here in this forum. I will try to accomplish this on this weekend along with some popular SS fakes guys can compare to.
Cheers Dan, thanks again for bearing with me on this.
Doug

[Schwerpunkt]

Quite a long topic on a fake SS decal , interesting read.
Dan , if you want to make a point with USB close-ups I suggest using the actual photos in large size so that we all can take a good look at it.
A collage like the one you posted is useless if you want to make a point. (It looks nice but that's about it)

[Danmark]

Thanks for weighing in Frank - yes it was a long topic ......I am on a long learning curve.
My colleague at work did the collage for me - I told him that members would deem it useless at that size but you cant tell some people. I pursued it no further because Doug's reasons for it being non-genuine were clearly pointed out to me.

My ONLY remaining question is " how was a reproduction decal applied to an original helmet finish and weathered this way???" THAT remains a mystery to me and if I can get decent close-ups I would like to pursue that line of enquiry.

My reasoning you may ask? - well if the reproducers DO get it right ( shape / cellulose / Pulver etc... ) and can weather it this way, then sheeeee - it, many collectors will be fooled in years to come.

Dan

[DougB]

I don't think that weathering is natural at all. As I said before it appears sanded and that is simply from my experience. Now, will they get everything right? I really honestly doubt it. We have other tricks up the sleeve, like databasing the helmets and lot numbers, decal to shell relationships, manufacturer "fingerprints" on the decals, etc. I honestly do not believe that fakers can fake down to the 200x level. One thing that messes them up is the simple act of printing. Modern print techniques vastly differ from those in the 30s and early 40s. When they try to fake the technique it is easily revealed through magnification and modern mechanical print ( laser jet for instance) leaves tell tale signs. That said, it makes having the article in hand even more important than judging an item by photos. And the uninformed will always get burned no matter how good the fakes get or how much we can combat them.

[Danmark]

THanks Doug - all we can do is continue to learn.
Please close this thread if it has now run its course.
Cheers ( & thanks to all )
Dan

[Schwerpunkt]

I don't think that weathering is natural at all. As I said before it appears sanded and that is simply from my experience. Now, will they get everything right? I really honestly doubt it. We have other tricks up the sleeve, like databasing the helmets and lot numbers, decal to shell relationships, manufacturer "fingerprints" on the decals, etc. I honestly do not believe that fakers can fake down to the 200x level. One thing that messes them up is the simple act of printing. Modern print techniques vastly differ from those in the 30s and early 40s. When they try to fake the technique it is easily revealed through magnification and modern mechanical print ( laser jet for instance) leaves tell tale signs. That said, it makes having the article in hand even more important than judging an item by photos. And the uninformed will always get burned no matter how good the fakes get or how much we can combat them.

That's it , study the real ones in depth. Don't waste time on what ifs.