A 267c Auction Sale And The Ambiguity Of Certificates Dependent Upon Color/Shade For ID

I was perusing today's Kelleher auction results and came upon this 267c (Lot 379) with a 2017 PSAG certificate that was sold for $5400 with BP:



https://stampauctionnetwork.com/V/V73319.cfm

The stamps value is based upon its color and it got me to researching.

I did a PF search and found that only three examples have been submitted to the PF and all three received negative certificates stating that the stamps are actually 267's.

This one piqued my interest (picture from certificate database):

http://pfsearch.org/pfsearch/pf_grd...lledfrom=lkp



I decided to search Siegel's Power Search to see if they have sold any 267c's and low and behold I find the stamp from the PF database was sold twice by Siegel in the past, once in 2011 for $3900 and once in 2013 for $3900. The stamp had a 2008 PSE certificate (Graded 80) for both sales.

https://siegelauctions.com/lot_grd....nwwin=q5x74m

Now I am not casting aspersions upon any of the folks involved in certifying and selling these stamps but it raises serious issues once again about colors and shades in philately and the dangers of throwing money at same.

I wonder what the odds are that the Kelleher stamp would get a PF cert?

As has been discussed here before it is difficult to make color judgements based on a scan. However, based on the scans on the PF website I would say that only one of those three stamps has a good chance of being a Scott 267c. The most recent one, PF 562733, is probably not, just a nice example (shade wise) of a Scott 267. The middle one, PFC 538757, is definitely not, and the oldest one, PFC 472843, looks like it could possibly be in the family. Without seeing in person it is difficult to say yes or no. It would be interesting to know what the Scott listing is based on and could it be the result of a misidentification of a Scott 279Bc? The approximate EKU for both Scott 267c and 279Bc is March 1899. Perhaps print records would show whether the Type III plates were still being used in March 1899.

The Kelleher stamp has PFC 472843 as a Scott 267

According to the Siegel sale, the Scott listing came about in 1999.

I wonder if there are some philatelic journal articles from around that time, explaining this, or, possibly in the Scott catalog itself?

The images in this thread don't look like the correct color, but as mentioned this is perhaps a color management problem.

As far as I know the rose carmine should not show the bright orange under UV light like many other 2c colors, and there should not be the pink back as with the pink colors.

I would follow this note in Scott prior to #248. The serialized article is extensive.

"The Kelleher stamp has PFC 472843 as a Scott 267"


But it was just sold as a 267c.

The Kelleher stamp that was sold is the plate single; the part imprint single is the one with the PFC stating it's a 267.

It's a variation on the the theme of "buy fine and sell very fine"

I bid on that one after my last "267c" did not get a favorable PF cert. I think this is one color variety I will skip.

Stamperix

At this time I do not know whether to thank you or just throw all my stamps in an incinerator and never look back. I just got a UV light and found orange over almost everything I thought was rose carmine that I had searched and searched again for rose carmine in 267 and 279B except two Canadian stamps I was using with an SG color key, as well as the stamp smarter color extractor, to sort all of those colors and I am losing it man. Thousands.

Good things though. That light works. Those Canadian stamps do not show any orange, they are rose carmine.

I am going to take a breather from the colors and search through them all again and pull the ones that have no orange. Maybe it will go better this time with the light. I bet they will all have pink on the back too... If I find any at all I will post them but not now. Now I have to stop looking at colors for a while.

Here are some scans that I got searching through some of my stamps with the uv light.

I found some of the EDU's of this series (2c and other denominations) I became fascinated with the types and colors/shades of the 2c (A88). I had a long personal correspondence through the mail with Kenneth Diehl. I've looked at thousands of these for years and only have one that I think is a 279Bc. BTW there is only one PSE MNH certified example of 279Bd (orange red), which is not an especially valuable stamp: I submitted that years ago. I still have some stamps from that strip. The the main thing I got from Ken, in differentiating between the shades and colors is that there can be borderline colors...so it ends up being a judgement call (just like a cert is an opinion).

Hi 279B, welcome.
Color is an expression of light. Stamps absorb/reflect specific wavelengths of visible light and this results in a stamp appearing a certain color to the human eye. Putting the obvious subjective nature of human eyes/brains; understanding the ambient light source in any color/hue discussion is paramount. If we were standing in a room with no light source, the stamp color would be black. Most homes and home owner prefer warmer ambient lighting (<4000 on the Kelvin Color Temperature Scale) which will make a stamp look quite different than looking at it under a much cooler (>6000 on the Kelvin Color Temperature Scale) light source.

It is great that you are have worked towards a significant reference collection and a good 'color eye'; what is your ambient lighting parameters?
Don

Hi 279Bguy --

Here is a photo that I posted in another thread back in August 2020 where the discussion involved color varieties of another issue (i.e., the 1851 3-cent imperf).



FYI -- I stumbled upon this photo in the Library of Congress archives when doing some research on the Bureau of Engraving and Printing -- and it pretty much says it all when it comes to understanding why there are so many color varieties on certain United Sates postage stamps of that era.

Those guys probably re-filled the press ink well from those buckets as the printing process was underway and the press well was starting to get low -- mixing and measurement was probably by "eye" -- with a slip here and a spill there -- well you get the picture.

Anyway -- just for fun -- thought you might enjoy seeing this pic.

Regards // ioagoa

edit was for grammar fix only

ioagoa; Cool photo, thanks for posting it.

279Bguy: Great color study! It's amazing how many subtle color variations some issues have.

Good to know quality control was not an issue when the picture "Ioagoa" posted was taken. I noticed the bucket was nice and clean.
Interesting comments by all. And I thank you, all.