No Listing? Error?....scott 516 30c Franklin Perf 10x11 ???

So been through about half of my stamps and still waiting to recieve more. Been going through pics of stamps that are on there way. I am have been trying to match and verify the stamps and what it is listed as with a 1995 US stamp Scott guide. Found a few already marked wrong by the cent(go figure how that happened). Anyways this posting is in regards to my previous posting about perforation rarities and the question with a Scott 516a with perf 10 at top AND bottom(I know it's top OR bootom but suspect stamp differs). So here is 3 pics that show what would normally be Scott 439 or 516. First pic is just of stamps, Scott 515 on left and suspect on right(439,516,516a,or...?). Second pic displays what templates I had copied and used paste and rotate to align perfs(there was no resizing done). Third and final pic shows the aligned and misaligned perfs. I used the suspect stamp perf 11 side template to show perf 11 match on both vertical and horizontal of the left Scott 515 stamp. Am I missing something? Can't wait till I actually have the stamps. Again, thank you for ANY and all input. Any thoughts?....(cough)...Russ?...anyone?....lol...

Wow alot of work on stamps not in hand yet. Sounds like your excited at the challenge. Although your comparisons are great and potentially correct don't get to far ahead. If you had the 50 post I could send you a computer perf gauge that works very well with scans 600x600 and photoshop. Once you have them in hand you will be able to answer much better and definatly with the effort you've already put in I'm anxious to see what the real stamps will hold. If you can do a 600x600 I can repost the pics with the perf gauge to help out. Perf varieties are definatly something that will keep you busy for many a year to come!

Thank you so much for replying Nitrolures. Ya last few and next couple weeks ill be on a break from work so lots of time on my hands and thought what better time to start looking through this collection I received 16 years ago as a teen(it has been sitting in parents attack since then, and half still is). It going to take couple weeks for me to get back up to my parents to get rest(got the fam for rest of my off time:). I appreciate the offer for the digital perf gauge but I can wait for the stamps. Just wanted to here any opinions. It caught my eye because you can tell it has bigger horizontal perf holes just by looking at the pic. If it turns out to be a true Scott 516 perf 10x11 then is this a new variety?..or error?

Seems very possible a previously unidentified value could have the perf variety. If it is, congratulations, you win the Jackpot.

I know on these higher values I never even checked all four sides, just one side to know if it was perf 10, 11, or 12. I may not be the only one and their may be many in collections for the last 90 years that have never been check on all four sides.

Starring at your pictures still.

If one is perf 11 and the other is perf 10 (lower right picture,) should one have 11 perf holes in the space the other has 10. The way I count it seems like they are perhaps different by 0.5 holes at best, not 1.0. Not sure, just working on the puzzle you present. I know some people can look at a photo of a Washington Franklin and tell the perf gauge based on the number of holes along each side of the design, but I am not there yet.

San, they possible look as if they are .5 off because I aligned the holes starting from one side. I did not align the stamp. If I align the stamp it looks like this pic which makes then look more off but I can see taking into thought that the distance from camera is slightly further , and thank you for your input.

San, what keeps me going is if you have a 516, why wouldn't you check to see if its a 516a? Expecially if your a collector. Again I thank you for your input and we will see the actual perfs after I pick the stamps up.

Why not check?

Mostly because for most of the 40 years I have been collecting I didn't even know such a thing existed. We working on the washington Franklins because I have come into a batch and want to see if there was any I needed, I would just go through and seperate into perf 10,11,12 piles before pulling out the watermark fluid.

These varities are not listed in the Harris catalog / washington franklin variety chart I have always used. Same chart in the old Liberty album.

If you don't know the variety exist, you don't check for it.

I still have never checked in the albums, will have to do that sometime soon before I sell of the spare pile.

San if you need someone to go through your spare piles, well....lol...just kidding. But ya I guess what gets me going is that if all are not accounted for and they are "known", then why not check for them. There's new findings and Updating needed to follow anything that occures over many decades expecially the Philatelic hobbby, is what im finding out. Even if they were .5 perf off there is still no such thing as perf 10.5 x 11 (as far as I know).... I cant find the link at the moment, but read somewhere that in 2007 they found a watermark on a peice a sheet that produced some rare I think 3 cent Washington stamps that were supposed not watermarked, theswedishtiger.com has it described like that but couldnt find again(which I guess devalued them quite a bit). I have updated my reply pic to show the lower right horizontal perf comparison. This stamp does look like it is skinnier though without side margins. Thank you again for your thoughts.
-JC-

Sitting looking at the pic and the few things I see are you are using the same part of the stamp and the pic is distorted you need to use top to top side to side etc but lower stamp to lower stamp the other thing is the 30c is a very narrow stamp with the perfs touching the design on both sides and the 20c apears to be over size. I think the 30c is a normal 11 perf just a very narrow one but I think you were looking at the wrong stamp because on the bottom 20c I count 11 bottom 13 side (11) and top 12. And the top one is a mirror image 11 top 13 side (11) and 12 bottom. To me it's the 20c that looks suspect not the 30c and if it is then it would be a 515d 10x11 but an oversize by one perf accross the stamp and it was every other perf line that was wrong on that error because I have seen vertical pairs with an error at each end

I used a side I know is perf 11(so that was my control). I also used both stamps to compare and only right side suspect stamp horizontal perfs dont match. Let me provide the whole pic I have then you compare with the other sapposed perf 11 stamps(still looks like bigger holes...but will see). I do appreciate your thoughts though.
-JC-
P.S. BTW It only took me ten minutes to make the diagrams so im not getting too extensive...lol...I like this time to relax and have nothing but stamps on my mind.

Have you done stamp to stamp because you can use a scan for a perf guide but a photo is never square or reliable enough as a guide and the 15c looks to be a normal size 11x11 and putting it on top of the stamp will show instantly if the perfs are out on one side or two sides

You mean like this Razer? Or you mean using the guage? Cant you copy image and use guage or does it have to be a scan(prob a flat scan, so will have to wait)?
-JC-

The test will be when you get them but for now the sides are 11 you can see the design is almost the same size and the perfs line up but the top and bottom ones are different sizes. if you stretch the stamp so the design is the same size on both stamps you will see if the perfs match or not.

Yes Razer the test will be when I get them. And yes thats exactly what I'm trying to show....that the left and right sides match up and not top or bottom. Didnt want to stretch so not to start messing with resizing makes less accurate:) The sides are 11 and the top and bottom are diff...thats what makes this stamp suspect because not matter what its sapposed to be same on all four sides and there is no listing for a 30c Franklin thats not perf 10,11,or 12 on all sides except a Scott 516a perf 11 on three sides and perf 10 at top or bottom. Aagin thank you for you thoughts.

P.S. Using the side to side and top to top measuring for perfs that you had mentioned in your previous comment, has no reference because no matter what perf 11 is still perf 11 wether its on top, side, or bottom. If it does not match, it's not perf 11.