US 1936 Ce2 - Stamps Contain Two Blue Circles Around Eagles

Good Evening All,

So, I've been blessed by finding more stamps that are similar in nature lately so I have to post them. What do you think caused this blue circle around the eagles on the US 1936 CE2 stamps? (I'll let someone else do the honors this time)

The inner circles are faint - but you can JUST BARELY make them out if you try.

Stay on topic please. Post about these stamps only.

Thanks!

4 STAMPS


4 STAMPS - FOCUS ON TOP RIGHT STAMP


2 STAMPS


2 STAMPS - FOCUS ON RIGHT STAMP

Interesting circle. I don't have any to compare against. Is that what you are trying to show us?

I do not have many of the CE2, but just checked my used and unused totalling 8 in number and do not see any trace of the circular ring.

I did not remember any mention of this ring in Sloat's book on The Airmail Special Delivery Stamps .. (1977), and just now looked back into it at the logical places where this might come up and find nothing. Perhaps not surprising as he was focused on other matters.

Folks might be interested to know that the Great Seal on the CE2 is different from that on the CE1. Smaller and with seven horizontal bars in the shield rather than five as on the shield on the CE1. The BEP went back and pulled out a different die of the Great Shield that had been cut in 1905. (Sloat, p. 15)

The ring you show is interesting as it is not centered on the Great Seal (the eagle with shield, etc.) - the ring is off to the left as we observe it. But it looks like a layout arc.

In the United States Specialist June 1970 (v. 41 # 6), p. 243 there are reports of plate varieties for the CE2, including both frame and vignette issues including scratches and layout arcs, but they do not seem to correspond to this one. In the Specialist of February 1979 (v. 50 # 2) , p. 66 there is another report of plate varieties which adds some, including a layout dot, in blue, under the D of Delivery. I wonder if this corresponds to the dot on the arc which I think I see on one of your examples.

Such layout lines and dot can wear off the plate during use thus becoming more faint or being eliminated all together. Similar if a plate is repolished sometime during use. At times efforts are main to eliminate such items.

See: http://goscf.com/t/84171 for one such case.

Hopefull these pictures help, sounded like people couldn't see the blue circles around the eagles. I actually like using my phone on Stamp Community. Zooming in is much easier for me on my phone. Just a suggestion.

Would you mind showing a scan (or photo) of the back of the two stamps which exhibit the ring.

Happy Mother's Day Weekend :) Yes, I will do just that. Busy weekend though. I am doing all this from my phone... which is now actually on par with my computer - which is scary.





If you stare long enough at anything - you'll see double :p

I see them now. I don't think they mean much, and they are not circles but rather are arced lines without a constant trajectory to my eye. Doubtful that they have anything to do with layout.

Here are scans of the back of the stamps I have listed here.

FOUR - BACK


TWO - BACK

In photoshop, I overlaid a circle over the blue line. Verdict: it's a circle (semicircle).

It does seem odd that the circle is off-center with the emblem. But regardless, I don't see how these stamps qualify as EFOs.

I see two blue semicircles in the second image. The first one is obvious. The black dashed-line circle I added to the image matches the diameter of that semicircle.

I then copied and pasted that same circle indicator twice. The yellow version aligns with the fainter blue semicircle.

The green version is perfectly centered around the emblem. If a circle of that size was lightly engraved on the emblem die as a guide, the execution of the emblem itself both fell short and extended a bit beyond that guide here and there. I think that's inconsequential.

I can't imagine a reason for circular lines such as these to have been added to the plate itself. As for the possibility that those lines were present on the emblem die, it would strike me as odd that two attempts were made at outlining the design's perimeter on the die before arriving at the ideal placement for it. But if we assume that these lines were in fact present on the die, I suggest the possibility that they only appear in certain plate positions because a multiple-relief transfer roll was made from the die, and only certain reliefs picked up those otherwise faint lines.

The above are all theories, all fun stuff to ponder.

Thanks for doing that. That is fantastic Photoshop investigative work. Exactly what I would have done if I kept going on these stamps specifically. I'm tempted to investigate even further... and try to determine the VERY FAINT blue traces as well... Will take more time, scanning, patience on my part...

IF you are feeling investigative still - check this post out - it's rough with all the mud slinging - but the stamp is the stamp - I would try to ignore the opinions and just see it for what it is. My terminology was not good that's for sure LOL. Yep, might have screwed that up... wouldn't be the first! I can get a better scan if need be.

http://goscf.com/t/73565

Please, no more discussions of that other topic. We've spent way too much time on that one.

Hi souldjer, I did some analysis on the Togo stamp, but given how muddy the waters are over there I'm going to refrain from participating. Besides, this stamp is of much more interest to me.

Wondering out loud if there might be an image of a certified plate proof of this available online. I don't have time to search for it now, but I'm putting it out there as a possibility.

That aside, I don't think this falls into the EFO category. It's not an error of printing. There's nothing freaky about it, and it's not really an oddity.

For all I know (meaning I have no prior familiarity with this stamp other than I admired it as a young stamp collector, and again now that you've posted these closeups), you may have discovered something that no one else noted previously. This happens, and here I speak from having had several such experiences. Or, it could be absolutely nothing of any real consequence. That's happened to me too after an initial burst of enthusiasm.

If you don't mind my offering some advice as a published author of several plating studies, if you really want to try and establish this as a plate variety, do the required due diligence. If you can show beyond a doubt that these markings only occur in certain plate positions, or only on specific plates, (etc. etc. etc.) then you'd have the makings of a new discovery and fodder for an article. After sufficient peer review, publication can establish the find. I can tell you that doing this kind of research in earnest takes months, sometimes years.

[edited for clarification, blah blah blah]

essay proof,
There is a proof of the vignette plate 21501 which is illustrated in Sloat's book, p. 17. (You perhaps knew that).
Sloat credits the Smithsonian. But the Nat'l Postal Museum doesn't show one online at this time.
They do have a nice pane signed by Farley, but it doesn't seem to show the circles.

For Souldjer - if you do not yet have a copy of Sloat, he indicates there were eight blue vignette plates used, including 21501 (p.61).
If the Postal Museum has one, maybe they have more and someday you could run this puzzle down, or collaborate with someone in the DC area with access.