Poll: Grading Imperforate Stamps

first time posting a poll. Hope I get it right. Be patient if I don't. Purpose is to open a discussion regarding grading/preferences of collectors regarding imperforate stamps. As collectors, do we agree with PSE standards? I am seeing more and more imperforate stamps at auction with huge margins that include larger portions of surrounding stamps- I have seen it for scott 1, scott 7, scott 12 recently. My assumption is that blocks are being cut precisely to get jumbo stamps with perfect margins???

Which of these imperforate stamps do you prefer as a collector. This is scott #771, 1935 NGAI imperforate 16 cent dark blue.

If you want something big keep them as whole blocks

PSE standard ..... Lol

IMO, when in order to have a single stamp with big margins one destroys 8 adjoining stamps, it shows a lack of appreciation for stamps as well as reduces the opportunity for other collectors to add the stamp to their collections. It surely shows a greater interest to increase value more than a love for the hobby.

Hard to believe anyone that is serious about stamps would destroy five stamps just to get that first scan. That is a shame!

Peter

for sale in upcoming auction (robert siegel). Not an imperforate but same concept as you guys have replied. Stamp was graded by PF. 90--- I assume they grade it based on its REAL margins, not surrounding stamps since it is not imperforate.

another example-- imperforate jumbo 95 (PSE)

You show us a low value stamp as exemple . My concern with imperforated is with 19th one . With old imper. We are more talking about have 4 margins , not the size of them

My sentiments



https://goscf.com/t/39912&SearchTer...ng+of+graded

The word " manufactured" suggests to me that there is a level of fake or non-genuine nature to a stamp.

If a cancel, non contemporary is added to a stamp, the stamp is generally considered fake.

If a strip of 3 Scott #11 is "manufactured" into a single by using instruments and measuring devices in order to sell it as a jumbo stamp... This is not genuine. Should the certificate say : "genuine strip of 3 Scott #11, artificially trimmed on sides"???

The top margin in the Scott 11 at best would grade it at 75. It's quite disturbing that one can manufacture a VF stamp into a 95 jumbo by trimming off two sides.

However, others may believe that trimming blocks and strips into mega margin imperforates is perfectly acceptable.
This is part of the debate I was hoping to generate.

You got it Peter.


Robert

Peter is spot on.

Doesn't it add to the value and appreciation of the 5 cent red stamp error by having at least 1 intact 2 cent regular red stamp connected to it? In other words, if all of the surrounding 2 cent stamps were kept intact around the 5 cent error it would look more philatelically original to highlight and contrast the error. To me, this is willful stamp mutilation in order to make one stamp stand out by cutting up the other connected stamps.

With regards to the OP picture above, even though I think the right side is more agreeable to me, it looks like the extra margins would leave the surrounding stamps with shorter close margins. Ideally, these stamps should be separated with even equal margins between all stamps, if possible. However, imperforate stamps are best left in at least pairs to show that they are imperforate. All of this is philatelic old school that I learned.

Jogil,

I agree with you regarding 5c error stamp. I probably shouldn't have added that to thread but a novice buyer might look at the stamp and say "jumbo". I would prefer to have block or pair with error than single with cut stamps around it but this is getting off topic. Let's stick with imperforates.

Regarding the Scott 771, someone could argue that the right stamp was surgically cut just like left one to achieve perfect margins.

Perhaps the better question is if you collect imperforates, what is the definition a a "single stamp" versus a multiple. Should an imperforate stamp have a size limit to consider it a single versus multiple that was trimmed down.

I think that is best solution??? If an imperforate stamp is to be graded as a single, it should not be greater than let's say 15 percent larger than its size with full margins showing no other stamp.
Thus left copy of 771 should be authenticated as a plate block of 6, trimmed. (Ungradeable as a single). The Scott 11 above would be a strip of 3, trimmed (ungradeable as a single)

By the way, right copy of 771 is graded 100J. Stamp on right is a grade 98. How the imperforate on right is not given jumbo status as well makes no sense. It's almost as if PSE wants you to cut them up like the left stamp. Uggg
Rg

The 505 is usually collected in blocks of 9 with the error in the center, however the 499's that surround it are so common that trimming them like this cost nothing back in the day. Even today if the block is hinged but the error is NH and well centered there is probably a lot more money to be made by trimming it this way. I am not in favor of doing so, but that is the reason it is done.

Sorry.. I meant to say left stamp grades 100J. The right stamp grades 98!