It is very hard to tell for me if these are good or bad. There are a few things that make me wonder.
1. The shape of the board. One looks a little bigger than the other and one of the boards has a "bump" on it's side that sticks out.
2. The connection from the body of the board to the tail is different from I am used to.
3. Elongated diamond tress. Although this style of tress was used in wartime. I do not care for it. It is a red flag to me and should be looked at very closely.
4. I do not like the shape of the buttonholes on the board body! The one picture you have of a buttonhole on the tail looks fine but the ones on the board body are different.
To me it looks like somebody used period material and made new shoulder board bodies and attached original tails to them. This is only my opinion and I would wait for a few more people to chime in.
Thank you Fred for your thought. I wanted to take new pictures yesterday but my camera didn't work. I hope i could take some before the end of the week.
The unit insignia seems odd that it is two different style between the 9 and the 8 seems odd to me , uncommon pair of boards so they need to be carefully inspected try to get better pictures when you can
The shoulderboards are on a wool windjacke, wich is clearly tailor modified from an effect i don't know. The sewings of the modified parts are different from the construction sewing. But the windjacke has the loops for officer type shoulderboards (thin tongues).
But here are the new pics. Sorry for the quality, the camera is not good for close up.
These pictures make the shoulder boards look a lot better. The buttonholes look good and now I understand why the Board is wrinkled up in the middle!! To me these look like nice early boards.
Thank you very much for your help Fred.
One should keep in mind thant acording official regs, in a combat unit (here a Rgt), an Unteroffizier was not supposed to wear metal n° devices on his shoulder straps.