Become our sponsor and display your banner here
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Decal on the wrong side?

Article about: First, let me say I have no knowledge at all about German helmets or their decals. I came across this photo and first assumed it was simply mirrored, till I noticed that the sleeve eagle act

  1. #1

    Default Decal on the wrong side?

    First, let me say I have no knowledge at all about German helmets or their decals.

    I came across this photo and first assumed it was simply mirrored, till I noticed that the sleeve eagle actually is at correct place and the runes themselves point the right way. Was it common practice to put a rune decal on the left side of the helmet? I never noticed it before.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	tumblr_otkal5ExUR1rc7erjo1_1280.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	96.5 KB 
ID:	1114030

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    P
    Many
     

  3. #2
    Jan
    Jan is offline
    ?

    Default

    Certainly rare but they did make them. Could be for a so called "Reverse" Double Decal for Foreign Volunteers!

    See here for instance

    https://therupturedduck.com/collecti...ign-volunteers

    Best,

    Jan

  4. #3

    Default

    Quote by Jan View Post
    Certainly rare but they did make them. Could be for a so called "Reverse" Double Decal for Foreign Volunteers!

    See here for instance

    https://therupturedduck.com/collecti...ign-volunteers

    Best,

    Jan
    It could also be a double runic helmet, also very rare. Here are 2 double runic examples. The first is an ET M40 with a Pocher Runic shield added on the left. The second is an EF M42, again, with a Pocher added to the left. The third, an M35 EF, was originally a double decal combat Police helmet, converted to a reverse decal SS by the placement of a Pocher runic shield over the Police adler decal. The added decal on these reverse decal or double runic SS helmets is almost always, if not always, a field applied Pocher runic shield. Jim G.
    Click to enlarge the picture Click to enlarge the picture Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_5312.jpg 
Views:	6 
Size:	251.6 KB 
ID:	1114039   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_5316.jpg 
Views:	7 
Size:	247.3 KB 
ID:	1114040  

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9057.jpg 
Views:	2 
Size:	185.0 KB 
ID:	1114036   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9061.jpg 
Views:	3 
Size:	173.8 KB 
ID:	1114035  

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_5939.jpg 
Views:	1 
Size:	249.7 KB 
ID:	1114037   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_5943.jpg 
Views:	2 
Size:	250.9 KB 
ID:	1114038  


  5. #4

    Default

    Thanks for the clarification! Nice helmets too!

  6. #5

    Default

    There could be another reason too. It's obviously a posed photograph - perhaps for a magazine or something. If the photo had been taken from the right of the soldier the rifle would have obscured the soldier's face, although the runes would have been visible on the correct side of the helmet. Perhaps the shield was deliberately placed on the left of the helmet, purely for reasons of the photo-shoot?

    Cheers,
    Steve.
    Author of... 'Belfast Diaries: A Gunner In Northern Ireland'... 'A Tough Nut To Crack: Andersonstown.. Voices From 9 Battery Royal Artillery In Northern Ireland'... 'An Accrington Pal: The Diaries of Pte Jack Smallshaw, September 1914 To March 1919'.

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote by HARRY THE MOLE View Post
    There could be another reason too. It's obviously a posed photograph - perhaps for a magazine or something. If the photo had been taken from the right of the soldier the rifle would have obscured the soldier's face, although the runes would have been visible on the correct side of the helmet. Perhaps the shield was deliberately placed on the left of the helmet, purely for reasons of the photo-shoot?
    I think that might be an astute observation Steve and not as abstract as some might initially assume.

    The image is clearly intended to represent a sniper vis the scope and non standard grip on the rifle, more like that of a machine gunner yet no concealment at all? Even if this was taken in a training "range" environment wouldn't snipers (beyond basic) always train in full field rig?
    Back in the "dark days" LOL! I spent a lot of time staring at intel photoraphs of all sorts of nonsense and postulating about what the image actually showed. In this case notwithstanding the existence of reverse decal helmets I would maybe go a little further and say that I am not convinced that this was not added to the image afterwards. Does anyone else think it is just a little too much "high definition" against what one would expect to see on a worn helmet? Think of the censored white patches over formation signs we are used to seeing in allied photographs. We all know that the Germans in WWII were very handy with photography compared to their peers!

    Regards

    Mark
    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares more about than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature with no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

  8. #7

    Default

    I don't think the decal was added afterwards, there's a shiny patch on that side of the helmet that also partly goes over the decal. That would be hard to accomplish?

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote by earlymb View Post
    I don't think the decal was added afterwards, there's a shiny patch on that side of the helmet that also partly goes over the decal. That would be hard to accomplish?
    Yep, I see what you mean but it wouldn't be evident on the white of the decal at this level of resolution.

    In any I case I am not making an assertion, only a suggestion. The decal at least on my monitor looks very bright compared to the rest of the image. Hence the reference to censored allied photographs

    Regards

    Mark
    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares more about than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature with no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote by HARRY THE MOLE View Post
    There could be another reason too. It's obviously a posed photograph - perhaps for a magazine or something. If the photo had been taken from the right of the soldier the rifle would have obscured the soldier's face, although the runes would have been visible on the correct side of the helmet. Perhaps the shield was deliberately placed on the left of the helmet, purely for reasons of the photo-shoot?

    Cheers,
    Steve.
    My thoughts exactly Steve, there are many known examples of reverse HEER decals used for film and photographs by the Reich's propaganda unit so why not an SS helmet as this is clearly a staged/posed image. Leon.
    "Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." Ernest Hemingway

  11. #10
    CBH
    CBH is offline
    ?

    Default

    The image isn't reversed as the rifles bolt is on the correct side.
    Cheers Chris

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Something is wrong here

    In Photos - Papers - Propaganda of the Third Reich
    08-22-2014, 02:50 AM
  2. 05-26-2014, 03:13 AM
  3. right or wrong ??

    In SS Helmet forum
    11-27-2012, 08:57 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •