Is This Looks To Be A Forgery ( Washington, 12 Cents)?

What makes you think it's a forgery ? Looks fine to me, a tad off center but other than that.....

Hi Stallzer; when I find a not so usual stamp on the place when I don't expect it, usually think that it is forgery... do you know maybe which could be the Scott number for this stamp? Thanks!

You'll have to do a little investigating eg. perf size, paper type and color but these are your possibilities. Please correct me if I missed any or inaccurate?
Scott #36 (perf 15½),
Scott #44(perf 12 ~ 1875 Govt. reprint white wove paper Issued Without gum)
Scott #69 (perf 12)

Is there a way to tell if it was a reprint other than the "no gum" especially because this was used would you be able to look for (or even be able to tell?) for an applied adhesive or would it require a PSE to be positive? I know some of the old adhesives turn a dark black/brown (like tree pitch) and stain the stamps and covers but not sure what to look for?

Looks like a perf 12 to me meaning Scott #69?

Unfortunately that scan is so artifact-ridden that it is almost impossible to tell what is real and what is due to the poor image quality.

filipo we need a much better image scan hi resolution photo to more accurately tell what it is OK?

It looks like a Scott #36 to me, could be a #36B but not very likely. Definitely not a #44 or a #69.

Filipo,

Does the stamp look blurry or 'muddy' in appearance or is your scan that bad?

3 major concerns:

One, the perfs are all wrong. At the very least, it has been reperfed on all 4 sides.

Two, the paper doesn't look right. It looks frail and fibrous at the perf tips. Very odd imo.

And three, the image isn't sharp ... but that could be due to a poor scan.

If this image is all I had to go on, I would lean towards a forgery.

Brian

For reference purposes, here are photos of a US 17, US 36, and US 36b.

I'd have to disagree. Rarely on a forgery will you see the frame lines of the adjacent Stamp. If it were reperfed, I would have done it where the frame line of the attached stamp was while still leaving a margin. The left side looks fine and the bottom looks ok, even with the bent perf. I think it's a dirty used Stamp with what looks to be a 5 or 7 Bar grid cancel. It has a tear on the top just left of center. It is a Scott 36, Outer frame lines recut, Plate 1.

Here is another grungy one for comparison.

hello people, thank you for so many suggestions! unfortunately, this stamp is stuck in an old album, and bad scan is a product of 114 year old and 2 inches thick book in my scanner.

indeed on scan looks like it is hand-made with a watercolors, but in live looks just normal.

thanks again on advices!

In my opinion, although the scan is not optimal, the detail of the engraving appears to be good enough to say that it is not a forgery. It must be a Scott 36 or 36B. I say it is a 36 because of the well defined, unbroken and evenly spaced outer frame line. No one in their right mind would add perfs to a Scott 17, plus the perfs are quite normal looking for the issue. Because of the big difference between perfs 12 and 15.5, one does not need a perf gauge to see that it is a perf 15.5. A perf 12 would have approximately 12 perforations across the top. This stamp clearly shows approximately 15.

I'm not convinced it's a perf 15½. they look to rugged and further apart than the 15½ perfs I'm looking at in my collection that's why I'm leaning toward a #69 perf 12.

EDIT:
I was looking at Rileysan's scans and I know they are perf 15½'s so I suppose I'm mistaken and a #36 seems reasonable as was my first ID before I second guessed myself.

Sorry to pick on you but a 69, although similar, is a completely different stamp design. The only stamps with this design are the 17, 36, 36b, and 44 (1875 reprint).

The perfs still don't look correct to me, but this too may be due to a poor quality scan.

If nothing else, this is a good lesson on the importance of high-quality scans. Image quality causes us to see things different than they really are.

BRian

You beat me to that one Brian, here is a 69 ILS, 2 totally different designs.



Like I mentioned above, the Stamp shown is a 36, outer frame lines re-cut, plate 1.

I actually just purchased a Scott #36 and that one is a #36 the perfs look right (despite my ignorance in my original reply) but the frame lines are complete (as opposed to broken which would make it a 36b. A better scan would be great but I can see it is indeed a 36 and I apologize for my bad ID to begin with. I know this is an old post but I was using the search function and was embarrassed by my original post.

The top of the stamp is torn. right side.
the top outer line is out of whack. looks drawn...