Possible Scott 233A?

I'll be sending it off to PF for certification on Monday, but value the opinions of SCF. Any thoughts?

Some of my 'Columbus in sight of land' have a very-very similar color with your 4c.

Not a chance.

I'm afraid I'd have to agree with rogdcam on this one. The color is not the blue you are looking for in a 233a. There are a range of shades for 233 and the blue is a no questions color which you immediately know once you've seen it.

No way.

It is definitely NOT a Scott 233a. Go to the Siegel website or PF Search for examples.

you should make a scan better than a photo. the paper of the stamp in the middle seems yellowish which could let you think the blue color is different. but perhaps this is only in the photo, so a scan would help. from the image you posted and the visible color, everything is said above already.

Hello forum. Just a newby question on the color but could you match the blue color of this stamp up with let's say the blue color of an E1 speciall delivery for a close comparison? Maybe not perfect but close.

Thanks everyone and have a great stamping day.

More 233a
http://www.theswedishtiger.com/233-scotts.html

https://siegelauctions.com/display_...s.php?id=176

Scroll 2/3 down for the 233a
https://d2jf3tgwe889fp.cloudfront.n...lor-Lera.pdf

redwoodrandy,

Thanks for the links. The NPM report (last link), specifically page 31, is quite confusing. The #233a "Bright Blue" still looks ultramarine to me, and the #233a "deep dull blue", which I think is the traditionally-accepted Blue Error, looks nothing like the One Cent, Scott #230.

Does anyone know if the "Bright Blue" shade is accepted by the PF as a #233a?

Up for sale in Gross collection from Siegel is strip of 4 of blue error. Estimate 100,000-150,000$.
In description it states, "the deep blue ink of 4c error contains Prussian Blue, same pigment used for the 1c Columbian, but does not have any Ultramarine, the pigment normally used to print 4c stamps."

Thus, is a comparison of blues between 1c and error the most reliable mechanism to evaluate. On my screen, the specimen compared to 1c blue are not even close?

And by comparison, the color of the blue of the stamp strip of 4c error in Gross collection matches the 1c Columbian blue posted by OP above almost perfectly

I also didn't know about those two shades of the 233a, but they exist and are also mentioned in Scott specialized. I wonder why they are not listed separately. But indeed it's great to see the pictures in the PDF above.

About the stamps in this thread: I also see quite a difference between the two 233, and the one on the left is much closer to the 1c (just look with zoom at the blue areas). But as the paper is yellowish I don't know whether the color is the real blue color of the stamp or changed.

The ambient light conditions in the original posters camera image makes it difficult to determine any color. Ambient light is almost never discussed in this forum for some reason but for any serious color study should always be highly defined. Color are light waves bouncing off of a surface; this is why they use certain wave length lights over the fruits and veggies in all produce sections. Look at an apple under these lights and then walk it over to a window and look at it. Completely different color.

My wife owned a pet store for years and she used certain wave length lights over specific aquarium fish and these lights would make the fish color really 'pop'; so much so that once we netted one and would put them in the bag, customers would ask if they came out of the right tank.

Colors are all about the ambient light and the OP image proves this perfectly.
Don

After reading everybody's opinions ranging from "Not a chance" and "No way" to "I also see quite a difference between the two 233, and the one on the left is much closer to the 1c", I'm still trying to understand the difference between "ultramarine" and "blue". The color error is listed as "blue" and not "Prussian blue" which may be more accurate, but is not described that way.

I am not what Don would call a "treasure hunter", not one of the "not really hobbyists (yet) but have come across some stamps, look in a catalog or online for the highest value stamp it could possibly be, then make plans for quitting their jobs and retiring." I do look at all the possibilities, eliminate the obvious, and ask why an item is different from all the others. We never stop learning, and I want to learn more. No matter how this find plays out, I will still add it to my Columbians (complete to and including the $1) and continue to collect the same way I have for the last 44 years.

Here's a scan of my Scott 230, 233, 233 "three leaf" variety, and 233 in a different color. While it does not appear to be Prussian Blue, it is decidedly different than the color of the other two examples of 233. It does not appear to be a just a darker shade of ultramarine. On the color error, Lester Brookman wrote "The usual statement that it is like the color of the l¢ is not exactly accurate. It is much more like the l¢ than it is the normal 4¢ but, if such a phrase means anything, the color seems to be a richer and more lively color than that of the l¢."



Here's a photo taken outdoors in direct sunlight. The color is different in direct sunlight as well.

The paper of the bottom right stamp is slightly yellowed or color altered in some way. The othe three stamps don't have this problem so it's not exactly a fair comparison. Considering the alteration in color, the stamp looks closer to an ultramarine shade than blue.

Walkman don't waste your money on expertization. Guarantee yourself it's not a 233a by searching the Stamp Community forum for "233a."

Much explanation and photographs exist in other threads.

Congrats on your Columbians up through the $1, a great achievement.