Australia Mullett Plate Block - Trim Or Not?

Just picked up this Scott 67b block (ACSC 80za) in Mint, unhinged condition. However, I don't like the look of the bottom area ... too uneven. Should I trim it up a bit, or leave alone? (Can't do too much with the uneven top, unfortunately.)

Maybe something like the left side or the right side of the next image?

Shocking coincidence. I pulled out a Mullett imprint pair to scan this afternoon, for the purpose of asking about trimming the top of the gutter. I scanned the Barbados first and ran out of time.

I think I'd leave this one. Maybe it's 50/50...

Always leave it, IMO. I shudder at the notion that you'd want to trim it. If you don't like it, sell and replace with a "prettier" one.

Personal opinion,
leave well alone, and mount as is.
I like classic paper's option.

You will also lose the "Jubilee Line" format for study.
(I fail to recall the official name for those bars / plate strengtheners)

I agree with Rod222. Don't touch it.

This is a very special block. It shows "Ferns" ( VII/54) and "RA of Australia retouch" (VII/60).

Is it Perf 14 or 13.5?

Black Swan
How do you regard the perforations

Did the Grover perforator "jump" on the last feed for this row?
Something is amiss.........

Actually, having trouble here, in which direction would they have been perforated, do you think?
North to South (I think not) or south to North ?

Correcting myself..."Jubilee Lines"

Australia, in this case are "co-extensive marginal rule lines"
Now I feel better

Used to reduce pressure on the edges of the printing plate, and
so obtain a clearer and better production.

Rod222 asks:

How do you regard the perforations

It's a head-scratcher all right.

Did the perforator "jump"?

The bottom perf aligns with the N/S perf lines. It shows no sign of of any jump carrying through to that E/W perf line.

There is definitely a discrepancy in the space between the N/S perfs at the junction of the upper and lower pair of stamps. If you were to adjust that space back to the standard one then you'd have the bottom pair of stamps being perfed high at the bottom, ie., into the image. It's very close as it is.

There's one perf hole missing as if the sheet slipped or the perf machine had a missing line of teeth. I can't see how the sheet would slip since the teeth would be holding it firm. If the perforator jumped you'd expect to see damage to the sheet.

I wonder if the sheet was put in one full cliche short and they had a second go at the last line and didn't quite get it precise enough.

Leave it as it is.

I was thinking about leveling off the top of the gutter on this one, fully above the perfs, so it would still leave a little "chimney."



It's not objectionable, by any means, and there is no uniformity to the methods and styles of cuts and tears in my accumulation of marginal markings, anyway.

It is perf 14, and definitely shows the ferns and retouched RA join. I've attached the scan of the back, which seems normal, except for a small squidge at the very middle, bottom. This damage could be normal due to the age of this piece, or maybe it helps explain the perf issues noted earlier?

Example "Co-existant Marginal Rule" Line.
Richard Juzwin 2023

Presumably comb perf fed from South to North.