Scott 386 Line Pair ?

From original post.....
The photo showed the line was like a smudge....no way as clear and defined on the new scan.


Previous quote from sinclair.....who seen what I seen.

Im out on this....original posted has not posted since.

I was also thrown on the original posted image, the Op must have made a mistake and over-written the image or something. For clarity, here was his original image in post #1.
don

All,
Sorry about that. I inadvertanty named the second pic the same as the first and it replaced. This is the FIRST set that had the strong negative reaction. No intent to decieve....

Ah ha, now it makes sense. But I don't think THIS fake was made from imperf stamps. I think the right perfs were unevenly trimmed off a straightedge pair from a perf 12 pane (375 or 375a), and then a line added over the perfs in the middle. The giveaway on that line is as sinclair said, the perfs are not centered between the designs but they put the line on the perfs anyway. It's a good thing that the booklet stamps for this were only produced from 360 subject plates, so we do not have to contend with position E fakes.

Does that sound about right kevin504?

Thanks essayk. What about the SECOND pair that I posted. Seemed to be some confusion on whether or not that was a fake or not. What say you :)
I bought the FIRST pair knowing it was a fake; the second has a cert which I have yet to dig up but folks here seem to think its not right either....

Essayk,

You could be correct but with such a poor image it is difficult to say. To me both sides look scissor cut and the top and bottom perfs don't look good to me. The best way to explain all of that is to conclude that the raw material was an imperf pair. I believe we are also dealing with a photo, which complicates things.

shannon7692,

There isn't much to debate about your second line pair. It has issues, especially with the bottom row of perfs. If you have a good cert on it, the cert is no good. If you would just post a better image we could pick it apart further. Who issued the cert that you can't find?

The arrangement of the top perfs on your example corresponds almost exactly with the top perfs on the Siegel pair. Ditto the middle perfs. For that reason it is disconcerting that the bottom perfs differ so radically. To my eye they even seem to angle up a bit (note the difference in proximity from the design as you move left to right). I am not able to judge the width of the pair in comparison with the Siegel pair, but I do note that your pair exhibits better centering. That needs to be looked at critically, since your pair has about the same amount of left margin as the Siegle pair, but theirs has a noticeably smaller right margin.

If your scan were of the same scale as the Siegel scan I uploaded, or at least larger than it is at present, we could tell more about other details such as printing quality and overall color shade differences/similarities. I know I share that opinion with others.

Bear in mind that the genuine coils were replaced about two months after introduction. There wasn't time for a lot of variation.

Those are thoughts from someone who is WAY outside his field for material of this sort. I have a fledgling collection of it from the days of my youth (literally) but haven't touched it in over 35 years. So anything I have to say about it needs corroboration from a competent authority. However, I would suggest that you get a cert from something of the caliber of the PF for your pair, if it has a cert from some other agency. Again, that is an opinion shared by others who know far better than I what we are looking at.

@sinclair1010 My principle reason for preferring to assume that the fake artist started with perforated stamps is precisely because they put the fake guide line in the wrong place. Had the pair been fully imperf they could easily have laid down the line well centered, and then put perfs on it. I think they put the line where they did because the perfs were already present, not by their hand, and they didn't want to fight the problem of trying to scribe a line on the edges of the perfs. They went for the center of the perfs because it drew less attention to the addition. A really good blowup of that area might show accumulations of color at the "leading" edge of each perf hole.

Whether or not there is merit to this thinking, it was the driver for me. As for the cutting, it was easy for me to see the trouble on the right, but not so much for the left. Here again though, the image needs to be brighter and larger for me to see those details well enough to feel sure. To my eye the left edge maintains good parallelism with the left edges of the design.

Here is a blowup of the present image, which has a light gradient in the original I cannot easily overcome, so it has to wash out at the top a bit. Needed a dark/black background.

You make a good point. I will at least agree on the middle perfs possibly being genuine.

Little update here...since I could find the cert that I thought I had, I sent this into Weiss and you were all spot on. It is a fake (a good one per Weiss). Expensive lesson for a rookie on coils but one I will not make again :)

Onto the next project.