Tea-Staining Shirt:

[History36]

Hi,

Off question, but just curious if anyone has ever tea-stained a cotton muslin shirt, by chance? If so, I'm curious if either the bleached or unbleached version would be best to give a more battle-used / lived-in campaigner impression.

Thank you for your time and any photos.
V/R,

 

[Ben Ford 987]

Hi,

Off question, but just curious if anyone has ever tea-stained a cotton muslin shirt, by chance? If so, I'm curious if either the bleached or unbleached version would be best to give a more battle-used / lived-in campaigner impression.

Thank you for your time and any photos.
V/R,

Never tried tea staining, but I have experience with walnut staining.

For non reenacting
pick up walnuts when they hit the ground in the autumn
get a 5 gallon plastic bucket & fill it about 1/3 full of walnuts
beatup the walnuts with a hammer. take the nuts out or leave them in makes no difference
fill the bucket with enough water to cover the nuts
wait a couple of weeks or more, adding water to keep walnut husks under water
when the husks are good and gooey and water is black
buy a package of white 100 per cent cotton t shirts
wash your hands thoroughly with soap and water
take One t shirt, shake it out and submerge it completely
stir it up well with a broom handle or similar
wait 3 to 4 days (or more) occasionally stirring it up to make sure the t shirt gets evenly stained
take the shirt out and make sure it is stained to your liking.
If there any portions needing more stain, back to the bucket
there be some slight mottling
Wash it with soap and garden hose (outside) several times.
Do not machine wash until you have worn and hand wshed it several times
Do not machine wash it with anything except black items

If you wear the t shirt before staining, the stain will not be even no matter how many times
you launder it. especially the armpits.
.
I always wanted to try butternuts, but could never find enough nuts.

 

[7thWisconsin]

How long will your hands be black if the dye touches them?

 

[History36]

As an update, playing a little catch-up, but the process turned out fantastic. I first started out with tea (two separate batches). Since I was leaning towards a slightly darker tone, I then followed up with coffee (also two separate batches).

Nothing was difficult by any means and it 'dyed' thoroughly as if store-bought. Once you get the color you want, simpky use white vinegar to set the color. Attached are pics of shirts (not mine, but mine looks identical - pics to come!

 

[wuzreb]

Hi,

Off question, but just curious if anyone has ever tea-stained a cotton muslin shirt, by chance? If so, I'm curious if either the bleached or unbleached version would be best to give a more battle-used / lived-in campaigner impression.

Thank you for your time and any photos.
V/R,

Good evening all,

If I may offer an opinion, I think the tea staining thing is not optimal. The historical image you linked is of a 160 year old shirt. Fabric oxidizes and changes color in the passage of time.

If you want to age a shirt to look like you've sweated it up in the past year, and do so within less than 30 days, think about the natural wear of a working garment. I spent a lot of years working outside, sweating up a storm, being around animals ... and light colored shirts do not become tea colored.

What you do get are funky armpits, dirty cuffs, dirt around the collar, and mysterious stains anywhere you lean forward and pick up something.

If you want to stain something a little, I would say be judicious and just go for a little muted stain from the inside of the armpits, not the outside. Let your cuffs get dingy. Let your collar get dingy. A quick way to dirty up a shirt might be to get it damp, you could spritz it with a water bottle, then wear it outside and do something dusty or dirty.

I think people can overdo trying to age things. It's like some people take a hat and make it look grossly sweaty, saying it's how a used hat would look. Meanwhile I look at my 5-year-old hat and I don't see stains unless I turn it upside down and look at the interior.

To do it well, I would say think about where a shirt naturally wears and where a person naturally sweats. Between your shoulder blades, under the armpits, around the collar, dirt at the ends of the cuffs, mysterious stains because you were doing something and unthinkingly wiped your hands on the front of your shirt. If you wear suspenders, there might be smudging over the tops of your shoulders.

It would also depend if this is a civilian or uniform shirt. A uniform shirt is going to be covered by your coat or blouse. So then you won't have as many mysterious stains, you'll just have the sweat stains.

Anyhow, just some food for thought.

Respectfully &c

 

[wuzreb]

Late to the party on this, because I misplaced my camera for a bit.
Please see photos attached.
This is a shirt I made as a non-issue commutation item, so of course it does not have the same look as a regulation issued garment.
But it's 100% cotton.
Notice a few areas of discolouration or stains but most on the cuffs and collar. And yes it was hand washed between events.
More to the point, it's 43 years old and I wore this to more than 50 events, where it saw hard use. But no major holes and certainly not the sort of yellowing on the OP photos.

View attachment 582979

View attachment 582980

View attachment 582981

View attachment 582982

Excellent illustration! Normal wear and a shirt doesn't turn it beige. Not unless you've been marching with Lawrence through Arabia.

As I just advised in my own comment, a used shirt is going to wear more normally. Cuffs, collar, armpits and things like that.

 

[History36]

A photo of a collection of original CW Federal shirts (pic attached). To beg to differ, as we can see in the image, there is an original white shirt that obviously has not darkened naturally on its own after all those 160 years as most here have claimed.

I'm not an expert, but I would imagine it all depends on a variety of factors, such as how it was worn at the time, the quality of the materials used, and how well it has been maintained in storage since then, etc. To say that it's impossible for an original white shirt to remain white and that ALL of them naturally turn darker based simply on its age would be false and isn't always the case as we can see as discussed in the points listed above / as exhibited in this particular collection.

Also, please keep in mind too that these soldiers slept in, fought in, swet in, & got muddy in, etc. in those shirts. As such, I find it highly unlikely that they were walking around in perfectly white shirts like a lot of reenactors and dandy living historians like to do today, which is inaccurate to a degree, which in turn, only perpetuates onto the next generation that sense of inaccuracies. For example, I too can quote where soldiers stated that they were: "dingy, dirty, filthy, lice-infested, and threadbare." And, those shirts wouldn't be brown-ish & stained...?

Did they get new equipment in at the time? Absolutely, but to put shirts in either a 'black or white' camp simply wouldn't accurate based on a wide slew of factors.

V/R,

 

[wuzreb]

A photo of a collection of original CW Federal shirts (pic attached). To beg to differ, as we can see in the image, there is an original white shirt that obviously has not darkened naturally on its own after all those 160 years as most here have claimed.

I'm not an expert, but I would imagine it all depends on a variety of factors, such as how it was worn at the time, the quality of the materials used, and how well it has been maintained in storage since then, etc. To say that it's impossible for an original white shirt to remain white and that ALL of them naturally turn darker based simply on its age would be false and isn't always the case as we can see as discussed in the points listed above / as exhibited in this particular collection.

Also, please keep in mind too that these soldiers slept in, fought in, swet in, & got muddy in, etc. in those shirts. As such, I find it highly unlikely that they were walking around in perfectly white shirts like a lot of reenactors and dandy living historians like to do today, which is inaccurate to a degree, which in turn, only perpetuates onto the next generation that sense of inaccuracies. For example, I too can quote where soldiers stated that they were: "dingy, dirty, filthy, lice-infested, and threadbare." And, those shirts weren't brown-ish & stained? Come on.

Did they get new equipment in at the time? Of course, but to put shirts in either a 'black or white' camp is simply not accurate based on a wide slew of factors.

V/R,

View attachment 583579

All excellent points. Duly taken. There are many factors that could contribute to the state of anybody's shirt, including it's original quality and use.

I based my response simply on the point that shirts get dirty primarily depend on where we sweat on them. I would think tea staining would not approximate the sort of wear one would expect, when they've been sweating out their pits, sweating on their back, getting dirty cuffs and acquiring massive ring around the collar.

The shirts would be preserved to a limited extent, at least, by the fact they were generally covered by a uniform coat or blouse. Except of course when they were in camp and could shed layers. My instinct would be to focus more on how the human body is going to dirty up a shirt in those conditions.

 

[The Ninth Ohio]

A

A photo of a collection of original CW Federal shirts (pic attached). To beg to differ, as we can see in the image, there is an original white shirt that obviously has not darkened naturally on its own after all those 160 years as most here have claimed.

I'm not an expert, but I would imagine it all depends on a variety of factors, such as how it was worn at the time, the quality of the materials used, and how well it has been maintained in storage since then, etc. To say that it's impossible for an original white shirt to remain white and that ALL of them naturally turn darker based simply on its age would be false and isn't always the case as we can see as discussed in the points listed above / as exhibited in this particular collection.

Also, please keep in mind too that these soldiers slept in, fought in, swet in, & got muddy in, etc. in those shirts. As such, I find it highly unlikely that they were walking around in perfectly white shirts like a lot of reenactors and dandy living historians like to do today, which is inaccurate to a degree, which in turn, only perpetuates onto the next generation that sense of inaccuracies. For example, I too can quote where soldiers stated that they were: "dingy, dirty, filthy, lice-infested, and threadbare." And, those shirts wouldn't be brown-ish & stained...?

Did they get new equipment in at the time? Absolutely, but to put shirts in either a 'black or white' camp simply wouldn't accurate based on a wide slew of factors.

V/R,

View attachment 583579

Again, I would suggest you do a little (or a lot) more research. Please go look at regimental clothing returns and you will see that shirts were issued so often that they likely spent more time with them looking new than not.

Most of us understand much more than you probably realize regarding what people actually wore, and what it looked like when it did. As I said in a previous post, you came here for advice, and those of us who know spoke up. Now, after your project, you are coming back and telling us that we're the ones who are wrong, and that we might have missed simple details that we knew about long ago and posted about in this very thread.

What we have gotten in exchange to politely answering your request on experience doing tea staining, is a series of non answers and don't worry about what I'm doings.

In my view, the only reason anyone would attempt to tea staining a shirt would be to make a reproduction appear to be an original so they can sell it for more. You have several other posts on this site with a similar cantor.

Tea staining didn't happen as a general rule in 19th century America, because tea wasn't the easily accessible commodity it is now. If you needed to dye something, there were plenty of other readily available barks and nuts that weren't imported and intended to be brewed and drunken.

I'll await your staining attempts on eBay.

Tschüß!

 

[History36]

A
Again, I would suggest you do a little (or a lot) more research. Please go look at regimental clothing returns and you will see that shirts were issued so often that they likely spent more time with them looking new than not.

Most of us understand much more than you probably realize regarding what people actually wore, and what it looked like when it did. As I said in a previous post, you came here for advice, and those of us who know spoke up. Now, after your project, you are coming back and telling us that we're the ones who are wrong, and that we might have missed simple details that we knew about long ago and posted about in this very thread.

What we have gotten in exchange to politely answering your request on experience doing tea staining, is a series of non answers and don't worry about what I'm doings.

In my view, the only reason anyone would attempt to tea staining a shirt would be to make a reproduction appear to be an original so they can sell it for more. You have several other posts on this site with a similar cantor.

Tea staining didn't happen as a general rule in 19th century America, because tea wasn't the easily accessible commodity it is now. If you needed to dye something, there were plenty of other readily available barks and nuts that weren't imported and intended to be brewed and drunken.

I'll await your staining attempts on eBay.

Tschüß!

For someone claiming that I came on insulting anyone, your response seems unwarranted in that your rant was just that.

1.) I simply asked if anyone here has done it themselves. And, if so, how it went. It was a merely a 'yes' or 'no' question, but it went off into left-field for some reason over who has more head-knowledge over whom, 2.) Where do you get that I'm selling anything on Ebay? Overthinking / accusatory any? I simply like the color & backed it up with discussion points. 3.) Please be aware that writing, like texting, lacks emotions. If we were having a discussion via in-person, it would be completely different. 4.) Please see above that I clearly and politely wrote, "I'm not an expert, but I would imagine, etc."...5.) Yes, I respectfully am aware that soldiers at the time didn't tea / coffee stain their shirts, and, that shirts at the time aged naturally around the collar and cuffs, thank you. 6.) I've also acknowledged that soldiers did get new stuff in, yes, thank you again, 7.) And, I've also stated respectfully that I don't have time to let it age naturally - I need it in a pinch for prop purposes.

Please also see attached images. As a disclaimer, I do not know the gentlemen pictured, but, as you can clearly see, a reenactor is wearing the color shirt that I was trying to replicate. The supplemental images are how mine turned out in comparison along with an original shirt being in the similar color family. If I personally like the color with a distressed look, so what? Why does that bother you? Is the reenactor in the attachment wrong too? Are you going to also insult him by claiming that you know better in that he's wearing inaccurate shirts / selling schemingly on Ebay? If I shared about finding a cool quote from a surviving soldier having worn this very same color, that can be a good thing. Besides, there were many colors of shirts based on a slew of contractors to private civilian shirts. Please show respect as well in coming together peacefully; not through accusations and insults.

Mods - feel free to lock this thread down as I feel that it has reached it's point....

 

[7thWisconsin]

Actually, I think your tea dying project was pretty successful. If your goal was to tone down the stark white of a brand new shirt and you're happy with the result, then it's a win. To oversimplify grossly, it has been my experience that reenactors are pretty bad at "simulating." We fixate on original materials or methods and fail to recognize that sometimes a satisfactory appearance can be achieved with a couple coats or spray paint or a dye job. This isn't a criticism just recognition of a blind spot. Sometimes the simulation is enough. (Example from another period I reenact: A few years ago, a fellow new Soviet reenactor needed to ditch the postwar ammo pouches he was wearing. Problem for him was he didn't have anything else to carry rounds in right then. There was a pre-war pouch that looks pretty much the same, only it was black. I advised him and an hour and a can of black spray paint later, he had ammo pouches that were acceptable for the moment. Were they perfect? No. But they were affordable and attainable in the moment.)

 

[Old Soldier]

Curry powder or beef stew gravy does quite well too. It is how the Brits managed to turn their Indian white cotton shirts into the first camouflage color - khaki (Hindi for 'mud' or 'soil(dirt)-colored'.)

 

[captaindrew]

For someone claiming that I came on insulting anyone, your response seems unwarranted in that your rant was just that.

1.) I simply asked if anyone here has done it themselves. And, if so, how it went. It was a merely a 'yes' or 'no' question, but it went off into left-field for some reason over who has more head-knowledge over whom, 2.) Where do you get that I'm selling anything on Ebay? Overthinking / accusatory any? I simply like the color & backed it up with discussion points. 3.) Please be aware that writing, like texting, lacks emotions. If we were having a discussion via in-person, it would be completely different. 4.) Please see above that I clearly and politely wrote, "I'm not an expert, but I would imagine, etc."...5.) Yes, I respectfully am aware that soldiers at the time didn't tea / coffee stain their shirts, and, that shirts at the time aged naturally around the collar and cuffs, thank you. 6.) I've also acknowledged that soldiers did get new stuff in, yes, thank you again, 7.) And, I've also stated respectfully that I don't have time to let it age naturally - I need it in a pinch for prop purposes.

Please also see attached images. As a disclaimer, I do not know the gentlemen pictured, but, as you can clearly see, a reenactor is wearing the color shirt that I was trying to replicate. The supplemental images are how mine turned out in comparison along with an original shirt being in the similar color family. If I personally like the color with a distressed look, so what? Why does that bother you? Is the reenactor in the attachment wrong too? Are you going to also insult him by claiming that you know better in that he's wearing inaccurate shirts / selling schemingly on Ebay? If I shared about finding a cool quote from a surviving soldier having worn this very same color, that can be a good thing. Besides, there were many colors of shirts based on a slew of contractors to private civilian shirts. Please show respect as well in coming together peacefully; not through accusations and insults.

Mods - feel free to lock this thread down as I feel that it has reached it's point....

View attachment 583623

View attachment 583630

View attachment 583642

The reenactors pictured are not wearing what you're trying to do. The one on the left is wearing a white domet flannel shirt and the one on the right looks to be wearing an alternate issue wool flannel shirt that was grey now slightly faded. The same as the two pictures you posted from Echoes of Glory. Why you are being questioned is why do you want to make something look 165 years old? They would not appear that way even dirty and heavily used at the time. I posted a couple examples of shirts in an earlier post. The one on the right is a exact copy of an issue shirt, hand sewn, correct fabric, and it has been heavily used yet doesn't look like it's taken a tea bath. From past experience people question when they see someone trying hard to make something look like an original piece so don't take it personally. Show how your project turned out and tell us your purpose for making this "prop" and it would answer those questions, don't take it personally. Might help someone down the road trying to do something similar.

 

[Old Soldier]

The reenactors pictured are not wearing what you're trying to do. The one on the left is wearing a white domet flannel shirt and the one on the right looks to be wearing an alternate issue wool flannel shirt that was grey now slightly faded. The same as the two pictures you posted from Echoes of Glory. Why you are being questioned is why do you want to make something look 165 years old? They would not appear that way even dirty and heavily used at the time. I posted a couple examples of shirts in an earlier post. The one on the right is a exact copy of an issue shirt, hand sewn, correct fabric, and it has been heavily used yet doesn't look like it's taken a tea bath. From past experience people question when they see someone trying hard to make something look like an original piece so don't take it personally. Show how your project turned out and tell us your purpose for making this "prop" and it would answer those questions, don't take it personally. Might help someone down the road trying to do something similar.

It's rather like our old uniforms. Nice and bright when first issued (obviously so - made you feel awkward (at least). A few exercises and washes soon changed that - worn knees and elbows, cam cream lingering on cuffs and collar and dribbles from tea, coffe and hot rations down the front! All washed out and hygenic again, of course, but ... used.

 

[History36]

The reenactors pictured are not wearing what you're trying to do. The one on the left is wearing a white domet flannel shirt and the one on the right looks to be wearing an alternate issue wool flannel shirt that was grey now slightly faded. The same as the two pictures you posted from Echoes of Glory. Why you are being questioned is why do you want to make something look 165 years old? They would not appear that way even dirty and heavily used at the time. I posted a couple examples of shirts in an earlier post. The one on the right is a exact copy of an issue shirt, hand sewn, correct fabric, and it has been heavily used yet doesn't look like it's taken a tea bath. From past experience people question when they see someone trying hard to make something look like an original piece so don't take it personally. Show how your project turned out and tell us your purpose for making this "prop" and it would answer those questions, don't take it personally. Might help someone down the road trying to do something similar.

I can certainly see the reenactor duo where one has a white flannel shirt next to a wool flannel shirt, yes. Though I stated as a disclaimer that "I'm not an expert" to appease the 'Ninth Ohio,' I never claimed that's what I was trying to do using the exact same materials, that I supposedly am going to sell 'something new on Ebay,' etc - it was merely, as I've stated *multiple times, to take a cheap thin COTTON shirt that was buried deep in the closet and put it into that color family. Simple as that. In addition, based on the three images I attached yesterday the reenactor's shirt color on the right looks almost identical to mine in my 'opinion.' While I respect your opinion and the fact that monitor colors vary, that's my opinion therefore it cannot be wrong. It's an opinion that mine and his look very similar color-wise that would take us 'weekend warriors' years to get otherwise.

In agreement with the '7th Wisconsin,' I did it, it turned out well, and it was a success because...drumroll...I LIKE IT. Being respectful to everyone, we need to just get past that. Old news.

You're asking why I wanted to do? Again, we keep rehashing the same thing repeatedly like the movie Groundhog Day, please read above in which I noted, "I found a quote where the soldiers stated that their uniforms (including the SHIRTS) were: "dingy, dirty, filthy, lice-infested, muddy, and threadbare," there were a slew of contractor and civilian color shirts anyway, and I had posted original shirts that looked similar in which I, personally, LIKED the look. That being said, let me ask you a rhetorical question: why *not try to replicate that somewhat, especially if they too may have had thin dingy cotton muslin shirts? To each his or her own. Further too: why would I want all my gear to look new? Yes, mine will have all the age spots under the armpits, the collar, etc. You made the comment that the original shirts didn't look like that. How do you know? Did you, respectfully, examine every shirt ever worn by every soldier, lol? You couldn't have. Therefore, it's impossible for you to state that there wasn't ever a shirt like this one, respectfully speaking. On that note, you'll need to ask why other hobbies prefer the distressed look too. For instance, there's an Indiana Jones hobby forum in which they have an ENTIRE section on 'how to' age their leathers and equipment. Why? Because they, as myself, simply prefer the aged / distressed look (samples attached). Same with films / movies. They obviously don't have time to let gear weather naturally - it's all done artificially! Take a look at the attached vest. It's brand new; yet artificially aged.

With the exception of the 'Ninth Ohio' going off the rails making accusatory statements who doesn't know my level of integrity, nothing was being taken personally. The whole premise was to inquire a different question: 'has anyone stained a shirt and how did it turn out?' All that being said, these responses have deviated from that original posting and its my hope that the mods simply lock it down as it's now merely wasting time.

 

[The Ninth Ohio]

Nah. You're pretending to be a victim here.

You came to a civil war discussion forum and posted in the reenactor section. You asked your question, and when I and others reasonably asked "why", you were actually rather evasive. When we explained that there are more authentic ways for you get the effect you want, you dug in. THAT was when I started to doubt your motives, and noticed that you've started similar threads in the past (ie, how to make something old look new)

In case you were unaware, let me educate you.

There is a huge problem in the collecting hobby with people taking reproduction gear, "mussing it up a little", and reselling it as original. There is also a huge…we'll say "disagreement" (I see it as a problem) within the reenactment community with people using inauthentic methods to recreate an "authentic" look. The main reason I have a problem with this is precisely because it reinforces the idea reenactors have that everything the men wore was a stained, mottled mess. My comment (and others) about the frequency of newly issued shirts was simply to educate you that, based on what the records say, a soldier more often had a "new" looking shirt than a shoddy one.

"Because I want it to look like a picture I saw" is an explanation that would perk up the ears of anyone even moderately involved in either community.

 

[captaindrew]

I can certainly see the reenactor duo where one has a white flannel shirt next to a wool flannel shirt, yes. Though I stated as a disclaimer that "I'm not an expert" to appease the 'Ninth Ohio,' I never claimed that's what I was trying to do using the exact same materials, that I supposedly am going to sell 'something new on Ebay,' etc - it was merely, as I've stated *multiple times, to take a cheap thin COTTON shirt that was buried deep in the closet and put it into that color family. Simple as that. In addition, based on the three images I attached yesterday the reenactor's shirt color on the right looks almost identical to mine in my 'opinion.' While I respect your opinion and the fact that monitor colors vary, that's my opinion therefore it cannot be wrong. It's an opinion that mine and his look very similar color-wise that would take us 'weekend warriors' years to get otherwise.

In agreement with the '7th Wisconsin,' I did it, it turned out well, and it was a success because...drumroll...I LIKE IT. Being respectful to everyone, we need to just get past that. Old news.

You're asking why I wanted to do? Again, we keep rehashing the same thing repeatedly like the movie Groundhog Day, please read above in which I noted, "I found a quote where the soldiers stated that their uniforms (including the SHIRTS) were: "dingy, dirty, filthy, lice-infested, muddy, and threadbare," there were a slew of contractor and civilian color shirts anyway, and I had posted original shirts that looked similar in which I, personally, LIKED the look. That being said, let me ask you a rhetorical question: why *not try to replicate that somewhat, especially if they too may have had thin dingy cotton muslin shirts? To each his or her own. Further too: why would I want all my gear to look new? Yes, mine will have all the age spots under the armpits, the collar, etc. You made the comment that the original shirts didn't look like that. How do you know? Did you, respectfully, examine every shirt ever worn by every soldier, lol? You couldn't have. Therefore, it's impossible for you to state that there wasn't ever a shirt like this one, respectfully speaking. On that note, you'll need to ask why other hobbies prefer the distressed look too. For instance, there's an Indiana Jones hobby forum in which they have an ENTIRE section on 'how to' age their leathers and equipment. Why? Because they, as myself, simply prefer the aged / distressed look (samples attached). Same with films / movies. They obviously don't have time to let gear weather naturally - it's all done artificially! Take a look at the attached vest. It's brand new; yet artificially aged.

With the exception of the 'Ninth Ohio' going off the rails making accusatory statements who doesn't know my level of integrity, nothing was being taken personally. The whole premise was to inquire a different question: 'has anyone stained a shirt and how did it turn out?' All that being said, these responses have deviated from that original posting and its my hope that the mods simply lock it down as it's now merely wasting time.

View attachment 583657

View attachment 583658

View attachment 583659

I will answer your question then I'm done with this because you don't want to listen to folks who have studied this stuff for years. Neither side wore light dingy cotton. Confederate issue shirts were made of osnsburg, a much heavier varient of cotton than modern cotton. Federal issue shirts were made of either domet flannel or wool flannel. Nowhere near the same characteristics of modern cotton. Were soldiers sometimes filthy dirty, of course they were after a hard campaign. And you know what they did, they washed their clothes at the first opportunity or got issued new. Both sides got issued new clothing every few months so a soldier might be wearing a 3 or 4 month old shirt. The pictures you're trying to copy are shirts in collections 160 to 165 years old. NO WAY, NO HOW, NOT EVER, would a soldier of the period wearing a few months old shirt, no matter how dirty he was, would have a shirt of the same patina as a 160 year old shirt. If you really want an authentic shirt buy one from one of the quality vendors or get a kit from the same and make one. If you don't want it to look new there's several trade blankets online where you can find a well used correct shirt. Artificially aging a not period correct shirt is just that, artificial, and will be spotted a mile away by those that know the difference. All that said if you like it God bless and enjoy it. But don't pass it off as authentic to those that don't.

 

[History36]

captaindrew / the ninth ohio:

No one is playing a 'victim' here. I repeatedly explained in detail (using small words) breaking down as to 'why' the staining - as a PROP! Let me try this yet again: I DO NOT CARE ABOUT AUTHENTIC MATERIALS!! But beteeen you two, you're falsely claiming that I'm trying to pass it off as "authentic," selling it on ebay, etc. but, I have a right to defend myself. Are you not reading my responses? I simply liked the color. What a travesty, ! That being said, and despite what you 'think' you're entitled to, I don't owe you two a da*m explanation as to why I dyed it. If I wanted "authentic," then, yes, I would have done just what you shared. Besides, even if I wanted to sell it as authentic, which is NOT the case, then true CW dealers would obviously know the difference between a cheapy & the real deal anyway. The ninth ohio acts entitled with a massive ego that I should have consulted him. If he has a track record of folks passing this stuff off as authentic, while I sympathize & respect the need for protection, he doesn't know me to falsely accuse - you could have certainly handled it better. Let ME educate you ~ hopefully you learned to conduct yourself in a more professional, cordial, and mature manner in the future with other members.

I'm not evasive. Whether I tie up & throw it in the lake, dye it pink, etc., that's none of your business. Should I then consult you on my next home purchase too? How about my next vehicle loan? The insults here are astonishing when trying to have a civil conversation simply because someone has another *opinion* than you do. I didn't ask to be grilled over 'why' when the original question was stated: 'has anyone ever done it, etc.' It's that simple. Trust me, I'll never ask a humble question here ever again. You two should be ashamed of yourselves. This is EXACTLY the reason why it's difficult to keep folks in the hobby - by the constant bickering showing who has more head-knowledge over who and instigating of an argument in addition to putting someone (myself) on the constant defensive from accusations, which actually deters folks from asking questions in the first place. I hope you're real proud of yourselves, embarrassingly.

captaindrew - you have a right to your OPINION, yes, but I can assure you there is primary source material describing a shirt(s) that was: 'dirty, dingy, stained, muddy brown, threadbare,' etc....even if it was only for a brief time and just ONE shirt, which was the genesis that peaked my initial interest. Of course, soldiers would eventually wash their clothes; sometimes weeks later. Who's the more correct - you or the primary source? It comes down to interpretation and perspective. Again, I DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE MATERIALS. And, there were a wide variety of colors; including drab tan, such as my INAUTHENTIC tan material shirt. But, while I understand what you're getting at with the materials, apparently you're 'all knowing' and somehow know exactly the color of every shirt worn by every soldier. Amazing and absurd.

One thing we can agree on (agree to disagree) is that I too am done with repeating myself in such a lowly argument. As a third time, mods, please lock this thread down....

 

[Story]

One thing we can agree on (agree to disagree) is that I too am done with repeating myself in such a lowly argument. As a third time, mods, please lock this thread down....

To review - you made a mess and are now seeking validation. Since you didn't get it, you're going to pout like when mommy was late with your plate of hot pockets.

Stick to Reddit - this place isn't for you.

 

[History36]

To review - you made a mess and are now seeking validation. Since you didn't get it, you're going to pout like when mommy was late with your plate of hot pockets.

Stick to Reddit - this place isn't for you.

Nope, its called standing up to bullies and slanders because they couldn't force their 'it wasn't authentic' accusations & understand that it was for prop purposes only.
PS - being a member of other forums that do artificially distress items, I'll be sure to let them know not to post anything under civilwartalk.com for fear of them being castrated for their gear not being 'authentic,' heaven-forbid.

 

[Story]

Nope, its called standing up to bullies and slanders because they couldn't force their 'it wasn't authentic' accusations & understand that it was for prop purposes only. Go back to bullying 3rd graders where you feel the most empowered.
PS - being a member of other forums that do artificially distress items, I'll be sure to let them know not to post anything under civilwartalk.com for fear of being castrated for it not being 'authentic.'

If you think the responses in this thread are 'castration', you are quite the delicate sugar-frosted princess. Bye bye, keyboard warrior.