44 8c Small Queen Black Violet - Not A Re-Entry?

The word cents seems to be missing spots of the black between the letters. I do not think this is a re-entry but does give the word a fuzzy appearance.

Bwdavis, unable to answer your query but looking at your clear ENLARGED image, the Perfs on our left side are a good educational guide for new collectors when determining what 'genuine perfs' should look like under Mag'.'

Though not listed, I still think that your stamp is a re-entry. This happens wen a damaged plate is repaired and portions of the old engraving do not absorb the ink at the time of printing.

Chimo

Bujutsu

bwdavis...send some pictures to Ralph at the address below...He is really good at re-entries and he will tell you if it is or not.


http://www.re-entries.com

Most re-entries that I look at seem to be doubling of edges. This seems to be splotches of color missing instead.

Well bwdavis if you are still unsure, Ralph IS the expert and he is very, very helpful...To me there is no one better to analyse your stamp.

All he can say is no, then you know for sure.

Excellent pics- and may be almost double impression or one extreme re-entry. If you look at bottom lettering it screams re entry but the top being blotchy above and below is starnge. Usually the doubling effect is in one direction (ie up down left right or in between) but this looks like trippling in the words yet nowhere else. Definatly want to hear Ralphs explanation on this one. Beautiful piece.

>> Wert

Thanks for the information and the link to that wonderful site.

You are very welcome bwdavis

Reply from Ralph Trimble

Hello Brian,

Thanks for your email and scans.

You are quite correct that this is not a re-entry. It is a dry print. Early line-engraved stamps were printed on dampened sheets of paper, where the dampening helped the thickish, pasty ink adhere to the paper. If the paper was allowed to dry out too much, the ink would not adhere to the paper properly, remaining in the engraved grooves of the steel plate. This resulted in the white patches you see on your stamp. One thing to keep in mind is that re-entries always have 'extra' ink on the paper, not less. This is exactly what you point out.

Further examples of dry prints can be seen on my Technology web page at:

http://www.re-entries.com/terms.html#dry

Dry prints are constantly being mistaken for re-entries, even by long-time experienced dealers. They often show up on ebay, along with examples of pulled ink:

http://www.re-entries.com/terms.html#pull

You can also see the only real re-entry ever discovered on the 8c SQ plate at:

http://www.re-entries.com/small_que...tencent.html

I hope this helps.

Best wishes,

Ralph

Ralph E. Trimble FRPSC
President, Philatelic Specialists Society of Canada
PSSC RPSC BNAPS CPSGB CCNY APS APEX EFOCC AIEP VGGPRF
Director, Board of Directors, The V.G. Greene Philatelic Research Foundation
Member of The Greene Foundation Expert Committee
Unitrade Specialized Editorial Associate

Sure surprised me on this one.

As I have said many times, we live and learn every day.

Thanks for the info

Chimo

Bujutsu

Forgot to ask in my last post - - if this is not a re-entry, would this be also referred to as a 'double transfer', comparble to U.S. stamps listed in the Scott's U.S. Specialised Catalogue for US stamps??

Thank you

Chimo

Bujutsu

So not a re entry and not a double impression and not a kiss print. I believe Ralph at re entries.com has pretty well most known examples of true re entries listed and pictured. If this is an example of a dry printing error it is a great example and probably as rare or rarer than the re entry itself. I would imagine very few sheets made it through before this was corrected. Maybe never see unitrade but it would be noted in my collection.

Presently listed on ebay for a bit of a premium over catalog value. will re-list somewhere (maybe stamp community) if it doesn't sell.