Ed_Haynes Posted January 16, 2006 Posted January 16, 2006 These are, I assume, unattributed miniature medal groups? The danger, of course, is the comparative ease with which such groups can be faked. This is especially a problem when high awards and impossible combinations are represented.
peter monahan Posted January 16, 2006 Posted January 16, 2006 And last ...I like this one! Who is it attributed too? Peter (in Canada)
Ed_Haynes Posted January 16, 2006 Posted January 16, 2006 (edited) So many of these miniature groups are just pure (impure?) fantasies, comncocted out of the assembler's imagination and several stacks of miniatures and devices. Sometimes, and these are the rare ones where the faker does research, they represent a real someone's real group. Rarely would I call them "attributed", for that suggests some connection with that real person. Personally, this reflects my general hesitancy about miniatures: even the ones legitimately arttributed will never be any more than that. How many "John Chard" miniature groups are bashing about the trade? Oh, just wait, let me assemble one from period miniatures and carefully aged materials . . . . And Commonwealth collectors don't have their ever handy black light to check for glowing ribbons that is part of the kit for our Teutonic Cousins! Edited January 16, 2006 by Ed_Haynes
Tony Farrell Posted January 16, 2006 Posted January 16, 2006 (edited) The first 'representation' is Jones' group. The second is totally fictitious - and is neither imaginative nor even correct. Don't waste your hard-earned money on this rubbish. The Canadian group is pretty though, but a shame its not full sized (or is it?). Edited January 16, 2006 by Tony Farrell
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now