I agree, when worn in such a sharp incline the awards usually look unusual, but if you line up where the award would be attached to the appropriate ribbon, they are as they should be.
It's difficult to get an overall feel of the serviceman getting just a partial shot of his chest. Did the photographer have some sort of fetish or was the recipient just sat too close to the camera?
CtahhR Wrote:It's difficult to get an overall feel of the serviceman getting just a partial shot of his chest. Did the photographer have some sort of fetish or was the recipient just sat too close to the camera?
It's just photo cropping to better capture the awards in light of the 120kb limitation.
Al-muell Wrote:Is it me, or is there something wrong with the way the awards are mounted?
desantnik Wrote:I agree, when worn in such a sharp incline the awards usually look unusual, but if you line up where the award would be attached to the appropriate ribbon, they are as they should be.
I think he means the ribbons are bass-ackwards; High-end underneath the next highest, instead of the other way 'round. Ribbon mounting, not order precedence.
"patina imparts character" - PJS
A wise man said: 'you should not pay a premium for what you want beyond your comfort level, and always ensure there is a mutually agreeable return policy.'
EricFG Wrote:I think he means the ribbons are bass-ackwards; High-end underneath the next highest, instead of the other way 'round. Ribbon mounting, not order precedence.
Gents,
This point/question has come up on the forum in the past. There was a period in time when the orders/medals were in fact worn in the order/precedence seen in this image. DougD or another forum uniform expert should be able to furnish more detail.