Australia 45 Color Flaw

Two Questions:

1) Do all of these qualify as ACSC 7(U) Color flaw in lower right corner?
2) The ACSC number and picture don't seem to match. Which is 7(U)e and which is 7(U)d?

Thanks in advance.









The picture in the ACSC looks closest to the last one, but I could be wrong.

Hi Partime, I do not understand the meaning of color flaw. But I think you mean the inkblob in the corner. If you show three stamps from the same position ( and I believe you do - the inner frame line looks similar ) these three stamps show the flaw at different times in the printing process.
The bottom one is in my opinion the earliest, with the top one a bit later than the middle one! Very nice looking "evolution" of a flaw!

Peter

Yes, Peter. The color flaw is the lower right ink-blot. I'll try to scan a picture from the ACSC later (giving appropriate acknowledgement), but I have found that if you don't EXACTLY match the item, you don't have it. The last one is the closest to the picture in the ACSC.

Unfortunately, the ACSC books also mix up the Color Flaw with a bite out of the neck. (They mix up 7(U)d with 7(U)e.) A little confusing.

Here is a section of the page from the Australian Commonwealth Specialists' Catalogue: Kangaroos. The 7(U)d and 7(U)e varieties are shown, but in the pricing section, they switch the descriptions. In any case, the color flaw is clearly shown below.

The 2017 ACSC Kangaroos catalogue has the 'Cut throat kangaroo' flaw identified as 1L48, catalogue reference 7(1)j.

The 'Colour flaw at S.E. corner' is listed as an unlocated flaw, 7(U)d.

Partime

I tried to plate this flaw a couple of years ago and discovered that the flaw could be any one of a number of cliches. If I can find my notes I will let you know which.

But you may also be interested to read a comment on Stampboards by one of that board's top Roo researchers http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopi...700#p5795176

As for 7(U)e I will have a little boast and tell you that it was a post by me on Stampboards which led to the eventual plating of this flaw. I spotted it on a block posted in the Hardy Collection auction catalogue.http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopi...650#p4573486

Still working on other unknown flaws when time permits but I wish they would stop including unlisted flaws. It is a sign that the person discovering the flaw is too lazy to do his own research.

Regards
Frank

Dormer Legge states, "Small colour flaws appear in several S.E. corners".

4d postage due: Nice value plate flaw in the SW angle of the '4'.

Opinion:
Nice catch !
I'd suggest you have the 3 states of the flaw, notice how the thickness increases in the outer frame. I'd be keeping / cataloguing the 3 in unison.

Your detailed scans are rather poor, but your first would suggest a 2R16 "break in the first line under CE of PENCE"
Your other scans are too blurry to take this study further.

Very Interesting!

Nice to see new ground opening up in this hobby we call stamp collecting!

rod222

I doubt if the three stamps above are all from the same cliche and note that I stated that this flaw is apparent on a number of cliches. The break you refer to under the last E of PENCE is a Master Die intermittent flaw and probably appears on at least half of the 2d Roos printed. Therefore it cannot be used as a marker for plate positions. The thickening of the frame you mention is present on a number of 2d cliches and again cannot be used on its own to plate positions.

If you have a copy of Dormer Legge you will find that he lists the break under E as a constant flaw but as it does not appear on every cliche printed this cannot be correct.

Regards
Frank

The break in the first shading line under the last "E" of PENCE, is barely discernible in the first and second watermark printings, but opens up in the third watermark printings.

This break occurs on almost all of the cliches.
There is tendency for ink leakage between the inner and outer frames in the bottom right hand corner

This what I believe partime has, (and in my opinion really neat !)

Wow, this thread is almost 4 years old! Thanks for finding it again.

I have tried to scan the three 7(U)d items, side-by-side, as shown below. I also showed a scan from the back. They are all interesting, but still unplateable, I believe. Sorry that I couldn't get them any clearer with my system.

Staying with this same thread, I also picked up an ACSC 7(1)j, the cut-throat neck, some time back. It has a short perf on top, but here is the area of interest.

Lastly, I never was able to find this one in ACSC, other than a cryptic note on ACSC 8c that says a double-print is found on punctured OS only. This was repaired by a Canadian company, as discussed in an older thread. (Located somewhere.)

Wow! you need to get that double print expertised?

"Two used examples of the double print variety have been recorded (presumably punctured OS-Rod) One is in the Royal collection.

Yous Pmkd NSW Stock Exchange.

Partime

I have located some of the flaws and hope I can post scans from an auction catalogue over the weekend. Hard to do at the moment as we are melting here in Canberra - 8.30pm and still reading 28 degrees centigrade. Praying for a breeze, any breeze! A good night for the katabatic followers.

Never got involved in those double prints but you need an expert and a good one. Chris Ceremuga is probably your best bet but ask Rob as he has used him often.

Regards
Frank