Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mariusgmioc
To me, this keris looks very new (max 10 years) and very Javanese and definitely not Balinese.
Am I right?! Am I wrong?!  |
Hello,
The pictures were made with a modern DSLR, the Nikon D7000 plus a high quality lens. Every picture has seen different automatic algorithms to increase the picture quality, without any possibility of influence by the user. The D7000 doesnt allow to use the raw-data. What I try to say is that pictures of old artifacts taken with a modern DSLR like this are always looks more modern than they are, always!
1: The scabbard of this Keris has been worn without any question with the typical signs of strain in the middle of the scabbard. Who was wearing such a big Kris ten years ago?
2: The blade itself has a mirror surface finish and a mild Waranga but there is corrosion everywhere and it takes some decades until a blade is corroded like this.
During the last cleaning the "foot" of the scabbard became loose and the resin inside the foot and also the wood from the core seem to be much older than 10 or 25 years.
If I see a artifact which is of unknown style to me, I would never judge the age of the piece by pictures. Especially if they are had been taken by an DSLR and if the artifact is made from gold or silver.
Without any question, this Keris is non traditional but this fact alone is no evidence for a recent production. What shall I say, my collection is full of unusual blades, I'm a kind of magnet for unusual artifacts
Regards,
Roland