Its The 596 Isnt It

Shelly/Blazenstar/Belfastgirl,

You just don't listen to good advice. You just argue.

Jack Kelley

Shelly, since you will not believe what has been told to you here there really is only one thing left for you to do, submit it for certification.

My recommendations.

http://www.philatelicfoundation.org/
http://www.stampauthentication.com/
http://stamps.org/stamp-authentication
http://www.psestamp.com/

You aren't the first one through here that thought they hit the lottery.


https://goscf.com/t/48373&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/48139&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/48033&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/38353&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/47620&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/47591&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/46500&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/15163&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/44974&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/42921&SearchTerms=596
https://goscf.com/t/39379&SearchTerms=596

Have a read through these posts, good information to be found. Please report back when you get the verdict from the certificate organization.

Here is an interesting article on these stamps: http://www.linns.com/news/us-stamps...-or-596.html

Like the article says and Clark said before: 596 is a rotary press sheet waste stamp that has the same printing design size as the rotary press sheet stamp 581 from which it came from and it also has the same perforations as the flat plate sheet stamp 552 with flat plate perforator perforation gauge 11 x 11 (10.94 x 10.94).

This entire thread is a waste of time. It should be consigned to the bit bucket. The initial images showed unambiguously that the stamp is too short to be a rotary press printing. It also brings shows that the stamp is the shade of green associated with the 1 cent flat plate printing. The comparison with the 5 cent Scott 223 shows a slight height different because the 552 was printed on vertical grain paper on 400 subject plates while 223 was printed on horizontal grain paper on 200 subject plates. Finally, the stamp is a bottom straight edge. A Scott 596 would have small margins, unlikely to be large enough to allow the perforations to be trimmed off and leave a margin as large as the one pictured.

Requests to show the back of the stamp were superfluous. Seeing the front was sufficient for identification.

This post summarizes and repeats what was posted previously.

Clark

Shelley,

You have posted several times your hopeful #596 beside a rotary press one cent green of the same issue, and it is abundantly clear that the supposed #596 is much shorter than the rotary press stamp. Why do you not believe your own eyes? If you will accept what your eyes can clearly see then you have your verdict. The height of a stamp from another issue thirty years older is meaningless, as Clark has said to you several times, so put away the five cent brown - it is of no consequence.

I have found many rare stamps over the decades but never a #596. However, I did find that a #594 posted By Bill Weiss several years ago for review and comment, which already had a PF and a RPSL certificate as a #594, was actually a #596 (if not an altered #632). So there are finds to be made if you can discipline yourself into rejecting the superfluous.

I wonder what has become of that stamp?

I have taken at least 6 photos of my stamp and every one of them looks like it is a different shade of green. The stamps in this post are from the Siegiel website and my stamp is the same sade as the stamp on the right ...the 596 its also the same size


but thank you for your expert advice

Congratulations on such a valuable find! The only way you are going to prove these naysayers wrong is to have the stamp certified by a reputable organization. I'd recommend the Philatelic Foundation -- they have issued 24 certificates on stamps submitted to them as being Scott 596 (nine of the stamps had been misidentified by the submitters). I also recommend getting a certificate for insurance purposes.

This is what I know from what I have read in the scott stamp cat and onlibe The designs of Flat Plate stamps measure about 18.5 - 19 x 22 mm. When impressions are placed horizontally on the curved plates, the designs are about 19.5 - 20 mm wide. When impressions are placed vertically on the curved plates, the designs are about 22.5 - 23 mm high.

My stamp is 22.5 / 22 3/4 mm it is too long to be a flat plate printing
and it is too short tpo be a rotary press printing

The 596 is 22.5 mm long it is perf 11 and it is a dark shade of green
my stamp is 22.5 mm long it is perf 11 and it is a dark shade of green

You told me it is a flat plate printing and that flat plate printings are easy to spot because they have green ink on the back

My stamp does not have green ink on the back

You called me stupid you called me a troll and you accuse me of arguing

Im just trying to get a little advice

I ubderstand the 596 is a rare stamp and I know it must be frusterating trying to explain to people who dont know what they are talking about over and over again but do you have to be so rude .....perhaps some of you are jealous maybe you have waited your whole life to find one of these stamps I dont know the reasons but I dont really care you dont need to be rude to people

The only advise you need is to get this stamps expertized. That advise was given to you early on and you could have saved yourself a lot of grief by just doing so. Good luck!

Peter

Thank you peter I will get the stamp expertised ...its just that it costs alot of money for the service money I cant really afford to pay

I just thought it would be a good idea to get a few opinions from the guys who know what they are talking about .....perhaps that was not such a good idea after all

thanks anywy

SEND THE STAMP TO BE CERTIFIED (since you're so intent on proving all these experts wrong).

Thank you for your advice tominiski ....

You are sorely mistaken, my friend. If you do even ten minutes of internet research on the background of Clark, who has advised you here carefully and completely, you will find that he is an expert on this issue and his opinion is equivalent to what you would receive from the PF or APS if you paid for a cert. He expertizes Washington-Franklins and has taught APS courses about the process. His knowledge and the literature available to him for consultation on W-Fs are encylopaedic. He knows or has known other experts in the field. Even a brief review of his past posts on similar issues will show you the level of expert that you have had the privilege of hearing from. Bottom line, when Clark says it isn't a 596 based on particularized reasons, it just isn't. Period.

As for the label of troll, providing a first image with the implication that it is accurate, then posting other images that are allegedly more accurate while coming back and attacking the opinions of others as mistakenly relying on what you previously said was accurate, is a hallmark of such behavior and ends this thread for me.

Just the first picture of the original poster above in the first comment comparing the design height of the stamp in question on the left to a copy of a 632 rotary press stamp on the right which is taller convinces me that the stamp on the left is a 552 stamp.