Scott 1687 - Another Printer's "Tail"

Looked at my Scott 1687 1.00 Loon mini sheet of a pane of 16...Came across another Printer's TAIL oddity...

Robert

This was a printer's tail I posted of my Scott 137 pair..See below.


Now take a look at this tail on my block of 16 mini pane...It is PP16


Look at this HAIR (printer's "tail") on top of the loon's head.


I used software to see where the hair (TAIL) was situated on the Loon's head and is continuous...Which could mean the tail had ink flung onto the printed area and the print went over top.


Interested if anyone else has the same oddity/error..???
Robert

On the 2 cent Admiral the stamp is green and the tail is black?

Good eye alanl....Oh yes it is, proof foreign ink caused the tail.
Robert

Hi Robert, question on the admiral stamp. Is it possible that because the ink is of a different colour and fountain pens and ink wells were used in that era, that it may be cast off from the nib, or just an ink mark from the pen?

The loon tail is interesting/funny. Reminds me of the angler fish.
Mike

Hi No1philatelist

Your theory is as good as mine or any ones, because we were not there at the time it happened.

Just trying to explain on the Admiral what might of happened because when I was young and in the printing game, I have seen the tail on prints...Usually we just remove them to the garbage, but with millions of stamps printed, it would be almost impossible to check every sheet..That would obviously take time and money.

And the loon I AM SURE IT IS NOT A CONSTANT VARIETY, but unique eh..??

Robert

What? Wert you wrote 'Just trying to explain on the Admiral what might of happened' Did I understand correctly. The black line on this Admiral stamp all in green would have been done during the printing process.I would really like to know the basis of this conclusion.

Pollux the incredule.

Another question for Wert. There are many termes used on this forum to explain different printing problems. I'm not so familiar with these, so I try to find the meaning of the term you use, such as 'Printer's Tail'. I found nothing on all the Glossary of Printing Terms on the internet, except "Tail Print" is it the same.

Pollux.

Teach the controversy!

hi Pollux...You may not be familiar with the term printers tail because that at printing school my teacher used this term to explain a line added to a printing...Not world wide known, but it was what we understood to explain the oddity.




pollux...Some printing machines like the A.B.Dick 360 printing press I was using among others had an ink tray and if the ink was too watery, and with the speed of the press, some times ink was sprayed on a print...Cleaning ink trays between print jobs some times left ink from the last job, which could have been black..Those the black tail on a blue print.



rmatossian..Not sure what you are asking..??

Anyways guys, getting away from the Admiral stamp and back to the original post....the loon has a weird oddity, dont you agree..??

Robert

For me, your explanation has no credibility. You will never be able to prove this to me. This burr or this so-called line of a color other than the color of the stamp has not been and has never been made during printing, these are just far-fetched extrapolation. You have wacky theories for mistakes on your stamps, please be serious a little and stop any unfounded explanation.

Pollux

Pollux, I think your last line there is a bit uncalled for. In the past, you and Robert have had good discussions about flyspecking oddities and although it is fair to be critical and to question Robert, or anyone else, on their findings, I'm hopeful these can remain as just respectful discussions.

I don't see anywhere in there that Robert was claiming fact - only his observations and a term he learned in school - one that makes sense, albeit not widely used obviously so it helped that he explained it.

Without the patience and perseverance of flyspeckers, new varieties and oddities are not as likely to be discovered. I grew up where Kasimir Bileski's lesser known brother, Walter, would literally go through thousands of the same stamp issues over and over looking for errors and oddities. I'm sure Mr. Trimble has done the same and I'm sure they've found many odd specks and lines on stamps that had explanations that ultimately ended up being nothing major - such is the hunt. But sometimes the hunt pays off.

Keep on staring at those stamps, Robert. It is not a task many of us have the ability to continue doing with such enthusiasm. Cheers!

Stamps101: I agree. As the grand old dame said in Downtown Abbey, "I don't argue, I explain."
So keep up the good work, Robert.

Social media can be a contact sport, and although we try to be a family oriented community a thick skin is sometimes necessary. Many folks here try to follow the adage 'If you don't have anything nice to say…'.

The following is a general statement about trying to avoid misunderstandings and/or drama.
While it may be assumed by some, I find that it helps if we start our posts with words like 'In my opinion' or 'I think that' to make sure that the context of the post is being understood. If I post a declarative statement like "Modern hinges are awful" chances are good that it will evoke/provoke others who feel that I am making a factual statement and their replies may be aggressive or defensive style push back (by those who use them). But if I post "In my opinion, modern hinges are awful" then typically what we see are others who might simply also post their opinions.

Lastly in response to stamps101 post; there is a side of fly-speccing that is not appreciated by some collectors. My own opinion is that I support anyone collecting whatever they like and collecting however they like. But fly speccers should understand that assigning names and promoting their fly specs to catalog publishers may not be looked upon kindly by other collectors. Some may feel that cute names drives less experienced folks to think they are rare errors. Other collectors might feel that urging publishers to include minor varieties runs up the cost of the catalogs and makes new, unnecessary album spaces to fill. In other words, fly speccing may extend beyond personal collecting preferences if it starts impacting others.

Note: I am not taking sides here, simply mentioning the flip side of the issue. My intention is to support everyone in the community and try to ensure a friendly family community.
Don

Very well said and excellent points on all accounts, Don.

Edit: hit enter too soon.

I was going to add regarding the catalog publishers, I do find it interesting what they do and don't include sometimes, but at least with Unitrade, I find there is relative consistency and overall I feel they make a good balance, but to each their own. I submitted a #925 full sheet that had an extreme colour oddity down the center. Unitrade saw nothing overly exciting but a stamp dealer I have much respect for saw it as a replex error. Opinions will differ for sure. Part of the aggravation. Part of the fun. Part of life :)

The lack of published inclusion criteria has been discussed in this community before and I think most agree that this is an area that catalog publishers could improve upon. Over time (especially decades) how/why things are added to a catalog becomes pretty important for hobbyists to understand. The lack of transparency on this issue is not helping the hobby.

I was always taught to 'follow the money' so perhaps the following might be a bit cynical. Catalog publishers exist to make money. Adding new entries, whether it is the newest stamps issued or new varieties of existing stamps, is common marketing fodder for catalog publishers. "57 New Varieties In This Volume!"

So my opinion is that catalog publishers may have incentive to add new varieties, may have incentive to 'spread out' new additions over several years, or may even at times have incentive to limit the addition of new varieties.

And then there is the issue with elitism, were a catalog publisher may support well known people or organizations more than others.
Don

Sorry wert and guys to have been so direct in my comments but I don't think I was disrespectful. His theory on this black line was too much for me. Finding errors on stamps is very interesting I admire those who take the time to do it, it's long and it takes a lot of time, congratulations to those who do it.
Stamp101, yes, he claimed two facts, he wrote: '' Good eye alanl .... Oh yes it is, proof foreign ink caused the tail ''. and also '' Your theory is as good as anybody, because we are not there at the time it happened ''
When one claims a fact you have to prove it, not just invent a story. This forum is one of the best, and the information that can be found is essential.

Pollux