01-14-2003, 10:36 AM
Alexei,
I think we have been using a slight difference in the meaning of reproduction. I was using it, for #4 items, simply to mean a newly made item made to fit exactly the original - material, style, production means, etc.
When you talk of "marking it reproduction" you are obviously refering to the maker's intent. That is, someone who makes and marks and item as an reproduction.
Hmmm.
There are really several things here.
If we define "fake" as a non-official creation then you are right that, in reality, they are all fakes. Not just examples #5 and #6, but also #4 (which despite perhaps being an exact copy is still fake) and #3 (which is, in the end product, a fake even if from genuine, albeit originally separate, parts).
There are also problems with #2. In effect, an unissued item is, if it was originally made under official authority, the same as a issued item except that it was not used. For some things this would not greatly decrease the value. For example, I have a 1922 dated M22 cavalry pull-over tunic which I suspect is unissued. It is in good condition showing no signs of actual wear. However, it does have general aging to it and the wool bits show moth nips, etc. Since these tunics would have been replaced only 2 years later with the M1924 uniforms it is not surprising that there are some unissued items. Or perhaps it was used only very, very little. Or perhaps it is a very good fake.
The real danger comes with the fact that often we can't distinguish between a #2 (unissued) and a #4 (current manufacture in correct style). So is an unused M1969 KGB captain's service uniform an original and official USSR item made in the 1980s and never issued or is it a "reproduction" made in a uniform factory in the 1990s/2000s? Is it an original unissued Soviet general's service tunic with original unissued Marshal of Armour boards added by the vendor - or with 1990s manufacture at original factory boards - or with outright fake boards??
It is very hard to tell. Yes there are ways to tell that an item is post-Soviet manufacture - such as the famous blank hat labels. But it would not be much work to prnt/stamp a fake label inside a 1990s/2000s manufacture hat.
It is clear to me that all variations exist. I too know of this Ukrainian facory and some of is sellers. They advertise clearly on the net that they sell newly made Soviet uniforms. To my knowledge they do not/not date their stuff either with true or fake dates. I consider their suff as #4 - newly made with original techniques. But they also sell newly made "high end" WWII era uniforms which are not/not exact copes - they have many errors. I consider them to be # 6 - total fakes.
It also seems clear, as DougD says, that in Russia, and maybe other places - huge stocks of original but unissued Soviet uniforms are being/have been liquidated. One example are the many, many late 1960s unissued gymnastiorka currently available. I have seen modern reproduction M43 gymnastiorkas - both Russian made and UK made. But there are also many original and genuine ones that are dated (either uniform or just buttons) from the late 1960s that were not issued after the M1969 uniform changes came into effect but were kept in government storage until they were sold in the Russian era.
Anyway, to conclude a long winded post. I think when dealing with uniform "fakes" we need to be careful to take into account several issues 1) manufacture and 2) intent of sale.
Then we can carefully seperate original issued, original unissed, good repros, bad repros, repros sold fraudulently as originals, and outright fakes, ec.
Shawn
I think we have been using a slight difference in the meaning of reproduction. I was using it, for #4 items, simply to mean a newly made item made to fit exactly the original - material, style, production means, etc.
When you talk of "marking it reproduction" you are obviously refering to the maker's intent. That is, someone who makes and marks and item as an reproduction.
Hmmm.
There are really several things here.
If we define "fake" as a non-official creation then you are right that, in reality, they are all fakes. Not just examples #5 and #6, but also #4 (which despite perhaps being an exact copy is still fake) and #3 (which is, in the end product, a fake even if from genuine, albeit originally separate, parts).
There are also problems with #2. In effect, an unissued item is, if it was originally made under official authority, the same as a issued item except that it was not used. For some things this would not greatly decrease the value. For example, I have a 1922 dated M22 cavalry pull-over tunic which I suspect is unissued. It is in good condition showing no signs of actual wear. However, it does have general aging to it and the wool bits show moth nips, etc. Since these tunics would have been replaced only 2 years later with the M1924 uniforms it is not surprising that there are some unissued items. Or perhaps it was used only very, very little. Or perhaps it is a very good fake.
The real danger comes with the fact that often we can't distinguish between a #2 (unissued) and a #4 (current manufacture in correct style). So is an unused M1969 KGB captain's service uniform an original and official USSR item made in the 1980s and never issued or is it a "reproduction" made in a uniform factory in the 1990s/2000s? Is it an original unissued Soviet general's service tunic with original unissued Marshal of Armour boards added by the vendor - or with 1990s manufacture at original factory boards - or with outright fake boards??
It is very hard to tell. Yes there are ways to tell that an item is post-Soviet manufacture - such as the famous blank hat labels. But it would not be much work to prnt/stamp a fake label inside a 1990s/2000s manufacture hat.
It is clear to me that all variations exist. I too know of this Ukrainian facory and some of is sellers. They advertise clearly on the net that they sell newly made Soviet uniforms. To my knowledge they do not/not date their stuff either with true or fake dates. I consider their suff as #4 - newly made with original techniques. But they also sell newly made "high end" WWII era uniforms which are not/not exact copes - they have many errors. I consider them to be # 6 - total fakes.
It also seems clear, as DougD says, that in Russia, and maybe other places - huge stocks of original but unissued Soviet uniforms are being/have been liquidated. One example are the many, many late 1960s unissued gymnastiorka currently available. I have seen modern reproduction M43 gymnastiorkas - both Russian made and UK made. But there are also many original and genuine ones that are dated (either uniform or just buttons) from the late 1960s that were not issued after the M1969 uniform changes came into effect but were kept in government storage until they were sold in the Russian era.
Anyway, to conclude a long winded post. I think when dealing with uniform "fakes" we need to be careful to take into account several issues 1) manufacture and 2) intent of sale.
Then we can carefully seperate original issued, original unissed, good repros, bad repros, repros sold fraudulently as originals, and outright fakes, ec.
Shawn
