What Do You Think Of This 278?

This is currently listed at an online auction. Seller says there are no minor faults. You experts out there - what do you think of the perforations? Are any of the sides reperfed?

Matt

I can't say anything with strong confidence because it is a picture taken at an angle and not a scan. This is evident by the design not filling the red rectangle evenly. By appearance alone, the bottom perfs don't look genuine.

Since it isn't a scan, the normal method of comparing sides doesn't work. Comparing each side to each other does work somewhat. Note how each half hole at the left of the bottom row line up. The further you look from left to right, they gradually shift away from each other. Then they come back into alignment on the last perf on the right. This to me indicates reperforation along with their non-round appearance and size variance.

I believe that it has been reperforated at bottom, but the test is never 100% certain and the angle of the picture adds some error.

A $5 stamp of that era, so well centered with so light a cancel, is just awesome. But my understanding is that these perforations have different characteristics than, say the perf 12 Washington-Franklins. Not that they are perforated differently, but might not share the same idiosyncrasies. However, DNA makes a good argument with his image that the bottom is reperforated - a shame but not entirely unexpected.

It's still a very good looking stamp. The reperforations at bottom are noticeable upon scrutiny, but don't attract my eyes to them. To me, they don't distract from the overall appearance of it. If priced accordingly, I would love to have this in my album.

Look again...

disi, your image is intriguing. If the camera was at an angle that was off center in a manner similarly equal to each side, then the distortion from off center perspective would be similar. Your image shows that well.

However, note how they are not parallel because of the off center perspective. Also not in my image below how the valleys of the left hand perfs are well in line with each other. The valleys of the bottom perfs are not.

Those disparities could also be due to the stamp not lying perfectly flat. In the end, we just cannot be more conclusive without a scan.

Personally... given all of the re-perf jobs we've all seen,
I don't think anyone is this good...

I'm certainly no expert, but I've done this perf comparison
thing with scanners going back to 1997 when I purchased my
first scanner... and you're right... camera angles and stamp
curvatures can definitely affect how we see things...

With this stamp, though, I think it's too close to call...
my opinion with the "DISI-TEST" is that the perfs are aok...

Thanks all for your input. It sold for $305 - a bit higher than I was willing to go. Although I already have a nice 278 linked below, I'm always looking for another of everything!

http://www.psestamp.com/Cert/1286438/

Matt

Nice stamp, Matt... but why not just save all your
nickels and dimes and wait a year or 2 and buy an
unused one....

Just as a reminder, you can't do any sort of meaningful graphical manipulation hoping to find reperfs using a photo. This stamp was photographed.

matttodd1, if you're curious, this stamp was also offered back on Feb 2 ( ebay - http://www.ebay.com/itm/271749062533 - sold for $202) and that seller DID scan it. Anyone who wants to attempt a meaningful manipulation should use those images.

On a related note, the back was also scanned in that earlier sale, and shows what appears to be a light thin in the lower left corner (lower right corner on the back scan.) While not described in that auction either, it no doubt lowered the realization, as most knowledgeable bidders would have valued it as faulty.

Probably a good thing you didn't go for it.

Thanks all - now I feel even better for having let it go. Sometimes you wonder if you passed up something you shouldn't have. Nice to know that's not the case here :)

PS - disi - that's one of the advantages of strictly collecting used for my own collection - no temptation to hold off for a mint example ;)

Matt

srailkb/Ken, thank you for finding that scan. Concerning analyzing photos, I disagree in that doing so can provide useful information. Though it depends on how perpendicular and flat the stamp is to the camera. Below is a manipulated image of the scan comparing opposite sides. The vertical row is pretty consistent. The holes of the horizontal row vary considerably in size and have a few misalignments. So, the top or bottom, or both might be reperforated.



Here is the same scan comparing each side to itself. The left and right rows still appear pretty consistent. The holes of the bottom row vary considerably in size and shape. They are also all smaller than the other 3 sides. According to the 1847USA site, straight edges can only appear on the left or right side. However the perf tips are all short and nearly flat. It appears that the genuine perfs were cut off and new ones added to improve the centering. The misalignment seen in my first manipulation image of the photograph is actually a phenomenon of camera perspective combined with the uneven hole sizes.

The holes of the top row do vary in size and a few in shape. Less so than the bottom, but enough to make me suspicious that the top is also reperforated.



Scans are always best, but it can be helpful to test photographs in situations where a scan isn't available. Comparing sides to themselves is extra effort that isn't always necessary, but it does provide further clues and can identify the particular side or sides that are reperforated.