Classics Forever Arrived

In looking at mine the stamp designs themselves do in fact seem to be engraved. The ink is certainly raised as ridges, and you can see the grooves on the reverse.

Matt

Mine have that same "feel". Is it possible that the central designs were printed intaglio, and remainder of the pane (the border) was run offset? I guess we'll never know unless the USPS is questioned.

I can't fault the USPS for not sending these to post offices. This issue will appear primarily to collectors and the general public either would not find the designs attractive or would not understand what it means for these designs to be "classics forever."

Although I have not seen the stamps, this "About" seems to indicate they are engraved.

https://about.usps.com/news/nationa...pr16_045.htm

In all fairness, if this is a litmus test for distribution, it would also apply to many other issues that commemorate historic events or people. That shouldn't be the determining factor in distribution. This is a lost opportunity for conversation starters and piquing interest or curiosity in collecting vintage stamps.

Thanks BeeSee. I ran my fingers over one of my sheets and sure enough, they feel engraved. But it confused the heck out of me when everybody kept talking about how they wished they were engraved!

Peter.

Perhaps I was using incorrect terminology; the printing does not look like engraving when I examine the stamps up close, and the quality of the images/engavings/whatever are poor compared to the original stamps. When I think "engraving", there's a certain clarity and crispness that is not there (for examples of engraving done right, see most modern Swedish stamps; if these had been printed using those methods, the stamps would be stellar).

Perhaps it's not the process itself, but the quality of the original images that were used to print the stamps that are at fault. It's like laser printing vs. offset printing.

Regardless, when you look at these stamps up close, they're a mess. Globs and blobs and streaks everywhere.

OK Now I am back to being confused again! I suppose time will tell how they were printed.

Peter

I mailed a cover to myself using one of the Classics Forever stamps. When I removed the single stamp from the pane, there was a distinct "engraved" impression embedded on the paper backing, so the printing process is certainly different from most issues.

Although its hard to reproduce in a scan, this might demonstrate what I mean:

Something else is bugging me on these stamps. On the technical details it says these stamps are printed on tagged paper, and then it states "block". Checking the tagging on these, the part of the sheet where the stamps are is tagged as one full block. The individual stamps are overall tagged though!

Peter

All of the modern U.S. special issues with engraving (Columbians, TransiMissisippians, Madison, Jenny, etc.) have a mechanical, unfinished look. The "hand of the artist" is missing on these stamps. There is very little, or no indication of finesse by the engraver, and never any sign of plate wiping. And there are always little areas where there are blobs and blurs, as revenuecollector said.. It is very robotic-looking work with no attention to quality and detail.

They did a poor job of both printing and die cutting for the $2 inverted Jenny.

That's probably by design. The USPS wants you buying new issues, not old ones.

I'll pass. Crème background, really? And the big broad "FOREVER" letters ruin it for me.

I'll save a sheet for $3.00 but nothing more.

I just checked the only copy (used) that I have and it IS engraved too. I did not know that - Revenuecollector is correct - it is hard to tell.