Do People Toss Bad Certifications?

Thought this example may spark some discussion in line with this topic.

This stamp was up for auction today at Siegel

comes with two certs: 2016 PF cert as unused regummed….

and now the kicker…. 2016 PSE cert as used, cancel removed…

somebody felt the pain here-- sold for meager 190$???-- ouch!

I wish I bid on it-- it is stunning gorgeous stamp! Siegel believes in is unused in line with PF cert and "strongly" disagrees with PSE.

With current technology, how can these two certifying bodies disagree on this one?

This is a good question. Unfortunately we are not likely to get a good answer, because there is a sort of an "arms race" between people who alter stamps and people who expertise them. Current technology is a mixed blessing: the expertisers can use it to make more authoritative judgements -- but stamp falsifiers can also use it to make more sophisticated scammery.

The best way to answer this question would be if we could ask both expert committees why they ruled the way they did for this stamp, compare their reasons, and weigh their evidence. However, expertising committees will never let this information become publicly available, because stamp crooks perhaps could then use it to improve the quality of their alterations.

Way back in the day, the most common techniques for removing a cancellation would all be detectable via close examination under UV light at varying wavelengths, for example. It may be that the most sophisticated crooks can remove a cancel in a way that it is no longer obvious using such techniques.

A word of advice: the regummers are currently ahead of the expertisers in the arms race; at least for many 19th century issues, there are methods of regumming that will pass expertization most of the time. Let the speculators get burned paying the "never hinged premium" on those. Never hinged classics are regummed by default.

If I was an expertizer at PF, I would call over to PSE and discuss why they believe cancel was removed. These expertizing bodies should feed off each other. If I was expertizer at PF, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night without knowing what the PSE person saw that made them believe cancel was removed! Did they use different instrument or light to evaluate?

Codehappy, ...Finally someone on forum with same belief I have...that never hinged classics are usually regums by default.
I collect only used stamps generally because I have also felt similar to you that expertization of gum is very difficult. Of course there are obvious regum jobs and then the not so obvious. I often can't tell so have decided not to collect mint or unused. It's nice to know that others looking at gum on a tiny piece of paper from 1852 has the same opinion I have.

Eyewitness to history: this was common wisdom in the 1960s ...

... and it mattered just as little to the folks asking & paying the MNHOG premium as the anti-grading arguments matter to the folks buying graded stamps today.

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

I will argue that grading, which is based on centering (mainly) is more easily evaluated by general collector. Although I may have beef between subjective nature of a 95,98, of 100 grade.... let's not compare apples and oranges.

Gum is an entirely different beast and I think both I, and codehappy are not confident that even the best of expertizer can differentiate between an original gum and great regum job... add the never hinged versus barely hinged versus lightly hinged. Ugggg. Can gum even last 160 yrs unless placed in a perfect environment to prevent degradation or drying out? I guess I haven't researched the chemical composition of "gum" to truly understand it... but after looking at most 19th century stamps and finding almost all unused stamps have no gum anymore or perhaps just part or trace remnant of gum, suggests to me that when one claims they have a 1861 stamp with full og nh, I'm reluctant to believe it .

Actually, no one is arguing about the gum on the 37. It is regummed whether it is used or unused. The difference is in whether the stamp has had a cancel removed or not. I suspect that the PF put it under the VSC6000 to determine this as well as using UV light. It's all but impossible to hide the evidence of a removed cancel from the UV, and is impossible to hide it from the VSC6000.

I prefer to get back on topic of how PF and PSE can have such a different opinion on stamp... and then what stops the smart guy it gal who bought this beautiful stamp for 190$ and can throw away PSE cert and sell on ebay as unused with PF cert and perhaps get a grand for it!

The question provides the answer. How can two bodies differ? Because a certificate is just an opinion. In 35 years of collecting I have obtained just two certificates and both were free with my club membership. One gave me the answer I expected, one didn't (and I'm, convinced the second one is wrong!). Otherwise I trust my own knowledge and experience. Certificates are just part of the modern phenomena of outsourcing responsibility. I understand that if you are going to purchase items seldom seen or frequently faked, certificates are valuable, but don't forget all major dealers will provide lifetime guarantees. The earlier statement about wanting certificates for everything over $20 is, to my mind, a nonsense. Spend some money and time joining a club with a decent library and develop your own knowledge to give yourself an unfair advantage over everyone else. No need for certificates if your own knowledge is good enough.

64,
I respectfully agree with Everything you said.. but then it brings us back full circle in stamp above to OP original discussion .... 2 different opinions, Is it ethical for new buyer of that stamp above to analyze stamp and say...I see no cancel,it's unused, PSE cert is garbage, and throw PSE cert away?

My opinion on this is that if I was the buyer and I see no cancel when I review it with my capability at home with my knowledge.... then it's ok to chuck the PSE cert. but if I look at it and agree it was previously cancelled, and try to sell it as unused then I am being deceptive ... unethical.

Rg

64,
While I agree with this I am not sure it is the real issue. Is not the real issue our egos, understanding we are biased and not objective? By definition our own opinion is subjective.

Folks buy certs to get an objective opinion, usually a form of validation of their own opinion. Without ever verifying their own opinion is not a person who always trusts their knowledge taking a large risk? Certs also assist in situations where the hobbyist passes and the family has to disposition the collection.
Don

I collect for my own pleasure and enjoyment. I don't need someone else's validation. If I am happy with an item, that is all that matters !

Like everyone, I have a couple items in question. But I'm happy with them, just as they are.

When I'm dead and gone, I won't care if someone else reaches a different opinion.

kcaramat,
Nothing wrong with being happy. Nothing wrong with being satisfied with your own opinion and level of experience and knowledge.

But keep in mind that we reach a lot of newer hobbyists and certifications are a good educational tool. Additionally, a lot of us also use certifications to learn and become better informed.
Don

Well it is a beautiful copy of #37.

But one key point - that has yet to be mentioned here:

(All of you have received envelopes - likely recently - where the stamp on the envelope - probably from a seller you bought stamps from! - was NOT cancelled!)

This is where the gum actually becomes very important.

If it isn't original gum, then it is NOT mint.

Is it 'unused'??

If it is on an envelope, but not cancelled - I consider this VERY used! (Even if there is no evidence of it on the stamp!)

I generally consider EVERY 19th century stamp to be used - unless clear evidence can prove otherwise. That would include original gum...

In my philatelic dictionary, 'unused' = 'mint' --> meaning the way it was when purchased from the post office.

All I need to see is the cert that says 'regummed' and I don't consider it 'unused' any longer.

(And yes - I know many folks removed gum on purpose - don't even start - I'm not changing my opinion...)

It is a really nice 37 - but it is by no means 'unused' as far as I'm concerned. Is there a 'removed' cancel? Hard to tell from the picture. Looks a bit dirty in the upper right corner, but impossible to tell for sure.

The notion of an automated image matching library sounds great in theory, but in practice it's a lot more complicated. As previously mentioned, to make it worthwhile you would have to get buy-in from the expertizing companies that do not currently make their certs and images public (PSE, PSAG). Additionally, what do you do about the items expertized longer ago than within the last 10 years or so, where electronic archival images may not exist, or the only images on file may be Nth generation photocopies or copies of certs rather than images of the actual stamps?

Even pfsearch.org, while a laudable effort, shows how difficult such an endeavor would be. As you proceed backwards in time, you go from color images to black & white, to very low resolution images taken of the certs, not the actual stamps themselves.

The image quality is all over the map, likely resulting in any matching algorithm producing false positives or negatives.

It would be great on a going forward basis, but there's a certain percentage of the expertized population that wouldn't fit this model unless the items were re-expertized and the old cert data expunged.

To add to this, Bill Weiss kept only written records. I offered to digitize them for Bill and he sent me a big box for discovery. I spent some time on them and after conferring with Bill we decided the job would be too huge. His written records still exist, their final disposition has yet to be settled. So here is a large body of certification work that is digitally out-of-reach.
Don