JT1959
Active member
For something which is almost 70 years old and has been used on a uniform they look too be in too good a shape. It simply lacks patina, in my opinion.
The badge was usually lacquered with a composition called "Brennlack," which was a powdered metal. When oven heated the paint was burned, leaving a metallic type coating that will flake off with time.
Der Alte:
Thank you for the introduction and info about the CCC awards :thumb:. Producers FLL and Juncker as you show pictures of, is the most common and many collectors prefer the awards made by Juncker. However, I chose self manufacturer F & BL as the quality of these is generally much better and have cleaner nicer details.
However, I'm not totally agree with you on some statement:
Finding 70-year-old artefacts in mint quality is not unusual (remember that many of these awards have been in the original boxes since 1945!) In my coin collection, I have among other Roman coins from BC, in mint quality with exquisite touch brilliance (these are more than 2,000 years old).
If awards were used in the field, they naturally easily damage. Temperature changes also were exposed, was also encouraging rust and tarnish the process started. Improper storage at collectors will also impair the quality of several years of storage, so these factors can make the coating flake off over time. However, if the award is treated well and stored in proper temperature and environment....... Believe there will be awards of this type in mint quality also 500 years into the future.
Best regards
JT1959
I show here a few more examples from my collection of objects in top quality. Are these also fake on the same basis as the previous ones?
(mint quality = fake)
Attachments
Last edited: