A Forgery Of A China Large Dragon 1 Candarin 1878/1882?

I have found this stamp in an pretty common album (although an old one), and really didn't expect to find this kind of stamp in it... so, I supposed that it is a forgery... however, I have compared to examples found on web, and, if it is a forgery, looks like a pretty good one... didn't find any major faults... stamp is on a thin paper, doesn't have a gum.

Anyone familiar with this issue?

On 1st and 2nd scan are original colours, and the 3rd is enchanced in a photo editor, so that details could be visible easier.

From the photo it has all the characteristics of the genuine.All the spots are were they should be.The slight slant in the bottom of the right 1.The two dots joined after CANDARIN :..Also the very slight upward slant in CHINA above.All the lettering conform.
The only thing that bothers me is the relative thinness of the "C" in CHINA,but that may be simply one of the cliché types.
Only one design was made and then reproduced for all the different clichés.
There were several printings.Several settings,(distance between the stamps).
With specialized literature the stamp can be plated.There are tiny différences in the stamps
in the same sheet,a break here,a spot joined with another ect.
So the design is 99.8% identical.

Thank you for your opinion and expertize, perf1!

I have found online a very similar example to this one, also with a thin lettering of C...





https://www.catawiki.com/l/25411013...-michel-n-1i

Yes it looks like it. I think it is position 3 in the sheet of 25.
below Spink example. Wide setting 3; 1882.
There is a break in the vertical line in the lower left square, also found in pos.3. Also position 3 has what looks like a thinner "C". That being said , it may differ in sheets of other settings.The break may also be closed.





As the settings changed the clichés were re-arranged in the sheet:
Interasia:Upper sheet (setting 7).1883-85. Notice how the stamps are closer together.The stamps with a break are now in pos. 9 & 10.

Thank you very much, perf12, for all your time and knowledge spent on this!

Btw. I have noticed that on all other examples, the very last (just upper to the number 1 on the left side) Chinese character in the left row have an extended right-bottom ending of the line (almost touches the inner margin), and on my stamp, and also on the another example which I have found - it is pretty much shortened... looks like a significant difference from the approved examples.

The large dragon 1 Cand looks genuine to me. Does it have the gum?

Hello TangStamps, thank you for your reply - unfortunately, I didn't notice it before. However, I have describe the stamp in my initial post in this topic... and I have specified that it doesn't have a gum.

I had a similar experience. Found these three Large Dragon China stamps in a very old stamp album I found at a stamp show several years ago. Any thoughts on these?

Thanks.

The stamps present all the signs of being genuine design wise.Except the pics are poor to check the paper surface and type...If you have these stamps you should indicate thin or thick paper..