Jump to content
Tim B

Question on Order of Leopolds

Recommended Posts

The reason I'm asking is that the Order is a Wolfers product if I'm not mistaken.

Tim

Tim,

I think this one is indeed DeGreef's product. Wolfer's pieces of that period had a distinct 'brick-wall-like' pattern. This is what I call this anyway. Find image attached (hard to get the detail with only 80kb that I am allowed so far).

Both, DeGreef and De Vigne-Hart used the 'radial rays' in their pattern under red enamel but crown was such yours was mainly observed on earlier De Greef's.

Take care.

post-8536-089220300 1292174863_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi farmer,

Are you sure about that? I was given the impression that the Leopold Orders with the "I" in the center were indicative of products made by Gustave Wolfers, much like those with a "II" (example below) were produced by Heremans of Brussels.

If that is incorrect, then I think several members would like to see some evidence ot that, I know I would. If I remember correctly, there was a fairly recent article written (OMSA?) on these orders and I am not sure what might have been said either way. Anybody else?

Here's one old thread that previously discussed this, there were a couple more.

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=30663&st=0&p=289168&hl=heremans&fromsearch=1&#entry289168

Perhaps this is a good time to readdress this topic and update our information?

Tim :cheers:

post-548-088858200 1292186294_thumb.jpg

Edited by Tim B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi farmer,

Are you sure about that? I was given the impression that the Leopold Orders with the "I" in the center were indicative of products made by Gustave Wolfers, much like those with a "II" (example below) were produced by Heremans of Brussels

Perhaps this is a good time to readdress this topic and update our information?

Tim :cheers:

Tim,

Sorry for delay but I was away.

I too believe most of post 1890's pieces by Wolfers used the 'I' (earlier pieces were made from Buls's dies and had no numerals at all).

Badges with 'II' are obviously more complicated. I have a French-made example (Officer) with 'II' - attached in this post. Quality and details are slightly different from the Wolfers/Heremans pieces.

Further, Heremans working out of Brussels and Schaerbeek (there were 2 locations) made examples with 'II' and also with no numerals. I have 2 officers (one bronze gilt and one silver gilt) - both cased - by Jules Heremans (both stating Schaerbeek). In addition, I have 2 cased Knights by Heremans (Jules) with no numerals as well.

I'll try to post images since it is not allowing me to upload more then one image (even though size is under 80kb).

All of my cased Heremans Commanders are with the 'II' except for one that was based on Bulls's dies in the 1880's - that one has no numeral.

It certainly is quite interesting.

It is an intereststing subject, definitely in need of more research.

post-8536-091395300 1293047501_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Farmer!

First, you appear to have some really beautiful examples. :jumping:

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!:lol:

Tim :beer:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

Thank you,

Yes, 25 years of collecting/researching L1 Order (with limited funds) but I do own some unusual examples.

Thank you for the offer to help with images (and yours are quite nice indeed) but it is the quality I'm concerned with. I shoot most of my stuff with a dedicated micro lens so file size is rather large. I am proficient with photoshop so cropping/downsizing them is not a problem but compressing to 85kb - I am rarely happy with outcome - especially when details are important. I'm not certain how long one has to wait until larger images are being allowed to post but I will just have to wait.

I am in the vast land of the 'maple leaf' - Belleville area so not really any coast, but there are times when I wish I was in the asylum.

Wishing all great Holidays!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi farmer,

don't wait, you only need a better program.

This is a picture with 82.9kb:

Uwe

Uwe and Tim,

Thanks for the replies. I would argue the quality and use of an app such in Uwe's post but this is not relevant here. I am perfectly happy with photoshop cs for my uses. What pains me is the 85/110 kb limit in the age of most servers going with almost unlimited web space (even free servers). Never the less, it simply takes considerably longer for me to shrink and downsize images in order to post them and I have no desire to purchase another camera just for the purpose of posting here.

Tim, your shots are really nice and well lit - older mavica's had surprisingly good lens and solid compression algorythm. My old canon failed few years ago otherwise I too would use it.

For your pleasure, image of my GC circa 1860 of - under 50 kb but it took me nearly 5 minutes to edit and save - call me impatient but it seems like a very long time for me. I just really hate the pixelization.

Cheers.

post-8536-074786900 1293653315_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

: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. :cheers:

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. :beer:

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :jumping:

Tim

post-548-023490000 1294013638_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :jumping:

Tim

Tim,

Always a nice find. Looks like late 1930's punch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi farmer,

Here's that cased (Fisch) Leopold II that I showed in the other thread. The crown and suspension ring are really quite thin compared to others I have. The lion has really nice detail but the black enamel is not quite as smooth as most. I'm guessing by the construction, this one must be earlier manufactured.

The Albert palm is also very thin and detailed. :cheers:

Tim

post-548-086114000 1294379676_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all,

Here is my single contribution to this fascinating thread.

I have identified this model as the post 1951 version that is bi-lingual. Of note is that this model appears to be of a silvered bronze variety as the bronze background can be seen on both the Order itself, as well as the swords. The 'L' monogramed palm by contrast is very silvered.

Close-ups of the central disc to follow.

I would appreciate any comments.

Regards,

Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the close-up pics of the central disc.

The bi-lingual inscription and black enamelling is quite good. Depending on the angle that it is viewed it also appears that the enamelling changes hue from black to brown.

The bronze can be clearly seen especially on the reverse. Are these silvered-bronze versions seen regularly?

Regards,

Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uwe and Tim,

Thanks for the replies. I would argue the quality and use of an app such in Uwe's post but this is not relevant here. I am perfectly happy with photoshop cs for my uses. What pains me is the 85/110 kb limit in the age of most servers going with almost unlimited web space (even free servers). Never the less, it simply takes considerably longer for me to shrink and downsize images in order to post them and I have no desire to purchase another camera just for the purpose of posting here.

Tim, your shots are really nice and well lit - older mavica's had surprisingly good lens and solid compression algorythm. My old canon failed few years ago otherwise I too would use it.

For your pleasure, image of my GC circa 1860 of - under 50 kb but it took me nearly 5 minutes to edit and save - call me impatient but it seems like a very long time for me. I just really hate the pixelization.

Cheers.

This is not a juwel of a grand cross but a commander cross.

Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just fell across this set at an antique dealer's table in the middle of a shopping mall. He tried to tell me he doesn't know much about medals, but that's never an easy thing to believe!

Major Miles Conrad Morton Cameron, Royal Canadian Engineers (Captain on CD, Lieut. for MiD and Belgian awards, all confirmed.)

Aside from the usual WWII stars and discs, he's got a UNMOGIP or UNIPOM ribbon (Both missions were in India and Pakistan, just about 15 years apart, and both used the same ribbon.) and the 1977 Jubilee medal, much more tarnished than the others. I think that when his set was mounted, that one didn't get silver-dipped like the others.

He was awarded both Belgian orders 'with palms', but there's only the palm on his Croix De Guerre. Might it just have gone missing from his Leopold II, or did the mounter feel it would be too awkward and not include it?

p4040358.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NIghtbreak, a great set! :jumping:

I court mounted medals for nearly 20 years, my guess is the palm on the Order of Leopold must've been quite hard to align considering you didn't want any part of it to slip under the CD bar, nor would you want the tip to overlap the palm on the CdG, any of which would cause it to break under moderate pressure. I used a press to afix the backing to the awards, overlapping devices were always at risk, maybe this is the reason here...? I have no explanation as to why the M.I.D. is mounted as such other than guessing it was outright forgotten of that one of the two prongs broke and there's no adhesive behind the ribbons.

Still, a wonderful set! Congrats on this great acquisition!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...