Tim B

Well, spent the better part of my Sunday afternoon trying to loop and photograph these marks. I just can't make out the maker's mark on this one. I did get a slightly better PIC of the Boar's Head though. As a bonus, I got curious and went back to my Leopold Orders and found a couple of interesting surprises there as well and posted those shots in the appropriate threads on the Leo I & II. Tim

Got looking a little closer with my loop today and found this nice surprise on my Leopold II that I shown previously in post # 38. Tim

In my endeavor to identify a particular maker's mark on a Belgian Military Cross today, I happened upon this mark on my Leopold I. Could it be a stray mark or perhaps another mark of Wolfers? Tim

Capt Albert, Believe me when I say you are far from the only person that hated that design. I always called it the "hand-out" medal. So many other possible scenes to depict for humanitarian relief, other than a hand. Tim

Hi Rob, Yes, I was tickled to see this one marked and that always adds a little more interest for me. As I looped the two Military Cross, the quality of the gilding is clearly nicer on the 2nd class version though both are showing signs of toning. So, based on the period and what you see of the mark here, how confident are you that this is in fact Delande's stamp? If I have time this week I will take it out of the safe and try to look a little harder under better lighting. Thanks again to farmer & Rob! Tim

Totally agree! The design process has went down the tubes since circa Viet Nam. You can compare just about any US service or campaign medal of the past to those made post '75 and see there is very little thought or effort that goes into these modern pieces of crap. Here's a case in point; show me one current medal that even compares to the quality of strike or overall design to these pre-WWII medals. Shame really, considering the meaning they are supposed to hold. We could/should do better! Tim

Hi Rob; Happy New Year to you! Yes, I had the boar's head but the bumblebee is a new one for my books. Bad thing about the actual marking here is, I just can't make out anything inside the diamond. As I pointed out in the French Maker's Mark thread in the French forum, sometimes a simple rotation of the mark or the lighting used and you have a completely different view of what might be there. In this case, I "think" I can see an "X" or something crossed one way and then change the view a bit and I think it's just a crushed bead from the original stipling. Still, it's a start! Tim

:speechless1: Well! What to say other than start posting some individual shots! Very nice! Tim

Ironically, the 2nd class is marked and the 1st class (officers model) is not. Can't quite make out what the maker's mark is. Tried to hit it from a couple of angles but, I think the background stipling is affecting the actual maker's stamping here. What was Delande's mark? Thanks again! Tim

A little closer; you can see the boar's head on the left. I can see it clearer through the loop, just can't quite get the PIC's to show the details. These marks are just too tiny. Tim

Hey farmer, You're right! After reading your post, I took the medal out today and looped it. Tim

$13.75 buy-it-now on eBay; more than 10 available. What's crazy is, others are trying to sell these same medals for over $75. !!! Goes without saying; pays to shop around! Tim

:D I hear ya, and believe me when I say it takes me time to shrink PIC's down to fit here, but you get used to it, and I can't complain for free access to members from all over the world. On another note, I don't use a flash on my PIC's. Instead, I use a secondary light for spotlighting the item in addition to a desk lamp for the main lighting. I used to use one of those lighted table magnifiers with a 40 watt bulb but eventually went to a hand-held spot (type wih the little plastic clip) and an incandescent 25 watt bulb so I don't wash out the details. Just a matter of positioning the lights to get the best look. The Mavica is old and the type that uses the 3.5 disc, which until a couple of weeks ago, I could still boxes of 10 get for a couple of bucks, but those days are numbered. I also have a Fuji Finepix which is excellent, I just don't waste my time dragging that out for these unless I need to capture French maker's marks or something really small. You're right, pixelization is the killer here. What I have found though, is that I can reduce my raw PIC's from say, 2500 kbyts down to a a format of 700 X 900 (depends exactly what I have in the shot) and get it to load without losing actual display size or much in the way of details. Of course, you're not going to copy that PIC and enlarge it from there as the image is about maxed out as it is. Anyway, it seems to work. I do have to clean my PIC up a bit and finally reduce it using the "Paint" program which further reduces the file size simply by opening it and then just saving it again. Sometimes, a lot of work and for the most part your efforts will go unnoticed, but your PIC's are nice and show what needs to be seen. Hope that helps some. Tim

I'm sure!

"cover that with medals until my money runs out." I need to a vacation! Does that work with the women too!? Tim

Yes, it's a great thread and probably one of the best sources online to really get some worthwhile information on these medals. There is almost too much information and too many different directions presented here for just one thread. I know Rob and I have kicked around the idea to ask Nick to start a separate sub-forum on Victory Medals in general, as it has such an international flavor, but so far the demand is not that sufficient I guess. Lot's of readers, but only a handful actually posting on any routine basis. I wish more members would routinely participate and maybe we could persuade those powers to be to make it happen. I personally could see several areas of interest here: - The various country medals and varieties themselves; both official and unnofficial versions and we could dedicate threads specifically to one type/country medal so the discussion stayed on particular focus. - The myriad of clasps and other ribbon attachments; official and otherwise. - The differences of ribbons between countries. - All the boxes, cartons, cards, MID's, etc. - The States/Cities/Local Townships versions. Hell, there are even veteran, VFW, and other organizations that produced these. - ??? I'm sure I'm missing other areas that would be of interest as well. Anyway, it would have my vote! The special interest forum would probably be the most appropriate area IMO. Tim

Hi farmer, I agree with Uwe here and honestly, there isn't much difference between the 85 kbyt you have now and 110 kbyt you are going to get once you have a sufficient number of posts anyway. I understand the desire to post nice clear, detailed PIC's and for the most part most members do, but all of us have to reduce our PIC's and you just lose picture quality when you do that. It's no use to have PIC's 2500 X 3200 and have to scroll across the screen or slow up the servers in order to view them in my opinion. Still, I think you can show anything you want simply by reducing the image and cropping out any unnecessary background. I personally never use my raw PIC's on anything other than saving them in case I need to crop details later, like needing to show some particular detail, which isn't often. Believe it or not, the camera I use 98% of the time, is an old Sony Mavica with only 3.2 megapixels. It's just a matter of using what you have available and making the best of it. I think for the purposes here, it's more than enough. Tim :cheers:

Hi William, Okay, good to know and thank you for verifying this. Tim

Hi William, No, I am referring to the front surface here, so you do not need to open the display or turn the medals. Here's a composite of the different types I have seen. You'll note the ones on top have a sunken reverse, while the ones in the middle and the piece on the bottom have flat reverses. What I understand is, the raised date versions are the standard versions and the recessed date versions were awarded to officers. I don't have a reliable source for that claim but see it referred that way. The example on the bottom has the raised dates, but you'll notice the background is actually stipled and not plain like all the other styles more commonly seen. So, I would like to know if the one you show on the medal bar is the same as the bottom example as I have not seen one of these mounted before and it would prove interesting for me. Thank you, Tim :cheers:

Hi William! I can't tell, but on that Mobilization Cross, does the center roundel have a plain background or is it stipled? I see it has the raised dates. Tim

Hi Josef! So, are these the three styles of Iron Merit Cross I could expect to see? What was the award differences between these and the Iron Merit Cross w/o the crown? Tim :cheers:

Cheers Kev! Tim

Yes, I have seen a lot of these on eBay and other avenues over the last few years, though they are starting to increase in price now. I see certain state victory medals still in the boxes as well. Good to grab when you can. Tim

Hi JM, Well, I don't know but I think we need to look into it a bit more before making conclusions. The US made stars (talking the small campaign/service stars for subsequent awards) are 3/16", or approximately 4mm in size. The larger stars (decorations) are 5/16" and noticeably larger. I believe, the correct silver star that was supposed to be used for the Portuguese Victory Medal is small in nature and IMO, probably closer to the 4mm size based on past examples I have seen PIC's of. The larger stars are just too big. So, perhaps Laslo got it correct afterall, or his measurements were off, ever-so-slightly. So, in my opinion, the star should sit inside the buckle and not on top of it. Perhaps the tips are touching the inside edges and it may be a case of manufacturer differences, but I think some of those larger stars you showed earlier are out of place and probably added by someone after the fact, for whatever reasons. My vote is for the smaller star and until I see some verifyable source stating otherwise, the small silver star is the only authorized attachment beside the common buckle we see on many Portuguese awards. I want to add in closing, that we see various examples throughout the European countries where servicemen have taken "artistic license" in adding unauthorized or non-regulation type attachments. Sometimes it's larger stars, gilted medals, or regimental insignia. So, who knows at this point. However, per regulations, only the small silver star is called out in the references as far as I see. Regards, Tim Here's just a few case in point: :cheers:

Hi Farmer! First, you appear to have some really beautiful examples. You really need to post your examples here as I am sure several members will not only love to see them, but probably can also learn a great deal more with detailed photos. If you're having problems with the PIC's, just PM me and I'll try to assist in anyway. Second, I see you're from Bellevue; is that the east or west coast one? Hopefully not the asylum! Tim :beer: