Could I have thoughts on this helmet please.

[Larboard]

Bad pics are very common, practically the norm these days... except on fine watch sites like Timezone, Military Watch Resource , etc... those guys really take their pics extremely seriously! And it is really difficult to judge items based on cell phone pics, vs using even a halfway decent point shoot digital, like my Lumix, or a DSLR with a good lens (not the "kit" lens).

To a photographer like myself, I just turn the page. I can't deal with bad pics, they turn me off on the product.

Lighting also, very important, flash or any artificial lighting is terrible, window light is usually best, on an overcast day. Sidelighting is best for detail, like id marks, stampings, etc, it shows much more relief than flat lighting.

Angles can make or break pics as well. In a recent thread about an Infanterie-Sturmabzeichen, it was pointed out that the angles were so odd (the badge was in the person's hand, awful lighting, weird angles) that you couldn't make out any detail, or barely enough to make a determination.

Helmets are very susceptible to looking distorted as you get too close, much better to back up and zoom in, that gets you out to a focal length that eliminates distortion 50mm or longer.

Also another realization of the age we live in, is that many people view pics on their cell phones, and at that point, I'm not even sure that it's worth the trouble to shoot with a decent camera....

It's sort of like listening to an MP3 of Mahler's Symphony No: 4 on some tiny iPod docking station vs listening to vinyl through a real old fashioned stereo, with a McIntosh tube amplifier and some nice Klipsch corner horns

I personally could never make a determination on the decal from the pics provided, there isn't enough detail, the resolution is not there. I'm not an expert, but with the pics provided, even "as hard as the original poster is trying", it was never worth it for me to spend any time figuring it out, except I think the pics make it look bad.

[busman]

I have checked the liner since having it in hand , all pins are straight and untouched and looks to me to have been in place a long while. Thank you for the constructive comments this is the reason I posted not for the quick I don't likes, so much more interesting and informative for myself and others reading this thread. I bought traded for this item knowing there may be a certain amount of uncertainty on the camo paint, as my thoughts are as it not a factory paint scheme , how can one be 100% on its WAR time originality, unless one being there at the time of painting , as to colour amount of wear , type of texturing, design , there are so many factors as to how long it was used who painted and for what theatre of war and what season . All I know is in my hand and by my judgement as a collector of helmets not just German and comparing patina of the paint and the exposed metal shell and the smell even down to the little dead Beatle bodies in the liner felt and the debris build up between the liner band and the shell and the muck in the vents, I have made a call on it and I am 100% on the decal and the helmet its self and as to the camo I am happy . My original post about the liner was due to the guy I traded with saying he was unsure about the liner as he thought the leather was a bit thin compared to other had. But all ok.

[busman]

I really will try to borrow a digital SLR or invest in one.

[Schwerpunkt]

Bad pics are very common, practically the norm these days... except on fine watch sites like Timezone, Military Watch Resource , etc... those guys really take their pics extremely seriously! And it is really difficult to judge items based on cell phone pics, vs using even a halfway decent point shoot digital, like my Lumix, or a DSLR with a good lens (not the "kit" lens).

To a photographer like myself, I just turn the page. I can't deal with bad pics, they turn me off on the product.

Lighting also, very important, flash or any artificial lighting is terrible, window light is usually best, on an overcast day. Sidelighting is best for detail, like id marks, stampings, etc, it shows much more relief than flat lighting.

Angles can make or break pics as well. In a recent thread about an Infanterie-Sturmabzeichen, it was pointed out that the angles were so odd (the badge was in the person's hand, awful lighting, weird angles) that you couldn't make out any detail, or barely enough to make a determination.

Helmets are very susceptible to looking distorted as you get too close, much better to back up and zoom in, that gets you out to a focal length that eliminates distortion 50mm or longer.

Also another realization of the age we live in, is that many people view pics on their cell phones, and at that point, I'm not even sure that it's worth the trouble to shoot with a decent camera....

It's sort of like listening to an MP3 of Mahler's Symphony No: 4 on some tiny iPod docking station vs listening to vinyl through a real old fashioned stereo, with a McIntosh tube amplifier and some nice Klipsch corner horns

I personally could never make a determination on the decal from the pics provided, there isn't enough detail, the resolution is not there. I'm not an expert, but with the pics provided, even "as hard as the original poster is trying", it was never worth it for me to spend any time figuring it out, except I think the pics make it look bad.

On German Helmet Walhalla moderators insist on presenting topics with good photos and the community there stands behind that.
A good camera costs no money especially compared to the prices you pay for nice Original German steel.
So a low investment cost in order to get accurate replies to a topic. There's only a benefit there.

[busman]

I didn't post on helmet walhalla, there rules I assume do not apply in here. Maybe a new thread should be started regarding my inability to come up to scratch regarding photos, as it has certainly worn this thread down.