Scott 4387 28c Polar Bear (Original V. Reprint)

As far as I know, the Scott catalog has only designated #4387 for the sheet version of the above stamp, however, in a recent purchase I made from the USPS Stamp Fulfillment Services, I noticed the 28c Polar Bear stamp is now being provided in a "reprint" format. I bought a plate block from SFS (right) and compared it to a used copy of the 28c Polar Bear stamp I had in my stockbook (left), which were both scanned together:



The two distinct differences I see are:

(1) The shades of blue around the left eye and into the upper body of the polar bear; and

(2) The shades of purple on the nose, eyes, and left ear on the right stamp (reprint) as compared to the same areas shown in blue on the left (original) printing.

Although these are noticeable differences, I don't know that they are significant enough that the Scott catalog will provide a separate listing for them.

Still, it makes for yet another variety to collect.

wt1
The perf are different ,Almost reversed
David

Agreed. I believe the perfs are reversed. Or in the jargon of those that collect perforation varieties, the older stamp starts off with a "peak" and ends with a "valley"; the newer (reprint) stamp starts off with a "valley" and ends with a "peak".

I do find it rather curious that Scott is not (or at least not yet) identifying these as varieties but are simply grouping them altogether as Scott No. 4387.

Excellent, a die cut difference!

Here's a note I have regarding the reprint:

"The 28¢ Polar Bear sheet stamp was reprinted in October 2010. 'The stamp design appears to be unchanged, though the color of the recent version...is a little lighter than the original.' Bigalke, Jay, 'United States 28¢ Polar Bear stamp appears with diagram change', Linn's Stamp News, May 16, 2011, p. 22."

Cheers, Robert

Another curious thing. USA Philatelic refers to the October 2010 version of the stamp as a "reissue"; the shrink wrap pacakaging of the product when received from SFS uses the term "REP", presumably meaning "reprint". (I guess we just chalk it up to yet another inconsistency in USPS terminology):