Reproductions

[Jim McDougall]

While I am not a moderator, I have a deeply vested interest in this forum, and I am becoming concerned about the character of its content, particularly in the posting of reproduction arms.

In the frontispiece of the pages......SECOND LINE.......importantly noted:
ON THE SCOPE OF THIS FORUM

The purpose of the forum and its discussions, it clearly says that the objective is to display, identify and discuss ACTUAL historic examples....for the purpose of classification by collectors, as well as learning from them historically for those of us so inclined.

This is not to say that reproduction arms are not often well researched from originals, in most cases they are, however they still do not carry the elements, character and nuances which are key to the historic value of original items.

We have a remarkable field of readership, often hundreds if not thousands to one of contributors. The discussion of recognizing key elements of authenticity in discussing the possibility of whether properly of period or modern reproduction for the benefit of improving such work accordingly is emphatically outside the intent of this forum.

Though Fernando, our stalwart leader is no longer with us, I would ask that we recognize the standards and integrity that he and Lee have instilled in keeping this forum aligned with the original standards, out of respect.

If in doubt on the character or provisions of something to be posted, check first for approval simply as a courtesy. After regrettably stepping out of bounds myself on a number of occasions, it became my policy to do just that.

Thank you guys,
Jim

[serdar]

It is very dificult to distinguis very good "reproducition" saber, before i posted a fringia one, as you yourself stated "expert" on that field proclaimed it original, but it was a fake.

I think it is good to post thing you doubt about, if not what is point of forum, this do, this dont....

But as i said, it is to think about if so caled forum "experts" cant identify something, well maybe this forum plumeted already.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by serdar

It is very dificult to distinguis very good "reproducition" saber, before i posted a fringia one, as you yourself stated "expert" on that field proclaimed it original, but it was a fake.

I think it is good to post thing you doubt about, if not what is point of forum, this do, this dont....

But as i said, it is to think about if so caled forum "experts" cant identify something, well maybe this forum plumeted already.

The fakers are getting good, they have been producing these for many decades, and they're better than the old days, however, to judge from photos is difficult if not impossible. I have never declared myself or anyone else as 'expert' as I think that designation is too subjective to be applied to anyone other than personal opinion of individuals.

I understand the points of discussion in posting a subject example as to whether it is fake or not, but presumably those acquiring these weapons and handling them personally have enough awareness and expertise to be purchasing weapons in these high end categories in the first place.

This forum has been an excellent place for us to all share examples, discuss them, and above all, LEARN TOGETHER!
Nobody claims to be 'expert' and it is unnecessary to use that term derisively toward those who make the effort to try to facilitate the discussion.

This post was not directed toward you personally, you may have noticed several other posts which feature reproduction weapons, entirely against the scope of forum noted.

I admit I personally try to look for all positive toward each persons weapon posted, and probably try to hard to avoid being blunt or directly derisive, but being placed in awkward position by posting of blatantly obvious subject items makes it difficult.

You seem to have acquired quite a selection of these 'unusual' Eastern European sabers, as you have posted, interesting.

I think overall as a forum, we have done quite well, and your observation quite unwarranted. Just my 'nonexpert'opinion.

[Marcus den toom]

It might be an idea to put some sort of "warranty" label to posts or threads that are recognised as factual and other post as under investigation or discussion?

I also am concerned by the frequent server downtime. Is there a reason why the forum has been down for a number of times the last few months?

Also, i tried to change my password multiple times but the email never reaches me. I am still loged on my mobile phone but this is also a serious issue :/

If there is a monetary reason, i am sure we can manage something together?

[ulfberth]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

While I am not a moderator, I have a deeply vested interest in this forum, and I am becoming concerned about the character of its content, particularly in the posting of reproduction arms.

In the frontispiece of the pages......SECOND LINE.......importantly noted:
ON THE SCOPE OF THIS FORUM

The purpose of the forum and its discussions, it clearly says that the objective is to display, identify and discuss ACTUAL historic examples....for the purpose of classification by collectors, as well as learning from them historically for those of us so inclined.

This is not to say that reproduction arms are not often well researched from originals, in most cases they are, however they still do not carry the elements, character and nuances which are key to the historic value of original items.

We have a remarkable field of readership, often hundreds if not thousands to one of contributors. The discussion of recognizing key elements of authenticity in discussing the possibility of whether properly of period or modern reproduction for the benefit of improving such work accordingly is emphatically outside the intent of this forum.

Though Fernando, our stalwart leader is no longer with us, I would ask that we recognize the standards and integrity that he and Lee have instilled in keeping this forum aligned with the original standards, out of respect.

If in doubt on the character or provisions of something to be posted, check first for approval simply as a courtesy. After regrettably stepping out of bounds myself on a number of occasions, it became my policy to do just that.

Thank you guys,
Jim

Well spoken Jim !

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Marcus den toom

It might be an idea to put some sort of "warranty" label to posts or threads that are recognised as factual and other post as under investigation or discussion?

I also am concerned by the frequent server downtime. Is there a reason why the forum has been down for a number of times the last few months?

Also, i tried to change my password multiple times but the email never reaches me. I am still loged on my mobile phone but this is also a serious issue :/

If there is a monetary reason, i am sure we can manage something together?

Thank you Marcus, obviously the intent of the poster is to discover more on identifying and classifying items they acquire, and there are of course many cases where the collector has no idea. However after a certain number of items continue appearing consecutively with the same basic cloud of suspicion things get a bit tiresome.

So far most of these posts have expressed open concern over the character of the item posted so that is not the problem. The idea is to cut down on this type of posts on items that are questionable at the outset, and at worst, being used to test the waters so to speak to get experienced insight into improving modern examples. No accusations but obvious potential for consideration.

Its like the 'I just inherited this' and I was restoring an old house and found this in a wall' ploys that have been well worn on certain other venues.

However it is understandable if someone has acquired something unusual to them, and hopes to have some informed input, that is indeed what we do here. Just hoping to stop the parade of reproduction items. These kinds of commercial products do have other forums where they are discussed with regard to the quality of each manufacturer.

[Ed]

Ahhhh ,,, fakes.

This occupies a special place in my heart, having been duped some number of times.

I suggest that perhaps a subforum entitled "Exposed" be created and if a piece is identified as a fake the entire thread be moved.

I think also that one needs to give the benefit of the doubt freely. I haunt a number of gun collector boards and non-collectors pretty regularly post examples of things that they got while clearing out parents' homes. They sincerely do not know what they have. Sometimes it sounds a bit dodgy but that is sorta the price of having an "expert" forum.

Maybe a forum entitled "What is it?" Those that do not want to engage can then ignore at their pleasure. If the thing is real the thread gets moved.


Anyway, I have been noodling a paper on fakes for some time. I attach it for your amusement. It is not where I want it to be but some might like it.

[Jim McDougall]

Great ideas Ed! I think we all have considerable experiences in the "hall of shame" as we fell prey to clever and innovative 'treasures' which were indeed too good to be true. Still the optimist and romantic in us compelled is to believe the 'stories' which surrounded the item.

I have always felt the best defense, indeed the most powerful weapon to keep us from further being victimized, is KNOWLEDGE, which actually is what these forums are all about. One of the drawbacks is that often, as noted, many do not enter detailed observations so as not to provide 'training data' for those out there concocting these artificial antiquities.

The elephant in the room however, is that of legality, and potential issues with declaring an item 'fake' etc. and to host a venue specifically to display a rogues gallery with examples, while obviously helpful, would unleash nightmarish complications in my opinion.

The only thing we can do is prudently make observations and comparisons with known other examples with provenance noting the differences without direct accusation. As our core of knowledge grows, as it has here in the past years, the 'trolls' will find it less lucrative to enter here as they realize our awareness.

I feel and well know the frustration, plenty of scars !
Nevertheless, well said and thought out ideas, and great attachment! Thanks Ed!

[werecow]

I like the idea of a suspected fakes forum. There's a lot to be learned from comparing forgeries to the real thing. We could call it "The oops box".

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by werecow

I like the idea of a suspected fakes forum. There's a lot to be learned from comparing forgeries to the real thing. We could call it "The oops box".

I think we all agree that we should have an awareness of the many fake items circulating and how to recognize them as compared to authentic antiques.
Perhaps the best way to represent these in discussion is to describe them as 'modern interpretations' so as to avoid inflammatory connotation (despite obviously our frustration toward them) .

It seems over the years, regions such as in Afghanistan's Khyber, the production of 'interpretations' of East India Co. components in producing tribal weapons evolved into a modern industry. These weapons are incredibly similar to the authentic examples, almost indistinguishable.

While most of us in the 'game' many years have learned through experience how to recognize 'interpretations' in handling them, however often when examples are assessed only through photos, as here, it is much harder and I admit to often being fooled by images presented.

The idea of a sub forum to compile these 'misteakes' is compelling, but a bit more complex than it would seem. Still the subject examples remaining in proper context I think serve the purpose.

Learning and awareness are the goals here, so I would say status quo remains, but care in wording and presentation of primary concern.

[10thRoyal]

I for one love the idea of a lessons learned folder. I'd love to see a collection of photos of reproductions on there along with an explanation as to why they look like reproductions. For example, show a picture of the smooth steel surface of the inside of a Victorian burgonet, then show a photo of a hammered finish on an original burgonet.

You can look at my profile on the site, my second thread ever was about, *screams internally*, a Victorian burgonet I bought. Man did I want to kick and scream. I was so bitter about it that it's actually funny in hindsight. But the knowledge I gained was worth the price of admission.

We are all on the same side here. We all want more authentic pieces in the hands of people who enjoy researching and enjoy the hunt. There will be bruised egos, there will be experience challenged, and there will be dollars spent. But after all that, we'll figure something new out, we'll look at it soberly after, apologize for harsh words, and go find something cool and undiscovered out in the world. We all at some point have to be a student, a teacher, or someone to pat someone on the back say "sure it might be a reproduction, but it looks pretty good for a fake."

This has been a great community by and large. So we all need to make the case for growing it and keeping it accessible. To keep the person who might have bought a fake, still interested and willing to learn and have fun. And personally I think that a lessons learned folder would be a great way to do that.

[Jim McDougall]

Beautifully said 10th!!!

[kahnjar1]

Hi Jim,
This thread started out with the subject of Repros but seems to have now also included Fakes. I believe that they are two different things.
IMHO a fake is a false copy meant to deceive, whereas a Repro is an (obviously) modern copy. A good example of Repros is the proliferation of samuri swords (for sale on a well known website) and often seen in groups of three on a rack. Personally I have never liked Repros and would not have an example in my collection.
Stu

[Lee]

Ed, I enjoyed reading your paper on fakes and find it potentially very useful reading for all stages of a collecting life.

I myself cannot always resolve authenticity even with an object in hand; indeed it is more accurate to say that increasingly I rarely can confirm or denounce with certainty and I have not made a significant antique arms acquisition in over a decade. When I will give an opinion, it is either that I am "enthusiastic about" or "afraid of" an item with the caveat that in order to reduce the risk of acquiring a fake, I have "calibrated" myself to walk away from maybe the best opportunities.

[werecow]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Hi Jim,
This thread started out with the subject of Repros but seems to have now also included Fakes. I believe that they are two different things.
IMHO a fake is a false copy meant to deceive, whereas a Repro is an (obviously) modern copy. A good example of Repros is the proliferation of samuri swords (for sale on a well known website) and often seen in groups of three on a rack. Personally I have never liked Repros and would not have an example in my collection.
Stu

The line is blurry though, and a lot of aged repros end up being used as fakes by unscrupulous dealers. For that reason alone it's good to be aware of repros even if you have no interest in owning them.

[Jim McDougall]

All very good points, and there is decidedly a difference between reproductions and fakes. Reproductions are made to represent examples of certain sword forms for collectors who wish to assemble examples of their favorite types but cannot afford or have access to authentic antiques.

They are not made to deceive typically, but I knew a guy who did make them and became so good at producing them authentically, they could easily be passed off as such. He responsibly would place his mark to avoid this, but unscrupulous dealers would eliminate it and cover over.

Fakes are varied, but of course have more nefarious purpose. Some sellers feign unawareness, but dealers handling many weapons certainly know better you would think. Its truly hard to determine what the case might be.

Knowledge is the most valuable weapon we can own.

[A. G. Maisey]

"Knowledge is the most valuable weapon we can own."

Knowledge is acquired through education.

Education costs.