This same badge is being sold by three different sellers, two of them have got an excellent reputation, a bit strange that all three sell it as a good one?
This same badge is being sold by three different sellers, two of them have got an excellent reputation, a bit strange that all three sell it as a good one?
The more I look at it the more I think it looks like an original pin and planchet assembly poorly re-enameled and silver washed (obverse) post-war... for whatever reason. If an all through fake it's the strangest one I've seen yet, doesn't really add up to me... still can't see any difference comparing this reverse to that of an original. Just look at the difference in the quality of silver wash on the reverse compared to obverse.
Yes, definetely a strange one, I will try and get some info from one of the sellers, maybe he can add some relevant information, bear with me here and I will come back to you
Hi Sladosby slados28
I hoik on board your previous post but I believe that Juan has come across and identified for us a brand new reproduction that is hitting the collection field
Under no circumstances would a rubbishy looking badge ever have been accepted as a good badge by the rzm office.
Even when the badges had deteriorated to the painted zinc examples the obverse design always had a decent strike
Fortunately for us even though the back looks quite convincing the obverse is rubbish
Saladin, I agree that the quality of enamel here is rubbish... but in light of the excellent reverse it doesn't make sense, to me at least, that this would be an all round cohesive faker effort.
Rather, like I suggested earlier, a good badge (planchet and attachment) re-enameled and silver washed to the obverse post-war by a dealer or collector or whatever (for whatever reason... damage or something similar).
Again, there's a world of difference in quality between the solid patinated silver wash and maker marks to the reverse and all that ugly silliness added to the obverse...
Also, I agree that a poor enamel/puffy enamel badge would probably not have passed muster with the RZM but, then again, not all badges in circulation today made it onto a lapel or even out of the factory... lots of odd rejects and half finished stuff out there. Not that this applies here, as the enamel work here is clearly wrong when viewed up close.
I'm not seeing problems with the obverse planchet strike though, all I'm seeing is puffy low quality enamel and some kind of unpolished silver wash that has bled into the enamel distorting the look of the strike and underlying planchet a bit.
I tend to over explain things a bit, so... all I'm saying is, IMO; original planchet and attachment with puffy enamel and obverse "silver wash" (or something like it) applied post-war.
Okey, With this better picture I see that the front looks like crap! But the reverse had still fooled me...
Edit: But it is a very interesting badge..looking forward for more theories!
Has anyone contacted Mark/Greenhorn and asked him to assess this?
William
"Much that once was, is lost. For none now live who remember it."
Hi William, no I have not, do not know who he/they are
Hi William, found him, sent him a PM, many thanks for your information, Best Regards, Juan
Hi guys, finally got an answer from the seller, quote "The Rettenmaier party pins I have (I had 20 from a veteran ringback) are ice cold mint, that’s explains their appearance. Every normal party pin was born with a good amount of silver finish. How ever, this weak finish fades away from the moment they are being worn. They mostly turn into tombak color, the color from under it. I can guarantee you these pins for 1000%, you can post them on any forum and even as the very critical Jo Rivett to have a look at them"
Similar Threads
Posting Permissions
.
Bookmarks