Scott 441 - Watermark Issue

I am new to the challenging world of A140 stamp distinctions! I have a 1cent A140 Coil stamp with horizontal perfs. Someone wrote in pencil on the back the number 441 which matches Scott 441. My stamp is indeed Perf 10. It also has ink run through on the back which makes me believe that it is not rotary. But, when I check for a watermark using specific watermark detector fluid, I don't see any watermark. Is this common to loose the ability over time to see a watermark? Are they really small or really big? I can't seem to find any good images of watermarks for A140 stamps that show the mark in relation to the stamp to gauge the size. Any help is appreciated.

Henry

Washington / Franklin stamps can be very difficult to locate the watermark. On certain stamps only a very small portion of the watermark makes it onto the stamp.

Can you post a scan of the stamp ?

Stallzer,

Thanks for the reply. I don't know how to get a high quality scan of a stamp and was not sure if the intense light of my printer/scanner is bad for a stamp. So, I am uploading some photos of the stamp and hope this helps. I also checked again for the watermark and noticed what looks like a partial "S" at the top. So, maybe it is a Scott #441. Here are the photos. Front, reverse and reverse with watermark fluid.

The curvature and irregularity of the vertical edges suggests that the stamp is a sheet stamp, probably a 424, trimmed to resemble a coil.

Clark

If no watermark found then faked from SC 462

I agree the sides look a bit wonky. Welcome to the site!
Tell us how you acquired the stamp. You also posted great pictures for someone here for the first time. Congrats!!
Pull out some coil stamps you have that are common. It's doubtful any common stamps would be faked. Line them up and carefully examine them to notice the differences. Educating yourself and training the eye will alert you next time to pranksters and crooks.

Hmmm. It definitely shows a single line watermark.

However, I wonder if the curvature of the edges is due to the limitations of the lens taking the pic. The parallelism of the design edges and the cut edges is pretty good. So, here's what gives me pause:

This stamp is without gum but appears unused. The cat value for 441 unused is less than half that of 424 unused, but used is valued at 6 times the value of a 424 used, yet still less than a 424 unusued. I'm trying to imagine using a 424 to make a fake. Could it be a 441 after all?

Any other options?

All,

Thanks for your input and output. I agree with essayk. The value of either the 441 or the 424 are too small in my opinion to convince someone to fake one. As well, the 441 is less in value than the 424. Therefor, I'll strike this one up to a 441.

The photos I took are with my phone camera and could have been at a slight angle thus giving the appearance of curved edge.

Thanks again,

Henry

Reality...

The 441 is worth next to nothing... faking it would be inconceivable...

Could it be a trimmed booklet pane made to look like a coil? ...Why I wouldn't know.

Is it flat plate or rotary?

It is definitely a single line watermark, but of what letter and what orientation? I can't make out what it could possibly be.

As far as an accurate ID some things bug me.

Why would someone fake a cheap stamp? For practice.


-IBFS