GB - Victoria 1865 3-P - Misplaced Watermark?

Lots of oddities lately, seems like.

This particular stamp arrived today. She's had a rough life, please try to overlook her flaws. :(

When I watermarked her, I found two lines that meet as a corner that I didn't expect. The lines don't align with the stamp outline on the front (which was my first thought), and the watermark itself is correct though shifted (can't really see it well in this scan).




My SG Specialized doesn't mention anything about watermarks missing or shifted (only the emblem errors). Has anybody ever seen anything like this, or read about it for this issue?

Editing to add: I enhanced / darkened the line a bit so you could see it better. It doesn't really show this much until one checks with fluid.

Polimom, I do not understand what a misplaced watermark is. Watermarks occur on a sheet of paper. If a sheet of stamps is printed on that sheet the watermark could be anywhere, partially on several stamps is a possibility. Lots of stamps show partial watermarks!

Peter

Hi Petert -

I posted another stamp in the "most recent purchase" thread earlier today. It is also a "misplaced watermark" -- by which I mean the layout for the watermark was not correct on the sheet. (I can't do a link for some reason, very sorry.) In the case of the other stamp, a double-lined "P" showed up - part of the word "Postage" that was NOT supposed to show on the stamps.

So in both of these cases, there are unexpected (and incorrect) markings in the paper.

These lines, for instance, are not part of the normal watermark for this stamp. I don't know enough about the watermarking process to know whether there are some kind of frame lines that might accidentally be showing, or if it's something else.

I hope I said this in a way that doesn't confuse things. :(

Polimon's stamp posted in the "most recent purchase" thread is indeed a misplaced watermark and is a known variety. It happens when stamps were printed on the edge area of the sheet where the words POSTAGE are located and is not normally used for the printing.

This current stamp is problematic in that the scan shows very little and it is hard to judge what is going on.
Perhaps if Polimon draws what is seen when looking at the watermark a better opinion could be offered... so draw the watermark in the position you see it and perhaps we can see if any misplacement has happened.

I agree, scan quality was not good. Trying to avoid giving her a bath if I can. Sorry! :(

I can't draw at all, so redoing called for much different technology, but I think it'll be clearer. I've photographed the back of the stamp both dry, and in fluid.





You can see that the emblems watermark is offset by the same ratio as the corner lines intrude.

I believe what you have is an emblems watermark that shows the edge frame that is holding the wire emblems in place... you can clearly see the thistle in the bottom right corner of the back of the stamp and it I "misplaced" higher and to the left as you look at it.
Remember that Stanley Gibbons illustrate watermarks as being seen from the front of the stamp so it would be misplaced upwards and to the right from their point of view.
Whether it constitutes a variety is impossible for me to say but it could be in the same league as your stamp with the "P" of POSTAGE... but I have no known reference for a "frame" variety.

Edit...Thinks! If that is a thistle emblem on the right hand side of the illustration of the back of the stamp... it must mean the watermark is reversed?

scotzm -- thank you so much for your reply! I had no idea how they made watermarks "back in the day". A wire held the emblems in place??

I'm relieved to know you see the same thing I *thought* I saw. I'm always confounded when I find something I can't explain with the detailed catalogue. Yes, it strikes me as very much the same kind of problem as my "P" misplacement.

It's a shame she's in such rough condition; I'd probably send her off to the GBPS if she was finer. Might do it anyway...

Holy smokes! You're right! It is a thistle on the right (from the back), ergo...

I believe the process involved punched brass emblems being attached to the paper mould...which I presume was a mesh. there were quite a few edge angles as well so your stamp may show one of those edge angles which would normally not be seen in a properly aligned sheet.
See edit above as I think yopur watermark is also reversed...I think!

I give up. This particular stamp has too many oddities for me to figure out at this point. I've sent a note to a consultant for the surface-printed, with a link to this thread. Maybe he will be able to tell me what's going on.

Editing to add:
On a different computer, so I can provide a link now to the other misplaced GB stamp I posted yesterday. https://goscf.com/t/33828&whichpage=63#369866

Also -- She has one trimmed side, and in this issue I usually see trims for wing margins. But I don't think her lettering is correct for a wing margin?

I think this is how the sheet may have roughly looked like regarding the watermark... the green corners and intersections would be the location of the edge angles. I believe your stamp OI lies next to an edge angle as you can see. I don't think the green lines were continuous as they are described as "angles" so would only extend for the length and height of one stamp at each intersection.



Good luck with your research.

scotzm -- thank you! That image is a great visual! You've been a huge help!

:)