Australia 1929 Centenary Of Western Australia Re-Entry

Very nice. Now I have to find one for my collection.

While you're looking Partime here's the other one I was referring to.

Plate 10 Number 4.





It's not listed in ACSC,as I mentioned. However, it exists, as you can see.

They occasionally come up at club auctions and the like. Sometimes through dealers. Other times you just get lucky when looking through old collections.

Ah, subtle, yet visible. Thanks for posting.

Re the Plate 10 No 4 retouch. Very subtle Partime. But visible, as you say.

While it's not listed in the ACSC, I note that Rod222 posted an extract from Billig's Philatelic Handbook, Volume 4, 1944 on 02/22/2021 at 02:36 am, above, in which it was listed.

That got me looking. I eventually found an example, I'm pleased to say.

Rod222 posted on 04/08/2022 at 09:12 am above, an extract from the ACSC 1980 Fortieth Edition, Page 159.

In the footnote, the extract recorded: "The imprint and some plate numbers are known perforated OS, but are very scarce in this condition. Beware of fakes".

Subsequently, in the ACSC of 2007, that reference appears as footnote 2: "Punctured OS stamps were distributed to Federal Members of Parliament, and cancelled-to-order stamps were included in collectors' sets. Quantity punctured: 24,000 stamps. Price for varieties punctured OS, x5 normal. All plate numbers exist punctured OS, and also the imprint, but these are very scarce and dangerous fakes exist. (Price, $250 each)".

While I don't yet have an imprint OS, I do have a plate OS (Plate 10):



I don't think it's a fake. However, alternative opinions would be welcome.

Nice. If it is a fake, it is a very dangerous one for sure. This piqued me to scan my only copy of the punctured OS variety, CTO. Absolutely miserable back with thin visible from front. However, I noticed that it has almost the same ductor blade / hairline fault that I posted earlier in this thread. I guess there are quite a few of them out there.

Partime says:

This piqued me to scan my only copy of the punctured OS variety, CTO. Absolutely miserable back with thin visible from front. However, I noticed that it has almost the same ductor blade / hairline fault that I posted earlier in this thread. I guess there are quite a few of them out there.

That got me looking:



That's from Plate 2. It's No 73. Its mate at No 74 also has the line, as has No 75. However, No 75 is very, very faint.



I'll post a block of 8 shortly so that you can see the positions relative to the Imprint.

Here's a close up of Plate 2, No 74 with the full stamp below it:

And, finally, here's a marked up block of eight from Plate 2 with the Imprint, showing the ductor blade / line on Nos. 74 and 75 (No 73 that I posted above was from a block of 4 that didn't show the Imprint):

The original stamp posted is a great item (what we would usually call a double transfer). I assume at this point it is both difficult to find and relatively expensive to obtain.

Great block of 8, and thanks for searching to confirm the existence of those horizontal lines.


Probably still quite a few out there. Mine was purchased via eBay only last year for less than US$10. Happy hunting.

Well, Partime, it was worth the search. I learnt something along the way.

Thanks for pointing out the flaw. I'd have missed it otherwise.

I've been through all of my other blocks for this issue and have not seen the flaw on any other than Plate 2. And, then only on Nos 73, 74 and 75. I don't possess a Plate 2 block that shows Nos 70, 71 and 72 in that bottom row so can't confirm whether the flaw exists on those as well.

Nevertheless, I think it's fair to conclude it's a Plate2 flaw, restricted to the bottom row of the Plate - possibly to the early Nos up to No 75 only.

Here's my favourite cancel - first day of issue:

Nice, clear cancellations. Beautiful. Not too many opportunities here in the US for Australian Plate Blocks, but I'll keep looking. And if I find anything out of the ordinary, you'll know where I will post it.

Sometimes, you tend to look too far and start seeing things. Here is another block of 4 where there is ever-so-subtle signs of a re-entry. I'm going to say No, but just wanted to post it for reference.

Interesting Partime.

I've been through my collection again and have not found an identical flaw. However, some were very close, which leads me to conclude that there are many "fly spot" type variations on this issue - like there are on so many others, especially on the KGV range.

I'm not aware of any plating study that has been undertaken on this issue. I'd be surprised if many of the flaws were not constant. As such, they would lend themselves to plating many of the stamps on the 12 plates produced.

I'll check with a few people who are better informed than I am, and see if they can throw some light on any plating work that's been done in the past.