Scissor-Cut Perforations

I noticed over in the First Christmas Stamp thread (https://goscf.com/t/11100) that wt1 posted an image of a stamp that appears to have been cut with scissors.

And that made me wonder -- scissor cuts perfs are generally frowned on by conventional stamp-collecting wisdom.

I wonder why that is? A lot of stamps would have much nicer perfs if they had been cut rather than torn.

I don't know if there's an answer to this question; but I sometimes get like this while I'm having my morning coffee

KirkS

Yech! Ptui! I find scissor cut perfs horrid.
in fact I put them in my duplicate folder
until a nice torn perf finish comes along.

I think it is because almost every time,
a scissor cut is never parallel with the base
of the perforation hole.

As soon as I spot it, it yells, "mutilation"

It's that "instant" coffee brand that's doing it Kirk.

I've wondered the same.

If done carefully, what's the harm?
Say, if a sheet or block of stamps is being cut into singles, wouldn't it be better to have them cut on a paper cutter? That way you can get the cuts parallel to the image, and save time. Not to mention eliminating the possibility of a tear or pulled perfs.

That's exactly where I got hold of the stamp I posted. When the 1st Christmas Topic came up, I went to my stockbook and pulled a used copy. I didn't have a MNH one handy, so I chose this one only becuase it happened to be one with the lightest cancel.

Do I care if it's been scissor cut or not? Not really. As with most 1960's-era US stamps, they command virtually no value, so as long as the stamp itself isn't damaged by a wayward pair of scissors, I usually keep it as a duplicate (and in this case it even became a topic of SCF conversation.)

That's because you probably have not thought it through.

I give you a pane of inverted Jenny's
are you going to cut them with scissors or tear-seperate them?
There is no real option,
cutting stamps apart is abuse.

The U.S. 1875 Continental special printings (of the 1870 banknotes) Scott 167-177 are normally scissor cut and often are, as described by Scott catalog, "much mutilated". At auction, examples of these stamps that were tear separated bring significant premium over scissor cut.

You guys are proving my point -- there's no real reason not to like cut perfs (assuming they're straight), but most of us seem to have a natural aversion to them.

Maybe the advent of scanning,
brings home the real result up close and personal.
If the perforated hole is not cut exactly in half
then one side will have a blunted perf, the other
a castellation that looks really awful.

I can't remember the exact post, but awhile ago on SCF someone showed a relatively rare stamp that had a Expertising Certificate rating it "superb" but it was only because someone scissor cut into the four stamps around the one being expertised to make absolutely certain there were no pulled perfs or creases in the stamp in any way, shape or form. They ruined four stamps for the sake of creating one "superb" rated stamp. That's taking the scissor cut issue a bit too far.

Yes, it's a personal preference that very few collectors prefer, or even accept. I don't like them.

I suppose it's like the difference between a cesarean and a natural birth, but the stamp world doesn't view them similarly. It doesn't like c-sectioned stamps!

Quite a few machins especially those from booklets have cut perfs.
Add to this imperf sides and you have a bewildering array of varieties.
Obviously this is part of the manufacturing process rather than customer induced though.

rod222, you can give me a pane of inverted Jenny's anytime the urge strikes.

Modern -- good point.

And just to go on the record, I don't particularly like the look of them either. But it is kind of strange to me that they evoke such distaste in the majority of collectors.

Kirk

Certainly...



Part of the reconstructed sheet
the blanks showing the stamps not as yet sighted
The plate block number, block of 4, is
noted down bottom right
curiously, not one jenny has been scissor cut IIRC.

So I find it interesting first that the sheet can be reconstructed. Does the way the sheet was torn apart have to do with it?

vacuum man, it called plating. Each individual plate position has small features in the stamp that are unique to that position. Plating is not normally done on 20th century stamp but is quite common in older issues. 10 of the 12 1851-57 1 cent stamp plates have been reconstucted and most of the 1851-57 3 cent plates.