![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Centerville, Kansas
Posts: 2,196
|
Hello Detlef, I'm glad that you like the results. I just wanted to try to return it to something close to what it was intended to originally look like. The etching was more to remove some of the gloss from the blade left after removing the chrome than it was to try to find any pattern in the steel. Again I am glad that you like the how it turned out.
Robert |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,250
|
I'm glad you went ahead and removed it Robert. Looks much better...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,345
|
Yes looks much better I agree.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Centerville, Kansas
Posts: 2,196
|
David and Jose, I am very happy that everyone so far likes the results of the chrome removal. Now that I have gone this far should I polish the brass fittings as well or leave them as they are? I have always wondered if on Philippine weapons if they would have been kept bright and shiny all the time or just cleaned as necessary to prevent rust?
Robert |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 338
|
I'd say that with moro pieces, I would polish them if they were in need of a restoration and especially if they have precious metals on them like gold, suasa, or silver, but even then a lot of people have differing opinions about that.
In terms of visayan blades and Luzon blades though, I say leave it as-is if it's brass. I think it looks better that way, and the brass you polish will have dulled and tarnished within a short time anyways. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,345
|
He has some good points (get it?
). I too would leave the brass alone. More value if patina is intact.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|