One Cent Franklin 63 Opinions

I was going through some of my franklins and wanted some opinions on this piece. The color is extremely deep with solid detail.
I lined it up with other #63s/#86s, as well as #134/#156, and the hue in the deepest parts appear to be more in line with that of the latter. Could this be one worthy to certify?
Thanks for the responses.

Your money, your lesson.

Oh, and certify as what?

Stephen - If you're thinking about Special Printings you can save your cert money for more literature. And this issue is full of different color/shade/hue varieties. In fact collecting them all is a passion of some. Most don't fetch a premium though.

Rogdcam - Sorry I didn't specify. I'm asking about the 63a and 63b which do carry a premium. I tried using different hues in the photos above the best I could to aid any opinions.

The hues of Scott 134 - 156 range from ultramarine to bright ultramarine, and bear a pretty accurate representations of what a 63a would look like, so I included them in the comparison. (This is different from Scott 182 - 206 which range from dull ultramarine to gray blue.)

Again, apologies for not being more specific.

Stallzer - Yes, I don't mind spending money on a learning experience. It's fun actually! I just thought it was okay to post about it here first.

The back of my piece shows a rough texture, which would imply a soft porous paper I believe? Whereas the "reprints" or Special Printings were done on hard paper, and were cut with scissors.. So that would be a great starting point when judging something like that I suppose.

Don't think it has a chance of being a 63b

Scott 63, Blue


Scott 63a, Ultramarine


Scott 63b, Dark Blue

Eyeonwall - Yes I agree. It's not dark/gray enough

Rogdcam - Very nice, clear pictures. I guess you're implying that if my stamp looks nothing like the one you show, it must not be so?
That's easier to suggest when claiming something to be "dark" or "light", because it is based on a value scale.
However, when you have a color change, that "color" can have a wide variety of hues as well.
The color of Lapis Luzi (ultramarine) is particularly difficult to recreate, but it doesn't have only one hue.

The one you show here is a dark ultramarine. It's the same color, but is lower on the grayscale.

Here are more examples of ultramarine with varying hues:







Bright ultramarine is especially vibrant. This is why I included comparison photos of the ultramarine color, which can have a multitude of depth.

Stephen - I showed the three stamps to demonstrate how difficult it is, aside from the 63b dark blue, to tell the difference without using a VSC 6000 or similar. More importantly, we are capturing stamp images on different devices and posting them where they can be seen on different monitors/devices. And the images were scanned in by an auction firm perhaps on different scanners. Don talks about this a lot and more eloquently but the point is that assigning definitive colors like this is virtually impossible given all of the variables involved. Not to mention the stamps themselves and how they have been stored and aged.

Thanks for the clarification! And yes I totally agree. I figured if I loaded the pic with comparisons it would be easier to get opinions. I understand that a definitive answer wouldn't be coming from the internet in this case.

This makes me think of something... I was a painter in my father's company for 12 years, and became well-acquainted with a machine that Sherwin Williams uses which scans any surface material and gives a near perfect color analysis. It then breaks down how the color can be recreated in the shop.
The color as it is, scanned in real time, can be captured, labeled, and sent in a file.
This routes any mistrust that comes from the tech problem you mentioned.
Any customer can walk in and have this done.
If you seek certification only for the color, wouldn't it be sufficient to use this machine, or the one you mentioned just for that purpose? Would definitely be a time/money saver, and actually a lot safer than putting it in the mail.

The above is incorrect. The color analysis is totally dependent upon the last time the light source in the device. Obviously any light source used deteriorates over time with used, the color detected when the device light source is brand new will give a different result than a reading when it has been in use for a while. This is why you can get one result at one location, go to a different town and in another store get a different result (using the same model color analyzer).

Additionally, did your store have a large amount of returned paint in the back? I have never seen a paint store that did not have a VERY large amount of returned paint. Why? The customers walk in with color samples, the device 'matched it', and when the customer put it on their wall it was not what they expected. Doh, their wall has different ambient lighting. What the device does is get it 'close' instead of a customer standing their trying to describe what they want. Color is 100% the result of the ambient lighting (since what we perceive as color is actually light bouncing off its surface).

This topic has previously been covered multiple times in this community and in other places online.

Lastly, Siegel is a great company but their images (especially the older ones) are horrible for color analysis. Capturing their images on your device, then saving it, and then trying to compare the capture images is even farther removed from any kind of accuracy.

The original question has been answered, let's not make this thread run on for page after page. So let's move on.
Don

Thank you for the response, Don! Yes, the above is mostly correct but not for the reason we're talking about.
What you're describing is a "human" error rather than a "tech" error. When it's done properly you get accurate results.
With all the steps, lighting (as you correctly stated), and paint codes involved, it is easy for an employee to mess up the matching process.

There are rarer times still when the machine isn't up-to-par, but is recalibrated immediately when the original surface material doesn't match. This is confirmed simply by looking at it, and is not so often that we'd have to check all paint cans 3x a day before leaving the store. That would be absurd.

In fact, the color HAS to match when you go back to a customer after 3+ years for touchups, otherwise you'd have to repaint the entire surface, or the wall would be splotchy. The whole practice of touchups wouldn't exist if the machine couldn't do it, and touchups are a consistently reoccurring part of the business.

To your point though there were some times that we had to go back and redo the process mostly due to human error, in which the store compensates us for the paint (and not the time wasted in doing so, unfortunately). But 95% of the time the fresh paint blended perfectly with the old surface color when dried. This was done 1000+ times a year.

But I digress.
Hope your house is blessed with uniformity and free from splotches!

Yes, color is 100% subjective.

I think your opinion of the 'tech' is incorrect. You ignored my point, the 'tech' fails because the lighting it uses ages with use. I learned this working with spectrophotometers (color matching device) in textile dyeing mills. I also have color matching experience in a manufacturing environment with full ISO compliance.

Let me say this once again... spectrophotometers do NOT produce consistent results because the lighting source they use changes over time. If you take a sample with the device using a 2 year old lighting source (bulb, LEDs, etc.) then replace that lighting source with new bulb/LEDs, the same sample will read differently. They have to be constantly calibrated and have the lighting sources replaced often to get close to a 90% accuracy rate.

Again, we have had this discussion before using spectrophotometers. At best they are about 90% accurate IF the company using them keep them keeps them calibrated and the lighting sources fresh. Go down to your paint store and ask to see the calibration record for their machine. Paint stores are not putting in laboratory quality spectrophotometers. It helps them come fairly close to a sample and is better than burning time listening to a customer try describe a color and then go through the 'mix some paint and see if the customer likes it' routine.
While there, ask them to see the returned paint they sitting on.

Again, let's move on. You have gotten an answer to your original question.
Don