Suspect Altered Stamp To Resemble 351

I purchased this stamp reported as Scott 351. I checked the perfs and they are perf 12 and top and bottom perfs match. I checked the width and it measures just 21 and not as wide as my 348 so I suspect has been altered. Weiss's guide states if not 21.5 95% of time it has been altered. The sides were parallel when I did an computer overlay. It is a double link watermark. The fact is was 21mm and did not match my 348 gives me confidence it is not as described.

Here is a scan.



Any disagreements? I am ready to return it.

Both vertical margins look razor cut and do not look straight or parallel.

The printing is not square with the vertical margins of the paper.

Also, it appears that there is a larger space between the perforations and the printing on the right (top of stamp) than on the left. But across the bottom the stamp, the spaces between the perforations and printing look to be about the same.

It would help to scan the stamp at 1200 DPI or higher. The image presented appears to have been enlarged after scanning. At 1200 DPI it is possible to see differences in width to a tolerance of +/- 1/1000 of an inch. From the image it appears that stamp is slightly narrower at the bottom than the top. The difference is likely on the order of 0.003 inch. The edges should be parallel to within 0.001 inch. Also, the perforations appear to have been added. It should be noted that earlier fakes were not exactly perf 12-66. The test is to match the perforations with a perf 12-66 sheet stamp. Even if the edges did check out, it is possible that the stamp would be from a vertical imperf coil (347V).

In any case, buying a perf 12 coil without a certificate is an almost sure recipe for disappointment. One well known seller has sold amazing quantities of coils and Scott 519 without certificates. Check the seller sold listings on eBay in Stamps > United States > 1900-1940 Unused sorted descending by price and you will see active listings: http://www.ebay.com/sch/1901-40-Unu...045573.m1684 Then select sold listings to see the "good stuff".

Perfs match but they also are aligned, makes me suspect. But hopefully Clark will weigh in for a more definitive opinion.
Don

Thanks. I will make a scan but I am going to return it.

The stamp is going in the mail tomorrow.

Here is a 1200 dpi scan.

Fake. Probably from a #347. Straight edges are not straight and top perfs don't look right. Anyway, that's how I see it.

At this magnification you should see paper fibers on the edges of the perfs where they have been separated from the adjacent stamp. There are a few of those fibers, but not nearly as many as should be there. So, the perfs are likely fake (which would also explain why they're not parallel). To the forger's credit, he's created variation in the length of the perfs by cutting a few of them at odd angles. But, that doesn't recreate the effect of tearing the perfs that is only achieved by separating from the adjacent stamp (or adjacent selvedge).

The bottom perf tips are lighter in color suggesting that they have been filed in an attempt to rough up what was originally a clean straight imperf edge.

The stamp went back in the mail today. The scan did not turn out right. When I scanned it, it did not have that yellowish cast. I need to see what I did wrong. It lost a little in the optimization to post it here.