Thanks guys for your replies, really appreciated your thought about.
Gaspare, I have pictures of all the details of various rings, but I prefere don't show too much.
What I posted here is only a very little number of shots just to explain the way of working, but the reference material is thousand times more consistent. But you already know it.
I spent years before reach this level and I presented this research now because I'm sure it is ended.
The reasons are a lot, but hard to write here all, especially in english.
Mark, about the rings yes, they were die struck not cast.
BUT they were die struck using cast silver bars, and you can see it in some rings, especially in '40 style rings where quality of the silver bars is sometimes bad (everything is visible with a microscope). Rings can't be cast because casting process compact the metal (see posts #329121 - #329123).
Some rings were also hand finished and this is why the external design presents sometimes differences (for example the "saw" signs on the oak leaves) from one ring to another.
Howdy Antonio, thanks for the reply! :-)
Yours is extremely valuable work for all kinds of reasons, not least because it can help to finally lay to rest this argument of die-struck vs cast.
This is what I've been waiting for; I always said there MUST be a scientific way to identify whether or not a ring was cast...
Bad news for the fakers, great news for us! :-)
Thank you for your work,
Mark
