A Scott #17 Or A Scott #36

This Scott #17 or #36 has an APS Expert Committee Report on it but still there indecisive on what this is,used,genuine,cut frames on all four sides,margins to narrow to positively identify either way.
So just to make a point most of the Scott #36 I have seen do have the perforations cutting into the frame on any one side and there not well centered (though I haven't seen one that is,this doesn't mean there could be some examples around),but this #17/#36 doesn't show perf cuts in the frame which tend to show that this could be a #17.
I'll post both photos of the #17/#36 and a #36 with it for comparison.





hope the photo's are clear enough as I'm not to steady with a camera these days

That... is a very interesting technical page! wow!

Yes Nic this the expertizing came free with the stamp but if you want expertizing on a stamp from APS normally you have to pay for it and sorry mate I can't remember how much.

If the APS Expert Committee can't decide, what chance does the average collector have in matters like this ?

Nugget.....

APS fees are $25.00 plus 2% of book value for any item......with an upper limit of $600.00, I think.




ellasguy......

In my opinion......for stamps of questionable identification most would consider this as the stamp of lesser value.

........and with cut framelines it should be a discounted stamp.

My #17 and #36 are fairly easy to ID. Not all are as easy as these. If I'm not mistaken, both issues were printed using the same plate. As you can see on the top of #17, there was very little spacing between stamps. Although my #36 has plenty of room to clip off the perfs without cutting into the frame on 3 sides, the bottom perfs do cut into the frame. Since perforating machines were not exact in spacing of perfs, it is not difficult for me to imagine a #36 with four wide margins that could be trimmed to look like a #17.

Nuggett,

I'd be suspicious or at least curious if I got an APS certificate like that too. Did you notice the typographical errors on the document, "cuts frames" and "margins to narrow?"

APS has smart people on top of their game. Am I the only one that thinks it odd they would issue an official document with those typos? For the life of me though, I can't think of any reason why someone would tinker with a certificate to get an inconclusive decision.

I'm probably just being my old anal-retentive curmudgeon self.

Danstamps54.......


Very good point........no ligitimate cert would have typo's......There are quite a few bogus certs from Asia, Europe and points inbetween.

Send a photocopy to the APS and ask their opinion.

Yes an interesting point Dan I didn't notice the typo's though this was brought from the APS store I believe they probably didn't proof read there certificate,what sparked my interest was there indecision's and a prime example is Quigngt's #17 that shows the cut borders of the stamps around it if this was the norm there should be more of these thin frame #17 around,Tom you are correct about the cost of this stamp I brought it at 10% of the normal price and a fine example sells for about $350.00 U.S.so not a bad space filler really and it will do until something comes along to fill that hole.

Nuggett-

I see your argument but I don't know enough about #17's to comment.

Even though you purchased the stamp from the APS store, it might not hurt to follow up on Nr's suggestion and see what's up.

quigngt-

Nice stamps! If you ever get the urge to dispose of the #17 .....

Yes Good point Dan I'll follow up on NR's idea and submit it for inspection

Sorry double klicked (now I know how this happens)