Scott 291 Plate Layout (Is This Stamp Reperfed At Left?)

I'm wondering if this scott 291 may be reperforated at left. It shows a bit of what I think must have been the guide arrow, although I don't see any more of the guidelines. Were the sheets cut along the guideline, making straight edges along the left side of the right pane?

Anyone know how the panes were cut apart on these?

Looking on Arago here (www.arago.si.edu) at the scott 291 plate proof I would think maybe it is reperforated at left?

Matt

In addition to the partial guile arrow, the perf holes are smaller and don't line up well with their counterparts to right. Have you checked them on a good perf guage (Kiusalas)?

Doesn't look good.

essayk, I know you really REALLY know your stuff however I don't believe the perforations have to line up? Now I'm not saying that stamp isn't re-perforated on the left, but I don't think that is a good tell? Please correct me if I'm mistaken. I suppose one would have to know what type of perforation device was used like a Comb, Guillotine or harrow?

If a Harrow was used they would all be quite even and balanced on the corners over the entire sheet.

A Guillotine style perforator would not line up either Horizontal or vertically.

A Comb style you would see where the vertical perforations would be slightly out of line.

You've got me there, Jeff! I think you are quite right that knowing the machine helps set the right expectations. I must confess that I do not know what kind of perforator(s) the Bureau was using in 1897 (or any other time). Not really my field. However, my understanding has always been that it was some sort of line perforator (as opposed to comb or harrow) that used multiple strokes to do a sheet, but was capable of doing multiple parallel rows at a single stroke. Since the question of whether or not the perf holes should line up on opposite sides is dependent upon the machine type and how it was set, I will back off of that point.

That said, it appeared to me that the right and left sides have a different number of perf holes for the height of the stamp. For me this raised a question about the gauge of the two sides, and I suggested, as I still do, that a critical comparison of the perfs should be done using a technically accurate gauge. To my eye it appears that the left side perf holes are not quite as large as those on the right, top or bottom. But eyeballing a thing like that is no substitute for using a good gauge - both for the size of the holes as well as their spread. Hence the recommendation to use a Kiusalas gauge.

Perforations along the vertical guide line of this issue guarantees fake perforations. This stamp has fake left perfs. Genuine perfs don't need to line up with the other side. You won't see perfs that should line up until you get into certain stamps in the W-F era.

Looking at the scan the perfs to the left (guide side) have a marked SW slope to the lower edges. The perfs to the right have marked slopes to the NE and SE on different perfs. The perfs to the top and bottom appear uneven. Doesn't fill me with confidence in its pedigree this one.

Terry

Thanks Sinclair. That's exactly the confirmation I was looking for. Below is the plate proof, as shown on Arago.

Matt

So can we put this one to bed now? Interesting post! Thanks.

I think we can. I'm satisfied that it must be reperfed.

Matt