Stamp Expertising Via Video Conference

The OP also ass-u-me's that experts evaluate a single stamp in a single, continuous effort.

That, in turn, ass-u-me's that experts do not set aside a stamp while they root about looking for a reference.

Etc, etc, etc.

All of which would make a real-time conference for several individuals a bit tedious.

/s/ ikeyPikey

My two cents worth...

I find the concept unrealistic. I have spent more time than I wish on this reply, it has been hard to compose a polite one.

With all due respect to the OP, nobody on an expert committee would ever video conference, or want to. Think about what you pay for certs, and the value you get in return.

The one on which I sit volunteers its time. We look at 80 - 120 submissions in a sitting, from perhaps 25 different sources. Would we want to schedule video conferences and justify our opinion to 25 submitters? Engage in debate, and double/triple the time we donate to expertizing? Already you benefit from thousands of hours of collective stamp expertise, a reference collection, forensic equipment, and more that you haven't considered.

In the real, paid world, experts get $100's / hour for their time.

"That, in turn, ass-u-me's that experts do not set aside a stamp while they root about looking for a reference."

Totally untrue.

It is interesting how many stamps on this forum are judged as fake, altered, or improperly described by picture only so it is not impossible to get some sense of authenticity. I do not think a video conference would help any better than some decent images for a number of issues. This is another case.

garcher is absolutely correct. Aside from the logistics of videoconferencing with a number of submitters there is the issue of uncontrollable conditions that may well have an effect on the development of the expert opinion. A prime example would be that of examining stamps with watermarks. It if often difficult using sophisticated tools such as the VSC6000 using features such as different lighting and a range of filters (400 to 800 nanometers at 1 nm increments) to see and / or identify watermarks so I would not want to express an opinion based on an image developed with unknown technology. Additionally, opinions are frequently developed using non technical assets such as touch and feel, grain of the paper, observation of gum quality and observation of well disguised repairs.
As an additional thought, some of the items that are examined by the committee cannot be done in a 10 minute video session. The 2 cent Large Queen on laid paper was in the hands of the committee for almost 4 months while we researched every aspect of the submission. Even the report of the opinion (not just what appeared on the certificate) was an undertaking that required a number of hours.
In my opinion, don't even think of expertizing via videoconference.

GJP