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!

Beautiful Example Of Scott 205c.

Previous Page
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 28 / Views: 1,425Next Topic
Page: of 2
Valued Member
United States
183 Posts
Posted 05/07/2021   6:04 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Tipzi to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Rodcam, I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just pointing out the fallacy of discovering a #205C because of traits that one would think, by reading Scott, are exclusive to #205C that really aren't. There may be as many or more #205's that look like #205C than there are actual #205C's. So, as has been stated, washing the gum off a gray-brown #205 won't make it a #205C even if t has a crisp impression.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
6381 Posts
Posted 05/07/2021   6:39 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
All good Tipzi. So how in the heck does the PF certify a 205c.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
183 Posts
Posted 05/07/2021   6:56 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Tipzi to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I think an expert checks a patient against records of known copies, and if it's not been certified as a 205C already nor can be found in any significant sale/auction of the last century, it probably won't get a certificate as a #205C. That's probably true of any Banknote Special Printing other than those on soft paper that were not regularly issued thus.

I recently got a PFC for a newly-discovered Banknote Special Printing, but only because I demonstrated that a known Special Printing in their data base was once attached to mine.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Tipzi - 05/07/2021 6:57 pm
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
6381 Posts
Posted 05/07/2021   7:36 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
So a 205c is considered a 205c, with the subsequent associated high value, because it was previously deemed to be such, right or wrong.

That really does not answer the question of how the PF determines a stamp to be a 205c. If there is no technical aspect and it is solely based upon provenance what is the point.

I would really love to know how the legacy 205c's were determined to be the real deal.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
183 Posts
Posted 05/07/2021   8:02 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Tipzi to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
That's my question as well.

I did want to add, in case I wasn't clear earlier, I disagree with Mooz's conclusion that the accepted #205C was issued before April 10, 1882. When he formed his hypothesis he had not seen the stamp Luff referenced and could not know the Reddish Brown stamp that was transacted on February 10, 1882, had the diagonal shading lines of the vignette printed so prominently. Had the stamps delivered to the Third Assistant PMG in February been in different shades as suggested by Mooz (reddish brown, gray brown, and perhaps other undiscovered shades), the tiny printing could not have produced the plate wear evident between the Reddish Brown stamp I pictured and the #205C Special Printing, known for having the diagonal vignette lines mostly missing. So all the stamps printed for February 1882 delivery would have the same detailed print as the Reddish Brown specimen shown here. That's why I think the order for 10,000 stamps, paid for in February and March, was not delivered until the regular issue was printed, after the plates were worn somewhat.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Tipzi - 05/07/2021 8:06 pm
Valued Member
United States
183 Posts
Posted 05/07/2021   8:22 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Tipzi to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Now, as far as a technical aspect to the #205C that distinguished it from the regular issue, I firmly believe there is one. I have stated many times that I think the evidence is clear that the Special Printing was perforated with a stroke perforator, not by a rotary perforator like most other 19th century US stamps.




I borrowed part of an image from another Siegel lot that demonstrates how round the perforation holes are on the #205C. You don't see the elongated holes from a rotary perforator, nor the compression ridges, nor the roughness in the trailing part of the hole as you'd see on a rotary perforation. In fact, if I saw holes like these on a W-F coil I'd assume they were fake. #205C holes are cleaner, rounder and appear smaller than those on the regular issue.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
6381 Posts
Posted 05/07/2021   8:51 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
And perhaps you are right Tipzi. Topics such as this always bring me back to how helpful, educational and generally informative it would be for the expertizing bodies to embrace transparency and thoroughly report how exactly they arrived at a conclusion for any given patient. Cutting a new cert because the patient was already certified as "x" hardly seems like a genuine effort if that indeed happens.

Question: What are the odds that an expertizing body would change course on a history of opinions upon which hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent if new information/technology/consensus showed that it was all wrong?

Multiple choice answers are:

Slim to None
Not a Chance
Likely Not
In a Heartbeat
Happily (with or without a political and nonsensical explanation that leaves you more confused than ever)
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
79 Posts
Posted 05/08/2021   7:07 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add bankruptcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:


Question: What are the odds that an expertizing body would change course on a history of opinions upon which hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent if new information/technology/consensus showed that it was all wrong?



Though I agree that the expertizing bodies will fight tooth and nail, weep, wail, and gnash teeth before changing course, they have at least twice. Once regarding China Clay paper and again on US Scott 424e. In both cases, the evidence was overwhelming and they would look like complete fools for not changing course.

Will they with 205c? Doubtful.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
6381 Posts
Posted 05/08/2021   8:16 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Another stamp that may not really exist is US 476A, the 30 cent perf 10 unwatermarked orange red Franklin. I wanted to acquire one through Rupp and Christopher told me that he would not feel right doing so because the existence of the stamp was not all that carved in stone. There is a backstory there to be told.

One take on the story from Ken Lawrence in Linn's:

https://www.linns.com/news/us-stamp...nge-fra.html

















Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by rogdcam - 05/08/2021 8:19 pm
Valued Member
79 Posts
Posted 05/08/2021   8:55 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add bankruptcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hmmm. If PSE found the watermark, then should they know the letter it formed? Is a squiggly line not forming a known figure that can only be seen with VSP truly a watermark?

We'll never know if the 30c was ever printed thusly even if there was enough time for the transition to allow for it. Certainly an interesting story, but not worth risking thousands of dollars on them never reversing their decisions.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
6381 Posts
Posted 05/09/2021   5:28 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I have wondered how 476A became and is still a major Scott number. It also has a space in the Scott National.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
331 Posts
Posted 05/09/2021   5:50 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Germania to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Here is a brief updated on Scott 476A, from Linns September 16, 2019.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
6381 Posts
Posted 05/09/2021   6:25 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks Germania. Interesting. I am thankful that Christopher talked me out of my quest.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous TopicReplies: 28 / Views: 1,425Next Topic  
Previous Page
 
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 0.25 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05