Fake General Comments and discussion about fakes

[JapanX]

[JapanX]

Different "manufacturer"

[JapanX]

[JapanX]

Typical

[rocketscientist]

Does anyone know why one of the most common markers to identify a fake medal is the serifs of the "K" in the word "COBIETCKYIO"? Is it so difficult to be reproduced correctly?

IMG_0362.JPG

Edited September 27, 2013 by rocketscientist

[JapanX]

Scandalosamente!

[Rogi]

Does anyone know why one of the most common markers to identify a fake medal is the serifs of the "K" in the word "COBIETCKYIO"? Is it so difficult to be reproduced correctly?

It is so difficult

Once you star faking all those Ks and Js and As look the same

*that's my explanation for it

[rocketscientist]

Right!

I realized that I took the worst example for supporting my question on the "K"... That Partisan medal does not have a single letter which might be confused with the original!

Personally, I would like that all fakes were like that one: oh what an easy life for a dumb collector as I am!

[rocketscientist]

An obvious fake of mine (I have many, indeed) for discussion. Stated to be "cast copy" by some viewers.

Please note: uncommon ring; lack of sharpness in all details; insufficient clearance in the "Y" on the reverse... and many more

[JapanX]

Yep.

Looks like cast.

З and O letters on obverse clearly indicate this

... fake of mine (I have many, indeed) ...

[rocketscientist]

This fake Polar Defense is less trivial to spot.

The suspension ring is oddly soldered, beside that I could not find other clear evidence it is a copy. Nevertheless, most collectors say so.

[JapanX]

Please give it to me straight (as we say in Moscow di buon inchiostro ) - why these collectors think that this is a copy?

Any forcible arguments?!

[rocketscientist]

The general opinion is the suspension ring is wrong. I agree it is very unusual but I have seen other medals with the same characteristics and I would say this detail depends very much on the workmanship, rather than whatever faking process. Then some experts asked me 1200dpi scan of both avers and reverse and their conclusion was that this was "one of the most accurate copies ever seen" but with no further information.

Since the opinion was coming from reputable experts, I took this statement for granted and I classified the medal as a fake.

As an amateur collector, as I am, I haven't reached a sufficient level of experience to understand on my own what's wrong with this medal. That's why I propose it time to time, hoping to learn something useful.

[rocketscientist]

Maybe this side-by-side with a sure original I made some time ago might help in finding differences...

[JapanX]

I see...

Relazione di perizia!

Personally I think that this medal is original and has perfectly normal suspension ring ;)

[rocketscientist]

Frankly, Nick, I share your opinion. Nevertheless the comment I received was that the medal has typical characteristics of a T2, which is not compatible with a soldered ring. Therefore, it must be a fake.

Sounds logic.

ciao

Sergio

[Rogi]

Some people have typical characteristics of douche bags, so therefore they must be? <- this concensus?

The medal looks fine to me, and so what if the suspension might be a later addition. It looks like it should belong on it in the first place.

I'm reminded of that Black Pearl in the pawn shop that was sold as a "cosmetic jewellery" piece, one day a lady walks in and noticed it, buys it and gets it appraised and tested, virtually flawless natural black Pearl. Some of the "experts" are wrong at times.

Is there any other argument to this specific piece being fake?

[JapanX]

..the medal has typical characteristics of a T2, which is not compatible with a soldered ring

No, it doesn't.

This medal is originale ;)

[rocketscientist]

Thank you Gentlemen, it is a great emotion for me to take this medal out of the fake box after 5 years!

Edited September 28, 2013 by rocketscientist

[rocketscientist]

I'm still thinking to this not-fake Defense of the Polar Region discussed in the previous posts.

I was trying to identify the difference between this one and other Polar T1, and I could find some. On the reverse, for instance, I noticed differences in the "K" and in the "D" as shown in the next picture (the medal under discussion is on the right).

I have also noticed, after so many years, that this Polar has a peculiar characteristic in the handle of the sickle: a sort of half-sphere where the handle joins the blade. So, this medal is in fact a T1.2 which must be not very common considering that all my other Polars (7 off - assumed original) do not have this "pimple".

However, the serif of the K and D (and maybe something else) give me the impression of being strange. There are also some small differences on the obverse, apparently.

Maybe these characteristics are typical of the variation, I think it would be very interesting to know. Does anyone have more examples of T1.2 Polar Medals for a comparison?

http://gmic.co.uk/uploads/monthly_09_2013/post-5691-0-97148900-1380481379.jpghttp://gmic.co.uk/uploads/monthly_09_2013/post-5691-0-49440900-1380481422.jpghttp://gmic.co.uk/uploads/monthly_09_2013/post-5691-0-88284400-1380481461.jpghttp://gmic.co.uk/uploads/monthly_09_2013/post-5691-0-13713900-1380481507.jpg

[JapanX]

A fake yesterday - rare variation today!

Yep, you are right about sickle and letters (they are also slightly thinner).

I'll post another example tomorrow

[JapanX]

Here it is

[JapanX]

[JapanX]

Same ring, same soldering, same sickle, but still micro differences in letter serifs

[JapanX]