Austria-Hungary ID Weird A-H Flying badges

[Les]

Here's a close-up of the badge, and part of the photo showing the same badge.

Les

[kyokashinkai]

..i wont pass comment on the banner below crown debate, as i have never seen documentation confirming they were right or wrong,be interested to hear comments on the pics you have just posted.

can we see the rear of the badge please.

I will send pics of some of my bits if someone can post..for some reason cant upload my pics onto the site.

steve

[Les]

..i wont pass comment on the banner below crown debate, as i have never seen documentation confirming they were right or wrong,be interested to hear comments on the pics you have just posted.

can we see the rear of the badge please.

I will send pics of some of my bits if someone can post..for some reason cant upload my pics onto the site.

steve

Steve, I'm always interested in what people require as "proof." A signed period photo, clearly showing the same identical badge being worn, and other paperwork goes a long way towards being supportive evidence.

In the sciences, there is an expression: absence of evidence, is not evidence for absence. That means you can't proove something -did not- exist. You can, if there's enough evidence, proove or stand a reasonable chance of demonstrating something does exist.

At this point, I've given you a documented photo, signed by the person in the photo, wearing the flight badge, and I'm getting what sounds like...."I won't pass comment......as I have ever seen documentation."

Let me know what else you require as proof or further documentation, since the problem of dispelling that the item I've shown you is not what the photographic and related evidence suggests, is now the "opposition court."

Les

[kyokashinkai]

..if you check the previous thread it was sogieman who stated that these were incorrect not me. I merely pointed out that i have not seen evendence eitherway.

There is reference to the award in Warren Carrols book though, as stated by Stogieman.

i would though love to see a pic of the back of your badge though ...information is power as they say.

Like you iam no expert ,just a collector of 30 years and we all make mistakes etc and have opinions.

As with my own collection i check and check again if eventually something is proved in all probability of being incorrect then i will get rid of it. It simply boils down to what one is happy with in their collection.

kindest regards

Steve

[Luftmensch]

Les, if you've quite finished building snowmen in your backyard, may we pretty please

1. See a big close-up of the badge in the photo

2. See the back of the actual badge itself

3. See a picture of one of the tunics

[Stogieman]

There are no references that I am aware of that document this badge. That is what I base my opinion(s) on. if Les' photograph is authentic, it will make exactly One (1) period photo of this badge that I am aware of.

[Stogieman]

And frankly, I'd love nothing more than to be proven wrong! ;>) It opens up a whole new realm of pieces to chase after...

[kyokashinkai]

...this is whats collectings all about !!!

Love it !!!

Steve

[Les]

Ok...errands and having to deal with all those un-important issues that pay the bills, etc are taken care of, and once I get the pooch fed (and the obligatory walkies and "quality" time in) I'll post a good picture of the pilot, and then a close up of the badge in the photo. The reverse of the badge will also get posted at that time.

I'll pose a question for you guys to mull over, and I'm open to suggestions on this. Posting the image of a badge which is controversial, and that many don't think exists...happens. But what posting will do, is if the image is left on-line for too long, it will provide details that someone who wants to pass off fakes of these can (and probably will do). Once I post the images, look them over, and -save- them, because if you think someone might use the photos to start passing off this type as real (without their own documentation), I'll delete them from the site (and archives) after you've had a chance to look at them, download them and save them for your own private and personal use.

I don't know if mine is currently "one of a kind" but I'd hate to see copies using the details based on mine, used for a fake badge.

Photos to come in about 2-3 hours (it's 1800hrs or 6PM EST) at this time.

Les

[Les]

I'll edit out the previous comments once the feedback about keeping or deleting the images roll in.

This image of the photo focusing on the badge, is about as detailed as I can get, using the posting parameters. Save it in case it gets yanked.

Les

[Les]

Reverse: normally I shoot against a light blue background with natural light. This was shot with artificial light at night, and a dark blue background used to reduce the contrast from shadows. The corrosion around the rivets is a chemical reaction that's a result of storing the badge against the same dark blue material. I suspect detergent in the cloth is present, and the corrosion is not due to solder/flux on the badge.

Les

[Luftmensch]

And frankly, I'd love nothing more than to be proven wrong! ;>)

Well done, Les.

Hey, Rick, you should love one-of-a-kind photos. You were the one with the only photo I've seen of a fretted out pilot's badge, remember?

But your badge won't be one of a kind, Les. I have a cased one. There was one in Vegas. Chalif pictured one. Andreas Thies had one...

http://www.andreas-thies.de/pdf/herbst02/B...log_II_2002.pdf

If only we could document our specimens as genuine as you have! I suspect they are already being passed off as fakes, as Rick can attest. When you have time, I'd love to read the whole story of this man and his artifacts in a separate thread.

I'm of two minds on this notion of aiding and abetting fakers. Forums like these are based on the idea that sharing information is ultimately better than hoarding it amongst an elite. Perhaps the best balance is struck by eliminating the reverse image or emailing it on request. But removing the front image I feel is unnecessary, possibly the back, too, unless there are unique and heretofore unknown markings.

There is much posting of detailed backs and fronts, and that info is archived, not destroyed.

Speaking as moderator, Rick, what do you think?

Edited February 14, 2006 by Luftmensch

[Les]

I'm of two minds on this notion of aiding and abetting fakers. Forums like these are based on the idea that sharing information is ultimately better than hoarding it amongst an elite. Perhaps the best balance is struck by eliminating the reverse image or emailing it on request. But removing the front image I feel is unnecessary, possibly the back, too, unless there are unique and heretofore unknown markings.

There is much posting of detailed backs and fronts, and that info is archived, not destroyed.

John,

Thanks for the comments and compliments. I like your idea of deleting the reverse image and allowing the rest to remain. That provides provenance of a sort for the items once I'm pushing up the daisies (taking a dirt nap, etc) and the items I've acquired run the risk of being split up and dispersed.

If there's interest in this grouping, I'll post scans and photos of the paper and "hardware" items that are part of the larger group.

Regards,

Les

[Luftmensch]

Split up and dispersed?

I thought you faxed that codicil to your lawyer naming me sole beneficiary of all kuk artifacts?

Hey, I've been watching your six since post no. 25!

And I think I've grown overly fond of emoticons.

But when my girlfriend complains about the time I'm spending on this keyboard....

I just post one of these and she's endlessly amused...it keeps her quiet!

How did you come by this superb group, Les?

[Stogieman]

The badge in the photograph is not the badge you have with the group. before everybody goes nuts, take a deep breath.... then start going over the badge with the photograph. Emphasis on the lettering on the shield, the shape of the wing tips, shape of the tail, etc., etc., etc. Sorry, that should do to start but if you study the enlargement carefully, you'll see what I mean.... First clue.. again with the rivets.

Now I will say, the photograph is astounding and I'd like to know if it glows..... Quick observations on the photo:

Hungarian style tunic, but Austrian collar tabs. Balloon insignia, but a pilot (flying) badge? I'm not a uniform guy, but that's a quick once over.

Study the enlargement and the badge carefully. They are most assuredly not the same piece.

This is a touchy one, I have no desire to share with potential fakers and at some point we should pool our collected thoughts/examples and get an article on the (soon to be) companion website to this forum. let me know when everyone has the pix and I'll yank them if Les cannot. I'll be in and out tonight.

[Stogieman]

Oh yeah, bottom line........ if someone sold you this group insisting that the badge is the one in the photo............. not a chance.

[Stogieman]

OK, here's a comparison photo. it's pretty big. There's additional details, but this should be enough.

Sorry Les....... thisis one of the "things" that helps me to define what to buy. I'm really good with photo recognition and keys... probably should have worked for Uncle Sam....

[Stogieman]

Now, also........

shape of wreath

shape of crown

shape of shield

neck of eagle

Now, keep in mind this should be tempered with the fact it's still the ONLY photo I have ever seen.......... is the photo/uniform legit? I will leave others to authenticate that. But this badge with the group is not the one in the photo and I would even venture one step beyond and say it was not made by Zimbler.........

[Les]

Rick,

Does the photograph has a silver-nitrate "glow" to it? Yes it does have that period "silver" glow to it that I haven't seen on photographs made in the last 50 or more years. There's also an otpical characteristic about the photo that's a result of period lenses...which modern camera lenses don't convey. Also, there no thick emulsion on the surface of the photo typical of prints made during the last 50 or so odd years. Some of the other photos I've sent John also show the same fellow setting in the cockpit of a Bleriot type mono-plane, and in/around other period aircraft. If someone went to the time and trouble of trying to make a fake portrait, and "fake" aircraft, with period settings, all using the same guy and some of his friends...they spared no expense.

The photo is authentic. Dispute it all you like, but it is real.

The torso of the fellow in the photo is at an angle to the camera, and so is the badge. The photos I've taken are straight on shots. What you're "seeing" is the result of looking at the same thing from two slightly different angles. For that matter, anyone taking photos they've posted to this site, knows that often, taking a photo of the same badge on different days can result in the badge looking entirely different. That's a problem for anyone trying to compare photo to photo, let alone a badge to a photo.

With the badge and photo in hand, I have an advantage that is tough to show in -a- side by side photo...I can try to adjust the angle of the badge in a rough alignment with the photo. In "person" they appear to match much more closely than you might be willing to concede.

If anyone wants to see them at the SOS next week, I'm planning on being there and will bring the photo and badge.

Austrian aviation uniforms: Austrian pilots wore balloons on the tunic collar. There are numerous photos showing this type of uniform, and the badges worn by -fliers- along with the flight qualification badge.

Rivets? That chestnut is true of the "bent nail" badges that have been fobbed off for far too long. Anyone given enough practice can learn how to rivet something to a specific standard. Thast doesn't mean that everything rivetted is done well though. I've seen "family" badges that weren't all that well rivetted, and from my personal perspective, if that's the sole criteria people use for judging a badge, someone making fakes would have long ago paid more attention to the rivets if that was the "first" thing a potential buyer was going to look at.

Les

[Stogieman]

Les, take a deep breath........... you can move that badge any way you want, look at it from any angle you want and the they will not match. Look at the letters! Look at the shape of the crown. Look at the wings.

It's not the same badge.........

[Stogieman]

For God's sake Les........ look at the crown inserts and bands. It's not the badge in the photo.

Sorry.

[Stogieman]

And BTW, I'm not disputing your photo, I'm only asking the logical diagnostic questions........ However, this does not change the fact that that badge in the photo, is not the badge in your hand.

[Luftmensch]

The forensic turn of this debate reminds me of Powell's mobile launch trucks at the UN or measuring the angle of the shadow of Old Glory to prove we were never on the moon!

As Rhett said to Scarlett, "Frankly, I don't give a damn" if it's the same badge. It would be nice for the value of Les' group if it was. I'm mainly interested in whether such a type existed. Rick doesn't have the benefit of the other photos of our man, yet, so he's justified in being skeptical of the photo.

I noticed the difference in curvature, too, when I first saw the side by side. But to me nothing is definitive unless everything is compared at identical angles. I'm confident we will feel comfortable with the photo once the other period photos are posted.

To dig in on the issue of whether these are the same badge is secondary to whether this type existed. Rick's opinion that the banners were fantasy is the hypothesis we set out to explore.

Hence we've made some great progress here!

Edited February 14, 2006 by Luftmensch

[Stogieman]

Well, I'm sure Les does (give a darn)..... I'm sure he purchased what he felt was a complete group and paid/was charged accordingly.......

I will leave you with one brutally point blank observation. No matter what angle you take the picture from, the precise number and style of bands at the bottom of the crown will not change......

They don't match.

The photo has 4 "rings"..... the badge has 3.

OK, I lied...... two brutally honest observations.

Look at the tip of the left wing (as facing the badge)

If you can honestly look at these 2 wing tips, look me in the eye and say they are identical.......................... then I will go away and trouble you no more.......

[Les]

Three photos, three angles, they all start looking -different-. If you want an exercise in frustration take several photos of the same medal over different days, overlap them and see if you get matching images...doesn't happen.

Edited February 14, 2006 by Les