Are traditional oshigata reference books obsolete?

[cabowen]

Please try the software recommended in this thread, it may prove to be very useful.

[george trotter]

Hi all,

Just my 2 cents on Chris' original post, which was about the changes in sources...book and on-line...not about what to collect or how...so on that theme can I say I am one of the geezers, so i still rely on my library accumulated over decades. I kinda like to look through my books from time to time and always use them as a primary look-up source for the only group of swords that I now collect...gendaito to 1945.

I do however always google gendai smiths as well and always print off info/pics/oshigata that may not be found in my books.

I like my books but do agree that the on-line material and data-bank is VERY valuable. I agree with Chris et al that it is certainly the way of the future, but I don't think it has caught up to the various Fujishiro.Tokuno, Ono authors or, Meikan type works yet (even Hawley), in the sense that a book puts the 150 smiths who used that mei right in front of you in the first minute...where on-line excels is that once you have narrowed your possibility, it has more oshigata on some smiths than many books so far, except perhaps the specialised book on a smith or a group or province.

I will continue with my library, but within my geezer ability, will of course utilise the online offerings. I doubt that I would make an on-line database of my own, but like Rich Stein's 'Showa Oshigata database" the possibilities of someone within our circle doing it are obvious (maybe someone should mention it to NBTHK?).

Hope this helps.

[Dr Fox]

Please try the software recommended in this thread, it may prove to be very useful.

 

That will be to my advantage to do so, this expanded topic will not only be a boon to me, but I feel for others too. Comparison sites for authenticating a mei would be of great service, but of course unless I can tell what or who the mei is, I can progress no further. I am trying to remedy that very situation, nobody said it was easy! But anyway thanks Chris.

 

If a man can't read, don't offer him a dictionary

[takakage]

An interesting question Chris.

 

Online Mei Comparisons

 

Not having the finances to collect an extensive library of oshigata (let alone actual swords ) I have certainly been among those who regularly create nakago/mei comparisons from free online sources:

 

Ogasawara Shōsai Nagamune

Omi no Kami Fujiwara Tsuguhiro and closeup mei comparison

them, etc.

 

Gabriel

.

 

Hi, Tsuguhiro U5R is soshinmei.

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Gabriel

 

About Tsuguhiro, like there are 2 generations signing the same way, how do you make a distinction between them ?

[Gabriel L]

Funny, lots of interest in the Tsuguhiro comparison.

 

Hi, Tsuguhiro U5R is soshinmei.

That was my operating assumption (emphasis on assumption); in fact if you visit the index linked in the image you will see I stated so explicitly. However as it was neither papered (that I know of) nor obviously gimei (that I could tell), I filed it as you see: in the unpapered/unknown group, with no "gimei?" notation.

 

When I group them by papered/unpapered it is not to say they are necessarily shōshinmei/gimei. In fact in doing these comparisons I have usually come across at least one papered example that is very suspect and a good number of unpapered blades that may well be shōshin. But the point of these comparison images is not to label them as real or not based solely on the individual source that provides them, but rather to create a spread that allows convenient examination for patterns (and deviations) based primarily on facts. This is especially true if you visit the link embedded in the image, which contains an index of links to all the actual sword listings (not just the nakago/mei), usually with some additional comments on each.

 

I try to restrict my "gimei?" annotations to swords which I think demand increased skepticism for whatever reason. But it is a suggestion to look closer, not a declaration.

 

In short my point is that these exercises are not an attempt at creating an airtight guide or delivering a conclusion, they were personal projects to investigate available information on a given smith. They may be useful to others, but only if people pay attention to the contextual information.

 

About Tsuguhiro, like there are 2 generations signing the same way, how do you make a distinction between them ?

This is a problem I have come across often. There is sometimes no clear information that I can find to distinguish generations. In the case of Tsuguhiro, he did not inscribe nenki, and (almost) none of the sources made any attempt to identify shodai or nidai. I did just notice that P8 was attributed to nidai, but the mei was so hard to see I didn't include it in the image; also, the REI magazine example was gassaku with Nobusada nidai, and dated, so was attributed to second gen.

 

When there is no obvious differentiation between generations (either listed or clear from the workmanship/mei), I don't pollute or bias the available information by trying to exclude examples or wildly guess which is which; I just include everything and make a note. In some of the other comparisons you will see that I explicitly stated this, for the Tsuguhiro image I went over this in the thread that it came from (the URL listed on the image).

 

Again… not intended to do all the work or make decisions for other people, but rather to make it a lot easier for them to make the same kind of examination and investigation. I had to search, compile, list, link, examine (for info e.g. paper level or generation etc.), rotate, crop, annotate… all you have to do is look at the images and follow the links.

[Stephen]

Mine was to go to shinsa in Tampa but alas the togi had too much work before mine.