Is The Gold Missing On This Reindeer Stamp Scott 3357?

I have two stamps Scott 3357 and scott 3361 both printed by Banknote corp of America. Scott 3361 has shiny gold in the deer's color while the other is a flat gold. Is that common?

It may be due to my aging eyes, but I can't see much difference between the two. Have examined my copies & think the gold is somewhat flat on both the pane (3357) & the booklet (3361) stamps. Your photo shows 3361 on the left & 3357 on the right. The major differences, as noted in Scott, are the width of the frame lines & the distance from the bottom of the hoof to the bottom frame line.
Added: After staring at these for a few minutes, I think that the gold on 3357 is a bit darker in color than 3361. This seems true of both your stamps as well as mine. This appears to be true across all of the colors, not just 3357 vs. 3361. But it does not appear to me that there is a difference in "shininess".

I will do some more pictures. I have showed them to several people and they all noticed how metallic or shiny the one on the right is. It is reflective where the other is completely dull. And it tis just the gold. The blue is flat in both.

I think you should try to scan these rather than a picture. The glare does not help things any


Peter

Ok here they are again. Notice how the gold in the bottom left corner shines and the deers body on the first two. The last image, I switched the images just to show that the lighting isn't different on one stamp compared to the other. the stamp on the right now shines.

Regardless of the color shades, dull, brightness ... the basic title concerns gold missing. There is no gold missing on these stamps. Interesting shades, though.

Here is a scan. Now the blue and ink look different. But can't show the shine on from the gold.

Well I beg to differ. Did they use different gold inks? I have seen many of these and this was the only one that the gold was reflective of light. the others had the same reflection as the blue color, none.

A previous discussion about Gold Missing can be found at this link. It is an interesting read, and I see the stamp up for sale every once in awhile.

https://goscf.com/t/40054

I think our current example is just different shades of gold / blue used in the different printings. Since we have confirming copies, it appears that this is just normal for this issue.

Hi Partime you mentioned we have confirming copies?? I would like to see another 3361 with this shiny gold. That is what I am asking; to confirm that the inks used on the different stamps, were not the same. And that the stamp I am showing with shiny gold is commonplace. If you hold the stamp up to sunlight or a bright light ,only the gold is highly reflective on 3361. If you hold up stamp 3357 to bright light the whole stamp has the same reflection or low gloss appearance.

Maybe this gold ink is the same but with all metallic inks they settle quickly and when this one was applied it was toward the end of a run where the ink was getting low and the metallic pigment was more concentrated thus a high content of metallic pigment was in this ink when transferred? I am guessing...

He also stated: But it does not appear to me that there is a difference in "shininess". That is what I am trying to find out, if my stamp is different than the norm. If his are the same in shininess, then mine is different. As I stated all my other 3361's are dull just like the 3357. I am trying to see what could have caused this. and again it is not the gloss of the stamp itself but the reflectivity of the gold that stands out compared to the rest of the stamp.

Something else caught my eye, but I do not know if it is true or if it is an optical illusion. The border looks to be different - on the lighter colored stamp the border seems to be quite a bit thinner. Could there have been different plates used?

Peter

that is one of the common features to distinguish 3357 from 3361 is the thickness of the border.

I suspect the "shininess" simply doesn't show well in a photo ... and not at all in a scan. This is one of those cases where the difference is likely all too obvious with the stamps in hand and difficult if not impossible to discern otherwise. That said, I suspect the shiny version is, as you have indicated, the exception to the rule. Of course, the dozen or so of copies that I have do not prove this. I also have no explanation for the difference. This is one of those frustrating instances where explanations seem to be in short supply. I wish you luck in your search for an answer.
... John ...