Scott 500 Ebay???

chaulkdust... you're quite welcomed, my friend...

From what I see so far, it's bound to look even nicer
in person, and I'll direct email you large scans...

The Scott #500... sigh. It has a corner crease that is not mentioned by the dealer. How typical.

Yes, as sinclair2010 pointed out, there's a corner crease in the upper left corner (upper right on the back, after rotated so it's not upside down as originally posted. Shown in red.)

I put brown circles where the two most visible "inclusions" would be seen if they went all the way through the paper -- the smaller one in the bottom frame line appears to go all the way through (albeit just slightly.) The big one in the ribbon (the one that looks "picked" to me) apparently doesn't go all the way through, but pixel peeping it looks as though the image may have been altered in that area (Photoshop is a great thing!) Still, an inclusion so close to the surface of one side may not go all the way through to the other side, so maybe that's just a paper irregularity, not evidence of image manipulation.

The OP is getting a Scott 500 for free, so probably won't complain that it's not used, not cancelled, and not sound. I'm still curious as to why disi123 won't take me up on the offer for free certs, especially when it's "10,000%" likely there's no downside risk for him. More importantly, he'd get a chance to "prove his point" (as he desired earlier in the thread) at my cost!

The offer still stands, as I'm not afraid to have an expert confirm my opinion that this stamp is not postally used...

Not to stir the pot any further, but here is another 500 that looks decent and has a nice image to analyze. Looks like 4-5 small spots/defects on the face and a small brown stain as well. No image of the back? Looks to be mint, perfs seem OK? Would this be worth a bid, for an average collector? Seems like if you look long and hard enough almost all stamps will have some very minor issues and I certainly can't afford perfect copies at super premiums. Perhaps I can end up with 2 collectable 500's?

I had put away all my stamps 35-40 years ago, and just recently started going back through them. I have a bunch of old classics that I now realize I'll need a lot of help with besides the confusing W/F series. I am totally amazed at the vast increase in the expertise and knowledge of collectors on this sight. Was wowed when a member identified the actual sheet position of my Scott #17. In the early 70's that information would have been extremely difficult to obtain. The ability with the Internet and sites like this have rekindled my collecting juices. I am learning more and having a great time - THANKS

http://www.ebay.com/itm/12164048814...RK:MEBIDX:IT

chaulkdust, I'm seeing some white specks (which may or may not be problems - could be dust on the stockcard, as I see a lot of dust in the surrounding black background too.) I also see a small dark spot on the neck. I suspect those are the things you're referring to.

If any of the white specks are picked inclusions (or scrapes, etc.,) they may (or may not) be significant enough to get mentioned on a cert (the one at the base of the "E" looks like it might have a little depth to it, that would be the one I'd be most concerned about.) Basically, if it shows as a shadow in fluid, or flashes while drying, they'd probably call it.

I doubt they'd mention the small brown spot on the neck. Too insignificant to call IMO.

BTW, I believe the stamp is properly identified as a type Ia and the perfs look genuine to me.

For those who may have missed it, I posted a picture of what Tipzi is talking about in the hair line that distinguishes the difference between a type-I and type-II on the rotary press perf. 10 coils in the following post.

https://goscf.com/t/42370

It's a sad, sad day in our hobby ~ when 'so called experts' have to
resort to flyspecking to prove a point... not to mention making an
unfounded accusation of a long term reputable ebay seller of
photoshopping... shame, shame...

Actually srailkb I was most concerned about the spot at the upper left in the edge image frame. Doesn't go through but under maginification is noticeable.

chaulkdust, I saw that one too. Also a potential picked inclusion IMO. Dipping it should answer all questions though. FWIW, I see a lot of stamps with clean certs that have tiny picked/dislodged inclusions. Paper quality on certain early 20th C. issues is poor (for instance, lots of inclusions on bluish paper stamps, many of which will pop out or be removed, and yet they get clean certs...) Expertizers tend to be a little more lenient with those.

disi123, I have no point to prove (that was your promise,) and made no accusations (even offered another plausible explanation for the odd appearance,) but I won't sit by idly when someone refers to my post as a "conceited pile of unmitigated jibberish [sic]." I've put my money where my mouth is. You're scared to do the same (for obvious reasons.) Enough said.

I'll continue to help others (especially when your advice will cost them money, as it would have with this Scott 500,) but I guess I'll just have to start ignoring you like all the other experts did in this thread. They're obviously quicker learners than I am, "LOL".

I finally convinced the seller of the lot originally mentioned in the first post to end the auction.

Sure looks more like an inclusion than a cancel to me. Backscan proves nothing.

The first rebuttal targets the nonsensical and totally baseless
circles demonstrating no less than pure speculation...

Demeaning an item without having the actual item in hand is totally
irresponsible... the only thing that's been demeaned (here) is the
credibility of the one doing it...

The reverse is clean and flawless...




And Mr Sinclair... as the brilliant expert you are, I'm surprised
that you would team up with the fly-specking speculator... there
isn't any crease... what you saw in the seller's original scan
(on a black background) was overemphasized shadowing of the paper's
own texture... I purposely scanned on white background to show there
is, in fact, no crease...

disi123 - backside looks generally clean except for the appearance of a light crease at the upper right corner (which you mention is not a crease). Have you dipped it to check? Cheers, Dave

That sure looks like a crease at upper right when seen from the back. Needs to be dipped to rule out, as Dave mentioned.

Well, I bought the 500 I had mentioned earlier.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/12164048814...AMEBIDX:IT

Ended up paying $86 for it. So I'll send it off with a few other items that I want certified in the near future. So, for what it's worth I now finally have a mint NH 500, and if disi123's 500 used stamp works out I'll be extremely pleased and complete my double play.