World Classic Doppelgängers

Both were typographed. Besides, whether "typo" or "litho", either would not make either one an "evil twin". It's actually three characteristics that make either one the doppelgänger. Then, there were some Georgian issues of India that were lithographed, beginning in 1929.

there would be, as someone mentioned, thousands of examples of this from many countries..

I'll be honest,I haven't really looked into much of India's stamps, one or two have caught my eye.
So it was pure guessing.

(The 1y I got into after a odd one caught my attention)

Stampguy, are you speaking only to the India stamp regarding typo and litho not making one an evil twin, as defined in your first post? Do note that, just as one example, there are some Russia stamps where the value and scarcity between litho and typo for the exact same looking stamp is quite significant. So for some issues, it would definitely apply!

No interest in selling , they are the two different die sizes that Billsey talked about .

Going back to the 1yen Tazawa issue, the 1913 issue is called the Tazawa white paper, old die issue, and was issued in Taisho 2. The 1yen was issued October 31, 1913 and is not that common (but not uncommon). It is unwatermarked (as shown previously) and only in line perf 12 (L12). As noted the design size is 19.0 x 22.5 (although I have observed slight variation).

The next series was issued from 1914 to 1925, and is called the Tazawa watermarked granite paper old die issue. The 1 yen was issued on May 20, 1914, displacing the white paper issue. It occurs in L11, L12 (4 color varieties), L12 1/2 (rare), C13 x 13 1/2 (C for Comb perforation- holes in each corner), L13 x 13 1/2, and L13 1/2 (rare). It also occurs and 4 different paper types that vary in composition, thickness and size of the granite strands in the paper (whew! lots of variants to collect, and as complicated at the Washington-Franklins).The size is 19.0 x 22.5 (with minor variation).

The next issue was in 1926-1935 and is called the Tazawa watermarked, granite paper, new die issue (Taisho watermark). This issue is divided into the rotary press and flat plate issues, but the 1 yen was only issued from the rotary press. This only occurs perf C13 x 13 1/2 measuring 18.5 x 22.5, but it has two color varieties and two gum types on mint stamps (gum arabic and dextrin). I have found the color types to be easily distinguished. The gum arabic stamps are rare.

The fourth and final issue was in 1937 and is called the Tazawa Showa watermark, white paper new die issue. This one is also divided into rotary press and flat plate issues, and the 1yen was again issued only on rotary press. This only occurs C13 x 13 1/2 and measures 18.5 x 22.5 with a bright green base color. The watermark is sometimes difficult to see even on a light box, so this is the real doppelganger of the 1912 issue. I have seen many 1937 1yen stamps being passed off as the 1912 stamp, even though the color is strikingly different and the perforations are completely different.

I have found this issue to be a fantastic challenge to collect and all of the denominations have their own unique complexities.

Great information, thank you for sharing!
Going to have to go back over mine.

Stamps101, I looked at that sentence right after I posted it, and thought about that very thing, but I didn't bother to edit it, and for those in general. I should have, and will be more careful in future. At the time, I was thinking of only those of India, specifically; my apologies.

Just from the description in Scott I'd have to say the vignette in the right one is red brown (1911), while the left one is brown (1926). The cancel on the red brown is a 1926 though, so I could easily be misled.

There are a number of differences between these two 1r issues...



Where they were printed, and their perceived monetary values, have nothing to do with designating the one of 1926 the doppelgänger, no. It is simply of the third printing. Generally, second printings are bad enough, again, although not in all cases, but a third?

Then, the second printing of 1911, red-brown & blue-green, might be construed as being a semi-doppelgänger, only, just, "semi-evil".

Billsey, verily I chose that 2nd printing of 1911, with its 1926 franking, and to mix it up a bit.

It's only been a few months since I've been able to distinguish between those shades of brown. Over time, I ended up with, count 'em, three 1926 1r examples, and when I didn't want a single one. The sellers from whom I purchase these are confused as well, right well. But now I can identify all three printings, more or less, by focussing only upon the brown portraitures. I don't pay much attention to the greens however. I no longer have to ask a seller to see the backside, to perhaps catch a glimpse, a hint, of a watermark. Then, that of 1926, the multiple stars, is more difficult to see. Further, most sellers do not illustrate the backsides of stamps within their listings. I suppose it's just too much trouble, particularly with stamps of lower monetary value. I can understand that, but I don't have to like it.

Either one is not a doppelgänger of the other in so far as monetary values are concerned, mint or used.

There are minute differences between each, other than that of the numerical tablets. See if you can spot said differences.

Yes, lots of difference. I notice especially the folds of her robe in lower left and the major shading differences in her right sleeve. Heck, even her nose has a different curve to it. :)

Yes, it's almost like a wholly different design, upon closer inspection. Therefore, neither is a doppelgänger of the other, as a result. The one of 1902 qualifies as a first printing, in its own right. One of the most interesting differences are the small leaves framing the design. The ones of 1900 are divided, whilst the ones of 1902 are whole. I prefer the former myself. Incidentally, the set of 1902 is valued considerably higher than that of 1900, mint or used. However, that should never be the primary reason to prefer the set of 1902 over that of 1900, oh no. I did that myself...