Question About Red Revenue China #84 Perforations.

This is odd. In the Scott catalog it says that the China #84 ghas a perforation of, "12 to 15". I still am a little confused, but I think what this means is, every other rippled edge is a perforation 12, then a perforation 15. I recently posted a thread about how PSE declared my China #84 counterfeit, but I am still not convinced that is a forgery.

Measuring the perforations on my China #84 it switches from 12 to 15 perforation "every 4 rippled edge" or so. Why would a forger go through the extra hassle of making sure the perf was, "12 to 15". It seems like a difficult process to emulate. Am I on the right track with the, "12 to 15 perf." idea? Thanks.



Thank you.

Please define "ripple". There is no regularity to the perf variation. It is just that depending on where you choose to measure, the closest gauge would be in the range between 12 and 15 (Everyone else besides Scott say 12 to 16). So the spacing between perf holes varies/wanders. Note perf holes also wander side to side, where the ones on yours do not at all. See the examples shown given in Scott above and elsewhere -- perfs are normally quite rough looking overall due to this "wander".

The main test is still the base stamp. And yours does not look like the proper engraved stamp much less being engraved to start with. There are many points of the black overprint that are wrong in yours -- wrong type font. If you must, APS, China Stamp Society (if you join) and the PF will also provide expertization. But I seriously doubt you will get a cert as genuine.

Scott is a general catalogue, they don't list every variety; when they says "perf X to perf Y" they've really clumped different stamps together. Sometimes they even clump "Perf/Imperf" issues together (often in early eastern Europe, e.g.)

For this issue, there are different varieties that measure between perf 12 and perf 16, some of them were intentional and others may have been due to bad tolerances, errors by workers, or other problems with the perforators. Both equal and compound perfs exist. Specialists distinguish between and collect them all, and specialized catalogues, like Ma's for China, give more detail about the perforation measurements found on this and other issues.

Sometimes, the "Scott Specialized Classic" catalog lists early perf varieties that the regular Scott general catalogs do not (as minor numbers, usually; Scott's inconsistent about that), but I'm away from home and can't check how this issue looks in that catalog ATM.

China Stamp Society is great with authenticating stamps. They will not even charge you to look at the poor forgeries unless you request a certificate.

https://www.chinastampsociety.org/

When I mentioned, "ripple" I meant perf. holes. I understand now, when it says Perf. 12 to 15 that means
exactly what it sounds like. I am considering sending it into PF or CSS. One last question, how do I explaing the tiny red specks on the back of the stamp? Thanks

You previously stated that they were just like the ones on redwoodrandy's example, which are not red. I see specks of brown paper inclusions there, impurities that are bits of tree bark. I see black and brown specks on yours which are the same thing. That proves nothing; both are on some kind of medium quality paper. I see 3 red-looking spots in the selvage of the back of yours which could be ink or from something else. Why should this be meaningful?

i don't know all those PSE, PF or CSS... I assume they're some kind of philatellic society of experts?

is that is the case?

Yes. US based stamp expertising services.

http://www.philatelicfoundation.org/

http://psestamp.com/

CSS is the China Stamp Society:
https://www.chinastampsociety.org/
You must be a member to use their expertising service.

@ Nanophilatelic






i have to say, I find it quite provocative that you, as a new collector, dismiss the expert oppinions, meanwhile you spam this forum for answers and in some way abuse the kindness provided by the members.

you reply thankfully if an answer is in your favor and nimbly ignore any reply that provides anything else than what you're looking for.