08-20-2002, 12:47 AM (This post was last modified: 06-12-2013, 06:18 PM by CtahhR.)
Dear Friends,
This badge came my way recently. It is very nicely made with tastefully applied patina on the front, nicely worn gold-plating, and it is very detailed. The enamel is very nice, but a little uneven, and ... it is almost twice the size of the original.
But your figures are not proportional. Your measurements would produce a short oval and not a long oval that is in avers No 1 and 5 that I have seen.
I measured the picture of the drawing in Avers No 1 as it shares the same proportions as the badge that I have. It’s measurements in Averc No 1 are 32mm x 50mm.
The badge I have measures 39mm x 60mm
The measurements you gave from kutzenko book were 26mm x 36mm.
I wanted to see proportionally what the width would be using kutzovs measurements to enlarge the badge size proportionally to 50mm in length, the length of the picture in Averc no 1 and see what its width size it would be in direct proportion.
Proportionally kutzovs size badge if it was enlarged to 50.4mm would be 36.4mm wide. Divided by 100 and multiplied by 14 gave me this figure.
I wanted to see proportionally what size Avers badge would be if it was enlarged proportionally to 60mm in length, the size of my badge.
I divided 32mm x 50mm by 100 and multiplied it by 12. It gave me the dimensions of 60mm in length and 38.4mm wide.
Proportionally the badge I have is 39mm x 60mm it is mathematically closer to the picture displayed in Averc No 1.
I also measured the badge in avers No 5 as it was 21 by 32 mm in size and applied the same principle and drew the same conclusions.
This would mean that either Kutzenko is correct or Avercs No 1 has a fake badge.
Have you physically seen a badge that measures 26mm x 36mm
I’m afraid you are cutting the cloth to fit what I can only say are disputed measurements from Kutzenko’s book.
I also can’t believe any one who has produced such a fine copy goes and messes it up by making it proportionally so much larger.
If you have got this medal from a known dodgy source or a large batch I have some shirts ready to eat.
My supplier had actually admited that this badge was a fake, and discounted it from $1000 to $200.
In my opinion Avers is not a serious reference, but the badge pictured in the Kutsenko book also measures 50 x 32, and is out of proportion with his data. Give me a day or two, and I will try to dig out some more information about this badge.
I have seen a smaller badge long time ago, and back then I did not have enough experience to tell if it was OK.
08-22-2002, 02:33 PM (This post was last modified: 06-12-2013, 06:19 PM by CtahhR.)
Thanks Alexei
So your supplier tried a fast one? Ok I can handle it if your supplier has admitted it. I would be interested to know where he got it from and its history.
Have they got a die, did they........basically how do they make such good fakes because that is not cast and is identical to avers.
And yes I do believe you when you say Avers is not the best reference book.
I would not be surprised if they have a fake if your searches prove they are differnt from theirs published.
I wouild love to see a real one then against this one supplied by your supplier.
He is anything, but nice. When I told him the badge was a fake, he probably figured he would try to make some $$ anyway, just not as much as he hoped to.
I am expecting some information about this badge in a day or two. Will post it right away.
Alexei
Quote:Originally posted by Chris That was nice of him to discount a fake badge!!!
I've done some research and some asking around. Most collectors believe that the large badge did exist, and the one pictured in the "Blue Book" is large. Why would they put measurements for the small one is beyond me! Somebody had mentioned it to me that in the Avers they simply published a drawing of the photo from the "Blue Book". One of the collectors has a theory that all smaller numbered badges were large, and eventually the cost to make such large badge became prohibitive, so they have switched to a smaller variation. According to him all badges with numbers greater then 1050 are small.
This still doesn't change what I have said about my badge - it is a fake. Apparently a reliable way to detect them is to look for fake patina, and enamel imperfections.
