Brand Name?

[medicalcadetcorp]

NOTE: I am NOT putting down any sutlers out there!

Over the past 7 years I have been reenacting, which isn't that long, I have noticed a lot of folks that don’t know what they're talking about. It seems to me like a lot of people that are in the hobby now go after the name, not the quality or authenticity. I hear people talk all the time and they say, "my coat is a so and so " and the other person bows their heads and says wow. It is like a high school popularity contest, too many people are going after the name of the maker.
I have spent the last 9 months doing countless hours of research on only leather accouterments. I have been to the Gettysburg Archives and handled, researched, copied and photographed hundreds upon hundreds of cap poxes, cartridge boxes, belting, scabbards, knapsacks, and on the side uniforms. I have probably handled more originals than most reenactors will ever see in their lives.
Now that I have an ideal of how the originals felt, looked, how they were constructed, and all that other stuff, I can go around and look at something some "hardcore" sutler produced and say, this is wrong. But.. some new guy comes into the hobby and his buddy says, this is a so and so and they are gods and they make the best stuff you can get and this poor young boy will buy it.
Sure, some suppliers of 1860's uniforms and equipment do make top of the line, quality and authentic stuff, but these reenactors don’t have a clue what they're looking at and again, they go by the "brand name" .
The other day, I got a comment posted in my guest book and this comment read
"Your authenticity requirements are admirable. But how on earth can you suggest farb vendors like; The Gettysburg Sutler and Regimental Quartermaster as suppliers?? Yuck. "

This person is a "brand name hardcore." I will not post his name for some good reasons. He has no clue what he is talking about. I had the Regimental Quartermaster posted as a place to get type IIa shelter half’s (which they do carry from Sekela or somewhere and they are well made) . I also had the Gettysburg Sutler posted to buy numerous things. The Gettysburg Sutler makes very excellent SA jackets, NYS jackets and many other specialty uniforms on request, and they do their research on many of their items. I also have them listed for belting, slings and other leathers, they make very excellent belts that actually are researched and copied from the ordnance department, and hundreds of originals.

I just don’t understand these "names"


These sutlers out there go off of a visual look, what they see in museums and what they assume the item to be, they don’t open up, and look at how these items are actually constructed. But just because they have pictures of the originals and they saw it in a museum, it must be right... not
They also copy certain uniforms off of a special uniform one person wore, but then hundreds of people buy this uniform that one person wore back then. geeze..

If anyone has anything they would like to add, please add it, if anyone would like to comment on this topic, please comment, and if anyone would like to argue with me, I don’t mind, I always like learning new things and I don’t mind constructive criticisms. Thank you.

Your Obedient and Humble Servant,
Michael Merritt
The Susquehanna Mess
portraying the
64th NYSV Co. A

[TimKindred]

Okay, I'll bite... how can you reccomend those farb vendors? :rolleyes:

The reason, young padawan, that certain vendors are "reccomended" over others by certain classes of folks, is that those sutlers have a proven track record of actually doing the research you claim they haven't. One well-known maker has spent a great deal of his life studying pattern-making and tailoring from earlier periods in order to better recreate items from that time.

I'd also like a little clarification on those "hundreds and hundreds" of items at Gettysburg you studied. Are you doing a NYT's editor impression here?

[Memphis]

I'd also like a little clarification on those "hundreds and hundreds" of items at Gettysburg you studied. Are you doing a NYT's editor impression here?

Slam dunk bluff calling!

Score one for Maine.

[medicalcadetcorp]

I do know lots of sutlers also that have done their research and so on, I pay great respect for many sutlers, but some of these
"hardcore" sutlers don't do there research or they don't do the right research, they go off a visual look or what they just see in the museum.
No, I'm not a NYT editor, what kind of clarification would you like on my research?
Also, thank you again for the medical information you gave me a while back, don't know if you remembered, but it helped me greatly.

[medicalcadetcorp]

Rog, I'm not trying to cause a fight here, would you like some clarification also, I am known for my trust. If you have anything you need, just ask..

[Memphis]

Sure, which sutlers and which products? No need to beat the hornet's nest with a stick and then run from it.

[medicalcadetcorp]

Sorry, I will not name names on the forum, but with your permission, I would like to send you an instant message and I will explain in detail what suplers and which products

[Memphis]

With only 19 PMs in the box, feel free to send.

It can handle the strain.

[toptimlrd]

Well, as a rep for one of the "name brand" guys, I can only speak for our wares but it is like Tim Kindred mentioned, certain vendors (I hate the term sutler since it has a narrow and specific meaning in the Civil War lexicon) are known for the amount of research they do and their exacting requirements. When possible original items are used to create a pattern from (no they are not taken apart but are measured and thoroughly examined) then a pattern based on that original is made and the garments constructed. In the case where there is not an original, then we have to dig deeper looking for original patterns, photographs that show the necessary detail, etc. Often when you look at the websites there will be some description of where the pattern was taken from or how it was derived. Now that is not to say that some of the "mainstream vendors" don't have some good wares but often it is not consistent throughout their wares. How many vendors sell stainless steel canteens for example? Now, if a particular vendor is known for an exact replica of a widget and that replica widget is spot on, when someone says I have a widget from maker X others may want to look it over and examine it and comment on the reproduction. Add to that they may have not had the opportunity to see an original widget so they want to see the next best thing which is a widget recognized as being one of the closest repops out there. Unfortunately not everything is in a name but with some names you tend to get a better product. The reputations these "names" have has been hard earned and they have come under very close scrutiny, often they can't afford to make an inferior product because of the fickle nature of the hobby. Think of it as peer review of the products because not everyone has the opportunity to study original items in such detail and at some point you have to take expert analysis in lieu of personal expertise. I couldn't tell you the first thing about period horse tack but I know someone who does know and I would respect his opinion above many others. The bottom line i we should be as knowledgeable about our impressions as possible but we also have to rely on others research from time to time.

[toptimlrd]

Sorry, I will not name names on the forum, but with your permission, I would like to send you an instant message and I will explain in detail what suplers and which products


If any of them pertain to our line, I too would like to hear. Please use the e-mail below since my PM box tends to get full rather quickly.

Thanks,

[medicalcadetcorp]

Dear Mr Collett, I have great respect for Nick Sekela's work and he does have a wonderful reputation, he and his products are not one of the many I was refuring to, My coat and some other things are actually from you and it is wonderful, nothing but compliments.

[medicalcadetcorp]

Rog,
I have sent you a PM as you requested, please confirm that you recieved it

[toptimlrd]

Dear Mr Collett, I have great respect for Nick Sekela's work and he does have a wonderful reputation, he and his products are not one of the many I was refuring to, My coat and some other things are actually from you and it is wonderful, nothing but compliments.


First, call me Robert.

Thanks for the kind words. There are some very good makers of goods out there and their names are synonomous with quality but they are few and far between. If I can ever be of service, drop me a line.

[Rob Weaver]

Few of us like to admit that there are market forces at work on consumers and providers in reenacting. Probably because so much of the hobby is amateur-driven, we don't label, study and research those forces in depth. Like any outdoor sport, there are levels of participation, experience and finance. Walmart, Gander Mountain and Cabela's all sell camping equipment. The quality of the equipment, and the customer service returned with them change at each merchant. Cabela's will sell a tent to someone who intends to use it one weekend a year, in their backyard or at the local KOA. Are they likely to be buying more tent than they need? Probably. There are likewise different levels, or leagues, of reenactors. At a certain level, there are merchants who cater to the entry-level, casual reenactor, or to the reenactor on a budget. That gear will be just fine in its appropriate setting. If that reenactor gains experience, uses his gear harder or wants to explore other reenacting venues (hiking the Appalachin Trail as opposed to occasional car camping, for instance), he's going to find that other gear, complete with bigger price tag and more involvment from the merchant (i.e. special ordering) is going to be more appropriate. We frequently need reminding that the occasional "car camper" and the "trail backpacker" are both still "reenactors," I mean, "campers." :D

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Good post, and one that gets to heart of the matter of "designer repros" being blindly accepted in some quarters are "authentic". In reality, I've never seen any vendor yet who isn't cutting some corners or in some way making a repro not quite accurate per the originals. Someetimes those inaccuracies are small and extremely difficult to notice, and sometimes they are very obvious.

No vendor universally makes "great stuff" all the time. Some have a rep as being better than others, but keep in mind, even "the best ones" alter their suppliers of raw materials, and modify construction techniques either in response to updated research or to market conditions (some "dumb down" their repros to make the more affordable and thus increase their business).

And yes, now and then one can, without loads of searching, find certain "mainstream" vendors who are selling products that are quite acceptable at the most "discriminating" events.

Take each repro one at a time, and know what you're buying before you buy. And for heaven's sake, don't represent that a repro is "accurate" simply because of who made it.

Remember: There's much more to an accurate portrayal than material kit.

[bob 125th nysvi]

that "brand names" will sway some people, how do you think they got to be "brand name".

In all endeavors there are "brand names" that people swear by (ex: Chevy, Ford, BMW, etc). Some people love them some people hate them but no case does it mean that every product produced by a vendor is top notch (any of you ford guys ever hear of an Edsel?).

However "brand name" is a way for someone to appear smarter than they actually are because the "brand name" impresses some people.

I recently bought a hat from a "brand name" vendor. I love it and a number of people recommend him. A larger number recommended their favorite "brand name". Did that make me right or them wrong? No aboslutely not. Will some people be impressed by my "brand name" probably, others will of course knock who I selected in favor of their "brand name".

I take it all with a grain of salt. Do I know that a particular vendor actually LOOKED at the item he is claiming to copy? No not unless I go and look at it myself, so somethings you have to take at face value.

Also as far as "mainstream" sutlers are concerned, many of them have upgraded their products to meet demand for better products. Is there somebody making a "better" version, maybe. Is there somebaody making a worse version, probably.

If there is anyway that you could point at a specific product and say it is the best, bar none and convince everybody else, I'd love to see it.

This is sort of like owning a car. My brother-in-law drives a BMW SUV and his wife drives an Audi SUV. My wife and I drive a Dodge and a Subaru respectively. My in-laws CLAIM their SUVs are better but I don't know how they'd ever know that because their vehicles have never been off-road. Where as both of ours have seen some pretty rough terrain in their time.

It is all in the eye of the beholder.

[medicalcadetcorp]

very good Mr O'Beirne and Mr Sandusky

[Rob Weaver]

When it's all said and done, there is no replacement for personal research. I rarely buy blindly. It's also a good policy to look at documentation (photos, originals, etc) not other reenactors for what is period. Reenactors have their fads; remember when blousing your trousers was in, then was out, then was back in under certain circumstances?

[Memphis]

I have sent you a PM as you requested, please confirm that you recieved it

Got it.

Thank you, and you aren't the first person to notice the corner cutting from that specific garment maker. Nate Petersburg, Joe Blunt, Don Roder, Ted Quednau, just to name a few aren't name brand, but they do good work and their prices are not horrific. I do hate to see a good maker get overwhelmed by orders once he is discovered, then get frustrated and quit making anything. That happens time and time again to good people who aren't prepared to jump from custom made goods to what is essentially production line work.

Sometimes we need to kick back and ask ourselves if we are buying a name or a quality reproduction.

[medicalcadetcorp]

thats right, reenactors should do there own reasurch and find out for themselfs whats right and whats wrong, they shouldnt have to look off of other reenactors or suppliers

[flattop32355]

thats right, reenactors should do there own reasurch and find out for themselfs whats right and whats wrong, they shouldnt have to look off of other reenactors or suppliers

You obviously have a deep interest in the details and minutia of period clothing, etc. You are to be commended for that, as are all those who do.

That said, I do not.

Call it a fatal flaw, intense lack of comprehension, or whatever, but that level of detail is of absolutely no interest to me. As I've stated before, it's taken me four years to figure out warp and weft. You might as well try to teach me Ebonics.

Counter-balance that shortcoming, among others, with my specific areas of myopic interest to the Nth detail concerning other period matters, which possibly to you and others are of lesser interest.

The point being that we do those things we like best, focus on those things we do best, and rely on others for information on those things that don't pique our interest as much. As I cannot possibly be fully, totally informed upon all aspects of CW history, material culture, etc., I rely on others to help fill in the gaps. Sack coats and belts are just two such areas (don't even ask me about civilian matters).

Relying on the experiences and opinions of others, particularly when they are informed opinions, is necessary. The trick is to figure out which opinions are trustworthy and reliable, and on which subjects. Similar to vendors, I value some folk's opinions on a given issue more than their opinion on other areas.

I'm smart enough not to rely on any vendor's opinions on their own wares. I'm also smart enough to know my own shortcomings (well, some of them, anyway), and when I need to rely on others for specific information.

[SmellyFed]

It's really up to each of us to "do the research" - although too many times that word research is used to describe talking to a buddy who knows a guy who saw an original once at the Mansfield CW show.

Put simply, if you haven't taken a white glove tour through original CW uniforms, you haven't done much research. There's enough of that stuff still around, that if a person wants to really see it for himself, arrangements can be made.

When it comes to CW reproduction gear, you always want to compare reproduction gear to the original its supposed to represent - and not against another reproduction. Comparing reproductions to other reproductions is an exercise in the inane.

Namebrands are good in the sense that these are proven vendors, craftsmen in their own right, with a reputation at stake. When you order one of these "namebrands" there's a certain quality level thats to be expected. You expect them to use correct patterns, materials and craftsmanship - that doesn't excuse YOU however from being personally informed on what a period correct pattern looks like, or what the characteristics of period correct materials are, or what defines period correct craftsmanship.

We shouldn't be buying namebrands just so we can own a "P.T. Barnum sack coat" - although I've seen plenty of P.T. Barnum sack coats, most recently at the Corydon Funnel Cake Emporium.

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Research on gear involves things like,


Reading period accounts of what the gear was like,
Handling originals (relic shows, local historical society, private collection, etc.)
Reading period accounts of how the gear was made, purchased, distributed, and used.
And other stuff.

Research may include things like,


Doing the research yourself, whether by going to sites, looking at relics, reading first-person accounts, reading records, reading period newspapers, reading second- and third-hand histories, etc.
Reading with a critical eye documented research results presented by others.
Experimentation on your own initiative, whether experimenting how a knapsack should be packed and worn on a march, or using logwood dye on a blanket and seeing how long it takes to fade, or other experimental approaches.

Gear isn't the whole story. In order from easiest to most difficult to achieve in projecting a "good" portrayal,

1. Materials
2. Methods
3. Man

All parts of that authenticity triad should receive equal emphasis by reenactors.

I get the feeling that, when reenactors hear, "do your own research", many tend to think, "I don't have time to sit in a library at a microfilm machine, I don't have time or money to go to _____ to look at archive records, and I can't afford to buy relics." Research is so much more than those things, and it's often a lot easier too.

The Internet is a useful resource. Don't neglect to use it. Google.com is a wonderful place to start.

[Parault]

Kevin

If I'm not mistaken, didn't you do an article on this subject? I cannot remember where I have seen it,but,I found it very interesting. I wish I could remember where I have seen it,so I could place the reference on here.

[medicalcadetcorp]

I have not writen any articles like this before, thanks tho. I havnt read any article out there like this specific topic

[indguard]

I have no problem with people referring to their stuff as a "Sekela" coat, or the like. When discussing where we get our stuff, I see nothing wrong at all with passing on the names and contact info for the vendors of the best stuff. In fact, it is a must for people who want the best stuff because often times the best fabricators of our equipments and material culture items are not well advertised.

They only problem I have with the "stuff" talk is when it becomes the ONLY subject of discussion. When the campfire rings with 10 hours of "stitches" talk, "weft and weave" talk, or "I got mine from..." talk, it gets old FAST.

I have noticed that with some people there is NO other subject of discussion but their "stuff" and maybe this is what the original poster is reacting to. When I am around such talk for too long, I just leave the circle. It bores me to tears to have to listen to hour upon merciless hour of "stuff" talk.

And I can ASSURE you of ONE thing. NO real Civil War soldier gave a flying hoot in **** where his jacket came from, if it was hand weaved and hand dyed, or if it had the perfect number of stitches! He was just happy to have it and that was that.

There is certainly a time and place for "stuff" talk but ALL the time is NOT it!

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Okay, I'll bite.

While no CW soldier cared where his uniform and kit came from, today we are not Civil War soldiers or anything like it. We are attempting to provide a window into understanding that time and, because it's necessary to get into some details to help re-create that time in some small way, it IS necessary to care about the details.

Now, I can certainly sympathize with folks who are distressed that some reenactors go overboard talking about gear. I enjoy learning more about material culture of the era, but what floats my boat in reenacting is functionality and re-creating what I read in the history book(s) about the events being portrayed.

As a leader, perhaps one way to help those who seem mired in material culture alone--and a good impression in that is easy to acquire with a credit card and a few days' wait--is to, occasionally, shift those "stitch-counting" discussions into the "Methods" and "Man" facets of reenacting, and spur research into and discussion of those areas. If the guys of whom you speak are "that into" stitches, maybe they can be encouraged to apply their enthusiasm into more diverse areas to help create a more-rounded portrayal.

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Kevin

If I'm not mistaken, didn't you do an article on this subject? I cannot remember where I have seen it,but,I found it very interesting. I wish I could remember where I have seen it,so I could place the reference on here.

It wasn't me who wrote that; rather, it was John Tobey. A version of it is in the Forward in the CRRC1, and I believe there may be an earlier version of the article still kicking around www.columbiarifles.org.

[toptimlrd]

I had the Regimental Quartermaster posted as a place to get type IIa shelter half’s (which they do carry from Sekela or somewhere and they are well made) .

Michael,

The shelter halves are not Nick's, not saying they aren't good, but I'm not sure who makes them but it isn't us.