Just What Is A Stamp Error And Who Decides If It Is?

Identifying stamps with genuine errors must be a challenging task. I've seen stamps said to be errors ranging from minor color variations to the dramatic. Some of course were little more than wishful thinking, ... and I am guilty of that myself.=

Is there a "standard" written to identify true types of errors? I know about missing colors, wrong colors, major perf shifts, inverts, missing perfs and the like but what else qualifies? What about a stamp with perfs, or perf remnants, where there should not be perfs?

Who or what group, if any, decides what constitutes a true error?

IMHO a good characteristic of "true error" is that it exists in quantity and the production (printing process) of error is known.

And for who decides... I think the main responsibility lies within catalog and handbook publishers. A lot of EFO's never end up listed on catalogues as "everything" can't be listed (due to limited space).

A very debated subject as to what qualifies as an error and what is just a freak or oddity (apparently the term oddity was likely just included because EFO sounded like UFO .) Then there are also varieties.

There is no standard to my knowledge of "true" errors. Any variation or error on a stamp is usually discovered by normal people buying stamps - if they're discovered by the P.O. before release they normally get destroyed. Once an error is discovered, it's then up to the philatelic community and experts at the major catalogue publishers to decide if it qualifies as an error, so each case would be looked at individually. Only major errors make it into the catalogue, although there are many minor ones that don't. Some of these make it into specialist catalogues.

An error can occur at virtually any stage of the stamp production process, even the very designing stage. Wrong paper used, faults with the actual paper making process, multi part dies being put together wrongly (eg wrong value or invert), wrong colour etc. The list of posible things that can go wrong is a long one.

Things that are not considered errors but rather variations include plate flaws. So cracked plate, plate wear, retouches etc, although listed and collected as varieties and often commanding higher prices, are not considered as errors.

It's a long complex topic. As to imperfs that have perfs, if that's what you're referring to, most of these are the results of early perforation experiments or unofficial perforation machines - although many imperf designs were later issued perforated, so without knowing the stamp in question it's difficult to answer.

Probably hasn't really answered your question, but hope it's of some help.

Balf

You have both given me some valuable information that is new to me. My questions have been answered, at least in part. There may be more to be said on the topic but I am grateful for your knowledge on the topic. Thanks scb and Balf.

As to my question about perfs where none should be, I'll post what I have. The bottom edge perforations appear to have been done by a printer who mistakenly perforated a press sheet and then attempted to correct the mistake by trimming the mini S/S but couldn't, or didn't, fully succeed. So far, 7 copies were identified out of 5,000 total printed. All S/S are distributed through the Philatelic office at the Central Post Office.

From the post by Balf, this stamp may be an "O" in the "EFO" classification.


Marty

Balf,

That was as good an explanation as I've ever heard on a highly debated topic!

Does anyone remember the brouhaha about the Dag Hammarskjold stamp? Scott's 1203 and 1204.






The "error" caused so much ruckus they made 40 million more and Scott's gave it its own number!

**An error is a major mistake in the production of a stamp. Production errors include imperforate or imperforate-between varieties, missing or incorrect colors, and inversion or doubling of part of the design or overprint.

**taken from the August 31, 2009 Linn's Stamp News.


Butch

On the Dag issue, the error got passed normal quality controls, then intentionally made more of the errors to devalue the error among speculators.
That's why it is listed, but really not anymore valuable then the correct version.

Mike

And that intentional manufacturing of errors was stopped by H.E. Harris, who went to court to prevent the same thing happening to the Canal Zone Bridge issue that was released without the Bridge.

Balf,
That was a great explanation. Way to go!

The only thing I would change would be the use of un-offical perferation machines. They maybe better stated as private vending machines.
The PO was not able or interested to fund vending machines everywhere, the private venders were. Since imperferated coils were designed for vending machine use and sold to those venders for distrubution there was at least an implied offical use of the stamps.

Mike