Print On Both Sides And Reverse Offset

I bought this from some guy in Poland who said a Dr. Kronenberg (?) had looked at it during some exhibition he attended and said it was real, though not sure if that matters.

In any case, is it uncommon to have a reverse offset with a print on both sides?

This is the back shown; the front appears normal.

All I can imagine is that they printed it first on the back side, but was too light to use. So, they flipped it over, and printed again, ensuring that it had proper ink. But, when they did, another sheet stuck to it, leaving a prominent reverse offset image on it. Or, I could be wrong, as I'm newer to stamp collecting, and just making an educated guess.

It's Central Lithuania #37 from 1921 in Scott's.

I haven't sent it to PSE yet, and am trying to figure out if it's worth my effort and cost. Would this have any value, or not since it's from Lithuania (and maybe there's not much interest in that sort of thing there)?

Hi EFOcollector. Your stamp has what we call "set-off" to distinguish it from offset. This may have happened during printing when the still wet sheet was covered with another just printed sheet. You can learn more by searching this forum for "setoff".


Peter

Hi Petert4522,

I thought set-off was when the ink bleeds through the stamp, and this is usually lighter (whereas the off-set is often as dark as the original in this case)?

Or, do I have off-set and set-off confused?

Thanks

Would this be considered set-off too?

Mint light-hinged with image under original gum

I may misunderstand, but thought offset describes where a sheet has a heavy reverse print from the underlying sheet being grabbed at the same time as the above sheet, whereas set-off was when a sheet was merely set on top of another sheet not fully dried (or merely bleeds through).

Definition from labelplanet.uk:

Definition of SET OFF:
"Set-off is commonly seen in the printing of sheets, where printed sheets are usually stacked on top of one another; if the ink on a sheet doesn't dry properly before the next sheet exits the printer, the ink will transfer to the back of the next sheet."

In that case, ifI understand, this would likely be a set-off, whereas the above image would be an offset (and the original one an offset and print on both sides).


I did search this forum using the search button, but didn't come up with much. But, the above definition seems pretty consistent, if I understand correctly (and I may not).

Offset is the technical term for an actual printing technique - should not be confused with set-off.
And yes, your last picture is also a form of set-off, as is the 3 cent stamp on the left side


Peter

The more I search for offset, the more it seems to mean the same thing as setoff; it would appear that the two words are indeed synonymous.

Scott's p. 1339:

"Offset: 1) A printing process that transfers an inked image from plate to a roller. The roller then applies ink to paper. 2) The transfer of part of a stamp design or an overprint from one sheet to the back of another, before the ink has dried (also called set off). Such impressions are in reverse (mirror image). They are different than printed on both sides."

Let me know if this sounds right. There is no corresponding definition there for "setoff."

It is a curiosity and has a bit of value IF you can find the right buyer. It reminds me a great deal of early Russian material that is loaded with similar printing anomalies. They generally are of low catalog value (Zagorsky) but are popular because there are a lot of collectors of Russia.

Yeah, I may be wrong and not fully understand the different uses here, but I'll just say there's just a mirror-image on the backs, with the first example also having a normal image on the back too.

In any case, do you think it might be worth my time to get authenticated?

IMHO the cost of the cert would outweigh the value of the stamp. In the case of Russia "errors" such as these were manufactured for sale to the trade to give collectors another way to spend their money. Lithuania would have been no different.

Thanks, rogdcam.

I guess that applies to any stamp: it's worth as much as anyone is willing to pay. ;-)

I've seen a lot of Russian stamps with a strong mirror-image on the back, too.

What really strikes me as odd is some of the Ukrainian stamps of the old days (presumably after the formation of the USSR), when, similar to Latvia, they were printed on the backs of maps.

In Latvia's case, they were normal, and due to surplus German maps left over and not much other paper.

But, I think Ukraine had it done more as printer's waste (test runs using foreign equipment), though I may be wrong.

They are not more synonymous than rectangle and square. All squares are rectangles but only certain rectangles are squares.

For printing ink the process is the same; Ink goes from A to B and then to C. When A, B & C are all intended destinations, that is normal printing. When B or C, one or both are not intended destinations, then you get set-off, a special type of offset.

EFO - the proper term for mirror images on back is set-off, but many collectors and dealers mistakenly call it offset. It has nothing to do with how strong the image is and nothing to do with ink bleeding thru.

Eye on wall,

Good to know. Thanks for sharing.

This is mor info https://stampsmarter.org/learning/M...methods.html (see setoff section)
Don