Learning Experience, Damaged?

So as you may know from other threads, I'm just starting out. Loving the history of stamps, although I must admit I never gave them a thought before. I don't need the Scott # as I don't have any catalogs yet, too expensive and the library does not carry multiple copies. ***My question would be this...Since this particular stamp is cut, proper measurements and such would not be able to be exact, only extrapolated - guessed. Would this stamp be considered damaged? Was it cut wrong off the line or is this something that was done when removing from the cover as it is used? Is this something visually that one can tell and if so could you give examples or site. Reading is fundamental and all that. I find it fascinating that quite a few of you can look at a stamp and just blurt out the "make and model" if you will. Example, many threads have "gold diggers" thinking they have the one or two. The stamps look the exact same to me and even after an example is provided of a non-common stamp, they still just look the same. Fascinating! Thanks
Cheryl

Cheryl,

Several thoughts come to mind.

1. Do get a Scott U.S. Specialized catalog. It is not difficult to find one which is 3-10 years old for about $10. The prices change very little and the ID information stays (almost) constant too.

2. Stop trying to measure the design size. Set your ruler aside. NO, really do it! Set it down and leave it there. Pick up your perforation gauge.

3. The majority of the stamps you are posting from the 1923-38 series can be positively ID'd by perforation gauge alone. The stamp posted here is most likely from a booklet pane which are often slightly miscut into the edge of the design during manufacture. The top and side can still be gauged and the stamp ID'd correctly. The fact that 2 sides are straight edge leans very strongly toward a booklet stamp rather than cutting damage by a recipient later. Is it perf 10.5 along the long side? If so, then it is a 634, done, stop.

Yes, some (well, most) collectors consider this trimming to be damage but some consider it evidence of normal manufacturing variability and would seek a pair with the stamp to the left being extra wide.

Cool.Yeah, 10.5 is the best fit since perfs aren't perfect. Got it and thanks again for all the help. Really do appreciate it. I'll do my best to find a few year old catalog. Ruler is down, promise;)

Re: 10.5, Scott rounds-off the perforation rate to the nearest half. The stamps won't be exactly 10 or 10.5 or 11 or 12. So the closest fit is where it will gauge unless you get a specialty gauge. Many collectors use a stamp of known rate to gauge against instead.

Cheryl --
These templates help measure perfs and distinguish rotary, flat plate designs. Got 'em years ago at APS Summer Seminar on W-F's. They work very well for my purposes.

Per John Becker, it is very likely a stamp from a booklet pane. The one listed by Scott as 634d (perf 11x10-1/2):



The extremely square corner is the tip-off as are the very straight cuts. This is hard to do with scissors or even a chopper-type cutter. It could be done with a mount cutter, but there is no reason to do that.

You may wonder why the cut is not perfect. It might be just age. The original paper is rather soft and would get slightly ragged edges when cut, particularly if the blade had tiny imperfections from constant use.

A pile of printed sheets is cut with a guillotine-style blade with the sheets securely clamped down to prevent them from moving around. Clearly, the intent is to not cut off parts of the design, but stuff happens, and these were deemed good enough for release. The situation for booklets of this era is that sheets of stamps with interleaving sheets between and sandwiched between sheets of the eventual cardboard covers are stacked and cut. Since the stamp design can't be seen at this point and may not be perfectly aligned with booklet cover printing or its cutting marks, you get a result like this. More than you maybe wanted to know, but there it is. And this miscutting is/was fairly common.

So, this stamp is not damaged, but it is in a pretty low grade to collectors who (in the US, at least) prefer well-centered stamps.

Knowledge is fundamental. Love the information and history. Thank you.