Im not sure I understand this. How is it wrong in this instance to compare good quality photos to good quality photos? If the marks are visible, it works. Why is this a mockery? Am I totally misunderstanding you?
That`s a good question and I am glad you asked.
You see, when you want to clear something controversial up, like these Honor rings - then you need to be 100% clear and factual, you need to present the facts as they are, and not leave any door`s ajar with room for - as you can already read on that WAF thread - perhaps, probably, looks like - could be - apparently and so on.
When you are outing something as incorrectly produced,
in this case as being cast, then you need to show, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the little holes, the little bubbles or whatever else you have finger-painted over and highlighted, really are, exactly what you are claiming they are.
This can never be done with blurred digital camera images, and is in fact not clear at all. As the bits and pieces highlighted, could in fact, just be damage, or dents that have filled with dirt, or corrosion etc... This can also not be done with good clear digital camera images either.
Silver (content) items, especially jewelry, is not a piece of bronze, and corrodes in a different way, dents and dings in a different way when it comes into contact with the elements. And a ring, well that comes into daily contact with the elements 100x more than a badge pinned on a coat would. Even when die struck, the surface looks different, and even under the microscope, can in many instances be very difficult to attribute a line or whatever you are claiming is a casting flaw, to be just that, withour many detailed images for all angles.
So, you need to take it step by step, and prove to the readers that each oddity you are pointing at,
really is, what you are claiming. Especially when what you are presenting is possibly damaging to the reputation of someone like Don Boyle, and could have major consequences for many collectors. Remember now, we are talking about items worth 5 figures. So, if there “is a scam,” if there are as this poster claims, many of the same cast Honor rings with Don`s CoA, then we are talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Do not forget, there is a 2010 book by Craig Gottlieb claiming that Honor rings were in fact cast! Yes, I know that Don Boyle believes they were not, and I too believe 100% that they were certainly never cast but die struck, but the fact remains that there is a modern book out and about that has not been debunked yet, correctly anyway.
So, it`s just not right to thieve other people’s images – indeed even possibly the same image that you have jumped to the conclusion is in fact two different rings – and then scribble over it and make a few claims, then start getting angry and mentioning things like “Fraud” and that your “
amazing new revelation is bad for his business” but so what because, as this poster wrote – Don has tried to
“commit fraud by claiming the ring he examined was ground dug.!”
The truth of the matter is, there is no proof on this WAF rings thread at all, there is nothing that would stand up in a court of law. Not a single image, and not a single line he posted. What I can see, are libelous comments and slander even that could possible get him sued if Don wanted.
This is not the way to “break new evidence” or to try and clear up such a controversial subject.
Clear, detailed microscopic imagery is, of each oddity you have found, proving that what you are saying is the whole truth, with no room for personal interpretation whatsoever.
You need to have the item, to protect yourself from a law suit firstly, and in able to be thorough!
You need to be in a position to take multiple detailed images of what you are claiming is a flaw, from all angles, and lay your case out in such a way as to make it 100% clear for everybody to see exactly what you are talking about, and that the images in fact do reveal exactly what you are claiming they do.
As far as Gottlieb and the stupid lost wax casting method go, you can easily debunk this too, adding weight to your “The Truth About Honor Rings” post, by simply taking a few examples of genuine Honor rings, and presenting microscopic imagery of the exact same areas you have found the oddities on, on this/these cast rings. That way any reader can follow you with ease, and will in fact come to the same conclusion as you, that the originals were die struck, and the cast ring(s) you have “exposed” are cast/produced differently/not die struck part-pieces.
Naturally you’ll still have two sides, with those owning or who have sold the cast rings, claiming they are genuine, and that maybe there were two methods of making them, war shortage, lost dies therefore some were cast etc.. you will always get the nutmegs and cling-ons that subscribe to these late war-different methods of manufacturing etc.. but they become irrelevant once the complete and easy to understand, factual truth is presented – in the form of easy to follow, clear, irrefutable microscopic imagery.
This WAF thread is no different to many others, except that this poster is throwing around “microscopic examination – inspection-conclusive” and other words in posts that contain nothing but stolen third party blurred camera images, overlaid with what he believes to be this or that. And has gathered up a lunch mob based on them. This is wrong, because there is nothing conclusive at all, in fact worse, many are unsure if the 2 rings shown are not really one ring with two sets of images from different cameras! The latter shows you just how weak his “evidence” is at the moment, and why this is a "mockery" to me. It is just NOT the way you do things.
As I said, I am all in when it comes to exposing a scam, but something on this level needs to be done correctly. For the sake of a few people`s reputations, for the sake of many collectors who have 5-6 figures invested in the items.
Now, once this has been done correctly, then it will be the easiest thing to follow up on, and to look at each and every Honor ring with a CoA from Don Boyle.
You may just find, then, that this was a one-off, and that he simply made a mistake, and the other 20-50-300 CoAs and rings you have followed up on are in fact genuine die struck rings.
If this was found to be the case, then you`d have lynched someone who has devoted decades of his life to helping other collectors, for making a simple mistake – nothing more.
If it was really a scam, then only by following up on the detailed and factual research done to begin with, would the scam in fact reveal itself, and you`d find, naturally, CoA upon CoA from Don Boyle, for cast (fake) Honor rings. And then, and only then, would it be justified to “lay into him” and connect his name and reputation with “a scam”.
