When Is A Double Overprint Not A Double Overprint?

Seeking opinions.

A faint second "2d" can be seen above the 2d surcharge. Too distant to be considered a "kiss", how faint does an overprint have to be to not be considered a double?

I don't know what rules apply here, as some seemingly faint "doubles" are offered as such and receive certificates.

Worth rolling the dice for and sending off for a certificate?

This stamp is not listed in Stanley Gibbons 2020 edition as existing with a double surcharge.

Opinion:
Do we know how the letterpress was printed at all?
1. You have something also above the R of VRI
2. Your period dots are out of place, either the typesetter put them in upside down, or they were done on a 2 pass print, or maybe hand applied?
If we knew this it would be easier to postulate.

If they were printed set out in a "forme" then I would suggest it would be a double print.



Hmm another with misplaced periods source : Hipstamp


This would suggest they were letterpress in "forme"
question then remains, why only the "d" is visible?
https://www.stamps-for-sale.com/ora...-66329-p.asp

Odd that both above the "R" and the "2d" the faint double print (if that's what it is) are both consistent to the upper-right. However, one would expect the same above the "V" and "I" - do you see any trace of that happening?

I think double overprints should be just be what they are called- "double" …
Auction:classicphil Gmbh
1896 1/2 d. on 3 d., pair, left stamp double overprint (!) in combination with single overprint, MH, XF!
Estimate €140.00

Plateflaw,

Great question!!!

My guess is it will differ depending on who you ask. I recently discovered a stamp with a double overprint hiding in a collection I had purchased on ebay. I had already removed the items I originally bought the album for, and was going back though the album several months later, and something looked odd about this stamp. When I looked closer, I couldn't believe my eyes! Scott lists R191 with multiple overprints, but not R185. I have the discovery copy - right?



Plain as day - two overprints.

So, I did what this forum recommends daily - I submitted it to the Philatelic Foundation for a cert.

Imagine my surprise when the envelope came back and I opened it up!!!



Huh?

I did a search to see what the R191s looked like. Not exactly dark and complete strikes. Here is an example of R191 from PF Cert 398860



Murmur!!!

On the plus side, PF estimated the value of my discovery at $1, so I have that going for me!!!

These kiss-prints are relatively common on these V.R.I. surcharges. Sometimes you also get a faint ghosted inverted surcharge which results from the ink not drying fully before the overlying sheet was laid down. Both varieties are not constant and won't be listed by a catalogue. They seem to be more common on the 1d and 2d surcharges, but are definitely worth collecting.

A certificate will almost certainly describe it as "variety with kiss-print doubling the surcharge value".

Thanks Tim. Yes, I have a few "obverse offsets" as they could be described.

Interestingly, the next tranche of Besancon has an eerily similar variety as I show above (including the doubled 'R' above 'R' in 'V.R.I.'). With RPSL certificate from 1961. I wonder if it would get a certificate today?

Here is the stamp in question, Lot 6237 in the upcoming Corinphila sale next month...