I'm sure we all have a photo or two in our photo archive of high-quality fake decals on various helmets. Why don't we start an archive of these? In 20 or 30 years, this thread would be quite a valuable resource!

Very good idea. I usually will print any good clear photos of fakes so I have them handy as references. Perhaps this should be set up as a permanent reference section, to which new and improved fakes can be added as they appear. I was just over at the WA forums and note someone has posted a new (to me at least) "Fat Runes" W-SS decal. Have a look.

The latest fake decals are usually in a transition period where the consenses is split. Some believe in them and others do not. Time sometimes remedies this, and at times it may not. It then becomes authors opinion, these are the hardest one's to decide on if building a on-line archive. But the concept of a archive is a great idea.

Craig,

I am of the opinion that you catalogue the confirmed originals as a stand alone reference. Ones energy and attention should focus on these.

Too many collectors are fixated with the reproduction in deference to the original! Some of the lesser forums have initiated something similar and the results are shocking. Collecting INERTIA.



Just my $0.02

Billy

It would certainly help helmet novices like me.

I agree that an online catalogue of known
good decals would be of help to new collectors.
Jim

I agree with Mr.Matchett. Although the common response is "We don't want to give away to much information"

My thought on that line of thinking is if anyone is going to go to the great effort of making a fake decal that will fool an expert, all the information is readily available now. And very easy to aquire.

What I WOULDNT want is any explanations or discussion to go with the pictures. Just the pictures. Most don't see what there looking at. And that should remain that way. No teaching.

What I see as the achilles heel of repo decals is that the artist doesn't know what he's looking at.

On another board an SS decal was being discussed recently and all involved had Mr.Hick's book. Even with the book as a reference 60% of the group didn't know "what" they were looking at. They had ALL the information and still were incorrect in there analyis.

A collection of known decals would be a great reference. For example, a "big foot" in issue state and then examples of different types of aging from minor, to road hard and hangin by a thread. The gamut of wear and percentage remaining.

Ken has a pretty good section at his site.

All good comments. I suggest the moderators "PIN" this topic, and we go from there.

Craig,
E-mail me.
Larry

OK, so this thread has been pinned since 9/20/05 with nothing added to it. Today there are 2 good examples of repro decals. Should not the moderator add these to this thread? Or is it strictly up to the individuals to do so?
Just a question guys.

This is a prime example why I will not be collecting ANY more helmets. Too many fakes and it seems like most do not want to share info, they just say "no good" but rarely say why. I see why the Sr. folks don't want to help out the fakers with detailed info. Its a shame.

The fakers have all the info that they need, it's just a matter of execution.

Actually , there is already plenty of info on GDC , it is just scattered over all the threads . Just browsing through all the ones called " Real or Not ? " , or similar , will give you a lot of fakes to look at .

It takes a lot of time , and I have by now a modest ' archive 'of some 75 pics of confirmed originals & fakes on SS-decals alone - should I ever need it .. . Since I have not always attached the name of the actual Helmet-owner ( or the judges ! ) to them , it wouldn't be fair to show them here .

Now does that help ? Because I did find a helmet with SS-decal today ( It will be a seperate thread in a minute or so ..), I just spent an hour going back & forth these pics & my decal . It passed the test with many fakes ..

But Chris is so right here - I DO NOT know what exactly to look for ! I cannot " feel " it . Mr.Hick's book would probably have the same effect . ( But I WILL buy it if my helmet should happen to be O.K. , for the history of SS-decals alone ) I will give an example right here ; if it is not O.K. to use these pictures taken from other threads on GDC , I guess they can easily be removed .

First one > described at the time as " Textbook-example of 2nd pattern - Champagne ".

This one as " Fake " ..

This one as " MAY just be a high-end fake " ...

And THIS is what I have ..

The longer I try to compare them , the more confused I get . I think I see differences with the fake , but sometimes also with the original ? Apparently I do not have the " feeling " for that original .

Well , at least I tried my best , I've seen people do a lot worse ..

This one is fake that was put on the camo repanted 42 helmet ! For the beginers it looks O.K ! I hope that Decal Archive will help to prevent colectors from buying fake SS decal helmets !


Matthias Fritz

I'm not principally a helmet collector, but I like them and own several. SS decals have always confused me. Apparently, there are subtleties that the learned can spot to determine what is fake and what is not. To add to the confusion, the fine Hicks books on SS helmets depict variant decals, so such do exist. Even for the knowledgeable, how can you tell a period variant from a reproduction? I understand there are "well known" reproductions and blatant ones that even a novice collector should spot, but what about the mostly unknown area of variants?