Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read
Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

Color Changeling Article

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 12 / Views: 1,031Next Topic  
Moderator
Learn More...
9481 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   09:35 am  Show Profile Check 51studebaker's eBay Listings Bookmark this topic Add 51studebaker to your friends list Get a Link to this Message

To help folks better understand 'color changelings' there is now an article which contains details and a gallery of stamp examples. This article will be helpful to point to when folks post a question about a color changeling.
http://www.stampsmarter.com/Learnin...gelings.html

Don
Send note to Staff

Pillar Of The Community
United States
673 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   09:55 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add oldtriguy1960 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Another helpful addition to Stampsmarter!
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
673 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   10:09 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ClassicPhilatelist to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Good examples (hey, my RO68b is in there...) But I would comment that changelings are different from alterations. There's a lot of discussion about purposeful exposure to chemicals in an attempt to deceive others. And while orange frequently changes to brown, it is the presence of sulfur that accelerates this, so that could be naturally occurring or induced (though that is so well known, I don't think it would fool anyone into another "color", aside from the novice. But if you note the 213 example, the blue in that case is direct result of specific chemical alteration that doesn't "naturally occur".

Like this 147



Likely they were trying to remove the pen cancel, which is lighter, but still visible, so they attempt to further cover it with a fake cancel. Ugly all in all, my guess in this case is, someone was "practicing" on a cheap stamp before trying on something more expensive.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Moderator
Learn More...
9481 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   10:28 am  Show Profile Check 51studebaker's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add 51studebaker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Scott,
Agreed, chemical alterations are a subset of color changelings. This is mentioned in the article,

Quote:
...This change may have been accidental or even an intentional attempt to deceive...In other cases, unscrupulous people may have treated the stamp with certain chemicals to fool collectors and the marketplace...


Don
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
673 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   11:31 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ClassicPhilatelist to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Yes, I read that... but I don't fully agree. Changlings occurs naturally (unintended impact of time on a stamp). Alterations are something else. Just like the difference between a Fake and a Counterfeit.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Moderator
Learn More...
9481 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   12:00 pm  Show Profile Check 51studebaker's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add 51studebaker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Scott,
You are making a differentiation that all the sources I have do not agree with. Here are only a few...

Linns definition
Changeling: A stamp whose color has been changed-intentionally or unintentionally-by contact with a chemical or exposure to light.

PF definition
Color Changeling - A stamp on which the color has been dramatically changed from its issued color either chemically or naturally, e.g. a green stamp which has been changed to blue.

Wikipedia definition
Some dramatic color variations occur as a result of chemical action; such stamps are called color changelings. Examples include sulfuretting (often misnamed "oxidation"), a reaction involving lead that may turn a blue or green stamp to black, and the effects of salt water, famously seen in stamps of New South Wales recovered from the wreck of the Colombo. Forgers have also used chemicals to try to produce seeming rarities, although by now experts know how to identify these attempts.

Hobbizine definition
To complicate matters further the colors of stamp inks have been known to change over the years. Fading of colors, especially if the stamps have been left sitting in sunlight, can be extreme. Purples and violets can easily fade to gray. Sometimes chemical changes in the stamp will dramatically alter the color. These stamps are called "changelings." Yellow and orange inks are very prone to oxidation and will change to brown.

Mekeel's Weekly (1919) article


Don
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
673 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   12:51 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ClassicPhilatelist to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Don,
When we create a cert, if the color has been chemically altered with the intention of presenting a stamp that is not (i.e. a fake), we do NOT note it as a color changeling. It is noted as a fake. Take this attached example:




This is a 78b that has been chemically altered in an attempt to pass of as a 70b (steel blue).
We don't call this a changeling we call it chemically altered 78b fake of 70b.

Whereas this C1 we describe as a color changeling.


Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by ClassicPhilatelist - 01/19/2019 12:53 pm
Moderator
Learn More...
9481 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   1:20 pm  Show Profile Check 51studebaker's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add 51studebaker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Scott,
Yet PF defines a color changeling as either?
Don
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1167 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   3:51 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Hal to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Don,

GREAT article from MEEKELS from 100 years ago! Somethings are timeless.

Hal
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
673 Posts
Posted 01/19/2019   11:12 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ClassicPhilatelist to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
So does that make it accurate, or does that leave it rooted in a definition that is incomplete, vague and misleading?
Some of the issues facing the decline in this hobby are people turned off by the unequal application of terminology, unnecessary complexity, and knowledge hording.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Moderator
Learn More...
9481 Posts
Posted 01/20/2019   04:35 am  Show Profile Check 51studebaker's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add 51studebaker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Scott,
I agree that everyone should be on same page. I am using the commonly accepted definition of the term and I have not been able to find a reference that makes the distinction as in your post. Being on the same page, for me, means using the term the same way as the majority of philatelic organizations and companies currently do.

I am also unsure that what you are suggesting reduces confusion. How are the terms 'natural' or 'alteration' defined? Which definitions do we use for these terms?

Water is a chemical, so is a hobbyist who soaks a stamp off the paper now altering stamps because a stamp becomes slightly lighter in color from the chemicals in tap water? Or is water incorrectly assumed to be 'natural'? (If we are going to be technically accurate than there is no doubt that water is a chemical.)

Say hobbyist #1 displays a stamp in a picture frame and it naturally lightens, hobbyist #2 intentionally uses UV light to lighten a stamp for deception. Looking at the stamps, how is a differentiation made between the 'natural' lightened stamp and the 'artificial' lightened stamp?

A person could argue that there are 'alterations' that are not currently called out certs. We can alter a C1 using hydrogen peroxide outgassing to remove the sulphurization and the cert would not call this out as an 'altered' stamp. When we alter a stamp by adding graphite on the back of a stamp it will not be called out as 'altered' on a cert. If I send a cover through the mail and add a cachet the day that I get the cover back, the cover would not get a cert as 'altered'.

I do not understand how adding in this distinction (which drives the need for further definitions of terms like 'natural' and 'altered') makes our hobby less vague and misleading; it seems to stir the pot and make the water more muddy. But more importantly, it drives home the point that our hobby has no standardization of ANY philatelic terminology.

There are many significant areas where our hobby needs nomenclature standardization. For example, color naming nomenclature. What one catalog publisher calls 'red' another calls 'scarlet'. Or how about all the certifying organization standardizing on grading nomenclature and designations? Even the most commonly used terms like 'Mint' are not standardized across our hobby.

Stamp Smarter has its own illustrated Glossary as does the APS site, the Amos/Linn's site, even this forum has a glossary. (It is interesting to compare them.) In the hard copy world, there is a long history of a very large number of publications which defined terms. Hell, there is one 4 volume set of books with the sole purpose of defining philatelic terms. But over 150+ years none of these efforts has ever succeeded in becoming the hobby standard.

l felt strongly enough about the need to reduce confusion on our hobby's nomenclature that about 5 years ago I promoted a single, open source, online philatelic term database. I volunteered to develop the SQL database, write the interface code, and donate it all to whatever philatelic organization would like to host and administer the effort. A single reference point of philatelic term definitions that any website or hard copy publishers could freely access and use; everyone on the same page. It also supported multiple languages which addressed another important need in our hobby; a language cross reference of philatelic terms. When presented to many of the major philatelic organizations I got no interest in the project. Here was someone who would eliminate all the development costs and there still was no one was interested in nomenclature standardization in this hobby. I also have offered a code snippet(single line of code) to any web site for the 'philatelic word of the day' database. This changes each time a visitor view a page and introduces them to a new philatelic term. Know how many other website took me up on the offer? Zero.

So you will have to excuse my stubborn position on this topic; Stamp Smarter will continue to use the most widely accepted use of philatelic terms like 'changeling'. If anyone can get the other major players in the hobby to change their definition of 'changeling', then I will certainly update Stamp Smarter. If anyone can get the major players to standardizing on terminology, then they are a better man than me.
Don
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
515 Posts
Posted 01/20/2019   09:42 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Newby Stamper to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Another nice addition to your site Don.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
559 Posts
Posted 01/21/2019   12:05 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Ciletaliph to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Very educational Don. Nicely laid out.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
  Previous TopicReplies: 12 / Views: 1,031Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.


Go to Top of Page
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2021 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2021 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.69 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05